The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1883-10-03
Washington County Court.
Hon. T. P. RFDFELD, Chief Judge.
Hon J. II. HASTINGS, ! Ass,s,on, .1,d,,,
Hon. j, NJ. FISHER, h0S'S'""' '""ye''

HON. j M. FISHER Assistant Jadges.
NJ. T. SMILE, Clerk
+ ii. ATHKRToN Sheriff
ii. A. UUsE, States Attornev |
HENRY OviATT Stenogrdpher.
At the time of going to press last week the |
case OF j. w Leonard Us Achsah Dutton was |
on trial This was an action of trespass on the |
freehold, entered at the March term, 1885, to |
recover the value of some twenty or more
standing trees alleged to have been cut by the
defendant. 1t appears that there had been
dispute OF long standing concerning the bound
ary line between lots number seven and eight
OF the FIRST division In the town OF Calais. The
plaintiffs father came to the ownership OF lot
number eight in the year 1888 by purchase OF
one Noah Pierce who had occupied 1t since
1870 and on the decease of his father in 1842
it went into the hands OF the administrator,
and so remained until about 1847. when
the northwesterly corner-containing the land
in question-was set out to the widow rs her
dover. Westerly Of said lot number eight lies
the land OF the defendant. and between the
adjoining owners there has never been fence
ON the line, as the plaintiff claimed, but was
some three or four rods too far east, and on the
land Of the plaintiff. The defendant has dur
ing all these years occupied this narrow strip
OF woodland and claimed to own it as a part Of
her farm, having gained title to the same by
long continued possession. The plaintiff claimed
in answer to this defence, that he had allowed
the defendant to occupy and that he had him
self occupied said land sufficiently to cut off
any claim OF prescription, which the counsel
for the plaintiff claimed, should have been ex-
c'usive possession. The jury rendered a YER
dict for the defendant to recover her cost s.
c. Shurtleff and Harlan W. Kemp for the
plaintiff. j. p. Lamson and George W. Wing
for the defendant
The next case tried was that of John Currier
Us. the Continental Life Insurance Company of
Hartford, Conn. This was an action OF as
sumpsit to recover on a five-term life policy
for 50, 600 by the plaintiff beneficiary, taken
out on the life Of the plaintiffs wife in 1865
The plaintiff was then resident Of New
Hampshire, and the agent who took the appli-
cation was P. II. Hinckley, son-in-law of the
plaintiff, then resident of Manchester, N H.
The plaintiff claimed that the premiums were
to be paid one-half in cash and one-half in
notes, and that the agent represented to him
by circulars and otherwise, that fifty per
cent dividend was to be allowed, which would
be sufficient to cancel the notes. The evidence
tended to show that after one or two yearly
premiums had been paid, the plaintiff, to sat
isfy himself about the dividends, wrote to the
company inquiring how the same were to be
applied that they informed him in return
that the plaintiff was to have his option either
to have the dividend on the five-term rate, for
five years, or on the life rate during the life of
the policy. Relying upon this the plaintiff
continued to pay his premiums, according to
the terms OF the policy until the last premium
was due, when the same was lost or stolen
while In the custody of the express company
and while in transit. The defend mt refused
to allow the same to the plaintiffs credit or to
make any application of dividends in liquida-
tion OF said premiums. The plaintiff then
brought his bill in equity in the courts. Of New
Hampshire to compel the defendant to make
application of dividends sufficient to pay that
premium and to keep the policy in force. He
obtained decree to that effect, which was
| sustained by the supreme court. Snbse auently
| the insured dpnaaa tha dofa
| proof OF death, rendered the plaintiff So, GIT,
| 1t being the amonnt of the policy less the pre-
| MUM notes and interest, not allowing any
dividends except the one applied by the New
Hampshire courts. The evidence tended to
| show that dividends on all other policies had
been allowed from thirty to fifty per cent in
the different years during the life of the pol
icy The plaintiff introduced copy of the
records OF the courts OF New Hampshire to the
admission of which the defendants counsel
objected on the ground that it was not prop.
erly certified by the presiding judge of that
court. The defendant introduced the testi-
mony OF one Morley, their actuary, who de-
livered di.quisi,ion on the subject Of life iu-
surance and the principal duties Of his office,
| to draw stated salary. He gave no sufficient
reasons why the defendant had not allowed
the dividends on the policy. The court Or
! dered the jury to return a verdict for the
plaintiff, allowing said dividends on the life
rate to be applied in payment OF the premtum
| UbltS. ltdNlHB u Oub tDb
| 81 347 76 Exceptions by defendant aud cause
passed to the supreme court. S. G. Shurtleff
| for plaintiff Charles w. Porter for defendant
The case of A. A. Mead uS. John w. Clark,
WAS then uied. Action of assumpsit In the
winter OF 1877 one George w. NJ Silver. then
of Tivoli, N. Y, came TO Vermont and wante
to settle up some debts with various Montpe-
lier creditors and gave his note to the plaintiff
for S27. The plaintiff claimed that an arrange
ment was entered into BY the defendant and
said Silver to buy plaintiffs note and bring
| suit on 1T with defendants account against
said Silver. Plaintiff delivered the note to the
attorneys OF defendant, who got judgment
against Silver, by default and execution was
| issued on same and levied on some land of the
defendants in Moretown. The defendant
claims to have received the note with the un-
derstandng that he and the plaintiff should
share equally in the result Of suit on the two
matters joined. The jury returned verdict
for defendant. Harlan w Kemp and John H.
Senter for plaintiff; G. W. Wing for defendant
| The disposition Of criminal cases was taken
up on the assembling of court Monday after
noon. The first case for trial was State Us L.
b. Huntington of Montpelier for violation Of
law relative to the fife in Intoxicating liquors
The respondent pleaded not guilty and the
state pre- duced one Israel Tracy of Bolton, who
testified that he WAS in Montpelier in October,
1882 and got pretty full and got arrested, y
but failed 10 connect the offense charged with
the respondent except that he said he procured
| one glass OF lager beer at an eating saloon on
State street. The counsel for the respondent
moved the court to order verdict on the
ground that there WAS no evidence in the case,
which view the court decided to be correct and
| ordered the jury to return verdict of not
guilty. Hiram A. Huse for the state; ii. w.
Kemp and j. ii. SeDIer for respondent.
State Us John Porter. This was an appeal
from Justices judgment of guilty Of five first
offences against the prohbitory law This was
heard by the court on plea in abatement filed
by the respondent and demurred to on the part
OF the state. The plea alleged defective ser
vice OF the warrant, 1t appeared that the town
| OF Barre failed to hold their annual meeting
for 1888 on the day appointed by law, and that
the constable OF Barre, the officer who served
this warrant was elected at the meeting held
on another day, and was there given the juris-
diction OF the state by vote of the town. The
| respondent claimed that under provisions of
section S5l Of the Revised Laws, as amended
by No. 81 Of the laws of 1882, The constable
could serve no process even in his own town,
unless given the jurisdiction of the state at the
annual meeting. The court overTuled the plea
and sustained the demurrer holding that the
! legislature intended to amend the last of the
St cion referred to, and that it did not affect a
constable serving process in his own town, and
| further that In a criminal cause it made no
difference what kind of process or service
brought a re- p ndent into court, II he was only
| there and that his only remedy would be
against the person arTesting him II the service
| Waa NOT repulur N which SnOudpnt eNppntpd