The independent-reporter. [volume] (Skowhegan, Me.) 1909-1955, 1921-04-14
SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT

saw Pratt hand Bush some greenbacks
Afterwards the deputy met Pratt who
offered him a drink. Under cross ex-
animation conducted by W. B. Brown,
attorney for the respondent Clark
stated that he couldn't recall any
trouble he had had with Bush when
he had worked for him, and that he
found no liquor in searching the prem
Uses hut found some mash that had
been dumped out back of the buildings.
Judge e. w. Sawyer of North Arson
told of the hearing in the lower court
from the records he had of the case.
The defense claimed that no such sale
had been made and that a significant
fact against the State was that the
bottle was not shown in court to prove
definitely that it's contents had been
really alcohol. Bush further claimed
that he was at party the night that
Clark claimed to have seen HIM hand
the liquor to Prtt. The jury dispersed
after lengthy conference.
THE MYSTERY OF THE MISSING
COAT
Monday afternoon In continuance OF
the criminal docket the larceny case
against Maurice Tuttle of Summer st.
this town was placed before the
Jurors. The foreman, DR.. I. l.. Salley,
was excused and both supernumeraries
were challenged. This necessitated the
calling of an extra juror from the
room and E. B. Curtis of Skowhegan
filled the panel. Herman Perkins was
appointed foreman. The case was
opened by County Attorney Thorne for
the state, w B. Brown of Madison de-
Tending Mr. futile. The story as told
by the attorney for the state was sub
stantially as follows: Mr.. and Mrs.
Timothy SWEET moved from Summer
st. to Factory st. December 28th last
and Maurice futile moved them. as
sisted by his stepson, Harry Lancaster
and Roland Trask Mr.. SWEET was
never able to locate his coat after the
and subsequently accused
futile of the theft of the same. The
assumption was that futile who lived
next door to the Summer st. home OF
SWEET took the coat which was lined
it'll sleeps wool, into his own home.
Mr.. and Mrs. SWEET. their son, James
SWEET, Trial Justice T. G. Lord and
Sheriff John A. Mooers were called as
witnesses for the state. Mr.. SWEET
told of bringing the garment down and
didn't see 1t on the load, testifying to
other details connected with the load,
of the goods on the team and de-
scription of the sled. Mrs. SWEET gave
similar testimony to that of her hus-
band and told of notifying futile, who
she said spoke rather sarcastically to
her when she notified him. James
SWEET told of being present when the
goods arrived at their destination.
Sheriff Mooers said that subsequently
ruttla had said in his presence that IL
he could settle the affair for money he
would plead guilty. He offered to pay
The sum of $50. Trial Justice Lord
who was present at the conversation
between the Sheriff and Tuttle offered
similar testimoney to that of the sher-
n. He said that Tuttle said he could
not produce the coat. The defense was
mainly that the coat was lost. Mr.. and
Mrs. futile, Harry Lancaster and Mrs.
celeste Roullard were called as wit
nesses. futile testified that the load
was not tied on in any way. He was
unable to describe the coat but had
seen Mr.. SWEET wear it. He was will
ng to settle because he thought he
had ought to If he had lost it off from
the load when he was moving the
goods Stated that he didn't see the
coat at all the night he moved SWEET,
but that Lancaster or Trask might
have put 1t on the team. Mrs. Celeste
Roullard, a .neighbor said she had no
iced the load as being high one and
that it swayed on its way down the
street. The jury acquitted Mr.. futile
and the whereabouts of the missing
coat is still mystery.
GREEN CASES DEFAULTED
The cases of H. F. Green VS.. John
w. Green and Mrs. Catherine Green
vs.. John w. Green, Skowhegan par
les, were defaulted for $50, no court
rial being held.
THREAD AGENCY VS.. HAMILTON &
YOUNG COMPANY
The action was brought by The
Thread Agency, a corporation doing