Norwich bulletin. [volume] (Norwich, Conn.) 1895-2011, 1909-02-26
MAIN CASE COMPLETED
IN SUPERIOR COURT.
Following Short Calendar Today, the
Criminal. Business viii Be Finished
Up


In the superior court at New Lon
don on Thursday the case Of Amasa e.
Main of Iowa, administrator of the
estate Of Amasa A. Main, father Of
both Anasa z. and Lafayette. vs.. LAT
ayette Main, a suit brought FOR a judg-
ment Of foreclosure on the farm owned
and occupied by Lafayette in North
Stonington. This judgment is asked
because It is claimed that a mortgage
held by the elder Amasa before his
death against Lafayette's farm has
never been satisfied.
Lafayette's claim Is that the mort
gage was paid and that he secured
an entire release from his father. This
release was exhibited in court Thurs
day, but its genuineness was doubted
by the defense. as the only witnesses
Lafayette's father and his housekeep-
er, Miss Nellie Austin, are both dead
The case was a protracted one and
there were many witnesses. The first
was Luther Main. another son Of
Amasa A and the real plaintiff, in the
absence of Amasa r. He said that
the farm in question was about 100
acres and was worth about 81, 600 Wit
ness father had paid taxes in 1905
amounting to about $40 while hold
ing the mortgage on the place.
The defendant, Lafayette, was then
called. He told Of buying the place
from HIS father and giving his father
a mortgage on the farm. On this
mortgage Lafayette said he paid
$1,000 at one time. Then later he on
Sept. 10, 1907. paid the remainder. At
this time he went to his fathers place
and made a final settlement. In ad-
dition to the mortgage, lafayette and
his father had other accounts, Iafay-
cite having purchased articles from his
father. The settlement was made in
the kitchen Of the house and was wit
messed by Miss Nellie Austin Of Fall
River, hbusekeeper for Lafayette, the
elder Mr.. Main giving Lafayette an en-.
tire release.
At this point the alleged release was
laid in by Attorney Arthur NJ. Brown
for the defense as exhibit A. The
amount was 1890 approximately Laf-
ayette then continued to say that Miss
Austin died in March. 1908, In Wester-
ly, two months before witness father,
the only other person present at the
settlement. Witness insisted that his
father was in fair health when the set
Element was made and the release CIV
en-, although he had sick spells"
Then Attorney Donald G. Perkins,
representing the plaintiff, cross exam
ined Lafayette. This cross examina-
ton was particularly interesting be-
cause Of the former relations of the
cross examiner and the cross exan1in-
ed. Mr.. Perkins defended Lafayette
Main in a trial for the theft Of a heif-
er. Main was convicted and sent to
states prison for one year. He claim
ed that he paid Mr.. Perkins On full for
his services. a claim that was disput-
ed by Mr.. Perkins.
Mr.. Perkins did not forget the for
mer case, and he asked Mr.. Main II
he was not the same Lafayette T.
Main that was convicted and sentene-
ed to spend a year in states prison, TO
which Mr.. Main, with some hesltancy,
answered ''Yes" after which he
launched out into an extended apology
and explanation Of his innocence of
the theft Of the heifer, which was
nipped in the bud by Judge Wheeler,
who rebuked Lafayette and admon-
ished him to be careful and answer
the questions directly and not wander
away from the questions.
Attorney Perkins subjected Madn TO
a scathing cross examination asking
him why Miss Austin had gone down
to the witness fathers house on this
particular day. Main replying that
she often did.
After Mains testimony an imposing
array OF witnesses were called in or
der.
The evidence and arguments in the
case were, completed during -he after
noon, and court adjourned at 4 o'clock
until this morning, whes there VIII be
a short calendar session.