Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1874-09-25


b,iji Ltahv u.s. kldc 4. .fHtH.--This was an AZ
dian of nssumpait to recover for certain amount OF
i.olo.k and spruce lumber sold to the defendant iu
,,ruiptcr Of 1879 and delivered the same year. The
,iniony on the part of the defense tended To- show
Che, fine defendant contracted with Tcnhy for all the
t,,,r which might be sawed from quantity uf lugs
then In q saw mill ia Dummoratnn, for n certain price
ir thousand feet; that the plaintiff did not deliver
1.-THE lumbcr thus contracted for but sold quantity
of it for higher price than that stipulated between
the parties aud that in consequence OF this fault on
the part Of Leahy to fulfil the contract the defend
ant was not bound to pay for that portion which wig
delivered to him. The plaiutns evidence showed that
There WAS Misunderstanding between the parties in
roArl to the price Of the hcmock lumber ard that
Whom the plaintiff learned what the dcfcuuant under
stood the bargain to be in regard to the price, he in
sisted that It was more per thousand and ceased to
draw the lumber To the defendant but sold It 10 other
p,rties. Verdict for plaintn el53gG.
HHry {. PhmpfoH IS. LewN N. SpraIuc. This
WAS an action of trovcr Tor horse. From the testi-
m,ry II appeared that sheriff sprague had an oxccu-
,ti, ulhcod In his hands against the said plimutun
with directions to levy the upon one Of three
r,r., then in the possession of said plimpton. The
utns evidence tended to show that he SELF tcd the
nlr4r taken the occasion by officer Spraguc his
Z AM as exempt from attachment. The defendant
trstifed that he called upon said Pmpton to make
selection from the three horses above mentioned, aud
that having declined to do 90, he levied the execution
uinu the horse in question aud sold the Same. The
question as TO whether the selection was made was
submitted to the jury. Verdict for plaintin sll5l8.
EJ,Dt j. Hgicy US. NcwiaHs.-This was an action
on the to for the value Of horse claimed
iohuvo been accidentally killed by reason of the in
.uiuci,ncy Of the highway in said town The t,-t-
mon, showed that while the defendant was driving in
HE wagon IN said town that his horse stepped upon
srin If board which struck the bone and SO injured
him that in consequence thereof the horse died With
ina few hours. The defendants evidence tend 1t to
show that the injury occurred upon road which had
never been laid out a. a highway uy the srlecnnr Of
said town and that what the highway surveyors had
done to said road by way Of repairs was done without
the knowledge of the scecmcn. The conrt instruct
Cd tho Jury that the road mu, have been laid out as
highway by the proper town authorities that it
must have been dedicated to the public by the land
owners and adopted by the proper tswn authorities.
Verdict for defendant.
J,nnisoa r.. TAur6yr ug IdolphnS RHicGi.-1ls
was an action of trover for horse wagon and buiIa-
l., robe The ovid nee showed that the above proper
~ was purchased Of Drowned Niles by the defendant.
The evidence on the part Of the plaintiff tended to
show that the property stolen of rhurhrr by saii
Ntrs aud that the defendant purchased and disposed
IT the same knowing it to be stolen property The
attendants testimony tended To- show that Eulcau
had no knowledge that the horse, Wagon robe MAS
Stolen and that the defendant disposed Of sand proper
ty before he received such information Verdict for
plaintiff, SSs2S.
state - Ihomd' JHdJf, 1Pf.-Ihs was complaint
against the respondent for an assault upon Que Iho-
Carey. The evidence disclosed thti in the evening
Ut Dec. ls 1873, that said Carey, with Pat Mcguire
vent into the store of said Judge II purchase pair Of
ilnts, that difficulty arose between Mcguire and
Judge, that after some harsh Language had been used
carey aud Mcguire started for hons, and when they
had reached the street the said Judge rushed from his
store with club known As boot tree aud siruoA Ca
reg severe blows upon the head, knocking him down
and greatly injuring him. The respondent claimed
that he struck the blows in scdefenac and IN defense
IT his property. Verdict of guilty.
Mir'hdH Rtdfeh rS. ROckinghdm.- was an ac-
ton the case to recover damages for Injuries re-
criycd by reason Of the nsuiciency Of the highway
in the town Of Rockingham. The plaintin ana his
wife were tipped from their sleigh down al eInnanE-
ment. Tue main question in the case was whether the
sleigh such one and in such condition a. not to