Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1880-09-29
washington County Court.

Washington County court
u.u TIMOTHY p REDFIELD. Presiding Judse.
Hon JAMES A. ooBURN I hss iss,.aistantJad re.
Hon. PHILANDkk hiEUtAIS tsrt
f fhLSlPP LuxLET, stste's Attorney.
Ions + o TgITIEs s shs5sP
Tha oo,rt ia now trying the third case OF
the term-F. w. Miller VS.: Amos rlas
,r;daa and r w. Howe. Mortified case,
in which the plaintiff seeks 70 recover tn
valne of about 1915 worth OF cattle ana
other personal farm properly whlcn uIe
defendant attached and sold upon process
MN a debt which the plaintiff ) father,
Russell II. Miller, owed him. The PLAIN
tiff, young Methodist minister; claims
tha. the nroperty attached was his, and
NOT his fathers, while the defendants
claim that the sons ownership is fraud
90, mn IN cheat the fathers creditors. The
case will be given to the jury this after
noon. Messrs. Plumley & Bates and w.
p. DILLINGHAM; are for the plaintiff ana
Messrs G. ri. Heath and James n. John
son for the defendant.
The cases of w. A. Boutelle vs. the
Westchester, Planters, Globe and Kansas
insurance companies have, it is hoped, all
come to an end, and will trouble tne
courts no more. In the Planters case the
referee, Judge Thompson of Washington
has made a report and the court has given
judgment thereupon for SOL and costs.
The verdict in the Westchester case was
for some 5000 90 and costs. The Globe
and Kansas Companies male the litigation
against them quite brief by falling. Inc
suit of Mr.. Boutelle against Col. A. Z.
Brown for Islander, which was feature OF
the quarrel, has been settled by the de-
PENDANT paving one cent damages and full
costs.
The three students who were admitted
to the bar on the first day of the term
Messrs. c. B. Goodrich George B. Cliff
ford and George W. Morse-are young
men of unusual promise, who passed sue
cessfully very strict and thorough exam
nation. Mr.. Goodrich has already opened
an office in West Randolph; Mr.. Morse
will practice in his native town, Water
bury, while Mr.. Clifford will remain in
Montpelier for the present.
The new docket is very small consisting
of only "a cases, of which 6 are divorce.
The term will probably be quite lengthy.
| Herbert G.. Leonard VS.. Ira Hutchinson.
This suit was one brought by the plaintiff
Herbert G., Leonard of Barre. to recover
the amount due on note which grew out
of horse trade The plaintiff and his
brother, E. o. Leouard, were teamsters.
and owned team consisting of certain
brown mare" and horse, each oil
which, it appears. weighed about twelve
hundred pounds, and constituted good
team for work; at least, so thought the
defendant, Mr. Ira Hutchinson, who is a
farmer of Barre and runs threshing
: machine for variety 1t appeared from
the evidence that the defendant and his
two sons proceeded to the stable OF the
Leonards in Barre village, for the purpose
of effecting a swap, by which the defend
ant could obtain possession OF the coveted
team. After good deal of talk and ban
tering, and after leaving out to TWO black
smiths in regard to the relative values o.
the team owned by the Leonards and the
span of old white plugs owned by the de-
PENDANT, trade was finally brought about
rhereupon the defendant departed home
word with the team owned by the Leon
ards, giving in exchange his own team
800 in money and note for SllO.
k The great question in this suit was il
regard to the condition of the brown
more at the time of the trade. The mare
was formerly owned by Mr.. George P
. Foster, landlord of the Union house, o
" Montpelier. Mr.. Foster testified that th'
mare had what horsemen call Il "win'
;. SPAWN and he also related how the mar
v got it-by slipping while at play in hi
yard one icy day. The plaintiff admitted
il that the mare had SPAWN and was lame
IS but averred that he told the defendant tn
. condition of the mare bsfore the trad
was consummated. The defendant ais
admitted that he found out that the mar
st was lame before he got home with her
Y but denied that she had any SPAWN. ii
= put on several witnesses to show that tn
mare had no SPAWN. but was lame o
II some mysterious disease in the hip; an
< he asked the court to permit him to otfse
against the note which the plaintiff hel
against him the difference between th
e mare if she had been sound and what sh
re was really worth at the time he got heI
- The defendant also affirmed that the mar
. was warranted to him, but admitted tina
e he made no complaint to the Leonard
70 until after the suit was brought.
In this case, as in other horse cases
there was good deal of tall swearing i
in regard to the condition of the mare an
N the conditions of the trade. So much an
g so hard was the swearing on both side
4 that the jury finally concluded to settle tn
= affair by allowing the defendant to pay t
u the plaintiff 1868. and the two endorse
y ments-one OF 500 90, the other of 81
which did not appear upon the note, bu
which defendant said had been paid b
j. him, were left to the plaintiffs conscience
r, Messrs. w. A. & o. B. Boyce for plaintiff
ar Messrs. Heath Il Carleton for defendan
s Homer D. Camp VS.. N. F. Averiil-
which was tried here in court q yea
= ago-is a suit we'll known in this section
Homer d. Camp of Orange sues the d.
(. PENDANT. n. F. Averill of Barre, to recove
A on note which reads as follows:
Il $4,000. BARRE, Aug. 81, 1877.
a For value received we jointly and Sc,
orally promise to pay Homer ID. Camp. c
70 bearer, four hundred dollars on demand
st with interest,
N E. o. LEONARD,
20 G. c. LEONARD,
j. S. COLLINS,