The voice of freedom. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1839-1848, 1847-04-08

OF the court neat 10 De neld on Lne uTsL 1ues
day of May neTt." The neat term OF the
| court was to be the first Tuesday of May, l 844
Another term was to be held on the frs
Tuesday of Nov. 1874. AT the session O
1914 the legislature changed the time Of hold
ing the spring term of the county court from
May to the 4th Tuesday of March, 1915, sc
that there was no term in May, 1915.
Held, that the latter "nerf' should be re
iected and the deposition admitted
Redfeld j. said he saw no reason why q
deposition might not properly be taken to be
used at q term subsequent to the meet term
provided the pending case was not to be tried
till such subsequent term.
The defendant covenanted to pay one half
the taxes on the leased premises. The whole
of the taxes were assessed against the plain
tiff, and collected of him. The defendant
to which the plaintiff replied, notice, and
thereon issue was Joined. Held that the is
sue was immaterIai.
Horace Onion " Nathaniel Fullerton. Judg-
ment in C. C. for the plaintiff. Exceptions
by the defendant. Arg ued by Mr. N Rich
aldson for the plaintiff, and by Mr. Stoughton
and Mr. Tracy for the defendant. Opinion of
the court pronounced by DaVisJ. Judgment
Of the county court affirmed
Assumpsit for money had and received
The suit was commenced against Fullerton
and Onion, partners. Albert Onion, the
partner, pleaded his discharge in bankruptcy,
and had judgment thereon. On the trial the
plaintiff called the said Albert Onion as a
witness to prove that he obtained the money
of plaintiff on the partnership account. He
was objected to by defendant. His discharge
in bankruptcy was shown, but no other dis
charge or release to or from him. The coun-
ty court held him admissible. The Supreme
court affirmed the judgment for the plain
tiff.
Cummings and Manning v. Levi Gasset-
Judgment in c. C. for plaintiff, Exceptions
by defendant Argued by Mr. P. L. Wash
burn for the plaintiffs, and MIR c. French and
Mr. Converse for the defendant.
Action on note and count for money had
and received. The note was in common form,
except the words 81 promise to pay" we're
omitted-rcading d" For value reed Of Cum
mings and Manning Qorty) dollars on de-
mand and interest" and signed by defendant.
At the bottom was memorandum" payable
in one year" Redfeld J.said the court doubt
ed whether the memorandum ought to be tax
eli as DaTL Vi llc uObc Ildt SuCh hlChiol oiioo
we're generally construed as part of the note
when made for the benefit of the signer. But
the court held that the paper was at least an
acknowledgement Of having received money.
That as the hiatus could be filled only by the
words 81 promise to pay" he thought it might
be treated as being a note-that it differed
from the omission Of the number of dollars,and
other omissions which might be filled with one
thing as we'll as another. \
There was az question under plea of the
statute Of limitation on which the court held
the admissions of the defendant to he q sui"
fcient Acknowledgements, to avoid the statute
within the principles of the cases decided Ill
this state. Judgment affirmed.
John BrintneH v. Ana0S w, Warren, T''uS-
tee. Judgment in G. c. against the trustee. |
Exceptions by trustee. Opinion Of court
pronounced by Redfeld j. Case remanded
to the county court for other proceedings.
In the county court the trustee disclosed |
at length. The plaintiff filed allegations. On
the trial in the county court the plaintiff Of
fered no proof under the allegations. The |
plaintiff claimed that the trustee should be
held, for that he held the property Of the
principal debtor by assignment i'll fraud of
The County Court rendered judgment !
against the trustee on the ground Of fraud
Exceptions were allowed, and the case came
up to be tried by the Supreme Court as on
error.
The Supreme court held that there was
nothing in the record tending to show any
fraud, and therefore the judgment of the
court below must be reversed. The judge
said that it was the usual practice in such
cases for the Supreme Court to render final
Judgment for trustee, but that the court would
end this back to give the plaintiff, an oppor-
unity to make up case containing evidence
If fraud, as the court presumed that some
Kings were taken for granted in the court be-
ow, which did not appear on the record.
Joel LuN v. Caleb f. Mathews. Judgment
n C. for the plaintiff. Exceptions by the
defendant, Argued by Mr. Converse for the
plaintiff, and by Mr. Coolidge for the defend
mt. Kellogg, j., pronounced the opinion of
he Court Judgement of the County Court
eversed Case remanded to the County
Court, for another trial.
Assumpsit for the price of wood. Evans
lad mortgaged his farm. After foreclosurs
md Just before the time of redemption expir-
ID, he cut and piled up on the said farm the
wood in question. The wood was attached
~ Plaintiffs deputy on writ against Evans
md by some arrangement was sold before
Judgment by the officer to the Defendant
The sale was made after the time of redemp-
ion had expired, the wood was the remain
ng where it was first piled. The mortgage
orbade the defendant to remove the wood
md he did not remove it.
Held that Evans had no property in the
wood, and nothing passed to Matthews by the
ale, even if it be treated as Il regular Sher-
# sale,--that the wood belonged to the mort
,agee.
Solomon Downer V. Clark Chamberlin.-
in G. c. for defendant Exceptions
~ the plaintiff. Argued by Mr. Hunton and
Mr. Tracy for the plaintiff, and by Mr. Walk
II and Chandler for the defendant Opinion