The Windham County reformer. (Battleboro, Vt.) 1876-1897, 1881-02-18
windham County Supreme Court

result was, tnaJ uVe VI tuo lh"o' '"'P''
tant suits upon the docket were ordered
TO the General Term at Montpelier II
October or November next The three
Judges present were dsinclined to hea
cases of doubt and difficulty. The send
ing of these cases TO Montpelier delay
their final termination and increases I'M
expense to the parties. The mos
feasible remedy for this state OF tnlngs
would seem to be for the Legislature
to provide that judge who shirks hi
duty, or who. for any other reason, neg
lects TO hold the terms assigned him
shall forfeit proportionate amount o
his pay.
The CAGES thus sent to the Genera
Term are Asa S Boyd o Town of Reads
boro, Maria M Graves. Ell ais, y. Chand
Ter Wakefield. Sally Bliss D. Town o
Nottingham. Bowker's Administrators y
Town of Dover, Hollis L. Robinson D
JOHN w. Frost Ct al The cases dis
posed Of are
Fints johnson & Co. y. Eureka Marble
Co.-Defeudants in 1871 leased then
marble quarry to the plaintiff, and agree
to furnish enough marble in the block fol
ten years to stock an eight-gauge mill anc
for tel years saw and manufacture the
marble, collect proceeds and pay defend
ants one half. The marble was unsound
and defective in quality and to obtain
marble, plaintiff had to endorse the de-
| fendants paper and become responsible
| to the workmen. In January, 1873, plain
| tiff brought an action of book account.
Il. 4 n ,r,,, h,
nership existed between them and plain
tiff; tEat the action of book account
could not be maintained, and in any
event that plaintiff could not recover for
the money paid by them after suit was
commenced to discharge their endorse
ment upon notes given before. The county
court rendered judgment on report of
the auditor to recover Sl7, S43.63. In'this
Judgment was included an item of 81 ,0S7
for bill of work done by Thomas Lynch
The plaintiffs had become liable for the
bill but had actually paid but $l79. The
court held that the plaintiffs judgment
was $S0S too large and rendered judg.
ment for plaintiff to recover $l7035. 60,
and interest since the March term, 1880.
Davenport & Eddy for plaintiff Prout and
Walker and w. II. Smith Of K Itland for
defendants
Alonzo Starkey, administrator, o. David
L,ahy.--Plaintiff as administrator of
Patrick Leahy, recovered judgment in
County Court against Leahy for $l295.75,
which tae latter had received as admin
istr4tor previously, and refused to pay
over. Judgment was affirmed aud the
defendant ordered to be confined in close
jail in default. Davenport Il Eddy for
plaintiff, Waterman for defendant.
Million F. Perry o. S. Wright Bowker.-
Plaintiff sought to recover for the default
of Lewis N. Sprague, deputy of Bow
ker, while Sheriff, for neglect to account
for money. County Court rendered a
judgment iii favor Of plaintiff, for $l3l, 10,
which was affirmed Wolcolt & Eddy
for plaintiff, Haskins and j, q. Eddy for
defendant Sprague.
James G. Roberts q. John Robertson
The famous Putney graveyard quarrel
ROBBERS conveyed to trustees of the Gem
etery a lot of land which he had pur-
chased aud laid out in burial lots reserv-
ing lots sold as the deed stated, giving
the numbers of over twenty lots. Among
these were two which had not before been
Sold which plaintiff claimed he designed
for his own family and that of his son.
The contention was whether these two
lots passed by tie deed. TIE County
Court decided not and rendered judg-
ment for defendant. The Supreme Courl
reverses it.
nsMary Weatheriead, appellant, .. Jonas
Weatnelhead, et ais, was argued by 5 Cd
dard for plaintiff, and Davenport &
Eddy for def, ndants. The question was
whether defendants, who were trustees
under the will of their brother, plaintiffs
father, were entitled to trial by jury,
which the County Court refused them.
Not decided, but entered with court.
Wales Ii. Willard .. Charles III. Willard,
d Townshend chancery suit, was argued
by j. G. Eddy for plaintiff and Stoddard
for the defendant. The decree of the
Court of Chancery i'll favor of the defend
ant was afirped.
b. f. BatcHelder D Russell u Roberts
was case of the common swindles of
these latter days. Roberts is an unso-
phisticated Guilford farmer. A smooth
tongued rascal called on him couple
of years ago and got an order from him
10 a lot of patent Eureka Moving Ma,
chine grinders and made him an agent
to sell them. under an agreement to di-
vide profits on what he sold and take
back what he didn't sell. Soon after
came with bill of $3.50
which be bull dozed Roberts into giving
4 note for, payable six months after date
1t bank in Brattleboro. The note was
If course sold Immediately to plaintiff !
Who paid rs he claimed $l75 in cash for
t. The County Court rendered Judge
nent for the plaintiff $2lS SO, Which is
Argued by briefs by j. M.
Tyler for plaintiff and George Howe for
defendant.
Nal Bemis D. Hiram Davis argued by |
Walker for the plaintiff and Ha,kins for
defendant. the Supreme Court found an
rror of sixty five cents in the Judgment
( $40 50 and /, versed the judgment of
be County Court and rendered judy
lent for S109 So.
Edward l.. Roberts o. Austin Carpen-
er.-An action on an officers receipt.
rgued by Brigham and C. N. Davenport
" plaintiff, and Butterfeld for defend
Mt, was also undecided, aud entered
with the Court"
In the pluper case Of Windham ..
Eardsbcro the County Court quashed
it OidEl Vi itllONdl ulJDll tlt RIOuIll |
lat two justices who made it were over
,ers of the poor who made the com
aint. Court affirmed that judgment
q. Martin, Davenport q Eddy for
aintitf; Waterman for defendant.
Jamaica .. Wardsboro, the judgment
the County Court in favor of plaintiff
n SS9.47 was affirmed without argument.
Warren r. Hildreth .. Henry n. Fits,
,tion of trespass against defendant for
taching as the property of one Waite
1 express sleigh which plaintiff claimed
own. Defendant claimed that there
as no sufficient change of possession.
he plaintiff recovered Judgment OF S62 {
| the court below. Argued by Water ,
an for plaintiff; j. G. Eddy for defend I
1t. With the court and undecided. 3
G.P. Spaulding, Ex'r, " Lucretia Wake {
Ids estate, plaintiff excepted to judg-
ent of the County Court against him '
r S1522.29, bAlanc in his hands belong
g TO the estate. But judgment is affirni- '
with interest. Clark & Ha>kins for |
x'r, Stoddard and Davenport for the t
tate.
Lindsey Bradley, an appeal from q
lancery by the plaintiff The decree of
e court blow discussing the Orators e
II was affirmed with costs. r
In Whitney FRS: National Bank of Ii
-attledoro the Judgment Of the Supreme v
)urt of Vermont was reversed ard the a
Sc ordered to the County Court for
w trial, pursuant to the mandate of G
e Supreme Court OF the United States. t
The cases of Edgar II. Davenport o.
lekiel B. Campbell, and Sarah M. s,
'nde VIM. II. Lynde ct ais, heard by I
g Supreme Court year ago and not
cided are sill hanging.
PUTNEY. A
UniveTsalist services in the town hall a