Burlington free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1827-1865, 1858-01-29
SUPREME COURT.
Cnl11ryDEx COUNTY, Jan. 7, l5j

lHlTTENDEN COUNTY, Jan. 7, Io0S.
This court concluded its session on Thurs
day. This was the first session Of tho Supreme
Court in tho state under tho new system, and
its proceedings and results seemed to provo a
favorable commentary upon the change
All tho new judges were present, and gave the
highest evidence Of their individual fitness for their
Office, in the impartial bearing and independence of
their decisions.
follows
GUILroRD, CLARK WIRES " sMIrn, ELpRlD5E
1 LEE lilies with the court for judgment.
WHlrFLE '. ADAMsi-Seue tacias against the
defendant bail for costs in a cause in tho Couu-
ty Court The bail was entered by recognsonce
before tho clerk vacation. Tho defence rested
On the ground that the clerk had no power to take
a rccosuizance in vacation and also upon the fact
that the plaintiff had discharged the bail by a
levy upon the land Of the principal, which ap-
pcarcd to have been inyailcd for informaity-
Judgment for the defendant. No opinion was
prepared and the precise ground Of the decision is
not known. 1t would seem that rccognilances
taken in vacation, are to say the least pn,afc Sc
curity. W W. Peck for plaintiff, C. Adams and
Geo. F. Edmunds for defendant.
CARPENTER V. PIER. Held that q justices judg-
ment rendered in the State of New York in case
within his jurisdiction, is conclusive here
Held also that warrantor who was notified of
the pendency Of such suit and had an opportunity
to appear therein and defend or prosecute, was
concluded by such judgment. Held also, that the
act of Congress Of 1890, providing for mode Of
authenticating proceedings in one State to be used
in another, does not treiuie the common law mode
Of proof in such cases Asahel Peck, and J
Mack, for the plaintiff. c. Russell, for defend.
ant.
BLOOD ', BATrsi-heard, and continued to the
general terms for argument,
AUSTIN Y. Curtis ABKER;-heard, and con
tinued to the general term for argument
STATE '. VT. c. R. X. Co., AND STATE v. VT. {
CANADA R. R. Co., Indictment for nuisance in o.
structing highways by train. Held that railroac
companies whose roads and train. are in the hands
Of receivers of the Court of Chancery are not re-
spon.ible for nuisance occasioned by the action Of
such receiver, or their agents. t. X. Hard State
Attorney, Underwood and French, and Geo c
Edmunds, for respondents.
TowS'END Y. Ri-heard, and continued
| to the general term for argument.
STATE ', WILLIsTos ct al heard and contin
ued to the general term for decision,
WHlPrLE JONES v. BRIGGs Held that SO
curity taken by one Of two joint sureties, who i
also separate surety for the principal for his liza
bilites enure to the benefit Of the other eouall,
with tho surety taking the security. When sucl
security is converted into money it is to be apple,
to the liquidation Of such debts as have been pai
by either Of the suretes, such they shall frs
pay afterwards, and it cannot be held to be ap
piled either to contingent liabilities not matured
or to the private dealings Of the surety taking tn
security, with the principal. ]. Mack and W
". Peck for plaintiff, W. ?. Briggs and D
Roberts, for defendant.