Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1915-09-23
franklin COUNTY
SUPREME COURT
At HARRINGTON

IOH, NC, 0CPI. Gu LAG N0SS
Of Wallace NJ. Fellows, VS.. Henry
Rackliffe ct al. was next heard. This
was an action to recover sum Of
money for use of automobile, for dam
ages to same and expense of repairs
The palintiff testified on Nov. 2. 1914.
he let to Mr.. and Mrs. Henry Rackliffe
an automobile to go to Aroostook Co.,
the distance Of 145 miles and they were
to return in four days with same
Plaintiff told defendants that the car
was all right but he would not be re-
sponsible for anything pertaining to
the car after it left his garage. Mr..
and Mrs. Rackliffe were gone much
longer time than they planned and
when they returned the crank shaft
was broken and Mr.. Fellows was at
the expense of $26 to have it repaired.
Plaintiff expected Rackliffe to pay pro
rata over and above the distance men,
toned. The defendants. Mr.. and Mrs.
Rackliffe. both testified that they sup
posed the distance to Oakf1eld was l40
miles whereas it was ESQ in all. but
they engaged the car to go into Aroos-
took county for $50. They had much
trouble with the car and it took them
a longer time to get to their destina-
ton. The machine was all out of ord
err The crank shafts broke and the
bearings were put in wrong and they
made no contract to repair an automo-
bile that was not in good running order
when they took it, Other witnesses
were introduced. F. W. Butler was
counsel for the plaintiff. Thomas D.
Austin for defendant. The jury return
ed verdict of s57 for plaintiff.
The case of Frank and John Smith
vs. Marion J. King was heard Monday
morning. This was an action, to re-
ceive wages alleged to be due plaintiffs
for labor. Austin for plaintiffs: Rich
ards for defendant. Plaintiffs testified
they worked for some time for defend
ant but received no pay Their testi-
mony was rather vague. They testi-
fed as TO working about the place,
milking cows. doing chores, etc. De-
PENDANT testified that she tried to help
them in every way and advised them
TO make home for their aged mother
who was on charity and she would help
them which testimony showed she did
but the boys got dissatisfied and left.
The matter was adjusted out Of court.
1t is understood settlement was made
for $40
The case taken up late Monday aft
ernoon was Kenneth and Grace Gill
VII hi
was a writ of action to recover $3.50
for labor and s135 for money put out
for Ellis. Austin for plaintiff: Rich
ards for defendant.
Plaintiff testified that he and wife
went to work for defendant March 80.
1914. and that arrangements were dis
cussed providing for caring for Mr..
and Mrs Ellis for life, defendants We're
to have the farm, farming tools and
personal property. not including the
big house or four acres Of land. Plain
tiffs worked from March 80. 1914, to
Jan. list. 1915. Plaintiff testified that
he had 5000 in his pocket when he
went to the Ellis place, laid out $3.50 Of
it for food. farm implements. paid So
on taxes of property. helped care for
Mr. Ellis, who was ill carrying him in
his arms about the house, also was at
an expense to hire help about the farm
for six weeks.
January /. 1915. Mr.. and Mrs Ellis
and plaintiffs all went to Elmer E.
Richards office to have papers made
out to deed the place The personal
property was not inserted in the deed.
Plaintiff then told Mr.. and Mrs. Ellis
they would leave. Asked if he needed
any notice Mr.. Ellis said. mo, go any
time" Then left Mr.. Ellis.