The Rutland daily globe. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1873-1877, 1874-02-21
RUTLAND.
Town Itcports.
REPORT OF TIE AGEST FOB PROSECUTING
AND DETENDrSo SUITS.

restrain the defendants from building the
Bates House, or n part of 1t in Center
street. in the village of Rutland, as the |
town claimed the north line of said street.
The defendants claimed that the north line |
OF said street ut the west end, was not |
straight line, but turned soutberly. and |
that their land extended about twenty feet |
south of the present southwest corner Of |
the Bates House. When the Bates House
was in process of building, the defendants
were about to extend 1t to the outer limit
of their land as they claimed the same, and
the town brought suit, claiming that the
north line Of Center street. ms II was laid
out, extended along near the north wall of
the Bates House as it is now built.
The town also claimed that the Bates
House nj lis southwest corner, was built
over the line into Merchants Row, and
there was dispute between the parties as
to the location Of the east line of Mer-
chants Row ut that point
The town authorities and the defendants
finally settled said suit without damages
from the town, and in the settlement ad-
justcd and located both said lines.
.. Charles Clement and Others, against
town Of Rutland.
This was petition for a highway, and
tunnel under the railroad at some point
between West street and the freight depot.
The case was heard before courts com
MI tan atati, e al
Hon. Henry G. Gleason and Hon. Edwin
Martindae And they made report
against the road as prayed for in the petit
ton, and the county court ut the Septcm
her term. 1873, dismissed the petition.
But it perhaps should be stated that the
commissioners Informed the town auihori-
ties that they thought there should be a
tunnel under the railroad, to accommodate
the large amount of travel, and relieve the
public from the embarrassment resulting
from the numerous trains almost constant
" passing TO and fro but they should re-
port against the petition, first because they
thought the tunnel should be at the West
street crossing instead of at a point south
erly as the petition called for and second
that they thought it would be much better
and more economical for the town to have
the whole matter of the tunnel in It's own
| control, and not be hampcred by any &C.
| ton of courts committee or the county
! court.
And they further said that unless they
! felt sure that the town would sec the ne
cessiiy for remedy to the public at said
| point, and would without the compulsion
of the courts furnish the remedy, they
should report in favor of the petition, al
| though it called for a tunnel at the wrong
| point in their estimation.
The good sense of the commissioners in
practically RENTING the question back to
the town, cannot be too highly commended
in view of the probable expense and pecu-
liar attitude of the project, and the ten
dency of such boards to lay every road
that anybody will ask for.
s. ID n. Lewis VS.. the town of Rutland.
4. ID. \. Lewis and wife VS.. the town of
Rutland
These two cases were brought to recover
damages for injury to the defendants by
reason of an insufiicicncy of a highway,
the insufllciency consisting of defective
bridge.
There was no question about the liability
of the town, and the only question was as
to the amount of damages to which the
plaintiffs were entitled The selectmen
and defendants finally agreed upon the
damages and settled the suits.
3. Rutland vs.. SALISBURY.
This was an action to recover for the
ialer's fees for board of W. y. Olin, a
pnuper having settlement in SALISBURY.
The defendant paid the claim amounting
to Sl17.33 and costs $130S.
Z. Rutland VS.. Weybridge.
This was an order of removal of q pau
per, and was settled by the overseer of tho
poor of Weybridge without trial
s. Rutland vs. Dorr & Myers.
This suit was brought to recover the
damages, which the town had paid to
Fayette Vaughn, for injury of his wife on
the highway at Sutherland Falls, the same
having been occasioned by block of mar
BILE being left in the highway by the de-
PENDANTS. The suit was finally settled and
discontinued at the September term of the
county court the defendants paying 5000.
The only cases remaining in court are
two petitions for highways viz, one for
an extension of Church street, the other for
q highway from point near the dwelling
house of Col. Proctor across East Creek to
"Tatcr street. so called. The views of
the selectmen in respect to the same are
stated in their report.
As | have been member OF the firm
that has been employed by the town in its
litigation. have claimed no salary as town
agent. W. u. NEAzEY
Town Agent.
REPORT OF TIE oyERsERg OF THE POOR.
herewith submit the transactions of the
poor department from February 18th, 1873,
to February lst, 1874, inclusive.
The labor of your oyersecr during the
past year has been arduous, and the tax ON
time and mind, at times almost beyond en-
durance. The cause will suggest itself to
all.
And that the expense of this year Is in
excess of the last or Of some former years,
no business man in town will be surprised.
While your overseer has been ever ready
to relieve the suffering and help the needy,
when brought to his notice. he has at the
same time labored to tighten the burden on
the shoulders of tax payers in town; which
should ever be the aim of men interested
with public business.
The superintendent of the poor farm is
paid up to the first of February, 1874, and
your physicians up to the same date.
| Tho anIire amnnut drawn from the trpa-