Norwich bulletin., 1910-06-11


 arraigned before Judge Oliver H. Will jams in the Third district court. Vest erly. Friday, charged with assault and attempt to commit murder, upon Ap- of June he threatened to shoot and kill sBurdick with rifle and attempt ed to carry his threat into execution, although Burdick sustained no bodily injury. Bennett, by advice of his counsel, Harry B. Agard, pleaded not guilty. A. T. l.. Ledwidge is the pros ecutor. Bonds were fixed at s1,50O for appearance of the accused in the Third district court next Friday.
 The case of Abel p. Randall against Annie E. Bags, for balance of S1S9.73 alleged to be balance due for heating and plumbing house said to be own ed by Annie E.. Bags wife of Joseph s. Bags was given a trial. MT. Ran dall testified that he arranged with MT. Baggs to do the work of heating for $275 and of plumbing for $500. and that by order of Mrs. Baggs changes were made in both contracts but which did not change the price. The figures were given MT. Baggs but were not accepted until approved by Mrs. Bags. The work was started in December, 1906. and finished in April 1907. MT. Randall testified that he did all his business with MT. Baggs.
 Attorney Ledwidee made motion for
 
 charges in connection with the heat ing and plumbing of tho house were against MT. Baggs and bills for the work had been presented to him and not to Mrs. Baggs. Now the plaintiff seeks to recover from Mrs. Bags be- cause she owns the house, although she is entirely separate in law from her husband in this case and has noth ing to do with the Business affairs of Abel P. Randall or Joseph S. Bags.
 Judge Williams denied the motion for non-suit, declaring that it had been shown that Mrs. Bags was en- work in her house, and that evidence enough had been introduced to re- quire defendant to make some defence.
 James E. Basgs stated that he dis puted the bil! of Mir. Randall. He sai1 he was a building contractor and that he had built the house in which the work had been done for his wife. She awarded him the contract for s2,6O6 and had paid him for the work. Since ness and his wife had lived there. He did not know whether Mrs. Bags had paid for the heating and plumbing of the house. The bills were all present. ed to him and he had made payments on MT RandalFs work.
 Judge Williams gave judgment for Mir. Randall to recover the sum of $1S9.37, which is the face of the bill without interest. MT. Ledwidge claim ed jury trial.
 The continued case of Welch, Opie & Timsbury against the New York, New Havene G Hartford Railroad Co. to which corporation was truSteed two carloads of household effects supposed to belong to A A. KingSland and which were attached for debt by plaintiffs was not heard. Writ of attachment was served upon c. Gilbert Tanner, station agent of Westerly, who noti- s] fled the cOmpany's office in Providence MT. Tanner was advised to release the goods to the deputy sheriff, who wa S the serving officer but the goods were not taken from the cars within three days when the goods were ordered to South Norwa1k, Conn.,, their destinatio This suit was in- stituted to recover the amount of the from the railroad com pany.
 Clifford Whippie, counsel for the -airoad company, made a long and 1 earned argument, to show that the I railroad company should not be in l court, should be discharged, no le- gal service had been made. He quot 1 ed authorities in substantiation of his l claim that the case was without the of the court. He quoted 1 he state law which specified that ser | rice must be made on 8, specified officer l )I the company HI HTOSlU0nc6,/ Where | service should have been made and | where it would have been, received by | Attorney Nathaniel w. Smith or his | office clerk. or Royce c. Taft. the res | dent director. The service upon Sta l icn agent Tanner was no legal serv- | co at aH he said. The goods had 1 o be received and forwarded, or held | inder legal process, and that legal 1 process had not been made. Ample | ime had fbeen given for proper service 1