The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1884-06-25

tie had got into his corn, and trampled down
and injured it; on another occasion the de-
fendants sheep got into the plaintiffs pasture
land. On most OF these occasions 1t was al
legged to be through the imperfection OF the
defendants fences. The plaintiff claimed In
the aggregate $780, The defendant did not
deny that his cattle had been trespassing on
the defendants land, but contested the claim
OF plaintiff as to the amount OF damages al
legged to have been the result. Upon this ques-
ton the jury gave the plaintiff $3.50. A. M.
Dickey and r. M. Harvey for plaintiff; John
H. Watson for the defendant.
A. r. &c e. Bdldtoin, Jr., vs.. Henry NJ
Doubleddy.- suit was TO recover SO, 900,
and interest thereon from the first of April,
1885, for balance claimed TO be due on some
bark sold by the Messrs. Baldwin Of Wells River
and late OF Groton to the defendant In the
summer Of 1888 The plaintiffs introduced a
contract made between the parties, by the
terms OF which Doubleday was to take all the
bark that was peeled that season, to be deliv-
cred the succeeding winter, 1928. The con-
tract provided that said bark was to be meas
ured on the ground, or in the cars, as should
best meet the convenience of the plaintiffs.
The Messrs. Baldwin commenced shipping the
bark and payments were made from time to
time by Mr.. Doubleday The whole number
OF cars loaded was fifty-seven, and the total
amount paid by defendant was about six
thousand dollars. In May, 1883, a fire swept
over the district where the bark was piled, and
destroyed about three hundred or three hum
dred and fifty cords. The plaintiffs claimed
that they had frequently written to Doubleday
asking him to come and measure the bark /;
that they had decided to have 1t measured on
the ground, but that Doubleday had neglected
to measure it. This quantity that was de-
stroyed by fire was what the plaintiffs sought
to recover the value Of from the defendant,
upon the ground that it was, at the time Of its
destruction, In the possession Of, and the prop
erty Of, the defendant. The latter claimed he
had not taken delivery Of the bark that was
delivered on the cars. And in support Of this
he referred to the undisputed fact that all the
bark that had been shipped was measured
after being packed in the car, and the measure
ment thereof kept account Of by the plaintiffs.
1t was also urged by the defendant, that the
bark was 80 piked on the ground as to make 1t
impossible to be measured there. The court
instructed the jury in such way as to relieve
them of finding general verdict, and in place
thereof propounded to them about q dozen
questions of fact for them to settle, and upon
such finding the court will order such YER
dict entered as will protect the rights OF the
parties. The jury will probably agree and re-
turn answers to all the questions submitted to
them. They will return into court this morn
ing with the special verdicts f. w. Smith
and D. c. Denison appear for the plaintiffs
Lamb & Tarbell and Charles II. Heath for the
defendant.
F. II Hartman vs.. Francis Cttrtis-Plain.
tiff seeks to recover damages for the wilful
cutting OF certain trees in a cemetery at Orange.
the plaintiff claims ownership This case is on
trial. Messrs Denison and Boyce appear for
Hartman; and Heath, Harvey e. White for
the defendant.
The jury business Of the term will probably
close this week.