Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1875-06-30

liquor for himself, which Kittrcdge forgot to men
ton. During defendants ossexaminatiun,
plaintiff Intercepted him as to the dates and
amounts Of the different sales made TO Snow. ~
shown by the liquor agents book, and put the en-
tries into the case under exceptions by defendant
The book showed that for the fall Of 1871, when
Simpson first began to sell Snow, til the last sale,
June 23rd, 1873, the total amount Of sales was
$40 20, nearly all being alcohol This evidence
substantially completed plaintiffs case.
DEFENDANT rvmrNcn
The main witnesses for defendant were himself
and his wife who acted a. his agent, and really
carried on the greater part Of the business They
testified that when Snow first came. he repre-
sonted himseltto he an essence pcddlcr and mann
facturer, and said that he was IN search Of very
pure quality Of alcohol, which would cut his oils
properly that he brought some oils with him in
little walls and tried the effect Of the alcohol upon
them before buying he praised their brand
very highly, and said that he had been unable TO
get as good In Montpelier They claimed that
they always supposed him to be using the alcohol
for the manufacture Of essences and had not the
slightest suspicion that he drank H. Their cross
examination very rigid, and developed some
incidents that might have excited their suspl-
cons; fortunately, 1t appeared that once when
Snow was fishing upon Greensboro pond, be
came To the defendants house, procured q
quantity Of boiled eggs from Mrs Simpson, and
also some alcohol representing it was for essences
As usual This incident, it was claimed by plain
tiff, was a little too iishy" to carry out the
presumption Of good faith ON the part Of defend
ants Defendant and wiio denied the notiiica-
ton by Kittredgc, put Messrs Samuel ingalls,,
Of Greensboro, +. j. Icayitt, Of Walden, Nelson
Rand, of Craitsbury, and Enoch Rowell. Of A.
bany, ON the stand, who testified that ON GER
tain Sunday in May, 1874, they met Kittredge in
the hotel at Greensboro by appointment, and that
he then offered to sell out 10 defendant for 500
to be endorsed on a note held by Ingalls, against
| him, and 10 secure victory for defendant in the
suit which offer they rejected Defendant also
put several witnesses on the stand 10 prove that
Snow had got over his drunk at the time Of the
murder, and that he got some liquor elsewhere
! than at simpsons There was considerable i'm.
peaching testimony on both sides by witnesses who
testified 10 conversations with other witnesses, in
which they gave a version different from that
sworn to on the stand And the plaintiff having
made point Of tic fact that they had been un-
able to get Shows deposition, Judge Powers and
Mr. Burke both testified in relation to that mat
ter, and said that Snow, being then on trial for
his life, they as biz counsel advised him to hold
his tongue. And every body must admit that it
was very good advice. Defendant also put on
one or two witnesses To show that Snow made a
business Of pcddling essences but it must be
confessed that the business did not appear to be
very large. It turned out also, that Snow lived
some eight or nine mil from defendant, and
that there was no great am INIT Of travel between
the two points
ARGUMENTS ASH CHAi,GTs
The case WAS argued by Messrs Smith and
Rogers, on the part Of the plaintiff and by
Messrs. Burke and Clarke, for the defendant
Judge Redfeld. in his charge, ruled as follows
in regard to the responsibility Of the defendant
the most important point in the case; " n de-
PENDANT was the agent, and held the Office, he
had the right n sell liquor for special purposes
only II he sold generally, making no inquiry "a
ascertain the purpose Of the buyer, it was unlaw
ful, because his right was limited II he sold If
for a lawful purpose and acted honestly In that
believing it to be Intended for lawful purpose
and made such inquiries as satisfied him that 4
was lawful sale, then, although there may b,
evidence that he acted indiscreetly, and without
proper vigilance we can't try that in this case
That might be very proper question for thu
county commissioner. II the commissioner ap
points an agent, who is indiscreet though honest
and does not make such yigilant inquiries as al
agent should, it is very good reason why h
should be removed. But when an agent is al
lowed 10 hold the office, and uses his best discre
ton, sells honestly, for purpose that is lawful
although the liquor is misused, although he
deceived, and a man Of more vigilance woul
have detected the deception, still it is Lawful
sale. When man is permitted to hold the Office
and honestly using his best discretion, sell
for lawful purpose, then, although h
misjudges, although he Is wanting in prope
skin and vigilance, still it is lawful sal,
II the defendant sells generally, making no il
quiry, and the liquor WAS used for drinking an
this evil resulted, he is liable, because an agent
not authorized to sell generally. But if deiendal
made such inquiries ms induced him honestly
believe that this alcohol was to be used for chem
cal or medicinal purposes and made such inquire
and got such evidence as satisfied his judgmer
that the sale was within the statute and lawfl
sale in other words il he made inquiries and acte
> in good faith then he * not liable. II he sol
reckessly, that is, sold with such carelessncss
to show an indifference as to whether it was to |
De used for lawful or an unlawful purpose, tn
> would show bad faith and would not be an hone
exercise OF his office and he would be liable for dan
= ages" Judge Redfeld's charge was very alb
- aud impartial, and explained the varied feature
. OF the case in a lucid and simple manner. II WI
listened to with the closest attention.
vpRnt..r ron ~ ,tNrfFr
The jury retired shortly before six oclo,
a Thursday afternoon, and aitera long deliberltioi
= came in ON Friday morning and returned verdict
= favor Of plaintiff for 81 $50 ST. 1t was general
a believed that they would not agree and the r
n suit was genuine surprise. The largest amou
;, marked, is said TO have been S3,0o0 The deie
4, dant has made u motion TO set the verdict add
I. and hearing will take place sometime this wee
4 II not successful in that defendant win take Il
/. case to the supreme court on the validity Of Il
~ proof Of marriage.
BRooKFIELD. Mr. : Carpenter WIS poison'
June 22nd by taking some suphuric acid, thin