Lamoille newsdealer. [volume] (Hyde Park, Vt.) 1860-1877, 1870-06-08

LamOille County Court.
MAY TERM, 1870.
P R ESIDIN G

Hon. FARwELh WErHERY, ! Associate
Hon. THOMAS POTTER, SJudges.
The Court was opened Tuesday, May
Gath, at about 10 o'clock, A. NJ, proceed.
ed with prayer BY Rev, 0. NJ. Boutwell,,
and after the usual preliminary ceremo'
MES, the docket was called, and the Court
proceeded to business.
The following named eases were respec-
lively tried by jury, viz:
Noah Scribner vs.. John Carpenter and
Otis Stearns.
This was an action on the ease for the
loss of a valuable horse occasioned by the
negligence of the defendants, as alleged
BY the plaintiff, in leaving a sled and a
large log thereon, near the travelled road,
within the highway, whereby the pltf.'s
horse in passing became unmanageable,
aud broke and ran away from the pli.,
aud received such injuries as to cause i'm.
mediate death, (the occurrence of which
was noticed at the time in this paper),
The trial lasted two and one-half days,
and resulted in the jury not agreeing, and
tn, case was continued.
R. C. Benton and Geo. W, Hendee for plf. {;
II. o. Heath, Powers & Gleed for defts.
Frances NJ. Gull, apl'ee, vs., Oliver H..
Potter, apl't.
Action for the alleged taking of a horse.
The defendant claimed that he had a
right to take the horse by virtue of lien
that he had upon the horse. Verdict aud
Judgment for plff. to recover 500 DANA
ges, and taxable costs.
Heath for plf, Powers & Gleed for def.
Geo. W. Doty, aplee, VS.. Town of Low
ell, ap1t,
Action for injury on highway. Dana.
gcs claimed for the loss of service of one
livery horse, and expenses, etc., for tax
ing care of Jury did not agree,
and case continued.
Powers & Gleed, Hendee for PlE.; Brigham
/ Waterman, Benton for def.
YIN. B. Page vs.. Town of Montgomery.
Bounty Claim. This case was heard
BY the jury, and after putting in all the
evidence on both sides Of the case, it was
considered that there we're 10 facts for
the jury to determine, and judgment vas
rendered by the Court for the def.
Ia giving the opinion Of the Court,
Juige Wilson said in Substance that vha1
. soldier re-enlistei in the 6eld. TO The
credit of any tOzu, claiming and expect.
Ing to receive a bounty from yaeh ,ozn,
Il was the duty of such re-sDlisie3 soldier
70 use all available diligence TO give the
town reasonable and proper notice that be
had re-cnlisted to the credit of said town
and expected to receive a bounty from
such town. In this case it was shown that
she town had furnished the men to fl
their quota, and paid them bOunties,
about two months before receiving any no.
tice that said plf. had re-enlisted to said
town, which the Court decided was not a
reasonable notice to charge said town with
the payment Of the bounty.
Exceptions by plff., and the case goes
the Supreme Court.
Brigham s Waterman for plE.; Powers {
Glccd for def.
Hiram Bailey VS.. Town Of Crafsbury.
Bounty claim, The questions submit
ted to the jury to determine upon the facts
shown in this case, were whether or not
the plff. had given the def. town any no.
tiee that he had re-enlisted to the credit
of said town aud claimed aud expected
to receive a bounty from said town; and
if so, was It a reasonable notice, and one
that should charge the town with the pay
men, of the bounty elaimed3 The jury
did not agree and the ease was continued.
Brigham & Waterman fer pla.; hsnass and
for der.
Among the cases tried by the Court
and otherwise disposed of. were the fol-
A. w. Averill. apHec. rs. p. Belknsp
L Co, spfts |