The independent-reporter. [volume] (Skowhegan, Me.) 1909-1955, 1922-02-09


many IS Damas LaFond of the LaFond
Dry Goods store, which was being
ricd yesterday afternoon was prob
pbly the last civil case OF the term.
I'm that event the criminal docket will
70 taken up today. Thirty-fve in
lietments were returned by the grand
iury and it is probable that it will
lake fully week to dispose of the
criminal matters. One day will be
leyoted to divorces and the final ad-
Sournment of court is not expected
b,ntl the end of next week.
As the result of the verdict for the
,efense in the case of John A Burke
cf Jaekman, against Ellsworth A. Pi-
ber. administrator in the estate OF the
late Nelson w. BARLEY of Jackman,
which was ordered by Judge Spear
MONDAY afternoon in Supreme Judi
rial Court, on the grounds that the
Two notes for $1,000 and $1400, the val
ne of which MIR. Burke sought to re-
cover from the BARLEY e. tate, were
given for illegal consideration, the
Two cases of William Murtha against
Mr.. and Mrs. Burke will probably
abide by the decision in the Burke VS.
ADMINISTRATOR case. The two cases OF
Ellsworth A. Piper, administrator
against the Burkes were defaulted by
agreement.
FOREMAN MILLER DRAWN TO
SERVE IN L. S. DISTRICT COURT
Owing to E. S Miller, of Norridge-
wock. foreman of the second jury be-
ing drawn to serve on the L. S. Dis
trict Court. Mr.. Miller was excused
and p. j. Phinney, of Madison. was
elected foreman. y. j. Moore, of Moose
River. was excused, and the vacancies
were filled by supernumaries.
HOLDEN VS. HENDERSON
The case of Frank r. Holden of
Portland. petitioner for partition vs.
William John Henderson of Dennis
hown was begun Monday afternoon.
Merrill & Merrill of Skowhegan for
he plaintiff and Jas. II. Hudt on OF
,uilford for the defense. The petit
oner asks for the partition of piece
bf land in Dennistown Pit, known as
the Henderson homestead farm. the
petitioner claiming that he owned one
ladf of the farm. through a deed given
to'him by RobertiJ Joseph Henderson. a
brother of the defendant, This prop
crty was decided to John Henderson.
father of Robert Joseph and William
John Henderson, by James Kennedy,
in 1874 SubsequeptlS John Hender-
on. about four years later decided the
place to his two sons, whose names
have jdst been given. The defendant
claimed that he owned the entire
property through deed given him
by his brother, II. J. Henderson, prior
to the deed which r. J. Henderson
gave to Mr.. Holden. Attorney Will
liam Folsom Merrill opened the case
for the plaintiff and read the two
| deeds, one of which was from john
| Henderson to the two sons and the
other from Robt. Jos, Henderf ON to
Mr. Holden the plaintiff. No witnesse es
were called.
The main point of contention in the
defense was whether Mr. Holden was
acquainted with the former deed
which the defense claims was given by
K !. Henderson to W. ]. Henderson,
prior to the one which Mr.. Holden OBJ
tanned It.appears that w. J. Hen
derson failed to get his deed recorded
before Mr.. Holden got his deed re-
corded, which it is claimed IL for the
same piece OF property. From the
opening it appears that Holden had
lived in Jackman his entire life until
eight or nine years ago. The Hender-
son homestead farm is located on the
oh mil
of Jackman Station. In few years
after John Henderson decided the farm
to his two sons in 1883 he died and an
arrangement ensued whereby W. /
HENDERSON remained in the old home.
and r. j. Henderson built log cabin
To the north on the property where
he lived; from that time on the Last
mentioned did not again return to the
old homestead to live. There was no
conveyance made at that time how
ever Mr.. Holden eventually bought
store at Jackman Station and en-
gagged in business and w. j. Henderson
bought his supplies of him. Hender-
son became indebted to Holden and
eventually the amount of Indebtedness
reached $575, and Holden took note
Tor that amount In 1911 Henderson
and John MacCormack entered in a
partnership and operated a boarding
mousse at Jackman and Mr.. Holden ev-
entnally obtained their note for $500
IN 1911 on account for supplies. Suit
was finally brought to recover on the
TWO notes by Holden 1t appeared and
Judgment obtained on both notes, exc
eutions were taken out and a process
10 sell the real estate of Mr.. Hender-
son was in order As a result of the
SEIZURE of the real estate, the defense
calmS that not one half of the Hen
ner' on farm, but the entire farm was
selzed in connection with w. J. Hen
aersons Indebtedness to Holden.
winch would show, according to the
oe'ense that Holden must have known
,hat w. J. Henderson owned the en-
ure property and that at that time
II. J. Henderson did not own the same.
me Sheriff's sale, however, never
occurred as settlement was made The
aeei from r. J. Henderson to w. J.
henderson was alleged to have been
gwen July "A, 1906. and recorded in
me Somerset Registry Of Deeds on
'Deo 4. 1915.
william John Henderson was the
hFSt witness and testified mainly IN