Every evening, Wilmington daily commercial., 1906-02-24
FARROW DAMAGE SUIT.
Tending in the Superior Court when Ad-
Journment Was Made Until Monday.

Pending in the Superior Court when Ad-
Journment Was Made Until Monday.
The suit OF Howard Farrow vs..
Joseph L. Hoifecker was pending in
the Superior Court, at g O'Clock, last
night, when court adjourned until 10
o'clock Monday morning. This is a
civil action brought in this county,
although the parties in interest are
residents of Dover, including the at
torneys for the defence, ex-senator
Il. Il. Kenney and Arley b. Magee.
The purpose Of the suit IS to recover
damages for an injury alleged to have
been inflicted upon FaTrow by the dis
charge Of q gun fiom a window in the
house Of Mr. Hoffecker. So far as is
known, there was no criminal intent
and there was no criminal prosecution.
The amount Of damages desired has
not been stated.
At the session Of court yesterday
afternoon Clarence Sypherd, clerk OF
the Dover Council, produced ths town
ordinance prescribing penalty OF from
81 to $40 for shooting firearms in the
town limits.
The mother of the boy testified that
she was walking on the street with the
boy, who is IL years old, and while she
Was passing Mr.. Hoffecker's house che
/ heard the report of a gun and her son
cried out that he was shot. She said
that she had been kept ava Ike several
nights to try and relieve the sufferings
Of the child. He complained of pain
/ in his head. She said Mr. Hoffeoker
/ had called at her house and expressed
his SORROW, say ing dogs had bothered
| him, but he did not admit that he
shot the gun. The plaintiff oorrobo-
rated his mother.
Edward Clark testified that he heard
a slight report on the day 10 question
and saw smoke coming out of q win
dow Ia Mr.. Hoffecker's house, and
afterward he found that the Farrow
boy had been shot. William j. Rus
sell and Arthur 4. Sheets gave practi-
cally the same testimony, but none of
them saw Mr. Hoffe cker do the shoot
ing. The plaintiff rested.
Mr.. Magee moved for a non-suit on
the ground that Mr.. Hoffecker had not
been sufficiently connected with the
shooting. The non-suit was refused.
Nj Hoffecker testified that he had
been troubled by number OF dogs
around his house and that he got
cat rifle and some 22-calibre cartridge,
which we're loaded with mustard seed
shot. When be shot cut Of the
window at the dogs he did not notice
any body on the street. As soon as be
fred he said he noticed the woman
and boy and saw the child put his hand
TO his head. He said he went out TO
them and also went to the boy g house.
He said he paid the bill Of DR.. DOWNS
for attending the boy.
DR.. Presley s. DOWnes testified that
he found two grains of shot and some
bruises. He said that Mrs. FagIoW
came to him and objected TO Mr. Hof-
fecker paying the bill for his services
TO the boy. She paid him So, the
amount 0f the bill, and he gave her
receipt for it and told her be would
Il return Mr.. Hoffecker's money to him.
He declared that such shot could not
cause neuralgia.
John W. Tigner testified that the
boy was bleeding very slightly imme-
diately after he was shot.
Dr. Thomas q. Clements testified
that he was consulted about the boy 3
condition about three weeks ago for
neuralgia in the head. he gave 1t as
his opinion that the pains could not
have been caused by the gunshot
wound.
Dr. Lemuel A. II. Bishop gave simi.
lar testimony.
William b. Stewart testified that he
had seen the boy playing upon the
street nearly every day since he was
injured. The defence rested.
The case will 90 to the jury after
argument on Monday morning.