The Mount Holly news. [volume] (Mount Holly, Burlington Co., N.J.) 1891-1942, 1908-01-28

There was session of court yesterday
to hear cases on the Supreme court list
rr.a ooo,,riad tha hanch

Court.
There was session of court yesterday
to hear cases on the Supreme court list
Judge Lloyd occupied the bench
The first case was that of Susan i
Loid. Administrative, against ]. s. Rogers
& Co.
John w. Wescott represented the plain
tiff; E. A. Armstrong appeared for the
defendant.
William II. Loid, the PLAINTIFFS hus-
band, was killed while working on the
Asylum building at New Lisbon, which
was being erected by Rogers & Co. A
derrick fell, throwing Loid to the ground,
res ulting in his death. The plaintiff
claimed that the Rogers company had been
negligent because the derrick was defec-
tive, and should be held responsible for
his death in damages of proper amount.
Susan T. Loid, the plaintiff, said her
husband was Al years of age when the
accident happened in August, 1900 Wit
ness had four children at the time of Mr..
Loid's death, the Oldest aged 13 years.
Witness said her husband averaged So a
day in wages as carpenter.
Thomas Morton, brother-in-law of Loid,
carpenter, was employed on the asylum
building when the accident occurred. An
A shape derrick had been placed in pos
ton to hoist timber from the ground to
the roof 1t was noticed that the derrick
was not properly placed-that it leaned
too far. A number of men were ordered
to straighten it. The feet, which had not
been fastened except by cleats nailed on a
plank upon which it stood, slipped, the
derrick fell, and rope attached toit drag
ged Loid from the building and threw
him to the ground. If the plank upon
which the derrick stood had been prop
erly fastened at the bottom there would
not have been an accident. Witness, be-
fore the accident happened, called atten-
ton to the looseness of the plank, but the
foreman said it was safe.
Ellsworth Davis. of Arney's Mount, was
employed on the asylum building at the
time Mr. Loid was killed. Witness help
ed to straighten the derrick, which stood
upon q plank that lay across the ceiling
joist on the top floor of the building, to
raise the roof beams from the ground.
The brick walls had been completed.
Loid was called with number of other
men to assist to straighten the derrick.
Suddenly the plank slipped, the derrick
fell across the wall, and rope attached
to it caught Loid's. foot and threw him
over the wall. Loid had his back broken
and died the next day.
This concluded the testimony for the
plaintiff.
Mr. Armstrong moved for non suit,
which was denied. He then rested and
asked that the jury be directed to render
a verdict for the plaintiff, which was also
refused. Mr.. Wescott argued the case
before the jury. Mr.. Armstrong submit
ted his case without argument
The jury rendered verdict of $4,000
for the plaintiff.
The next case was that of Elizabeth
Blew, Administrative, against the Public
Service Corporation.
Joseph Kaighn and Samuel Richards |
the plaintiff; E. A. Armstrong
and E. P. Budd appeared for the defend
ant.
The plaintiffs husband, Frank G. Blew,
while driving on the trolley tracks be-
tween Camden and Moorestown, was
struck by trolley car in the rear, the
wagon damaged and Blew thrown out.
He was SO badly injured that he died.
The accident occurred in August, 1907.
Thomas Middlemas. the first witness,
was on the car that struck Blew's wagon.
Mr.. Blew was unconscious when picked
up He was taken to Cooper Hospital.
Camden, where he died..
To expedite matters Mr.. Armstrong said
he would admit that the company was le-
gally responsible for Mr.. Blew's death,
and the only question to be decided was
that of legal damages.
Benjamin Haines, of Mount Laurel, was
acquainted with Blew and his business,
which was removing dead animals. Wit
ness knew nothing of the .,fofts of the
business.
Elizabeth Blew, the widow said her
husband was AZ years of age when he was
killed. They had been married 81 years.
He was in good health, industrious, and
always supported witness. They had no
children. He was employed in farming
and in the dead animal business. He
brought his money home and gave 1t to
the witness, and she put it in safe. At
ter considerable questioning and much
hesitancY and apparent misunderstanding |
upon the part of Mrs. Blew, she finally /
that during the last year he
made about $25OO from the dead animal
business and about $1,000 from the farm.
On cross examination she said her hus-
band and one man did all the work on the
farm and in the dead animal business. |
The farm contained so acres and they paid |
1925 per year rent for 1t.
Both sides rested.
Counsel for plaintiff asked from the
jury $50, 900 damages.
The jury rendered verdict of $6750
for the plaintiff.
Brilliant Reception.
IN Sofurdau avanfno Mrc Rania1 Sut-