The Lamoille news. (Hyde Park, Vt.) 1877-1881, 1878-01-30
LAMoILLe COUNTY COURT,


wick, Bbl. Of whisky, which was or
dered by the Deit. upon Il blank for
that purpose, which was furnished by
said Putnam, and was filed out and
signed by the Def. and read rs fol-
lows:
IIar7lwirk, VI, Sept. ~, lsIG.
Messrs seth +. Pcckcr & Co Boston, Mass.
Gents Please ship me tie following Eo1ds 10y
freight markell ;. T.. 4. y Co., Nolcott Depot
N. backed into q rstSc, / Bbl. of sweet Valley
whisky, at ss.O) per gallon. send bill 70 Hart
wick, Vt
"""' J. b. TITUS.
The Def. claimed that said order
was written by said Putnam, and then
copied by the Def. into the blank or
der furnished by said Putnam, and
that the order was made that way at
the suggestion of said Putnam as a
cover and to prevent a seizure of the
liquor by the authorities of Hardwick
or Wolcott. 1t further appeared in
evidence that when the Pllis. shipped
said whisky, they sent an order TO
the Def. on the station agent at VOL
colt, to deliver said whisky to the
bearer of said order, by which means
the Deft. obtained said whisky. 1t
also appeared that in Oct. Of the
same year, the Pltis. sent the Deft. Il
bill of cigars, amounting to s22, which
cigars through u mistake of the Def.
were returned to Plfls,, and which, by
an arrangement between the Def. and
said Putnam were again sent to the
Def. The Pins. claimed also that
when said cigars were sent the second
time, another box Of another brand
was also sent, upon the Delts. order,
but which the Def. denied, he claim
ing that he never ordered nor received
any cigars from the Pl.is, only those
named in the first bill. The second
bill amounted to S2S. 1t appeared
further, that the Def. paid to said
Putnam for the PlhS., $50, for which
said Putnam gave the Def. a receipt
in the name Of the Plfs. The Plfs.
claim was for $500, the balance on
cigars, and for the Bbl. Of whisky.
The testimony of said Putnam tended
to show that the Def. was a stranger
to him, that he went into the Dcft.'s
store, and Def. inquired of him if he
knew where the Def. could get some
whisky, and requested him to inform
the Deft. how it could be ordered so
as to keep it safe from seizure, and
that he gave the Dett. the information
he desired, but told Deft he could not
sell Def. any liquor as the laws Of the
State would not allow it, and that all
he did about the matter, was as a
favor to the Def. and at the Deft's.
special request. The Court charged
the Jury that if they found that said
purchase was made in this State, or
that said Putnam as the agent Of the
Plfs. was instrumental in negotiating
the sale Of said whisky: or, secondly,
if they found that the sale was made
in Boston, as claimed by the Pits,
but under such circumstances, that
the Plffs. might reasonably suppose
that said whisky was for illegal use,
the Plhs. could not recover for the
whisky. The Jury returned averdict
for the Pits. for $500 balance on ci-
CARS. Exceptions by Plfs. II. L.
Carter for Plffs. II. +. Parker, p. X.
Glced for Deft.
After the Jury cases were disposed
Of there were several unimportant
Court trials one an action ofTrover,
resulting in Judgment for the Pltf.
for fifty cents damages, to which the
Def. excepted.
The following are the Divorces
granted this term, land the causes, viz.
Caroline Stewart vs. Hiram Stewart,
intolerable severity; Mary j. Petit
VS. Gilbert II. Petit, intolerable sever
ty; Clara j. Homer VS. Thomas j.
Homer, refused to support; Lois
Peake VS.. Preston Peake, intolerable
severity; Ruth Mullikin VS. David r.
MullilIin, marriage annulled, for the
reason that it was contracted when
the petitioner was minor, and the
contract not ratified since she became
Of age.