The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1905-10-06

VS.. the Fidelity and Casualty Company
of New York, was taken up and when
court adjourned for the day the plain
tiffs had rested their case, SO this
morning witnesses for the defendant
company will be placed upon :he
stand. The following is the jury in
the case:
Messrs. John kuhIken. F. T. Skip
per, Frank K. King, F. w. Kuhl, L. o.
Ellis. w. ]. Mallard. John D. Cotttle,
Robert C. Orrell, d. J. Fergus, w. E.
Merritt. w. Van Hardin and w. A.
MCGOWAN.
The suit is brought by S. FL. Fish
blate and his wife. Fannie S. Fish
blate, who was BENEFICIARY under The
policy held in the defendant compa-
ny.
S. FL. Fishblate took out a policy in
the Fidelity and Casualty Company on
January 25th, 1904, the policy beng
for 5000 straight insurance and $I0,-
900 If death resulted from certain
accidents. and it further stipula ed
and agreed to pay certain sums Tor
$3.50 A~oS ~ "A Ia ANS vi al " III 81
amount named for the loss of an eye
by accident being $1,000, and it is to
recover this sum hat the plalntln
brought the action.
After stating the above facts con-
corning the policy, it is alleged in the
complaint that while the plaintiff s..
H. Fishblate, was crossing the street
at Market and Ninth streets on the
night of February 18th. 1904, that a
piece Of mud Or ice struck him in the
right eye. inc that he became blind in
this eye within 80 days from the time
of the accident The plaintiffs, in view
of this fact, ask that they be granted
Judgment against the Fidelity ami
Casualty Company for $1,70O with in
terest from May 1904.
Mr. Fishblate was the first witness
to go upon the stand and he testified
to the taking out of the policy, and
the cause of his losing his right ee
He was rigidly cross examined and ts-
pecially as TO an application made 10y
him for a pension from the United
States. The DaDers including his up
Dlication for tension will be placed
in evidence by the defendant cOmpa-
ny, but certain questions were asked
concerning them yesterday and the
Nv ~ IN ISi ny AAN AAS AA~0o $AS
application AMI said the statements
made at the time were to he best OF
his knowledge and belief. Mr.. Fish
blate testified that his eye gave him
trouble some years ago., but at she
time Of the accident it was not rou
ling him and he had not lost his sight.
He was unde the treatment of local
physicians for several weeks after los
ing his eye anil later went to Ricn-
mo1d and had it removed by DIR
White. a specialist.
The defense will rely largely on
the statements made in the applica.
ton for a pension. There were sev-
eral statements made by Mr.. Fishblate
and an application made On a blank
provided by the pension department.
In making the application for a pen
sion, the plaintiff alleges that he serv-
ed on two different occasions in the
United States army during the Civil
war. both times belonging to a New
York Company. The applications were
duly sworn to before United States
Commissioner 6. P. Collier and the
first claim for a pension was made
in October, 1908 An application filed
at the department on October 10th
1908, stated that the applicant vas
largely incapacitated by the loss OF
right eye and from several diseases
and asked to be placed On pension
roll. In the form of application fur
nished by the department. the blank
where the persons physical condition
was to be described. the following ap-
peared: Trouble with right eye-no
sight and light blue covering on same"
The above statements the defen-
dants contend will bar the plaintiff
P-or, rooovar;rr h,4 ofTornorc for tho
plaintiff hold 4 very different view
and say the result Of applications for
: a pension will make the case strongly
in their favor. The pension depart
ment held I'D the first application
for further Investigation and in the
meantime Mr.. Eishblate met with the
accident at Market and Ninth streets
which caused him to lose his right
eye. Later the government refused
to grant the pension on the ground
that be mad not lost sight of right eye
at the time the original application
was made.
After the examination of Mr.. Fish
hlate his wife took the stand and tes-
titled to Mr.. Fishblate's condition
prior to the accident and the losing
of his eve. Only Il other witness was
examined, DIR. 4. H. Harris. who was
Mr. Fishblate's physician.
ATTORNEYS in the case are Hon. Jo1n
D. Bellamy, MeSsrs. George Rountree
and William J. Bellamy for plaintiffs
and Messrs. Ire!ell Meares and H. Me
CIammy for defendant.
When coUr convenes this morning
the attorneys for the defendant will
make motion to non-suit and if the
motion is over-ruled they will pro.
coed with the examination of shcil
witnesses. The case will consume tbs
greater part Of today. 1t is very proc
able that the next case to be taken
up will be thu of J. w. Monk ct al
VS.. City of Wilmington. This case was
tried once and decided against the
city and went to the supreme courl