Orleans County monitor. [volume] (Barton, Vt.) 1872-1953, 1875-02-22

Assistant Judge
The FIRST ease that came on for trial
was Daniel Moody vs. Hiram Gray. apt.
This was an action of assumpsit. Trial
BY jury Plaintiff claimed to recover
$40 for one-half of a pair Of traverse
sleds sold by him to the defendant. At
the time Of the sale. defendant gave the
plaintiff an order on ono Sleeper for the
$40. aud the plaintiff executed and de-
livered his receipt for $40 to the defen-
dant. The order was not accepted and
paid by said Sleeper Delft claimed that
said order was taken in payment and
settlement Of the sled transanction with
out recourse to him. And also that if
such was not the fact. still that Plff had
no claim on him for the reason that he
had not used the requisite diligence in
notifying him Of the non-aceeptance of
the order. Verdict in favor of plaintiff
for Sl2 and costs. Moody resides in
Westmore Gray in bloomington. Ed.
wards &c Dickerman for Plff. W. w.
Circuit and F. W. Baldwin for Deft.
WEDNESDAY,. FEB. 10. Charles J.
Ufford VS. Town of Barton. This was
an action on the case for injuries receiv-
ed by plaintiff by reason Of the INSULT
cheney Of defendants highway. Plea
the general issue. Trial 10y jury. Plf
claimed that in S72 he was passing over
defendants highway near Daniel Owens;
that Just below Owens. there was hole
reaching nearly across the travelled path.
two or three feet wide and from fifteen
inches to two feet in depth PlfF claim
ed that he drove into this hole In the
night and was thrown from his carriage.
his carriage and harness broken. his
horse lamed. and plaintiff knee. shout
der and stomach seriously injured; and
that from these injuries he has never re
| covered
The defendant claimed that plaintiff
was not in his wagon when it went into
said hole, but was pursuing COW which
he was driving home that he had left
his team alone and uuhitched. to 20 af
ter the COW which had gone out Of The
road. and that his horse started off and
run into the hole or gully that the road
was in such 4 condit on that no accident
would have occurred had plaintiff used
ordinary care and prudence and that
all the injuries. trouble. aches and all
ings of Plaintiff which he claimed were
the result Of said accident, were caused
by a chronic disease by which he had
been troubled for Il long time previous to
the alleged time of accident, and from
which he had not yet fully recovered.
This plaintiff denied. This was quite Il
sharp fight From the number of Bar
ton people present it seemed more like
a town meeting than a court of Justice.
From the hard swearing in the case it
svOII bevurHo apparent that IL ".rs Il tUgn-
case. Verdict for plaintiff 70 recover
SlS7 and his costs. Exceptions by deft
on the question whether or not pIf. gave
delft legal notice Of the accident +.
W. Baldwin and j. circuit for plff. ".
W. Circuit for deft.
FEE. Il. Sabin Clary, of Greensboro
VS.. Holmes Wiley. of Wheelock. This
was an action on the case Plea general
issue. Trial by jury. Plaintiff claimed
that defendant was the keeper Of pub
lie inn in the town of Wheelocb on the
18th day Of January. 1873. aud that on
the night Of said day. defendant gave q
public ball, which Plaintiff attended.
paying a Till of Sl.5O for the entertain
ment Of himself. the lady with him and
the caring Of his horse that defendant
put plaintiff horse into his barn floor
by the side of another horse. which last
horse defendant knew was kicking and
vicious beast: that plaintiffs horse was
kicked and its leg broken and SO injured
that plaintiff had to kill it next day.
and brought this suit to recover the val
ue of the same.
Defendant claimed that at the time
above named. he was not keeping hotel
but had opened his house for the purpose
Of giving the people Of his neiahborhood
accommodations for having balls aud 9TH.
err public gatherings held for the amuse-
ment and pleasure of the young people
thereabouts that Plaintiff put up his
team himself: that it was the custom of
the people who came to his place on such
occasions, to put up their own teams.
Plaintiff claimed that if defendant was
not keeping hotel, yet he was liable
for the loss of the horse. for the reason
that he took pay for the entertainment
! Of plaintiff and did not use ordinary
care and prudence in caring for his horse.
The evidence was quite conflicting aud
evident in some instances that some of
the witnesses we're guilty of perjury.
Verdict for plaintiff to recover SlS7 So
damages. and his costs. p. X. Gleed
and Edwards ( Dickerman for plaintiff.
". W. Circuit and +. W. Baldwin for
defendant.
FEB II David Cass. of Glover. vs.
DR.. $. r. Corey, of Craftsbury. Action
OF assgmpsit, General issue and plea