Bellows Falls times. [volume] (Bellows Falls, Vt.) 1856-1965, 1872-09-20
windhaln Comfy Court.


1
SEPTEMBER TERM.
The September term Of Windham
County Court commenced on Tuesday
Sept. 10th. Present. Hon. james Bar
rett, chief judge, 0. I. Butterield and
o. S. Howard, assistant judges, Francis
Phelps, sheriff.
GRAND JURY.
Brattleboro, Lafayette Clark Dover
Edmund Howe; Dummerston, Jesse
Worden; Grafton, Henry Walker
Guilford, Joseph Jacobs; Jamaica,
Squire Gleason; Londonderry, Barnet
Waite; Newfane, Oliver p. Morse Put
ney, S. S. Hitchcock Rockingham, Jo-
siah b. Divoll; Townshend, Francis
Kidder; Vernon, Jarvis f. Burrows
Wardsboro, L. w. Newell; Westmin-
ster, FL. P. Ranney; Nottingham, Reu-
ben VIM Wilmington, Edward Titus
Windham, David Robbins; Halifax,
Benjamin A. Barber.
PETIT JURY.
Brattleboro, Roswell Goodenough, Ed
win Sawyer, A. w. Cudworth; Athens,
S. G. Ranney; Brookline, j. b. Steb-
bins Dover, HI. j. Towns; Dummers-
ton, A. B. Bailey Grafton, 2. A. Chap
man Jamaica, Moses f. Skinner Lon
donderry, A. ID. Whitman; Marlboro,
Geo. w. Washbuii; Newfane, Charles
E. Nichols; Putney, G. w. Underwood;
Rockingham, Benjamin Smith, Hollis
Streeter Somerset, Asa Burnap STRAIT
ton, E. d. Stiles Townshend, David
Howard Vernon, John E. Hubbard
Wardsboro. VIM. johnson; Westmin-
ster, Henry Page; Nottingham, I'll. B.
Ballou, Russell ID. Brown; Wilmington,
Jordan H. Russell, John III. Stowe
Windham, Geo. A. Farr; Halifax, -
Keith.
Sixty-four cases were set for the Jury.
biNSuOh OA5Es
The first jury case tried was Fred.
Franks vs. Thurston q Jockey and trus-
tees, a suit brought in the name of Franks,
though the real plaintiffs are Tuthill q
Read, of New Haven, Conn. The suit
is for the recovery of liquors sold in
1857 to the defendants while doing bust
ness in Sunderland, Vt. Mr. Thurston
was defaulted, and Mr.. Jockey defends
upon the ground that he knew nothing
about the purchase of the liquors; that
the partnership formed with Thurston
was for the purpose of carrying on the
lumber trade, and only that. The de-
PENDANTS in evidence tended to show that
Thurston conducted the business, and
that Mr.. Jockey, who is resident of
Leominster, Mass, only went OCCASION
ally to Sunderland; that the business
wss managed badly by Thurston, SO
that Jockey lost $4,000; and that as
soon as this was known, in connection
with the fact that liquor was being sold
to his employees, Mr.. Jockey dissolved
the partnership. The plaintiffs evil
dence tended to show that the liquor was
sold by the knowledge and consent of
Mr.. Jockey, and that he received the
benefit of the sales. Verdict for the
defendants, that they are not liable for
the liquors sold. For plaintiff, Field &
Tyler and K Haskins, for defendants,
G. N. and S. G. Davenport.
The second case was Eli Sargent VS..
Page & Orchard. This suit was brought
against the lessees of the Valley Rail-
road for damages sustained to wood lot
by fire occasioned by sparks from an en-
CINE, in Vernon. The jury went and
viewed the premises. Verdict for 1915
damages.
CHURCH VS.. WESTMINSTER.
The next case is one which has excited
some interest in this section, being L.
w. Church and wife VS.. the town of
Westminster. Action brought to recov-
er damages for injuries received by Mrs.