Ellsworth American. [volume] (Ellsworth, Me.) 1855-current, 1909-10-20

Springer, John...... sullivan
LEACH VS.. CARTER.
The first case called for Trial was that
Of Mrs. Lottie Leach vs.. Albert Carter, an
action for trespass. The parties live
in West Surry. The plaintiff alleged
trespass on the part OF defendant by
driving across her field and garden to his
woodlot, and alleged damage to field and
crops to the extent OF SIS.
Defendant claimed an easement or right
Of way across it's plaintiffs property, that
road had been in existence there many
years, and that his encroachment upon the
field was largely due to the blowing up
and planting of garden which took in
part OF the old road, and later, in the be-
lief that the garden had been planted for
the purpose OF interrupting the right OF
way, he drove through the garden, follow
ing the route OF the old road.
The defendant on the stand admitted
driving across another part OF the field
without permission. This constituted a
trespass, and judgment for plaintiff for Il
and costs was ordered.
L. F. Giles appeared for plaintiff and F.
L. Mason for defendant.
JONES We. MAINE CENTRAL.
Friday morning the case of Charlotte
ZONES VS.. the Maine Central railroad
company, an action for damages by forest
fire in the summer OF 1908, alleged to have
been caused by sparks from q locomotive,
was called. A drawn jury was empaneled
1t was the intention to have the jury visit
the scene OF the fire, but rain prevented
this. Witnesses not having been sum-
moned to appear until afternoon, the
opening OF the case was deferred until af-
ternoon.
Saturday forenoon the jury went to the
scene Of the fire, going to the meadow by
Especial train.
The fire in question started just before
noon on Sept. II, 1908, and burned for
several days, sweeping some 327 acres Of
Plaintiffs property = timber, woodland
mo meadow-and spreading to adjoining
property.
considerable evidence was introduced
" plaintiff to show the tendency OF loco
motives to start fires during the excess
sively dry period OF 1908, and by elimina-
uon Of other possible causes, tending to
prove that the fire OF Sept. II was caused
oya spark from locomotive.
defendant introduced evidence showing
.na' Tor some time previous to the Sept. II
nie' fire had been smouldering on the
meadow or bog in that vicinity, and tend
ing to prove its claim that the fire OF Sept.
y started from this old fire, famed into
new life by the high wind.
Experts for the railroad testified that it |
1 impossible for locomotives equipped |
.n spark screens, as were those OF the |
ascendant company, to communicate fire
"a Greater distance than thirty-five feet |
.om The track. Plaintiff in rebuttal in
noouced evidence Of several instances in |
sansworth in the summer OF 1908 where |
.'e mad been started by sparks from
~ connective at distance of from eighty to |
40 ieet from the track.
.ne case went to the jury about o'clock
monday afternoon. A sealed verdict was
,,oaeht in Tuesday morning, finding
me plaintiff, with damages awarded
'Vnn A. Peters appeared for plaintiff,
a.. s Fellows and Hale &....Hamlin for
JORDAN VS.. MAINE CENTRAL.
H. .ns case Of Mrs. Susan M. Jordan vs.
i'm Maine Central railroad company
III followed the Jones case.
80 was an action for damapes bv forest |