Evening Republican, Volume 15, Number 75, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 29 March 1911 — BULLDOG FEASTS ON J. H. N’NEALL’S FANCY CHICKENS. [ARTICLE]

BULLDOG FEASTS ON J. H. N’NEALL’S FANCY CHICKENS.

Former Rensselaer Han Is After Express Company for S6B, the Alleged Value of Chickens. The following interesting story of fancy chickens, a hungry bulldog, a stubborn express company and a persistent plaintiff will be of interest to Rensselaer people because the plaintiff is John H. O’Neall, son-in-law of E. M. Parcells, of this city, and for some time a resident here. Here is the story complete, copied from the Louisville Courier-Journal: According to testimony given during a trial in the Clark Circuit Court at Jeffersonville yesterday a bulldog ate S6B worth of chickens while riding as a chance fellow-passenger with the fowls in an express wagon. The case at bar was brought against the United States Express Company by John H. O’Neall, who is at present located at Jeffersonville as a field examiner for the State Board of accounts, and is working on the books at the Indiana reformatory. Mr. O’Neall is a chicken fancier, and alleged in his petition that the dog killed a hen worth SSO, three others valued at $5 each and two fowls worth $1.50 apiece.- No decision was reached in the case yesterday.

Mr. O’Neall sued the express company to recover the alleged value of the six chickens, which he shipped from Indianapolis to his sister at Washington, Ind., September 15, 1910, to be cared for. The fowls never arrived at their destination, and, after maklffw-several attempts to collect the price at which he valued them, Mr. O’Neall filed suit for the recovery of S6B, which he claimed the fowls were worth.

On a motion for a special finding on thejacts, the evidence of the plaintiff was heard yesterday. In substance this was that the fowls were sent to Cincinnati, and from there were turned over to a road running direct to Washington. T§ be transferred from one depot to another in Cincinnati, the chickens were placed in a wagon containing a bulldog being shipped in a crate. The dog proceeded to make a meal off of the expensive chickens, killing all of them, according to the testimony. There is no denial by the defendant that the chickens were killed by the bulldog, but the action is being resisted on the ground that the shipping contract fixed the value of the chickens at $lO.