Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1921-04-09

tain potatoes anu HdQ TcCClSSo ioSS
potatoes of much inferior quality
and less in weight than he had order
ed, and there was much dry rot in
the shipment Of potatoes which ar
rived for him at Gardiner. The plain
tiff claims that the sale was made
through the agency Of the Shaddock-
Carney Co. of Boston, of which Hor-
ace b. Belts of Cambridge. Mass,
was resident manager. E. L. Good
! speed and George w. Heselton OF
Gardiner are counsel for the plaintiff.
The defendant is represented by A.
IS. Crawford and John B. Roberts OF
| Caribou and Carroll NJ, Perkins of
Waterville.
7 The only witness who gave testi-
mony in the case at yesterdays ses-
sion was Mr. Belts who identified the
confirmation of the sale, and testi-
fed that Mr.. Shapiro's order was for
Ggeen Mountain No. potatoes. He
had later received a letter from Mr..
Shapiro concerning the shipment.
The case will be resumed at the
opening Of today's session. The
criminal docket will be called at 2
o'clock this Saturday afternoon.
Case Of Peacock, Admir-. vs.. Ambrose
| When the case of Peacock, admin
istrator VS.. Ambrose was resumed
yesterday morning. the testimony of
the defense was continued, the first
witness called being John B. Robin
son of Oxford. He testified that he
did not see any signs of any mental
incapacity Of Mr.. Faunce during his
illness.
Minor A. Albee Of Lewiston, daugh-
ter Of the defendant in the case, tes-
titled that Mr.. Faunce had lived at
their house previous to going to the
hospital. Mr.. Faunce was Mrs. Am
brose's brother. She had heard Mr..
Faunce say before he went to the
hospital that Mrs. Ambrose was
making a good home for him, that he
intended to give all of his property
to her, and that he did not intend to
give any more property to his brother
who lived in the West, and who is
now dead. While at the hospital, she
had heard Mr.. Faupce say that he
had given his sister the power of at
torney for he wanted to know where
the money went during the time he
! lived. She saw no change in Mr..
Faunce as far as his mind was con-
cerned. After he had left the hos
pital, she had heard him say that the
money was Mrs. Ambrose's.
Attorney Nelson then read the
deposition of DR.. E. S. Hannaford,
formerly of Readfield and now of
/ Springfield, Mass. He had heard
Mr.. Faunce say that Mrs. Ambrose
was making good home for him
and was taking good care of him;
/ and after his return from the hos
pital, Mr.. Faunce had told him that
! Mrs. Ambrose would pay him for
his services, that she was his pay
master now, that he had given her
all Of his money before he had left
! the hospital.
/ With this deposition the evidence
| in the case was closed. In the alb
/ sence of the jury. Attorney Nelson.
counsel for the defendant, made a
! motion that the judge direct q ver-
! dict for the defendant on the ground
! that the cause of action was known
to the plaintiff in 1911 and that it is
! too late now for the action; and on
| the further ground that there is no
fraud of concealment in the case.
that Mrs. Ambrose has said right
| along that she had the money and
! that it was a gift to her from Mr.
| Faunce.
Attorney E. NJ Thompson for the
! defendant argued that the money
went into Mrs. Ambrose's possess
sion by virtue of power of attorney
and upon the death of Mr.. Faunce,
she became a constructive trustee,
| and it was her legal duty to stand
ready to explain and give full de-
tails of all the money transactions
| that she had with Mr.. Faunce, and
that she had refused to give all this
information. On the matter Of the
/ statute of limitations, Attorney
Thompson cited authorities to the
effect that the plaintiff must have
! known for six years or have had full
: recourse for asccrtaining all of the
facts. He argued that Mrs. Am
brose had refused to give the full
| information.
Judge Beane made the suggestion
/ to the counsel on both sides that the
case be reported at once to the law
! court, rather than giving it to the
jury, as the matter might eventual
ly go to the law court in any event
A conference was held between the
counsel on the matter and it was
! decided to let the matter be decided
by the jury. The case was then ar
gued by Attorney John E. Nelson
! of the law firm of Andrews & Mel
son for the defendant, and E. M.
| Thompson for the plaintiff, and
Judge Beane gave the charge to the
jury.
Judge Beane in his charge point
ed out that there were three ques-
tons for the jury to decide: First,
was there any gift by Faunce to his
sister, Mrs. Ambrose, and If there
was, what property passed under the
gift; second, was the cause of ac-
ton fraudulently concealed from the
representatives of the Faunce es-
tate; third, was the cause Of action
started within six years or within the
statute of limitations.
RaiiNinuc Nen,c l.~-- All