Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1873-10-03
Chlitenden County Court.
Hon. JOHN PIERPoINT, Presiding Judge.
Hon. NATHANIEL PARKER, Assistant Jud,,s
lion, AI,NEY STONE $50

lion. Ai.yEY STONE. Assistant judges.
FRIDAY, Sept. 26.
| The case of the Winooski Lumber and
| Water Power Co. vs.. C. A. Rood was given
to the Jury at three O'Clock yesterday after
noon, the first hour Of the afternoon session
having been taken up with the charge of
the court. Immediately thereafter the
Grand Jurors signified to His Honor their
desire to report TO the court the result of
their labors at this term.
GRAND JURORS REPORT.
STATE of Vermont, Chihende1l County,
COtinfy Court, .SepteBlber Term, lS13.-rhe
Grand Jurors within and for the body of
said county now here in court, duly en-
pannelled and sworn. do respectfully re-
port; That in accordance with the duties
imposed upon them by law they have ex-
amined the county jail and find the same in
4 clean condition and apparently well
kept, but poorly ventilated, with little or
no convenience for the separation Of Offend
srs. The Jurors are, however, ofthe opinion
that the location is inconyenicnt and the
lot oftoo great value for business purposes
to he continued in its present use, and in
con ,eration of the generous provisions
made by the General Government for the
location of our county buildings, the ju
rOrs respectfully recommend that the lot
where the jail now stands be sold and
new jail, more commodious, and better
adapted to the purpose, be erected near the
site of the present court house. The Jurors
find the court house in good condition, COM
modious, elegant, and in every particular
well adapt d to the purpose.
Respectfully submi. d,
\. L. lane, Foreman.
The Grand Juries were then discharged.
The four following bills were found by the
Grand Jury:
State vs.. Edward Shiette of Burlington,
for burglary on the premises OF Henry ii.
Rankin ana Cassius \. Pratt in Milton,
Nov. Is, 1872.
State vs.. same for grand larceny and re-
cciying stolen goods on the same date.
State vs.. same for carrying slung shot,
with intent to use the same, IN W illlston on
the day following.
State rs. Franklin Packard of Milton, for
disinterring, March %, 1873, the dead body
of one Germain Booth, which was buried in
the public cemetery at Milton Falls.
The case of William 5. briggs V. Oscar
4. Burton was then commenced. This was
on action on the case for malicious prosccu-
ton on the part of the defendant in the
month of July, lo6S. The facts in the case
appear to be briefly these Mr.. briggs, q
resident Of Saginaw, Mich, had pending in
the L. 5. Circuit Court a suit in his favor
against the defendant, and it was for the
purpose Of assisting his counsel in preparing
the case for trial at the approaching July
term at Windsor, that he visited tins city.
Immediately on his arrival he was
arrested by the constable on COM
plant for perjury, in one of the
numerous hearings of the celebrated
nh g 4 -.
and the defendant: it being claimed that
he had Intentionally testified falsely as to
the presence of Q. \. Burton and \. NJ.
Clark, at the residence of J. H. Burton, in
New York City, on May II or -, 1853,
II beng afterwards unqucsti0nably proved
that no such meeting had taken place.
The respondent was brought before Justice
Hollcnbcck, the acting Recorder Of this
city; admitted to bail, and subsequently,
after an investigation bv the States attOr-
noy, Hon. l.. i. Englesoy, entered a R0Le
pros. in the case. On the claim that the sole
, object Of Mr.. Burton was to iniurc and en-
barrass him on account Of his suitin the L.
;. Court, the plaintiff brings this suit, lay
ing his damages at $4,000. This Is the
second trial Of the case NleSSrs. T.. X.
Hard, Z. }. Phelps and j. W. Stewart
for the plaintiff Il. Roberts aa1 ii. ;.
SATURDAY, Sept. p, 1913.
At the opening Of the court. yesterday
morning, the Jury in the case Of the WI
nooski Lumber and Water Power Company
vs.. c. \. Rood, returned q verdict for the
plaintiff of one cent damages and costs.
The remainder Of the day till four o clock
IN the afternoon was occupied with the trial
Of briggs V. Burton. On the conclusion Of
plaintiff testimony the court, at the re
quest Of the counsel for the defendant, d.
rectcd q verdict for the defendant with
liberty to the plaintiff to except, and the
| case goes TO the supreme Court.
Gustavus \. Austin IS. Charles Z. Bow
ker Of Orwell, was then commenced. This
was an action Of trover for the value OF
eleven sheep claimed by the plaintiff as his
propert-. \. '. Sparkling and L. L. Law
renee for the plaintiff, Z. J. Ormsbee and
/ Z. L. Hard for defendant.
TUESDAY. sept 30.
Austin Vs. BoWker was given to the jury
I d; half past four yesterday afternoon.
! Tho case Of Henry McNall and wife ys.
I estate of George Dunlap was then com
mcncel. This is an action of assumpsit
brought against the estate of the defendant
to recover the amount Of $1,000, estimated
as the value of the personal services which
were performed by the female plaintiff, a
daughter of Mr. Geo. Dunlap, while living
I with her father after She became Of age and
before her marriage. The defence Is that
Mr. Dunlap during the year preceding his
dccoasc, paId the plaintiffs in full for any
claim which either of them may have had
upon them by deciding his place to them for
the sum Of SO, 500, when it was considered
TO be worth from fifteen to sixteen thousand
dollars l.. L. Lawrence and G.. 4. Ballard
for plaintiffs, Henry Ballard for defendant.
WEDNESDAY, Oct. /, 1873.
At the opening of the court, yesterday
morning. the jury in the case of Austin y.
Bowkcr. returned q verdict in favor Of the
plaintiff for 800 and costs
The whole day yesterday was occupied
with the trial of McNall and wife vs. the
estate of Geo. Dunlap, the jury taking the
case Immediately on the adjournment Of the
session last evening.
The first case set down for trial. to-day,
is at Of Charles d. Stevens IS. Byron y.
Stevens.
This is an action of general assumpsit for
tho value Of 1000 feet of clapboaris at Sll
per thousand, claimed by the plaintiff to
have been sold and delivered to the dc
PENDANT in August, ISL. The defence Is
that there was no contract or obligation
whatever between the parties in the case,
the defendant claiming that the property
in question was sold to MeSsrs. {. Il Il.
Fields of Essex junction to enable them 10
fulfil building contract which they had
previously made with the defendant ;.
ii. Davis and Daniel Roberts for plaintiff,
L. p b. Hewitt and Henry Ballard for de-
fcndant.
The jury in the casco Of McNall and wife
vs.. tho estate of Geo. Dunlap returned a
sealed verdict this morning in layor of the
plaintiffs for $3.50 and costs.
THURSDAY Oct ,.
The case of Stevens Us. Stevens was con
cludcd at halfp past four yesterday afternoon.
One half hour later the Jury returned with
the report that they could not agree. After
receiving some instructions from the court
they retired for further deliberation.
The case of Alphonso Simonds vs.. Peter
Bordo occupied the remainder Of the after
noon. Owing to 4 misunderstanding on
the part of the defendant, he was not pre-
sent at the trial, on the suppositi0n that the
ease was discontinued by his agreement to
give judgment to the plaintiff Tor $50 dam
ages and costs. Evidence was then offered
to show the extent Of the personal damage
to the plaintiff. The jury took the case al
the adjournment of the court L. f. vii
bur and A. V. Spalding for plaintiff Z
F. Brownell and \. C.. Dixon for defendant
John Howard Payne.
Tho enl,ss1l bronze Inst Of Jnhn Uowart