Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1877-03-28
Washington County Court.

The court is now engaged Judge Ross presiding
in the temporary absence Of Judge Redheld) in
irving the case Of the State against Samuel,
Forest l.. and Nellie C. Green, all Of Woodbury.,
indicted for arson in setting fire to the barns OF
Gideon Burnham, in Woodbury., on the night Of
September 30th 1875, and causing the utter de-
struction of the buildings and contents. There
are about eighty witnesses, and to-day and Thurs
day, and perhaps the entire week, since there will
be no session OF the court on Fast Day, will be
taken up.
An INSURANCE CASE.
The last case tried Of the civil docket was Mar
tin Goodno Us. the Farmers Mutual Insurance
Company to recover the amount Of policy for
one thousand dollars on his barns and five hun
dred dollars on the contents, which were burned
on the night of April 18th, 1874 From the testi-
mony Of the plaintiff it appears that he, in COM
pany with his hired man, Winslow L. Voodry,
went to Montpelier on the day in question and re-
turned to his home in Calais after dark. Taking
a kerosene lantern they went to the barn, hung
the lantern nail near some stanchions, and
did the chores. Presently, Goodno went to the
house to get some potatoes for the young horses
and Yoodry took two horses and heiier to the
watering trough While there Voodry suddenly
saw the flames bursting out Of the barn and gave
the ALARM was soon joined by Goodno, but their
efforts at extinguishment were unavailing, and
hay, grain and straw first estimated at thirty
tons) were destroyed. The live stock, consisting
of several horses and some cattle, were saved The
chief defences made by the company were over
valuation on the part ofthe plaintiff that he had
put mortgages on to the property (which was CON
ceded) after the policy was issued without in
forming the company, and that the suit was
brought after the expiration OF the time under
which the law prescribes an action must be
begun Mr. Samuel Wells, the treasurer and one
of the directors OF the company, testified that he
gave Goodno notice that the company had dis
allowed his claim the 10th Of June 1874, and it
was conceded that the case wasn't entered till the
March term, 1876, long after the Limitation had
expired by law; but it was claimed by the plain
tiff, and the evidence Of himself, Mr.. ]. o.
Livingston and DIR. S. s. Macomber, tended
to show that no notice OF the disalowance
OF the claim was ever given to him, or his
representative, till November 9th, 1875, and in
that case the suit was brought in time. The
court told the jury to return special yerdcts to
the time OF the notice OF dsallowance and as to
the value of property, which they did, as follows:
value of the barn, one thousand two hundred and
twenty-one dollars; value Of personal property,
three hundred and ninety-four dollars; the notice
of disalowance was not given on the 10th of June,
1874 These verdicts are victory for the plain
tiff, unless the legal question ~ to the effect of
the mortgages, and some points taken in regard
to plaintiffs pleadings are decided against him.
Messrs. Samuel Wells, Homer W. Heaton and S.
C. Shurtleff for the company; Messrs. J. A. Wing
and Charles H. Heath for the plaintiff.