Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1856-05-24
LOCAL INTELLIGENCE.

! LOCAL INTELLIGENCE.
WrSpHAN CouNTr cornr.--The following was
the last jury trial Of the .4pril TERM
saifh, Tucker & Tate, vs.. Jo1ason & GoossH,
c0iria To,ensiey 4 Soa and O5adioh H. Pian.-
This was an action based upon the ailedged fraud
Of the defendants declaration containing several
counts. all. however. setting forth, in the main,
the same allegations, which we're in substance as
follows Tina, the defendants were, in the year
1852. carrying on the business Of purchasing aud
vending the American Porcelain fabries mannfac-
turei by Cartridge & Co, and, in the month Of
Decenber af thaty year, applied to the plaintiffs, then
resident at New London, in tho State Of connccti-
cut, and proposed to sell them this right for said
State, and also 10 furnish them with iron stone
china, or granite ware. in saeh quantities a. they
might orderi-that the negotiation was mainly con-
Quoted By Calvin Townsley and johnson, two Of the
defendants; aud contract was finally entered in
to between the parties. by which the plaintiffs we're
to buy Of defendants. $2s 900 worth Of said goods
and the defendants were to sell and deliver thi.
amount to m;-that they were to pay rs per
six months time from the delivery Of the goods
that the defendants in order to induce plaintiffs TO
enter into the contract and extort money from them
falsely aud fraudulently represented. among other
things, that they had power and we're authorized
by said Cartilage Co.. 10 append to said contract
written guaranty Of said Cartilage & Co. for
furnishing goods. and that said Cartridge & Co,
would be bound thereby = that the plaintiff, rely
ing upon the truth Of defendants representations,
tpaid over to said Townsley johnson the sum Of
$1,000, Tor S6l25, the defendants making a dis
count Of $50. or l2i per cent for cash down) be-
ing 20 per cent oftheir contract, but that the de-
PENDANTS had performed no part Of the contract,
and had wholly neglected and refused to furnish
the goods and before this action was brought the
said johnson & Goodell had become wholly insol-
vent, and refused to furnish goods or repay any
part Of the money thus obtained and the said
Cartilage Co. being called upon to fulfill, denied
their liability under the guaranty and refused to
perform.
The testimony Of the plaintiffs tended to show
that the defendants who conducted the negotiations
did represent that they had full power and author
y to contract for the sale and delivery Of the good.
mentioned In the contract and particularly 10 bind
the said Cartridge Co, to furnish the stone china
and to append this guaranty to the con,ract;-that
in fact the chief inducements to making the con-
tract, was. that they should be furnished in such
quantities as they might order, with the granite
ware that said Cartilage Co, did not At that
time or afterwards, manufacture or sell said ware
that said Cartilage & Co.. repudiated and denied
the power Of the defendants to append said guar
anty to said contract. and refused to be bound by
that they, the plaintiffs, did pay the sum Of
5000 as set forth in the declaration, and that
their orders for goods had never been responded TO-
except few small lots Of proclaim ware that
johnson Goodel, soon after the execution Of the
contract became insolvent and the plaintiffs there
upon went to New York. there saw Cartilage & Co.
aud made demand upon them for goods exhibit
ed their contract and the guaranty attached there
to that Cartilage Co., refused to deliver goods
at the times set forth in plaintiffs contract and
Informed plaintiffs, that they were under no ohli-
cations to furnish goods except according to the
stipulations ola contract entered into between
them cartridge Co.. and johnson & Goodell
that they did not manufacture the granite ware,
and that the guaranty to the plaintiffs contract
was placed there without authority from them, and
that they could not and would not fuldll II.
Testimony was also offered to show that the
plaintiffs, AFTER having made negotiations, and con-
cluded to enter into the contract, made arrange
ments somewhat extensively for the prosecution Of
the business under the same. hired store and went
to other expenses orders for goods we're made but
never answered, except In few instances to lin.
tied extent, in consequence Of which they were O.
bliged, after increasing expenses and paying the
said sum Of $1,000, to abandon the project and
suspend further attempts at business in that line
The parol testimony on part Of the plaintiffs was
that Of Smith and Tate-two Of the plaintiifs-and
one SiOddard Of New London, Conn. Dispositions
ofCartlidge and Ferguson were also used, and the
various contracts. between Cartilage Co., and
johnson & Gcodell. and between the latter and
Townsley & Son and Plat, and the contracts be-
tween the parties ia this suit were all put in evil
dence.
johnson & Goodell being non-residents. no SER
vice Of the writ has been made upon them there
FORE they are not, in fact. defendants in this suit
On the part of the defence il was commended that
no fraud had been practiced upon the PLAINTIFF
that the plaints in entering into the contract &C
cd upon their own knowledge and information OBJ
tanned upon personal examination Of the manu-
factory and its capacity for furnishing ware from
visits TO and conversation with Cartridge 4 Co.. in
respect TO the same and that no imposition was
ps~otioed or attempted on tho pay, Of defsudants.