Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1881-10-12

that no order Of removal should have been made as
George was insane when he went &c Marshfeld, and
consequently had no intention Of residing there,
and testimony was offered TO that effect The
verdict was against the defendant in all points,
and Middesex will be liable for the support Of
George Loveland until he dies, unless the supreme
court decides that dogs are not rateabe estate"
Georges board bill at the asylum amounts to
$40 year. Messrs j. p Lamson and S. G.
Shurteff, for the plaintiff; Messrs. Homer W.
ieaton and Heath & Carleton, for the defendant.
Leonard Dix rs. Wheeler J. Batchelder and the
Town Of Planfeld. The defendant, Batchelder,
In 1876 was first constable Of Plainfed; and the
plaintiff now a resident Of Marshfeld then re-
sided In Plainfed The facts as appeared from
the evidence In the were as follows: The
plaintiff, Dix, had large claim amounting to
some 81 400 against the firm Of K T.. Peabody g.
Co, who were then doing large um Der business
In Groton. For the purpose Of securing this debt
he procured a writ from Heath & Carleton of
Montpelier, and some time in August, 1876, he
sent his brother, Orville 10 Paineld village with
this writ and Orvllle delivered the writ as he
claims, to the defendant Bttchelder, with instruc
tions to serve it and attach property enough to
secure the debt; and the defendant, without the
knowledge or consent Of Dix. handed this writ
over TO his brother Charles Batchelder, who was
not at that time officer with authority TO serve
papers, although he was an authorized deputy
sheriff the year before But Charles Batchelder
went through the form Of attachment though the
returns were so improperly made that the pro-
cess would not have have been good II Batchelder
had been legally authorized to serve the papers,
but as he was not OF course the whole transaction
was void. When Dix's suit went to judgment
| and he attempted to levy on the property, the
| nullity of the whole transaction was made appa-
rent, and 1t was discovered that the property had
been sold long before that the company had failed
and the debt against Peabody & Co was worth
less Now the plaintiff sues to recover his debt
from Batchelder, on the ground that he neglected
| his duty The defendant admitted that the pa
pers had been put into his hands by Orville Dix,
but claimed that he had transferred them to his
brother Charles because, as he claims to have
told the plaintiff brother, he did not feel COM
petent to go through with the transac ton Of that
size and nature, and he claimed that Orvllle
| sented to this arrangement. About this point Of
consent there was some conflict Of testimony, be-
cause the whole case depended upon IL. Ofville
| denied that the defendant refused to serve the
papers that he consented to their being given
| to Charles Several witnesses In confederation of
Orville's testimony, swore to conversations which
| they had had with the defendant in which he had
made admissions showing that he gave the papers
to Charles without the plaintiffs knowledge.
| Although the defendants story to the contrary
was supported by young man named Herman H.
Dewey who swore he present when Orville
gave the papers to the defendant the jury re-
fused to believe him, and returned verdict for
the plaintiff to Si736 IA cents ard costs.
| Messrs. J. A. and Geo. W Wing and Heath L.
Carleton appeared for the plaintiff; Messrs. S. C.
| Shurtleff and William P. Dillingham;, for the de.
| PENDANT