Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1878-08-21
Washington County Supreme Court.

The August term OF the Washington County
Supreme Court was held here on Tuesday, We'd
uesday, Thursday and Friday Of last week, Judges
Barrett, Royce, Ross and Powers on the bench.
The following cases were heard and decided
William A Boutelle rs. Westchester Fire Insur-
ance Company. The plaintiff, n resident OF Mont
pelier, was the chief promoter Of the "hulless
oats" enterprise, which fourshed in 1873 and
1874. He had many hundred bushels Of the oats
stored in an old blacsmith's shop, which were in
sured in the defendant company and three Others
The oats were burned up on the 21st day Of April
1870 Thepolicy upon which this suit was brought
was issued March 81, 1875 and by It's terms the
plaintiff was insured "against loss or damage by
fire, to the amount OF $780," $4,000 other nsur-
ance permitted In case Of loss, not to exceed five
dollars Is to be claimed or paid on any one bushel
OF thirty-two pounds" The policy contained
| stipulation that the insurance should be void in
case Of "any false representation by the assured
OF the condition, situation, or occupancy Of the
| property, or any omission to make known every
| fact material to the risk, or an generalization or
any Misrepresentation whatever, either in a writ
ten application or otherwise" Tbecase was tried
in the county court last September, Judge Red
field presiding and averdict was rendered in favor
OF plaintiff for s162S. On account of the above
| mentioned stipulation to the policy the defendant
requested the court to charge the Jury that IL they
should find that the plaintiff ut the time Of the
application for the policy in question made a sub
stantial generalization, the contract was null and
void, and the plaintiff not entitled to recover.
| There was evidence tending TO show that at the
time Of the application for the policy the plaintiff
made largeand substantial generalization OF the
oats both as to quantity and value. The court re-
fused to charge as defendant requested but told the
jury in substance that unless they should find that
the plaintiff knowingly and fraudulently made such
representation to induce the policy, then it became
binding as any other contract which is entered
into. The defendant excepted to this ruling, and
to several Others and took the case 10 the supreme
court. The supreme court held the other ex-
ceptions to be bad but held that Judge Red
field erred in the portion of his charge above
mentioned, and the supreme court said substan-
TALLY that under the terms Of that stipulation any
Misrepresentation made by plaintiff, whether in
nocent or fraudulent, yitiated the policy The case
therefore, comes back to the county court for a
new trial. Messrs. J. A. Wing j. p Iamson and
J. o, Livingston, for plaintiff; Messrs. r. S. Taft
and Heath & Carlton, for defendant
State as. James Richards.-The respondent in
this case was convicted of setting fire to build
ing owned by Leonard Dix in Plaiufed on the
10th of May, 1877, and thereby causing the great
fire in that town. During the trial the court ad
mitted evidence tending to show that the respond
ent had threatened to have revenge upon every one
concerned in n liquor prosecution against him
short time before; that on the night of the fire
some trees belonging to O. l.. Hoyt, one OF the
prosecutors, were grdled and that about week
before the fire the fence of George Bartlett
another prosecutor, was set on fire, and that re-
spondent when accused of it after the great fire
said he didn't deny It, Respondents counsel ex-
cepted to the admission Of this evidence about
Barilett's fire, on the ground of mmateralty and
remoteness but the supreme court held that Bart
lett having been one against whom the respondent
had made threats, it was admissible to show the
carrying out Of these threats Of which the great
fire was part The respondent was sentenced to
ten years in the state prison. The States Attor-
ney appeared for the state and S c. Shurtleif for
respondent
In the case of the State u.s. Nathaniel Blair
William Mills and Beman II. Campbell, the bail
OF Mills and Blair was defiulted and the case OF
Campbell was continued to the general term He
has pettioned for new trial on the ground OF
newly discovered evidence and there are also ex-
ceptions involving important law questions
In the case of George Joslyn ct. al. rs o. H. Sea-
bury ct al, there was decree for the orators
In Martha Gourley ct al. Us. T.. j. Woodbury. ct
al, the judgment of the county court in favor OF
the petitioners was affirmed
The judgments OF the county court in the fol-
lowing cases were also affirmed: Ira P Harring-
ton u.s. A. G. Hill and Trustee, in favor of plain.
tiff Allen Bates as. Ira p Harrington in favor Of
plaintiff George p Foster u.s. John Elkins in favor
of plaintiff John W. Clark rs. Burnham and Hey
ward, in favor of plaintiff s S Towner u.s. A. A.
Bliss, in favor OF plaintiff Frank A. Joslin rs. G
Eugene Moody, in favor OF plaintiff o. L. Hoyt
rs. Wilbur Christie and Trustee in favor Of plain.
tiff; Jacob and Guy Smith rs. d. Mcdonald, de-
cree for orator. Heman A. Moore rs. A. j. Batch
elder. judgment for plaintiff; Bickford & swasey
rs. George L Barnum, judgment for defendant
Abby S Dodge u.s. Town of Berlin, judgment for
plaintiff; Lyman Clark rs. Moses Bass ct al, de-
cree in favor of orator.
The judgment OF the county court in the fol-
lowing eases reversed S. S. Kelton, admin.
istrator, as Town Of Marshfed where the county
court, after a verdict in favor OF the defendant,
allowed the plaintiff to enter a non-suit which |
the supreme court said was wrong, and ordered |
judgment for defendant on the verdict; f. II |
Town rs C. c. Rublee and Trustee, where the |
county court rendered judgment for plaintiff |
State Us. j. H. Drew, where the ability Of a sher-
i'll to issue writ as justice of the peace wa |
considered, and judgment rendered by the SUI |
preme court that it cannot be done
The following cases were heard and decision.
reserved: Henry K Field administrator, rs. Ran |
dali and Durant; Stephen Cochran, administrator, |
rs Thomas Elliott; l. and V. L. Black u.s. Nose.
f. Howard S. S. Keton administrator rs. n. C |
Bacon ct. al; A. W. Nelson u.s. J B Wells and
trustee; George P, Foster rs. Montpelier, Middle
sex and Worcester; Diana B, Mann u.s. Estate OF |
Gideon Mann Charles II. Dole u.s. j. D. and Mary |
A. Robinson; William Martin rs. Campand Perry |
The following cases were continued to the gen
eral term: Lamoille Valley Railroad Company as
Vermont Canada and Central Vermont Rail
roads; Asa George Us. - Slayton; NJ MURRAY
n II