Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1909-10-25
American Ice Co. Gets
$1,000 Verdict
In Suit Against South Gardiner
Lumber Company.
Counsel Acts as Interpreter in Tur.
cotte-harvey Trespass Case.

The jury after being out A.. hours
brought in q verdict at BIO Saturday
AFTERNOON for the piainti1 in the sum
of $1,000 in the 100000 damage suit
brought by the American Ice Co.
against tine South Gardiner Lumber
Co. i'll ronSo uucnce OF the lire of June
- 1907, in which the buildings OF the
American Ice Co. ut South Gardiner
We're destroyed. Exceptions were flied
by the defendant on the ground that
the verdict WAS contrary to the law
and the evidence and the case VIII
90 to the law court. This case has
been on trial i'll the kennebec county
supreme court since Tuesday. Hon.
Charles f.. Johnson of WaterVille and
Hon. VIII c. Atkins of Gardiner APP
pearcd for the plaintiff and Hon. Her
bert NJ Heath Of Augusta and Hon.
George w. Heselton of Gardiner FOR
the defendant.
An entirely unique procedure in
Maine courts occurred Saturday after
noon during the taking Of testimony
in the TurcOtte-HarVey trespass case
when Attorney Lewis A. Burleigh of
Augusta one of the counsel for the
plaintiff, with the consent of the court
and the opposing counsel interrCgated
the leading witness on his side of the
case in the French language and then,
acting in the capacity of interpreter,
put the questions to the witness
framed by the opposing counsel.
The 100000 damage suit of the Amer
lean Ice Co. against the South Gardl-
no, I h.o,s he inv, ~
10.40 Saturday morning. Associate JUS
tice Leslie c. Cornish, the presiding
justice at the October term of the Ken
nebec county supreme court, in his
charge to the jury declared the crucial
question to be whether the fire caught
on the inside or the outside Of the
shipping run. Justice Cornish instruct
ed the jury in returning its verdict to
answer the following questions:
Did the fire catch by sparks or Gin
ders from the stack OF the defendants
mill?'
WAS there negligence on the part of
the defendant?"
The jury was also instructed if it
found for the plaintiff to assess dam
ages at fair market value of the
property destroyed.
The next case to come on for trial
was that of Turcotte ct ais. VS.. Har-
vey. A. NJ. Goddard and Williamson
&. Burleigh for plaintiff; George W.
H"selton and w. II. Fisher for de-
PENDANT. This is an action for tres
pass brought by Frank Turcotte and
Addic Turcottte of Augusta against
Oliver Harvey OF Chelsea. alleging that
the defendant cut down standing lum-
Der and cord wood to the value of $500
upon the plaintiffs lot on the South
Belfast road The only question at is
sue in this case is that of the Locations
of the boundary line between the Har-
Vey lot and the TurcCttc lot.
The case went on trial before the sec
ond jury. Harry Greenlaw of Gardiner
was challenged by the defendants
counsel and ne was replaced on the
panel by G. Il. True of Manchester
The case for the defence was opened
by e. l.. Mclean of the law firm of
Williamson & Burleigh. Nine witnesses
were sworn Dy the defence at the OPEN
ing of the case.
The first witness called was Charles
a. Smart, who announced in a fun
round voice that he was a resident of
the town of Augusta" in which he
declared he had lived "all his natural
life" Witness had been shown Il