Burlington free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1827-1865, 1860-01-13

ton.
Hard French for plaintiff.
G.F. Eimunds and J B. Wheeler for defendant.
Jan. 9TH.
One John LETTERS, of Colchester, Frenchman,
was arraigned in court this morning on chsrEe Of
stealing from James Barrett two silver watches,
six silver spoons, gold breast-pin and locket a
broadcloth coat and vest, to the value Of about
$50. The respondent pleaded guilty and was
sentenced to eighteen months confinement at hard
labor in the state prison. The following cases
were disposed of
James Nichols, Us. John Midget. The defendant
owed plaintiff about sl65. The auditor reports
that in the fall of 1884 the plaintiff aspireed to
the honor of representing the town of Westford in
the State Legislature, and intimated to defendant
that if he would use his influence in procuring
his election, he need not trouble himself about
the account, gave him ten dollars to use to the
best advantage" and particularly indicated
man who was friendly to his election, but refused
to attend the polls unless he was paid one dollar.
Mr.. Nichols was elected. The latter, however,
insists on his right to recover, and the defendant
refers to the Court to decide whether the agree
ment to electioneer was legal and if so, sufl
cent discharge of the plaintiffs claim.
l.. F. Wilbur and W. G. Shaw for Defendant
J. French and Daniel Roberts for Plaintiff.
Jas. o. CRAZY U. Jno. II. Sdsrman.-This is an
action for SANDER involving questions in pleading
raised on demurrer to the defendants pleas. Hard
and French for Plaintiff, Edmunds for Defendant.
d. p. Noyes U. Bro,cu & Trustee E. Thomas Glsed
Claimant Roberts Chittenden for Plaintiff,
Thomas Gleed of Lamoille Co. pro
In our notice Of Pratt Reath V. Brinsmaid,
yesterday, we should have said that the
| ton, Esq.
Only four cases remain to be argued and the
opinions of the judges will probably be rendered
on Monday afternoon.
The Court has been occupied to-day follows.
The argument in Hard rs. c. R. X. Go. was
concluded this morning by Messrs Hard and L. B.
Peck.
GEO. ". Becku1th rs. Guy Fyisbi, s. Sons. The
defendants were owners Of the canal boat Indus
try employed IN thar otc- business in transport
ing lime to New York; and, chance offered,
carrying freight for others the return trip.
Towards the close of navigation they contracted
with plaintiff to carry cargo of oats to n. York.
When the boat arrived at Fort Edward its further
progress stopped by the freezing Of the Canal,
expenses we're incurred in unloading and storing
the cargo &c and tho question &c whether de-
PENDANTS are to be considered in law as common
carriers, and as such liable for damages caused by
the delay.
Hard and French for plaintiff
G. F. Edmunds, for defendants
Jones s. TIb5etts Us. Edru Hard The apple Of
discord in this is a quantity Of brandy and
gin, which has long since been swallowed hut not
paid for The main question is whether the &C
tion on book account can be maintained for goods
wrongfully converted.
Edmunds for Plaintiffs.
Hard & French for defendant
Pratt e. ReatEp, Brlnsma,d and Trustee, is now
being argued by VIM. G. Shaw for Plaintiff, ard
Leverett B. Englesby for Defendant. The only
questions involved are as to the liability Of the
trustee.
Monday, Jan. 9th.
The case of STATE rs. William p. Briggs was
continued to the next term'of the court, the
application Of the respondents counsel.
The whole of to-days session has been occupied
with the argument of Stat, Us. Peter Mcdonald.
The respondents counsel except to a number of
points in the charge of Judge Bennett to the jury
who found him guilty of murder, relating mainly
to McDonnells confession to Mr. Selding Pattee,
shortly after his arrest and the effect of the test
mony Of Brown.
E. R. Hard, States Attorney, for the State,
Roberts Chittenden for the respondent
v. B. Flanagan u. Wood E. St. John The
plaintiff, as sheriff attached some cattle on a farm
in Milton, took lease of the farm and left the
property in charge of servant. In the tempo
rary absence of the servant, the defendants came
to the place, attached tho same cattle drove them
away and sold them execution. The ques-
ton of law is whether there had been such a
change in the possession of the property between
the debtor and the plaintiff, as to enable the lat
to hold it against the subsequent attachment
and sale by the defendants
6. F. Edmunds for Plaintiff, H. B. Smith for
Def.
An application for a trial in the case of
r N. Adams v Soule Putnam was argued by
NJ L. Bennett, ESQ. for Orator and L. e. Chitten-
den for Defendants.
The Court have cut the Gordian knot of matri-
mony for the following couples: (the cause in all
the cases is desertion.)
Byron and Gratia Il. Woodwork, Of Essex
F. q Hill Attorney.
Caroline E and Calvin Martin, of Colchester.
David French, Attorney.
Thomas 5. and Nary P Bates, of Milton. H
B Smith, Attorney.
Simeon and Lucinda H. Wilcox of Westford.
Wales & Taft, Attornies.
Timothy and Catharine Hogan, of Colchester.
Roberts 4 Chittenden, Attornies.
Wednesday, Jan 18th.
The Court have disposed of all the business on
the docket, and the decisions far as prepared,
were delivered this morning. The session will
continue a. day two longer for hearing in
Adams V !Soule and Putnam on an application for
a new trial
In Brings v. Gleason the Judgment of tia coun-
ty court is reversed, and Judgment given for de-
fendant to recover nominal damages md costs.
In H. B Stacey v VI. Central r. e. Co. the
Judgment for defendant is affirmed. The Court,
per Fierpont, J. say that in the same cause this
court will not revise or reverse its former decis
ions The law is settled, that where enters
on land of another as purchaser, but fails to COM
plete payment therefor, the owner cannot maintain
an action for use and occupation. The defend
ants while in possession were owners of the prem
Uses in question aud not tenants of the plaintiff.
In Mason " Whipple 8. Russell, the judgment of !
the court below is affirmed
In State V. Peter Mcdonald the Court order the |
verdict of the jury be set aside and the case re-
manded for a new trial. The opinion Of the court !
was delivered by Chf Justice Redfeld in the corse
of which he said that the rule, in criminal cases,