1879-Annual Report - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

•r; • 21 Aware that we possessed no legal authority, to at- tempt to settle any claim, nevertheless, we considered it our duty to bring about a reconciliation if possible, and thereby stay the useless waste. of money necessary in litigation. With this object in view negotiations with Mr. Tidd were opened, whose suit was then pending; the result of our effort was an agreement of a settlement contingent upon the action of the town. At the annual March meeting this agreement was submitted to the meeting., whereby the town could for the sura of $3oo settle with Mr. Tidd. We were anxious that the town should accept the prop- osition., believing that it would not only be a com- mencement of settling the difficulties among ourselves, but also be far less expensive than continuing in law. The town however thought otherwise by rejecting the offer of settlement, and preferred to let the law take its course. The result of pursuing the latter course, was that the sum of $934.44 was required to pay the expenses of the suit, instead of settling for $3oo, there- by losing the snug little amount of $634.44. • Notwithstanding, the amount of costs for this suit may appear large, it may perhaps serve as an admoni- tion for both parties, and others, to reflect well, before commencing or continuing in law. During the past summer a notice was received from Charles Robinson jr., stating that Mr. George W. Robinson had placed in his possession, a claim against the town, and suggested an interview for the purpose of effecting a settlement. After considering the subject at length, we came to the conclusion, as fourteen individuals, who had been as- sessed, had honorably given a receipt releasing the 22 town from any claim on account of the Drainage Act, it would be an act of injustice to them, for the town to pay others who had been assessed; we therefore con- cluded not to entertain or receive any proposition for a settlement, believing it would in the end be for the in- terest of the town to have alt suits now pending settled byajury. WOOD VS. HUDSON. Mr. David Wood has commenced a suit for damages caused by deepening the water course, which makes the the division boundary on one side of his estate. Mr. Wood was awarded $30 by the Selectmen, in 1874. From this award an appeal to the County Commissioners was made, who confirmed the award of the Selectmen. An application for a sheriff's jury was made, and the ap- plication granted. By an informality the jury could not adjudge the case, and were discharged. We have been requested to consider proposals for a settlement. As the affair was somewhat complicated, we chose not to interfere, but let the law take its course. ARLINGTON VS. LEXINGTON. In regard to the town of Arlington objecting to be assessed upon property which it is claimed is exempted by law, a hearing before one of the judges of the Su- preme Court, upon an agreed statement of facts, has resulted in sustaining the assessment. An appeal from the decision has been taken to the full bench of the Su- preme Court.