The independent-reporter. [volume] (Skowhegan, Me.) 1909-1955, 1913-04-03

rs shtet upon me corn, IN gwen
case, j IS also important 10 consider
whether the corn was grown on high
" i9@ iahd, end II N" weather va
#5z5f #aa col or cloudy and 2arsa
Immediately alter the frost; Tor Il =
"a elemehfary principle IN The science
u pHSsies mat the atmosphere. rari=
30 az adj lighter bt warmth, -
UNIVERSAL tendency 10 rlse whlI=
III colder and heavier air takes III
Io%fs position ~ winch Graafatiea
entIiled T. Hence. II is a matter d
familiar experience that the earlier
irosIs O. autumn are more severe up
IN III lo# GROUNDS Than upon The
heifhbofsae hills. which arc not onls
eesef.a NH warmer ar but ar
NOR. szHes@a to The winds which pr
ssti Us stHsnauoh.
hf1hsfhof", y might nor b. ais
ofdiharll. would nor b" possible Tor
IT. defendants. win 10" factory OPT
ated al IIs inll capttliy 10 can, Ii Z
s1hfie ia. or in '"o OF three daS-
after a most all OF the -bitteH
corn la might b' offered hy he CO.
tracing parties.
The plalntih p corn Was growing -
10" land. about ~ miles below III
village OF skowhegan.
The plaintiffs testimony Ia regard
10 the bleaching Of the leaves ali
hgsks OF the corn, and the use OF II
Oh The table after the frost IS vel
a. before. was corroborated By his
hired man, and by the testimony Of
neighbor that the outside Of the plain
i tins com looked white in the fele
but tn stalks were straight az
green.
No Other witnesses were called H.
the plalntlf. NO evidence vas Offer
ed by him IN relation TO the chemical
change III the corn caused By the &C
ton OF the frost on the husks Of tn
ear or the suitability OF the corn toH
canning purposes after II Is frost
bitten The burden was upon the
plalntln 10 prove that his corn va
suitable for packing. But he intro
duced no witness who had ever had
experience In packing corn. or had
ever tested the quality or condition o.
frost-bltt"n corn after y had been
canned
Ne testimony II Dchali OIL me Dc
PENDANTS. III the llTst place. confirmed
that OF the pialnln himself in regard
10 the severity OF the frost Thursdat
morning September 18th, showing
that water standing IN vessels out .
doors at the Sko"heHan factory va
frozen over ana the water frozen II
the pipes ana faucets ana lour OF II.
defendants witnesses testified IN suit
stance that the plaintlH corn turned
Whlte WITHIN Two or thI"e ua%s altet
the frost struck H.
In regard 10 the effect u frost Of
: corn used lot canning purposes. tn
defendant Baxter testliles that he has
{ been engaged IN the packing business
Tor thirty years, with experience IL
all departments OF the Work, and
! oversight OF all the factories IN tn
/ state that at the time OF the frost
he had his headquarters at NeWpori.
ana hFe factories under ms lnfnedi-
ate supervision; that II matnr'
enough, frost-bltten corn can De PACK
ed FOR 46 and sometimes Tor - hours
after frost; that II the weather was
/ hot, II would nave 10 be packed sooner
than II II was loWery ana cold, that
i in his experience three days had been
! found 10 be the limit IN which frost
bitten corn would BE- suitable Tor
canning.
Mr.. BAXTER testimony was cor
! roborated by five other witnesses.
FINALLY, the defendants introduced
testimony from commission mer-
chants 10 show the reputation Tor the
i highest standard of excellence which
Maine sweet corn has sustained IL
the trade, and TO explain the eneei
E.. which the discovery OF even lev
. cans OF frost-bltten and inedlhle corr
inevitably has in depreclatlns tn
market value OF that brand OF corh
and impairing confidence in the sui
sequent products of the packer
In rebuttal, II Is insisted that tn
/ plaintif corn, rejected by the de
PENDANTS. had all the appearance and
characteristics of corn admitted 10 be
suitable for canning. and was in as
good condition for canning as tn.
other loads accepted by the defen-
dants at the time they refused 10 TAX
the balance. IL Is also suggested b.
the plaintiff that II any OF the frost
bitten corn canned by the defendants
fermented and became tasteless OF
bitter and unit for food. 1t was IN tn
power of the defendants 10 produce Il
can of II at the trial, as the best eXi-
denee of their contention that til,
corn was not suitable for paekins
But there Is testimony from the de
PENDANTS witnesses showing the ord
nary course OF business in placing Ia.
product OF a cannerY on the market
and The number of dealers who