Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1913-03-10
Street Railway Not Liable
In the Sullivan Case.
Jury Decides MOtOTman Brown
Was Running Gar Carefully.
Pierce VS.. Cole, In alleged Deceit
Case Now Before Court.

The case OF Sullivan administrative
VS.. L., A, & w. Street Railway, which
remained unfinished, Friday, occupied
the greater part of the forenoon, Sat
urday. before the supreme court IN
which the plaintiff sought TO recover
damages for the alleged injury, which
John E. Sullivan received in October,
1910, by being struck. by an electric
car, near his home in Hallowell, from
| the effects Of which. two weeks later.
he died. Attorney sawtclle for the
| plaintiff, who had not finished the
! summing up cf his ease, Friday, oe-
| curied the greater part of an Eour re-
viewing his case before the jury
AS soon as he had finished, chief
Justice Spear began his charge to the
! jury, in which he stated that should
the jury find that the motorman, Bert
a. Brown OF Palermo, who was in
charge of the car at the time of the al
/ leged accident, was not exercising due
care in running his car, but that it was,
negligence on his part in not discover
| ing Sullivan sooner than he did, the
! jury should bring in a verdict for the
plaintiff. "On the other hand" said
Justice Spear. II the motorman was
in the exercise OF due care in the run
ming of his car, the jury must bring
in a verdict in favor of the defendant,
the l.. a. & w Street Railway. Aft
er occupying an hour in his charge on
the different points of the law the ease
went to the jury at Ills. verdict
was brought in q 30 in the afternoon.
1 IL - MI q
Andrews conducted the railroads side
of the case.
The next case on the docket was
Pierce VS.. Cole, in which George a.
Pierce of Readfield was to recover
$1,000 Tor the alleged deceit III the sale
of farm brought from Charles j.
Cole ot Readfeid. Attorney George ".
Feselton of Gardiner appeared for the
defendant and Williamson Burleigh &
Mclean for the plaintiff.
The first witness to be called was the
plaintiff. George A. Pierce. Witness
stated that he purchased the farm CT
Cole. through the Strout Agency, in the
fall Of 1907. 1t VAS claimed by the de-
PENDANT that sthe farm cut tons OF
hay, and that there was that amount
Of hay in the barn At the time he sold
the farm to Pierce. Records were pro-
duoed by the plaintiff showing the ac-
eual amount 81 lay taken each year of
! from the farm sfhce he had been living
there. It was brought out in direct ex-
animation that 16 tons was the most
thar had been cut on the farm since
plaintiff had lived on it. That it had
| been put in better state of cultivation
since 1907, the plaintiff was sure, but
at no time in the last five years had the
/ farm cut 30 tons Of hay. When cross
! examined by attorney for the defend
/ ant rs to why he did not bring action
| sooner against the defendant, witness
/ stated that he WAS in hopes that he
would be able to raise the amount Of
! hay which defendant claimed and
avoid bringing suit. The farm was said
to have contained about so acres. When
/ Pierce and Cole had the writings done
| the agreement stated that the plain
| tiff was TO pay $500 at the time the
| trade was made, $4,000 as soon as the
place was occupied, and the balance
| in six months time. Witness said that
/ he first offered the defendant $1,000 for
| tie farm and all personal property, but
! defendant refused tie sale at that
price. The price paid for the farm, stat
/ ed the witness. was S410a. Witness,
when cross examined by Attorney Hes
elton. did not remember much OF the
| testimony which he had given before
| the september term of the superior
| court. in the year 1909.
Edward c. Palmer was the next wit
| ness called, and testified as TO keeping
! account of the number1 of loads of hay
/ taken from The farm since plaintiff had
| purchased ii, and it was shown by his
| testimony thar it had never cut over
| rs tons. The testimony of Herbert q.
| Wood of Winthrop was then introduce
ed. Mr. Wood stated that he was a
farmer, and also that he lad made a
business OF pressing hay IN the past.
Witness further stated that he had
pressed the hay on the Cole farm in
| the wears Of 1896. 1897. 1899 and 1900.
but WIS not willing to state upon be-
ing russ-eXamined whether he pressed
other years or not, but his general
opinion was that he had. Witness also
! testified as 90 pressing some hay for