Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1884-03-21
THE COUNTY COURT.

Fred h. Houghton gs p. S Hannum. This
was an action on the case to recover damages
for injuries to cattle through the application Of
mercurial ointment. The evidence on the
part of the plaintiff tended to show that in
February, 1882, plaintiff was the owner of 6
valuable herd of cattle consisting in chief of
Holstein thoroughbreds that his herd had
become infected with lice, and that to ex-
terminate them he employed the defendant
upon his representation that he had long
and successful experience in the extermina
ton of lice by the use of a preparation OF
mercurial ointment, known AZ unguentum,
and that it was harmless remedy to use, to
apply it to his cattle for the purposes afore.
said that on the 9th day of February,
1882 the defendant, having obtained two
pounds of the ointment, made the applica
ton to thirty-nine head by freely rubbing it
into the hair and upon the skin Of the ami
mails and that on the 18th day Of the month
he made second application in the same
manner and carding it in. In o short time
thereafter the entire herd became sick and
diseased, large blisters being raised upon the
skin where applied, that the teeth became
loosened, tongue swollen, with all the other
symptoms of mercurial poisoning The
plaintiff sent to Albany, N. Y, and employed
an experienced veterinary surgeon, who
found as fact that the quantity OF oint-
ment applied had thoroughly poisoned the
herd. The result was thirteen head of cattle
of the value of $2G75 died, and the re-
mainder of his herd was damaged and less
ened in value to large amount. He
also paid out nearly $500 for medical attend
ance, medicine and nursing. The evidence
of the defendant tended to show that he did
not represent himself as being possessed of
anything more than the ordinary skill of
farmers in the use of unguentum or in the
determination of lice, and only represented
it as harmless when applied carefully and the
cattle not exposed to the cold that he did
apply it on February 9th in a small quantity
and again on the 18th in still smaller guam
tity; that the plaintiff did not take proper
care of his stock, but that his cattle were OK
posed out doors to the rain, snow and cold,
and that it was through his own want of care
and negligence that tho cattle died that
they wore of a value of much less than plain
tifFs evidence tended to show. Verdict for
defendant. Haskins IL Stoddard and O. b.
Eddy for plaintiff; Martin & Eddy and o. E.
Butterheld for defendant.
This case was the important one of the ses-
sion and aroused much interest. The trial
began on Wednesday of last week and the
iury's verdict was reached after half hours
deliberation on Wednesday night of this
week at G o'clock.
Chester b. Ne,oeH 0s. tOoR Of Nottingham.
This was an action of assumpsit. The ev-
idence and conceded facts showed that in
April, 1881, one of the listers Of Whiting
ham called on the plaintiff for his inventory
to make up his grand list. They sat down
together and filed up the blank in manner
satisfactory to both the plaintiff filed
up the oath and signed it after interlining
therein the words according TO my best
knowledge and belief" The lister refused 10
administer the oath with such an alteration
therein, and his associates cOncurred with
him in so doing. The plaintiff refused to
sign and make oath to the same without such
addition thereto. Thereupon the listers
doubled his list according to the provisions
of the statute. Plaintiff refused to pay his
taxes assessed upon this doubled list, and the
collector levied and sold his property to sat
isfy the same, and this action was brought TO
recover back the excess so paid with the costs
of the levy and saler The court directed
verdict for the defendant. Hix and @. b.
and G. F. Eddy for plaintiff. Davenport and
Tyler for defendant.
The case Bracket VS.. Leonard was reached
Thursday morning, next after the Whiting
ham case, when the plaintiffs counsel set it
mot for triaw by the jury and filed motion
for continuance, on account of the inability
of DIR. Dearborn to attend as ON important
medical witness. This completed the trial of
all Jury cases that were ready, and the court
finally concluded to dismiss the jury, which
it did, and took an adjournment until Tues
day next at 0 A. NJ, when it will meet to dis
pose of the court issues.