Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1918-03-14
SUPREME COURT
Defense Opened in
Lumber Case on Trial
Wednesdays Session Taken Up with
Testimony Of Blaine s. ViIes and
Samuel II. Boardman Of Augusta
Case Viii Be Resumed This Morn
inq

The defense was opened at Wednes-
days session Of the supreme court in
the case Of Blaine S. Viles Of Augusta
VS.. the Kennebec Lumber Co. which
was commenced Tuesday morning. The
trial Of the case will be resumed today.
At the opening Of the Wednesday
morning session the plaintiff, Mr..
Viles, took the stand upon cross-ex-
animation. He testified that the pine
was to go in as part Of the contract.
The second year Of the contract he had
put in good deal Of pine and had
told Mr.. Boardman that it was worth
ST.. Mr.. Boardman had paid that price
and the third year Mr.. Boardman had
|agreed to pay that price also, as there
was good deal of pine in the logs.
The contract price, however, had been
$11. Plaintiff testified that in the
spring Of 1917 there was not we'll de-
veloped market for fir of that sort
He knew os no sales Of 100000 or p
100000 feet Of fir that spring.
Defense Opened
The defense in the action was then
outlined by f. L. Mclean of the law
firm of Williamson, Burleigh & Nc
Lean. it being briefly as follows: De-
tense claimed that the plaintiff had
made a breach of the contract in not
furnishing the number of thousand
feet of logs called for during the win
ter of 1867 and also that the plain
tiff did not show good faith in his per-
Torrance Of the contract. and having
preached his contract he cannot re-
cover in the action unless he can show
that he did act in good faith and sub
stantially performed the contract,
which the defense claims he did not
do.
Samuel H. Boardman
The first witness for the defense was
Samuel II. Boardman of Augusta,
treasurer of the Kennebec Lumber Co.
He testified that pine Is the most pop
ular wood in the manufacture of box
board but fir was used very extensive
ly. The I<ennebec Lumber Co. began
operations on the Kennebec river in
the spring of 1914 and had been man
ufacturing here for six or seven
months when 1t entered into the
agreement with the Boyd & Harvey
Co. and Blaine S. Viles. Witness had
expected 100000 feet of fir to be cut
that year, but Mr.. Viles had told him
that the contractors were getting more
fir and would probably have more than
the 100000 feet. Mr.. Boardman had
told him that he did not want more
than that amount but would take the
excess fir and deduct it from the s.
IN l,o lal ho
Of the contract. Mr.. Boardman had al
SO had some pine the first year. In
der a separate agreement from the
contract Mr.. Boardman had said he
would buy from Mr.. Viles logs too
small for saw logs and also tops and
Mr.. Viles had confirmed that arrange
ment by letter. In September. 1916,
Mr.. Boardman had entered into an
agreement with Mr.. Eiles by which
the latter was to cut up the logs
largely into 16-foot lengths and the
former was to make no charge for
counting and make no claim for short
age.
Witness testified that Mr. Viles had told
him he was not getting as much fir as he
had expected but was getting pine and
had asked Mr.. Boardman if he would ac-
cept pine as a substitute for fir. Mr..
Boardman had answered that he did not
wish to exceed the $4,000, but if Mr. viles
wished he might substitute pine for fir
under the contract At the time of his
settlement witness found that Mr.. Viles
had a different idea Of the agreement
Witness testified as to the overflow fir
and said that as the pine was substituted