Essex County herald. [volume] (Guildhall, Vt.) 1873-1964, 1873-08-30

the WORDS yOHfH tuesday IN place OF
the words third Tuesday in the infor-
nations, the informaiions by a mis-
take having been filed TO a day when
there was no Court, or term of Court.
The motion to amend was allowed.
Exceptions by respondent, who will
carry the case up. The cases ofseveral
persons confined in Lancaster Jail, as
it was claimed illegally, were then
called up, on motion Of their counsel,
was tried at the Feb. term, 1870, a.
verdict being rendered for the plain
tiff. The suit was then reviewed by
the defendant, and has been continued
along until the present time. The ac-
ton grew out of logging operation.
1t appears Gould took a job of
Wheeler, Bragg and Swan, TO log for
them during the winter of 1867;
and that defendants had contracted
the timber, as fast rs it was delivered
on Clear Stream, to the Bethel Steam
Mills Company, by the terms of which
contract, the latter company were to
furnish the scaler to scale all the tim
Der thus sold. Gould claimed that
the Steam Mills Company cheated
him on the scale, and did not furnish an
honest scaler, making the amount de-
livered during the winter abo"t l00,.
900 feet IS than it actually was, and
introduced evidence TO that effect.
The defts. brought on the man that
scaled the timber, with his scale book,
and introduced other evidence which
tended to show that the scale was
fair one, and that if it was wrong they
were also cheated, as they were get
ting so much stumpage on thousand,
aud that the suit should have been
brought against the Bethel Steam
Mills Company, instead of them. The
case was given to the jury Friday
morning, and verdict was returned
for plff. for $65l, which is the same
amount as was found at the first trial.
Bingham and Drew for plff. Hey
wood, Fletcher and Dudley for defts.
belinda Itibbard VS.. Oren Hibbard.
This action was commenced April Z,
1868, to recover the value of certain
articles taken by the def. from the
pltt. wrongfully. The case has been
twice tried before; the first time the
jury disagreed, and the next time
found for the plff. The case was car
ried up by the deft. on exceptions
taken, and was sent back by the Su-
preme Court for trial again. The
case was somewhat simplilied by pro-
ceedings last winter, when it appears
def. employed an agent to effect a
settlement with plff., and that set
Element was made, plff. giving re-
ceipt in full of all demand, costs, &c.
i'll said action. Subsequently, how
ever, plff. set up the claim that the
settlement was fraudulent, and refused
to anhm't TO it's terms. The question
for the jury was as to the validity Of
the settlement. Verdict for .plf
$31. ga. Fletcher, Bingham, Aldrich
and Shurtleff, for plff,. Dudley, for def.
Betsey Wright VS.. Charles Parsons.
There was special declaration in the
writ. The evidence disclosed the fol-
lowing facts: The plf. in Oct. 1871,
was possessed of a pension check, for
some 1851, which she desired to get
cashed. and failing to get it done at
home asked deft., who was going to
Portland, if he would not take it aud
get the money on it to accommodate
her. After some little talk about it
the deft. consented to take tie check
OF Portland. For some reason or other
ne did not get the money on it,
but left the check in q brokers' office,
with instructions to send the money
to Mrs. Wright. A few days after,
the broker, it appeared, became tired
of "ways that are dark and tricks
that are vain" and concluded to ex-
plore the region of "tbe hereafter"
and committed suicide. 1t also ap.
peared that he was not worth a dollar,
so the money on this check was never
sent to Mrs. Wright or any one else,
hence this suit to recover the amount
of Mr.. Parsons. Verdict for plff.
$4O7.39. AIdrich & Shurtleff for plff.
Fletcher and Dudly for def.