The Cecil Whig. [volume] (Elkton, Md.) 1841-current, 1910-12-24
COURT TAKES
HOLIDAY RECESS
Six Liquor Cases Tried --Eugene Reed
Given Five Years For Manslaughter.
W. H. Nesbitt And Hugh |.
Armour Win Damage Suits

Trial in the suit OF William II Mes
bitt, OF the Eighth district. VS.. the
Cecil Paper Company ior damages
for personal injuries, caused by his
mules frightening al bacs OF paper
stock OF the dc. cndnnt icit lying ON
the Porter's Bridgc-Rising Sun road,
where thev had fallen on transit to
the paper mill, lasted throughout Fri
day in the Circuit Court, and argu-
ment was heard at a night session.
The Court held the case from the jury
until Saturday morning, when it was
given to them. and about II a. m.
they returned with verdict for the
plaintiff awarding him $4,000 damn
ages. Defendants counsel moved
for new trial.
Armour vs.. Wilson. postponed from
Tuesday and set for Saturday. was
put on trial afte rthe Court had wait
ed some time for the return OF the
jury in the Nesbitt case, some oi whom
were drawn for service N the case
assigned for the day, and the sum
moning O several taicsmcn who were
later discharged.
The suit was brought by Hugh |.
Armour, oi the Fifth district, for
$3.50 damages claimed for injuries to
stallion worth $500 and damages to
d buggy, in collision with an auto
mobile owned by Charles J. Wilson.
of Avondale, Pa. in which he, a Miss
Mclaughlin, and Messrs. Joseph Nc
Vey and John Pyle. OF Oxford, were
riding, ON the Farmngton pike just
south OF the Central Railroad tracks.
at Rising SUN. about 7.45 p. M. on
T,l,r \1ogSrz
Warburton appeared for the plaintiff,
and Messrs. Omar D. Crothers and
Frank b. Evans for the defendant
Horace Duyckinck, OF Rising Sum,
was to repair the automobile after the
accident. and plaintiff attached it in
his hands. bringing a second suit
against him as garnishee. The pIaiTlr
tiff's side of the case was that the
horse was driven from Mr.. Armour's
home, about 7 p. IN. On July !, hitched
to buggy in which were Roy and
Earl Armour and Spencer Elliott
J Mheg = little south o, the railroad
rack al P'1g Sun md driving m the
right hi t?e ot the road, about
z.45 p. fCey saw an automobile .ap-
nroach:it Their horse was waking.
'rte aut drned to he same side OF
the roatc team was on, and when 1t
was wit IS or 20 ieet OF them Roy
Armoutllled his horse to the lett
( rom ttantre of the road The auto
veeredl the right One wheel of
t,re ADVENT in the ditch and the
horse \, struck on the flank and
tpock,lown. The auto was backed
and tporsc was raised. His flank
was fed and scrapcd, and 40 or
morechcs were required to close
the nds The road is 80 feet
v;d,She scene OF the collision. The
artoIId have kept the right side OF
- the | and avoided the collision The
horIs badlE Scared has grown
t;nr3l1 unfit ,ior driving and has
q IN H. such Of his value. The buggy
e. no&rress were also more or less
Hsa1 AID. The plaintiff claimed that
tnt attendant did not run the &utu
With care and prudence. Wilson and
McNey were asked whether they had
been drinking during their trip on
the Fourth from Avondale to Ken
nett, West Grove. ONnrd/ Hickory
Z Hill, Lewisvllc, Calvert and Rising
san, and said they had not. McNcy
said he does not drink Paul England
for The plainti stated that he met
the automobile near Calvert and saw
it's occupants passing bottle cen
tanning red liquid. Wilson said he
ran the auto ali day, but Harry Egg
land stated that he met the auto IN
the road with the lady at the wheel
The defendants version OF the col
lision was that the auto took the right
side OF the road, after crossing the
railway tracks, TO AVOID jolting ol
the section OF the road just past the
end OF the macadam surface, as dc
autos in general He was vel over
toward the ditch and was running
about II miles am hour when the
stsiiision occurred Armour pulled his
horse to the same side, practically
across the road, Wilson put on hi,
brakes aud ,hreW uut his clutch The
machine pushed rather than struck the
horse, and one OF the wheels rested
on its tail wilson offered to pay fal
the damage to the buggy and for thC
horses treatment. 1t was claimed b,
defendants witnesses and admitted by
the plaintiffs that il Armour had not
changed from one side to the other
the collision would have been avoided
but he claimed that he had no othe>
choice. Trial OF the case lasted til
the recess on Saturday when Cour
+as adjourned until Monday morn