Oxford Democrat. [volume] (Paris, Me.) 1833-1933, 1916-10-17

More or less of an education in forest
ry was the second case of Friday, which
also was concerned with pulp wood, and
was illuminated if not beautified and
adorned by number of butt cuts of pop
lar trees which appeared as exhibits,
and taken all together made quite re-
spectacle basket of kindling wood.
The case was Edward W. Penley va.
George N. Emmons, and was for the
value of twelve and one-half cords of
poplar pulp wood, cut by Fred c. Verrill
of Bethel on the Emmons farm in Green
wood in the summer of 1918, and sold to
Edward w. Penley of West Paris. This
pulp wood was later hauled away by
George N. Emmons, the defendant in the
case, who now occupies the EmmOns
Charles o. Small of Madison for defend.
ant.
In June, 1898, Joseph Emmons, then
the owner of the farm, gave deed to
Justin E. McIntire and Ira johnson of
Waterford, conveying to them the pop
lar, birch aud Eastwood timber on one
lot and half lot which constituted part
of the farm. No limit of time is named
in the deed for the timber to be remov-
ed. In 1910 McIntire & johnson gave
Fred c. Verrill quitclaim deed of their
interest 10 the timber on these lots, and
in 1918 Mr.. Verrill cut the poplar in
question, which Mr.. Emmons later haul
ed away, and for the value of which this
suit is brought.
The contention between the parties
was quite simple in statement, the plain
tiff maintaining that the pulp wood cut
in 1918 was part of the timber on the
farm when the deed was given McIntire
& Johnson in 1898. The defence on the
other hand contends that what was con-
veyed was only that which was timber
suitable for cutting at the date of the
deed, and that trees which were then
too small to cut, and trees which have
since grown out of the ground, are the
property of the owner of the land.
To ascertain the age of the trees which
had been cut was the endeavor, and for
this purpose each party had gone to the
cutting, and from the stumps and some
small piles of the cut wood which were
left had secured samples, and these
samples were produced in court. There
were introduced as expert witnesses on
the age of trees, on the part of the plain
tiff, George Cole of Greenwood, Josiah
Moody of Bethel, and w. a. JENNIE of
South Paris, and on the part of the de-
PENDANT James NJ. Day of Woodstock
and j. Herbert Ring of Greenwood. But
like the witnesses in another case, Meth
or so did their witness agree together.
For the same cuts which were estimated
by the plaintiffs experts to come from
trees of thirty to forty years of age, were
estimated by the defendants experts as
showing from thirty down to as low as
nineteen years of age.
This case will 60 to the law court for a
construction of the deed as applied to
this matter. Judge Savage submitted
to the jury two questions on matters of
fact, which, with the answers of the
jury, were az follows:
Question /. What was the market
value of the pulp wood taken by the de-
PENDANT and sued for In this action,
which came from poplar trees that were
standing and growing on June 20, 1898,
with interest from the date of the WRIT
Answer; Sixty-six dollars and seventy
cents (se6.7O).
Question 2. What was the market
value of the pulp wood taken by the de-
PENDANT and sued for in this action, which
came from poplar trees that on June 20,
1898, were large enough to be suitable
for pulp wood, or for commercial OF
manufacturing uses, with interest from
the date of the writ? Answer: Nothing.
Saturday morning the case of William