Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1880-03-19
Windhan, County Court.


Athens, Albert G. Cotton.
Brattlt boro, l. B. Taft Col S. b. Wells,
Lewis Putnam.
Brookline, Hosea b. Crane.
Dover, Thomas F. Boyle.
Dummerston, Alonzo o. Norcross.
Guilford, Joseph f. Jacobs.
Grafton, b. NJ. Walker.
Halifax, Hollis S. Plumb
Jamaica, Henry J. Sage.
Londonderry, Alonzo A Curtis.
Marlboro, Brutus NJ Whitney.
Eewfane, Zina c. Bailey Baxter Gushing.
Putney, Edgar c. Parker.
Rockingham, Truman Cook, Hugh Christy.
Somerset, James C. Wheeler.
Stratton Jerome b. Temple.
Townshend, Ira X. Bachelor, Oscar H.
Garfield.
Vernon, George NJ. Brooks.
Wardsbors Edwin f. Brigham.
Westminster, Benz. F. Sleeper.
Nottingham, Theodore c. Marsh.
Wilmington, Stillman Robinson.
WindhRm, Henry NJ. Abbott.
Messrs. Boyle of Dover Plumb of Halifax,
Whitney of Marlboro and Bailey of Newfane
were excused.
b. r. Jenne rs, Chds and Henry Hale
This was an action to recover the sum of fifty
dollars, for money advanced to the defend
ants by the plaintiff The evidence on the
part of the plaintiff showed that the defend
ants were insured in the Conn. River Mutual
Fire ms. Co., that their application for in
surance was joint application, upon which
joint policy was issued by the Company
Sometime after the policy was issued the
property insured was destroyed by fire and
the loss finally adjusted by the plaintiff. Be-
fore the amount agreed upon was paid, Henry
Hale requested the plaintiff to pay him fifty
dollars and that when the Company paid the
loss, the amount could be deducted. The
defendants claimed that the money was loan
ed to Henry Hale and that when he received
payment for the loss sustained by him he was
to refund the same to the plaintiff, and that
Chas. had nothin TO do with this loan. It
also appeared that the real estate was owned
by Chas Hale and the personal property,
burned, by Henry Hale that the agent OBJ
tanning the application for insurance first OBJ
tanned the signature of Chas. Hale and after
wards the signature of Henry Hale to the ap-
plication. Verdict for plaintiff, $57.
Sally Bliss Us. WAiGnghdm.-Th was an
action on the case to recover damages for in
juries received on account of the alleged in
suffciency of the highway in Nottingham.
The case showed that the plaintiff when pass
ing through the village of Sadawga, ON the
18th of March, 1879, was thrown out of a
sleigh near the Sadawga hotel, and her arm
was fractured and her shoulder injured 1t
appeared that the highway as used by the
public, run close up to the platform upon
two sides of the hotel, and that the occupant
of the hotel placed a stone near the corner of
the platform for the purpose of protecting
the same. This stone was placed at or near
said corner the day previous to the accident.
The plaintiff claimed and the evidence tend
ed to show that the obstruction was within
the limits of the highway and it was further
claimed that it had remained there for such
time that the town was presumed to have had
notice of it. 1t was claimed on the part
of the town, and the defendants ey-
idence tended to show that the obstruction
was not within the limits of the highway but
was few inches beyond the margin thereof,
1t was conceded that there was a space be-
tween the outer margin of the highway and
the platform of the hotel which was not in
cluded in the survey of the highway as orig
inally laid out, and one question in contro-
versy was as to the spot where the stone was
placed. This depended upon the memory of
the witnesses, the stone having been removed
shortly after the accident 1t was further
claimed upon the part of the plaintiff that the
space above mentioned, if not included in the
original survey of the highway had been
dedicated to and adopted by the town, SO
that in any event the town was obligated to
keep the same in repair. The defendant
town denies that the authorities of the town
had ever knowingly adopted any portion of
the named road as a highway which was not
included in the original survey. Verdict for
plaintiff S5G3 This was the last jury case
for trial.
The following divorces have been granted
Seamon L. Wetherell vs.. Laura Wetherell,
intolerable severity; Lucy L. Bond vs. Geo.
W. Bond, refusal to support.