The Caledonian. [volume] (St. Johnsbury, Vt.) 1837-1867, 1856-05-10
For The CALEDoNIAN.l
The Washington Co. Mutual ms. Co.,
Of Granville, NY.

Of Granville, N. Y.
MEssHs. EDITORS 1t NAV be- a matter
of interest TO the numerous rolicv-hoders Of
this Company in the State of Vermont, te
know what success the present holders of
their premium notes are having in their al
tempts to collect the assessments on the same
by legal process.
The result Of the case of Chandler & Bar
row VS.. Peter Buchanan, tried at Qneechv
Village, Hartford, w., was verdict for the
defendant There was a large array of coun-
sel-on the part Of the plaintiffs, Mr.. Marsh
(ofthe firm Of Washburn & Marsh, Mr. Bar
rett (of the firm Of Corners & Barrct,). and
the Hon. Andrew Tracy; on the part Of the
defendant, Roberts 4 Chit,cnden and \. T.
Hun'on. The importance of this case Law in
the fact that it was an experimental suit-thc
leader Of series of suits to recover assessments
upon the premium notes o: the Washington
County Mutual Insurance Company. Having
been brought before justice of the plaintiff
choosing, and tried by very substantial jury
OF MIR Barrow'S own friends and neighbors
(among whom was the Hon. John Porter
under circumstances of great disadvantage to
the defendant as to his defense, the result
ought to@ati,fy the parties who are prosccut-
ing these claims that they cannot be recover
ed in any fair trial. The main grounds OF The
defense were that the insurance was obtained
by the fraudulent representations Of the
agent, and that the assessment itself wa,
fraudulent 1t appeared that the agent rep
resented that the company had large casl,
capital on hand accruing from advance paw
ments, when, as in fact it had but small
amount, and that consisting Of claims against
agents. |; further appeared tina: by the com
pany's report of January /, :s5l, it was good
for near $1,000 as of that date. ont with la
bilitics to De paid in future Of something short
of 100000. 1hute,n days aff,rrards the
company assessed its premium notes of over
ore million Of dollars some thirty per cent,
thus raising, probably, about 100000 The
disposition Of this large sum was no; account
ed for. except ~ the pa,7e deposition Of
Arch Bishop, which seems not to have been
satisfactory to the Jury
There were other points in the defense not
necessary to be stated. 1t was drvc!oped on
trial that the amount of assessments sold. or
pretended to bc sold. to these Plaintiffs in
Vermont. is about ST. 900, and that they
gave their notes, therefore. for IS. 300: thai,
the note has been paid in part Nv Wa>hlurn
& Marsh tv means of the collections. which
amount to 81 ,4n4 or 81 400 An attempt WAS
made to elicit from one o. the plaintiffs (B,r-
row.. who was called by the defendant. what
interest, if any. Wa>hhurn & Marsh had in
the purchase or the assessments but the AT
tempt was stoutly resisted by the plaintiff :
'o"'EN'' II olI'Nhlt'I 'iltt wv purchase Wa
effected through them and have it from a
reliable source that Mr.. Marsh >ecr.cl ,hr
passage of the act of last fail allowing these
suits to be brought in the name o. the a>.i,,,-
cc>. and with Mr. Mar>h's assurance that it
was not drawn with reference to anv varticu-
lar case or eases The shrew,ncss Of the
parties was shown in the fact that thew So
cured the proposition of the company before
the passage of the act and completed i; after
wards George Chandler, one of the 1!ain-
titi>. Is young man some ~ wears OF age. a
student in the Office of Peck * Harvey. of
Burlington. who are also attorneys for the
;,ain;i;ls. FErEE BUCHANAN.
Barnet, Nav ). 1876