The Republican journal., 1915-10-07
The Supreme Judicial Court.
Justice Leslie c. Cornish of Augusta Pre-
siding.

justice Leslie e. Cornish of Augusta Pre-
siding.
me court was occupied Thursday with tn
case OF Chester L. Bailey vs. Sidney M Web
oer' Doth OF Searsport and former co-partner
IN trade In general store in that town.
| Tue January term of the court MIR. Bale,
Drought action against Mr.. Webber for s3c
CANNED to be due him on the settlement n
tne nrm's business. The case was opened be-
lore the jury and withdrawn from them b,
'odge Spear and verdict ordered for tn,
piaintin for $l65. Exceptions were filed apt
tne case was taken to the Law Court, which al
lowed the exceptions and granted new tria,
Inc case was reopened Thursday morning ant
occupied the day. It was given to the iurv :.
4 p. m and an hour later they returned seal.
ed verdict. which was opened at the beginning
OF the Friday morning session and was for the
plaintiff for $4O.2s. Bangs and BuzzelI 70,
plaintiff. Dunton Morse for defendant.
The case of W. H. Trundy, administrator on
the estate OF Emma Trundy, his wife. of North
oearsport vs. J. B. Kenney Of Newport, opened
at p m. Thursday. was finished Friday going
"a.
sion. Mr.. Kenney was the son of Mrs. Trundv
| and the action was to recover $l1O balance due
on note of $3.50 given by her son in 1904.
when she was Mrs. Emery and came to live
with MIN, as was then supposed for life. Later
MRS. Emery married Mr.. Trundy and her son
had paid the note to within $40 when she
died. 1t came out in the evidence that the de-
fendant mad agreed to buy monument for
his mother to cost 500. leaving only $40 bal
ance due. At her death in Searsport the de-
fendant was called upon to pay funeral ex-
penses to the amount of $780, using his own
funds. The plaintiff claimed no knowledge of
the agreement to buy the monument At 230
Friday afternoon the jury returned a verdict
for the defendant. W. C. T. Runnells for
plaintiff and John W. Manson of Pittsfield for
defendant.
Friday afternoon the two cases of the Bel
fast Water Co. VS.. the Inhabitants of the CITY
OF Belfast and Same vs. The City of Belfast
were opened before the second jury with
Charles Kneeland and Clifton Whittum suc-
ceeding L. F. Marden and Robert p Chase,
excluded as citizens of Belfast The cases
were both for hydrant rental and interest since
1908. the former for $4,000 80 and the latter for
$3.50. the total. with interest," about $1,000
The case is somewhat involved and many in.
tricate points of law figure. H. C. Buzzell
opened for the plaintiff and the case was then
taken from the jury, and counsel stated their
contentious to the court. Harvey D. Eaton of
Watervile, who also appeared for the plain
tiff, contended that the contract was void
Robert F. Dunton for the city claimed that
the contract specified free hydrant rental af-
ter 20 years and among other contentious
claimed that due to poor water pressure and
supply the city lost the North schoolhouse.
Judge Cornish suggested conference in his
room, at which City Solicitor Carleton Doak,
Mayor Charles R. Coombs, Alderman c. W.
Wescott and Robert f. Dunton, counsel, rep
resented the city, and Messrs. Buzzell and
Eaton, counsel for the water company, and an
agreement was reached to refer the case to
Chief Justice Savage and Associate Justices
Cornish and King to determine the principles
of law, also the adjustment of taxes and n.y.
drant rental due, the decision to be rendered
in vacation as of this term.
Messrs. Ebert and William Wheeler of Bos-
ton, representing the Water Co, were present
and agreed to this disposition of the case
The hearing will be in Belfast Nov. q 1915
when the adjustment of taxes and rental will
be made to Dec. 1915 and the decision is to be
final
The case of Albert Dickey vs. Frank A. Bart
lett was opened at p. m. Friday The par
ties live in Unity. In February, 1915, Mr..
Bartlett advertised for man and wife TO work
on his farm IN Unity. Mr.. and Mrs. Dickey of
Northport, then living in Caribou, answered
the advertisement and came to Unity to work.
The plaintiff brought the action to recover$ 80
claimed to be due himself and wife, having re-
ceived $S5 in part payment for their services
on the farm of defendant. He also claimed
that Mr.. Bartlett had agreed to pay them $50
per month, give them house rent on the farm
and provide their ''grub,' and July 1st to in
crease their pay to $35 per month. They be-
vertisement called for a term of year or
more. The defense was that Mr.. Bartlett
had never promised them $35 per month after
July 1st and had paid them in full for their SER
vices. Mrs. Dickey was called by the plaintiff
and Mrs. Bartlett and E. D. Chase by the de-
fendant. Both pleas were made Friday after
noon and Judge Cornish charged the jury at
the opening of court Saturday morning, stat
ing that it was simply case of fact and in
volved no questions of law. The evidence
was contradictory, and it was for the jury to
decide who told the truth. The jury report
ed at 1920, having found verdict for the
plaintiff for the full sum sued, $50 20. The
jury was then excused to Monday at 2 p. m.
A. l.. Blanchard for plaintiff; Libby and Rog-
ers for defendant.
The case of Sidney L. Harmon VS.. Philip R.
Porter was opened before the jury Saturday
at 93c q. m. The plaintiff was formerly of
Liberty but had been police officer in Provi-
dence, R. l., for IL years. He owned the
homestead farm in Liberty, which he had
rented to the defendant in April, 1914, with the
agreement that he should buy the standing
lumber on the place and also erect on it his
portable saw mill, using the house to care
for his mill, etc. In October Mr.. Harmon found
that the defendant did not intend to buy the
timber, that he had used the hay in the barn,
had pastured his oxen in the fields and orchard.
that the house had been injured and some Of
his personal property was missing. He warn
ed him from the place and brought suit for