Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1914-03-17
Evidence in the Bradstreat-
Darling Case Completed
At Mondays Session Attorneys
For Both Sides Argue
Justlc Spear Will Deliver Charge
TO Jury This Morning

AT the beginning of Mondays session
of the supreme court, Attorney George
w Heseton of Gardiner, who is rep
resenting the plaintiff in the case OF
d. H. Darling VS.. F. T. Bradstreet,
both of Gardiner, read a deposition
taken of the Merrill Oldham Co., stock
brokers in New York City. In the de-
position there was contained certain
letters from the Bradstreet Lumber
Co. to the Merrill Oldham Co. and also
letters from the latter concern to the
former relative to the purchasing of
stocks and the prices paid for same
The deposition was lengthy one, TAX
ing the entire forenoon session to read
it.
Afternoon Session.
When court convened for the after
noon session Attorney A. h. Butler for
the defendant, Bradstreet outlined the
defence to the jury. In his opening
statement Mr.. Butler gave the jury
in a concise form the facts which he
intended to prove by the evidence COM
ing from the witnesses that he put
upon the stand. He stated that the de-
PENDANT made the plaintiff two prop
ositions when he, the plaintiff, entered
the eraploy of the Bradstreet Lumber
Co, /. e., he could take UP the duties
Of treasurer at a salary of $l200 per
annum or he could go into the COM
pany as bookkeeper at the same sal
ary and take up his duties, the defend
ant as treasurer. I'VE intend to show
further, gentlemen, that when Mr.
Darling entered the employ of the
al. xxyoC n n
made between the defndant and plain
tiff, but simply that the defendant
told the plaintiff that if he would
take hold of the business and learn II
thoroughly he would talk agreement
later" Mr.. Butler went on TO state
that seven months following the time
that the plaintiff took up the duties on
treasurer he went to the Defendants
house and asked him what about the
agreement that was made and the de-
PENDANT replied: why Harry there
never was any agreement made"
Following the opening F. T. Brad
street, the defendant, was the first
witness called. Mr.. Bradstreet testi-
fed that he had been engaged in the
numbering business since 1874. Witness
then went on to state that he request
ed the plaintiff to go into the woods
and familiarize himself with what he
termed the rough end Of the work. In
response to these requests, according
to witness, the plaintiff made bat one
or two trips into the woods during the
entire time that he was treasurer of
the company. When plaintiff refused
to work in the woods witness told him
that if he didn't he would be of no
use to him. Witness denied that there
was ever any agreement between him
and the defendant but that he told
him that If he would show DISPOSE
ton to learn the woods end of the
business, namely the cutting and haul
ing of the timber, he would talk agree
ment with him later. Contrary to the
plaintiffs contention, witness stated
that the salaries of the different off,
GERS of the company were not raised
for the purpose of injurying the plain
tiff in any way. Attorney Heselton
then cross-examined.
I IF the salaries of the officers were
not raised to hurt this plaintiff who
was hurt by the increase?'
THE salaries were raised because Of
the fact that the profits were so large
that we thought we could stand it,
replied Mr.. Bradstreet
When did you say that the salaries
we're raised?"