Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1871-03-17

| ray whether his death was caused by reason Of
bis violation Of the law, or whether it was csus-
ed by Mr.. Gilman, the driver next to him, turn
ing in upon him nth the intention of driving
Mr.. Seaver from the trsck, and thus enable him,
Mr.. Gilman, 70 win the race, the result Of which
act was the collision Of the two sulkies. Mr.
Seaver being thrown to the ground and after
wards dragged and killed If this last get was
the immedidte cause of the accident. and but for
this Intentional movement of Gilman, the conse-
quences OF which Gilman is presumed BY law to
know, the accident would not have occurred.
then they should find verdict for the plaintiff
The language Of the provisos should be con
strued against the party using it, as it was their
OWE. This suggests the inquiry whether horse
racing In the country was viewed as an uuneces-
EARLY dangerous or perilous act. and so to be
included in the proviso, especially when the de-
iendsnt knew through the application Of Mr.
Seaver, that he was by employment livery sta
bic keeper, ami so was expected to be with and
about horses
The jury N request Of the plaintiff were in
structed also 60 bring a special verdict on the
point whether from the evidence in the case, af-
ter the collision Of the two sulkies took place
Mr.. Seayer jumped cut and was entirely free
from the sulky and harness that he spoke to
his horse who Stacked his pace a little, and
then stepping forward few feet to regain the
relns, he was caught in them and dragged till
he received the injury from which be died.
After being absen; for haitian hours verdict Of
S3,s4j was returned in favor Of the plaintiff
They also found the facts as claimed by the
plaintiff in their special verdict
Eliza A. Parker VS.. William Joslyn was then
commenced. This is an action OF assumpsit to
recover $, $3.50 in L. 5 bonds. 7-3Os, that
tra~ oil 81, 81, I.g.
house vas burned in Vergeunes. Feb. 10, 1866.
The plaintiff is the widow Of the late Geo Par
ker Of Vergennes, and the bonds referred to are
the product Of the sale Of her dover interest in
a mill in Nergennes. The defendant was ad-
ministrator Of Mr.. Parker's estate, and as such
had charge Of the lost property. Nessrs T. j.
Phelps and D F. Fifeld for the plaintiff
Messrs. J. W. Stewart snd Z. r. Hard for the
defendant
Sesyer VS.. The Travellers Ins Co. The argu-
ments Of counsel were concluded on the adjourn
ment Of the Court yesterday afternoon. The jury
will be charged by His Honor at the opening Of
the Court this morning.
TUESDAY, March II.
Parker vs. Johnson The arguments in this
case were concluded 1T the adjournment Of the
court yesterday afternoon. His Honor will leave
the case with his charge to the jury this morning
Parker vs.. JosIyn. At The opening of the court
tins morning His Honor charged the Jury in
the case Of Parker Us Josyn lie remarked
that the principal facts in the case were unl;s-
putel, that the plaintiff had on the decease Of
her husband q dover interest ia what was called
the mill property in Vergenues that by the ad-
vice Of her friends and especially Of the de-
PENDANT, who was the administrator Of the estate
Of her late husband, this property was sold and
the proceeds If the dover interest were invest
Cd in United States 20 bonds issued in 1854
and payable in 1867. At the time of the sale
the bonds were deposited in the bank in Yer
genucs, until they were taken by the defendant,
who WAS the proper custodian Of the property.
BY tie evidence Of the defendant it appears that
they were placed for safe keeping in bureau
drawer in defendants bedroom, where were a. /
SO -ZlCU Of his own and : 100 Of his sons .
b0nds. GA tie l0.h OF February the defend I
ants house was destroyed by fire AID the plain Z
tf's bonds acorling to defendants testimony
were also burned. His Honor here briefly re
viewed the evidence in the case and left II with the
jury to say
First, whether the bonds were really lost az f.
a.L AID sec1Hd, whether when the defendant
assumed the charge q the bonds be took sgch .
care of them as a man OF ordinary care and /.
prudence would have taken in his own business. T.
II they were satisfied the bonds were lost, were
they lost through any fault of the defendant
Dj re use that degree Of diligence during the
fire to preserve them as be should have done
The jury were instructed, it they found
verdict for the plaintiff, to return both the
amount II interest which The plaintiff hal no
lhe honls in question, and also the full amount
Of the value Of the bonds with the interest 90
the same up TO date
After a short !e'Iberaton TIE Jury returned a .