Ellsworth American. [volume] (Ellsworth, Me.) 1855-current, 1905-10-18

| Clerk-JoHs +. KsowLTos, Ellsworth.
Harbor 49, D"'
sherih-BrRoS ". MAYO, Ellsworth.
| Crier-BuRKg LEACH Bucksport.
Depntee = BURKE LEACH. Bucksport. RIOS
zoe ~ SPRINGER, West sullivan; JAMES ).
fERNALD, fremont; BLuoMFIELp l,IogfNs
bar Hnrbor; DAVID W. CARNEY, Ellsworth.
| stenosrapher--C. o BAaRows, Portland.
MESSENGER HAYLIE MADDocKs, Ellsworth
The trial of cases on the civil docket
| WIN probably be completed by Friday,
when the criminal cases will be taken up.
RoDIog WILL CASE.
| The Rodick will case, which went on
trial Wednesday afternoon, continued
until Saturday afternoon, going to the
| jury at BIO o'clock. AT 3.55 O'Clock the
| jury returned a verdict sustaining the will.
The case was conducted for Mrs. Rodick
| ny Ia. b. Deasy, Of Bar Harbor, and for
the appellant, Mrs. Flora Pneo, by T.. s.
Clark and G. B. Pineo.
The entire case hinged on the question
whether Serenus II. Rodick was OF sound
mind when the will was executed on Nov
., 1903. The appellant contended that
Mr.. Rodick's mind had been permanently
| affected by the constant and excessive use
| OF Intoxicating liquors, and introduced a
long array of witnesses who testified to
ineoherent and disconnected talk, and
childish actions of Mr.. Rodick during
recent years.
The appellee admitted that Mr. Rodick
| had been addicted to the excessive use of
| liquor, but took the ground that incoher-
ency OF speech, and childish actions, were
the immediate effect Of liquor at the time,
and not due to any permanent mental
disorder. Witnesses were introduced to
| show that Immediately before and after
the making of the Will Mr.. Rodick had
conducted business transactions. A dairy
containing daily entries during trip
South In the spring of 1901, and business
letters written by Mr.. Rodick Just before
going South, afforded valuable evidence.
Eminent experts testified on both sides.
On the side OF the contestants OF the will
were DIR. Bigelow T. Sanborn, of the
| Maine insane asylum at Augusta, and DIR.
p. ii. 8. Vaughan, OF the Eastern Maine
insane hospital at Bangor. The appellee's
experts were DIR. Edward Cowles, superin-
tendent of the Mclane sanitarium at Som
erville, Mass, for twenty-four years, and
lecturer on mental diseases at Dartmouth
and Harvard colleges, and DR.. Addison s.
iThayer, OF Portland, lecturer on mental
diseases at Bowdoin medical school, whose
testimony formed an important part OF the
recent Reyes murder trial at Bangor.
| CIVIL CASES TRIED.
The case OF Frank L. Brewer, of Bar
York, summer resident of Otter Creek,
where she owns a cottage, was tried Mon
day afternoon.
This was an action on account for ice
furnished and blowing done during the
summer Of 1908 The bill amounting to
1875, was contested on the ground that it
I should have been charged to Mr., Birge, by
whom it was contracted, and in fact, was
/ first 50 charged, and was afterward
transferred to Mrs. Birge when it was
| found that Mr.. Birge was dead, leaving no
property in the State.
Il The Jury returned a verdict for plaintiff
lfor si795.
/ The case OF Nickerson, Spratt Il Greedy,
OF Bar Harbor, against Mrs. Birge went
| on trial Monday afternoon. The case 'as
similar to the previous one, the account
being for hay and grain furnished,
practically the same as in the first case.
| The case went to the jury yesterday fore
noon. Verdict for plaintiff, s196.H.
Tuesday afternoon was occupied largely
| by divorce hearings. The criminal docket
was also gone over, and some old liquor
cases coming over from previous terms
were disposed of. Thomas E. Lee, OF
Ellsworth, paid fines of 800 and costs
each on two old indictments.
HINcKLEY VS.. GRAY.
The case OF J. T. Hinckley ct al, of
| Bluehill, vs.. Brooks A. Gray and Cecil K.
Gray, OF Bluehill, went on trial this morn
ing, and will probably occupy all of to-
day and Tomorrow. Judge E. 4. Chase,
| OF Bluehill, and Charles j. Dunn, OF
Orono, appear for plaintiffs, and }. H.
| Montgomery, of Camden, for defendants.
| The action is one for trespass, but in
| wolves title to a small strip of land in the
village OF Bluehill, not valuable in itself,
but valuable because of a spring upon the
| land lust on the line OF the town road.
] IT,, . ha ~ Rlnqhil voted To Law
| out a town road, and at the same time
bought and laid out a cemetery, one of the
| bounds of which was this road as then
laid out. The cemetery was enclosed by
| stone wall, the remains OF which can still
be seen, but the read as laid out was not
built.
Ten years later road was built, but be-
cause of physical conditions, one of which
| was perhaps this spring, which would have
come right in the middle of the road as
originally laid out, its location was changed
about half the width of the road farther
north.
This left a narrow strip OF land and the
spring between the road as built, and the
| cemetery, and it is this strip which is in
dispute. Plaintiffs claim title by adverse
possession; defendants by deed, which
| plaintiffs say does not include the land ON
| which the spring is located.
| The water from the spring has been
| piped to the house of the plaintiff, and the
spring has also provided public watering
place for horses, for maintaining which
| the plaintiffs have received remuneration
| from the town for forty years or more.
About a year and half ago the defend
| ants in the case, who had opened spring
which was admittedly on their land, and
short distance from the spring in question,
| laid spring from the latter spring to their
| own, drawing off all the water. 1t IS Tor
| this act that action for trespass Is Drought
ASSIGNED CASES.
| Following is the list OF cases specially
assigned for the term, with the record OF
| their disposal up to noon to-day:
| 1870 Pineo VS. Rodick. Clark; Deasy. Verdict
| for appellee.
1888 Crab,ree & Havey VS. Ales. Wormwood,
Crabtree; Pratt. Defendant defauitec.
1910 Norton VS. Roberts. Hale & Hamlin; WOOD.
Defendant defaulted by consent.
Damages for defendant, 81.
1899 Chalmers va Callahan. wornwood. Crab
tree; Wood. Continued.