Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1881-06-29
Orange County Court.

Ibe case Of Ira R. Melendy us. the Town Of
Bradford was argued at length and with ability;
every point was stubbornly contested and never
was case better tried. The result appeared in
the WircHMAS last week, the amount OF the
verdict, S7,6GS.75 was So, OO2 90 more than on
the previous trial. Exceptions are taken snd the
case will again go to the supreme court
oharles Sanders u.s. B. +. Durkee was the next
case called. This was an actien TO recover the
amount OF a promissory note executed by the de-
fendant In June, 1878 Execution o. the note
being admitted the plaintiff rested. The defend
ant contested his liability on the note upon the
ground that there had been failure OF consdera-
ton, and further that the note had been obtained
by fraud. The parties made an exchange of
horses. Plaintiff took mare Of the defendant
giving therefor a four-yearsold colt and s125
| After the trade Sanders found the mare lame and
wanted his colt back; 1t was then claimed by
the defendant that the colt was lame The mutual
alterations Of the parties were then adjusted by
the defendant giving Sanders his note for $50 with
the agreement that 1t was only to be paid II the
| mare proved lame, and the colt unsound De-
PENDANT claimed that the mare was all right. but
the colt was not, and upon this question the case
turned. The jury decided for the plaintiff for
the amount Of his note. John W. Rowell for
plaintiff; n L. Boyden and S. b. Hebard for de-
PENDANT
Ephraim Thayer Us. j. B. Mead-This also was
an action on a note, executed by defendant in Oc-
toDer 1876, payable in one year from date to one
Cramer or bearer for one hundred dollars given
Tor An interest In the patent right Of churn des-
ignated the Eureka" Defendant conceded the
execution Of the note, but claimed 1t had its in
ception In fraud practiced upon him by said
Cramer. Defendant claimed that soon after he
gave said note he discovered the fraud attempted
upon him and offered to rescind. Cramer put him
OIL for time and then left Randolph and nothing
more was seen OF him there. Thayer claimed to
be bona fde holder OF the note and that he OBJ
tained 1t In the usual course of busin ess Itap
peared, however, that Thayer had seen Cramer.
after he tThayer) came into possession of the
note; that he knew the note was IN be contested
yet never said word to Cramer about IT, The
Jury returned verdict for the defendant They
were out but very short time. Mr. Dunnett of
Ryegate and Colonel A. NJ. Dickey for plaintiff;
John W. Rowell and N L. Boyden for defendant
State rs. George W. Norton. This respondent
was indicted by the grand jury this term for
making an assault upon one Sewell Godfrey at
Strafford on May 18th last. Godfrey and Norton
owned lands adjoining, and had a quarrel about
their fences. Norton called out the fence viewers
who met to settle the contest. When the fence
was located dispute arose between the parties,
and " liar aud other such complimentary cpl
thets were freely passed. From high words,
blows arose, and Godfrey claimed that Norton
struck first but Norton said he had to "git thar"
first to protect himself from Godfrey's cudgel,
which was already uplifted to strike, but this was
denied by Godfrey. The evidence was conflict
ing but the state had not quite enough to satisfy
the jury beyond reasonable doubt, and so Nor
ton was acquitted. States Attorney II ebard pros
ecuted and George A. Dickey and D. c. Hyde
represented the other cDmbatant
The case OF Stevens Libby U.s. George Heath
was then called, but as defendant had not enough
ready cash to pay the jury fees it was set not for
jury, and will be heard by the court on assessment
of damages.
The state cases were then taken up. In the case
OF State u.s. Philip de Paris for assault with intent
to Kill and murder, the bail was arranged by
the employer OF Departs, who is holden in $780,
The case was continued on account of the absence
of material witness for the defence
State Cs Eugene Danforth indicted for assault
with intent to ravish one Jane Willis at Cornth,
ou the oru Oh ApriI last, pleaded " not guilty.,
but afterwards took back this plea, and said
guilty" He was sentenced to hard labor at the
state prison for the term of four years
State Us. George II. Abbott This young man,
who is now only twenty-three, pleaded guilty to
the charges contained in nine indictments found
by the grand jury one being for burglary, five Of
them for breaking into dweling-houses, and the
remainder for burglarizng depots on the Pas
sumpsic Railroad Sentence was passed on each
indictment the aggregate being fifteen years.
The prisoner is young man of more than ordi-
nary intelligence and presents very good ap-
pearance. When asked II he had anything to
say why sentence should not be passed. he made
an appeal to the court to temper justice with
mercy. - Judge Powers. in passing sentence OK.
pressed the regret of the court to see a young
man OF the respondents ability and brightness in
such predicament, and spoke some very encour-
aging words to the prisoner, with the hope that
when his sentence expired he would mend his
ways and become upright honest man in the
On Thursday morning last Deputy Sheriff S. X.
Berry took Abbott and Danforth to Windsor. and
the removal of these prisoners leaves the Jail
without occupants.
There being no other jury cases, the jurors
were discharged.
On Monday afternoon, at two o'clock, court re-
assembled, and this week is being occupied in the
trial of court causes.