Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1877-01-10
Orange County Court.

that the plaintiff is almost completely par
alyzed, so that he cannot be moved from
his bed to come to court. Hon. Luke. p
Poland, G. w, Clarke, Esq, and S. B
llebarl, Esq, are counsel for the plaintiff,
and Hon, John w. Rowell and Grin Gam.
bell, Esq, for the defendant.
There are still fifteen more eases set
for the jury, but it is now believed that not
more than three or -four of them will he
tried. Judge Redfeld can stay till the
twentieth, when he must leave to be pres
ent at the opening Of the Addison County
Supreme Court on the twenly-second.
Sixteen applications for divorce were
made this term, and there were eight pc
tilions left over from previous terms,
making twenty four divorce cases in all
on the d cket-a large number for our
county. The following have been grant
ed thus far:
Jndson A. Cleaveland of Randolph from
Mary p. Cleaveland of Illinois, for ntol-
tolerabIe severity; Emily Graves of Ran
dolp from Lauriston Graves of Wood
stock, for wilful desertion and refusal to
support, and the custody of her daughter
Luna given to her, and some furniture
and clothes us alimony; Edward Miner
of Tunbridge from Emma Miner of YER
shire, for adultery.
The jury trials since the last report
have been as follows:
Harriet Il. McNiece vs. Eben G. Weed.
Both the parties live in East Topsham
The plaintiff IL woman of about tweaty-
two, sued the defendant for having slam
dcred her on the third of November, 1870,
by saying to her cousin Ii. II. NJ, Niece,
in substance, that plaintiffs father kept II
house of ill-flmG, and that she had had
Illicit intercourse with u married man
aampd Warren G. Mcserve, now resi-
dent Of Wheelock, but then residing in
East Iopsham, and II partner of ii. II.
McNiece and of Parker McNiece, the
plaintiffs father. The defendant pleaded
Justification" that is, that the words
spoken were true, and "privicged con
yer>aion,' that is, that the charge WAS
made to McNiecc us n reason for desiring
the plaintiffs father to vacatc the defend
ant, house, and that the charge WAS made
in answer to McNiece', request for the
cause of defendants desiring their reno
val. during the trial the defendant wi h.
drew the plea of Justification" but was
allowed by the court to put in evidence
ending to show that the charge WAS true
in mitigation Of damages, There was
ma evi l,nce That the defendant had ever
made the charge at any other time or
place or to any other person than III. Il.
that The conversation took
place in McNiecc's store in East ropsIran.
and was heard only by him and IL young
man named George laplin. The defend
ant. to prove the truth Of the charges, tes-
lied himself, and put or to the stand two
Young men who worked in saw-milI
with him he season brIorc--James Burns. |
Jr., Chs brohrr-in-law) and Horace Mills.
The plaintiff herself and Me>erye denied
HE Illicit intercourse. The jury returned
a verdict in favor Of plaintiff for S67 so. |
Ales,rs. John W. RowclI and Grin Cam
bell for PLANTING; Mrs,rs. U. W, Clarke
and K. NJ. Harvey, for Defendant
Town Of lunbridge vs. Richard Smith
ct Ill. The defendant Smith was constable
and collector of take, in the town of Tun-
bridge for several years and this is IL suit
az inst him and hi, bondSmcn to recover
the sum Of $3.50, ID, claimed to be due on
the town tax of 1872. There are two
other suits ag inst him and his bondsmrn
for sums alleged to be due on the town
take, of 1870 md 1871. The defendant
Smith testified that he had paid into the
treasury the entire tux except $l29,32;
but that several hundred dollars which lie
had collected had been applied against his
direction to pay tine arrears of previous
years This was denied by the town
treasurer, Mr.. William p. Browne. who
drposed that he had always followed
Smi his directions, when given. The
chief defence relied upon by the defend
ants was the invaldily of the penal bond
in seven thousand doll;us, which htd been
given To the town by them previous to
Smiths assuming the Office. There Were
sixteen signcrs to this bond, and agains !
four names no seals are now affixed. Ali |
the signcrS but tWu--one of whom is dead |
and the other gone out Of the sale-tesi- |
fled that when they signed the bond no
seals VIII teyer were affixed. The town
,elcctmrn, at the time, testified that when
they first saw the bond it was in its pres
enl condition as to seals The counsel for
the town claimed that rs to the four names |
without soaIs, it was to be inferred by the
Jury that the signers had adopted the other
seals, and upon Cross-eXamination the
signers stated that they supposed, when
they pat their names to the bond that it
would be binding upon them, and that at
that time they had no objection to seals
being put on. The jury, after Il long de-
liberation, announced that they We're UNI
able to agree, and were discharged. 1t
has turned ont that they stood one for the
validity of the bond and eleven against.
The ease is one that ought not 10 be tried
by Il jury The three suits ought to be re-
ierred together, that Il competent man
make an accounting and report the facts
to the court. Alessrs S. i. IIebard and
John W. Rowell for the plaintiff; Messrs,
C. w Clarke and Grin Gambell for The
defendants.
State of Vermont VS.. William II. Ar
mold. The respondent, Il resident of Tun-
bridge, was indicted by the last jury for
with Rosannu or Roxanna T.
Whitney, the wife of james p. Whitney, n
Young armcr of the same town. The time
alleged was Sunday afternoon the eleventh
of June. The witnesses to the act were
two boys, who testified that they had
watched the pair. The jury brought in IL
verdict of guilty, after being out eigh-
teen hours. This WAS Mr.. Rogers first
trial since he assumed the duties of States
Attorney. Mrs. q. w. Clarke and Il. NJ |
Harvey were counsel for respondent.
William +. GiIlctl VS.. Horace Il White,
apt This case is one of the most ridcu-
l0us ever tried in County Court, and is
probably only paritlleled by the famous
runbrdge turkey case, which involved the
value of thirty or forty turkeys, had two
iAIs in County Court, cost the state from
first to last about SIX hundred dollars and
led 10 more perjury than an investigation
intoa Southern election. Tus case in
wolves even less money than the runbridge
suit but it contained nice point of law
and more counsel are engaged than are
usually seen in Il murder trial; on the
plaintiffs side are Hon. John w. Rowell
and Nelson J.. Boyden, E,q"; on the de-
PENDANTS side, lion. Dudley G. Denson,
NJ, g., Joseph ID Denison, Esq, Hon. G.
ii. Heath, Hiram Carleton, L q, and &.
W. Clarke, Esq, have been consulted, and
Messrs. j. d. Denison, Clarke and Heath
the trial. 1t appeared that the
defendant in 1874 had lox for pet,
which he kept tethered to Il post in his