The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1886-06-02
leferreb Matter.
Washington County Supreme Court.


report for the plaintiff pro tormo Excep-
tions by the defendant. The facts in the
case were as follows: 1.-THE plaintiff is cor
poration under the laws of Massachusetts
for the purpose of manufacturing and sell
ing articles consisting wholly or in part of
india rubber or of its compounds, or of SINH
lar elastic or vulcanizable substances, and
to further deal in all kinds of rubber goods,
buying and selling the same, or receiving
the same on commission or assignment"
The affairs of the company as related to this
transaction were conducted by the treas
urer of the company. The defendants were
partners doing business at CINCINNATI, in the
state of Ohio, under the same Aforesaid, and
their business was the manufacture of clothes
wringers. The writ in the suit ran against
Simpson q Gault by their individual names
and their firm name; but only Simpson was
served with the process, and he alone en-
tered an appearance in court and before the
referee. About the 18th of May, 1880, the
plaintiff and the said Peerless Wringer
Company began to have business together,
from which time up to the 18th day of
October of the same year the plaintiff manu-
featured for the said Wrnger Company
seventeen thousand wringer-rolls, at differ
ent prices stipulated between them, the
orders for which rolls were given to the said
plaintiff by the said Wringer Company in
writing, and the accounts of the parties were
settled up to that time. On the 10Th day of
October, 1880, the defendant gave to the
plaintiff an order for ten thousand rolls at
the price agreed upon-namely, ffty-eight
cents roll. Plaintiff Immediately began
the manufacture and shipment OF the rolls,
and completed the same on the 22d of jan
nary, 1881. On the 29th day of January,
1881, further negotiations were entered into
for the sale and shipment of ten thousand
more rolls, the price of which was fixed at
the sum of fifty-six cents roll. The said
plaintiff understood that the defendant gave
a verbal order to the plaintiff to that effect.
But the defendant understood that he had
made no order, but had merely taken the
plaintiffs price for the same, and that it
was optional with the defendant, upon con-
sultation, to give the order or not, as he
should think best. Acting on their under
standing of the matter, plaintiff manufac-
tured and shipped to the defendant three
thousand three hundred rolls, at the price
of ffty-six cents for each roll in six differ
ent shipments. A dispute then arose be-
tween the parties as to the price per roll to
be paid, which the defendant claimed was
to be fifty cents per roll, and the referee so
found the fact to be. On the 10th day of
January, 1880, one George III. Hood who
was one of the members of plaintiff COM
pany, and was the treasurer thereof, ap-
piled and received through one Simpson,
who was an agent in the Mutual Benefit
Life Insurance Company, and also men,
Der of the defendant company, policy upon
the life of said Hood for So 600 The premium
by said Hood giving to said Simpson an
order on the Peerless Wringer Company
for said sum in favor of said agent,
Simpson, to be charged to the account
of the " Boston Rubber Company" Said
order was paid by the Peerless Wringer
Company, and by it subsequently
charged in its account to the Boston Rubber
Company, and allowed by the Boston Rub
Der Company in settlement. In the latter
part of the month of July of the same year
Hood took out two other policies of in
surance in the same insurance company,
through said Simpson as agent and paid
the premiums thereon in the same manner
as the first policy, and the accounts of the
parties were subsequently settled with the
said premiums charged to the Boston Rub
Der Company, as before. The renewal pre-
MUM on the policy first above-named be-
came due January 16, 1881, shortly before
which time Simpson sent to said Hood a no.
tice of the same, according to the custom of
insurance companies, and upon the receipt
of said notice Hood wrote to Simpson, say
ing have your notice that the annual
premium will be due on the 10Th; shall
have to get you to carry it for me a short
time, as am little short. Will you do 500"
To which Simpson replied: " Please send me
an order on Simpson & Gault for amount
of premium, and it will be all right To
this last letter no reply was received, but
shortly after, on the 10th, the date when the
premium note was due, Simpson & Gault
paid the amount of said premium note and
charged the same to the account of plaintiff
This renewed the policies, though no order
was ever given to Simpson * Gault to pay
the money The Peerless Wringer Com
pany sent to the plaintiff a statement in
the month of March, in which plaintiff was
credited with the rolls delivered in March
and charged with the amount of said
premium note, amounting to S130.97, and
So for a shortage ON rolls. By this state
ment there was due the plaintiff 1851 .03. In
regard to the life insurance, defendant wrote
the plaintiff as follows: " We charge you
S13097-amount paid Mr.. Simpson on ac-
count of life insurance" To which the plant
if sent the following reply: With re-
gard to the amount of charges for Robert
Simpson, we do not remember giving any
order, and informed you it was for a policy
on which premium matured in January and
which we thought we would discontinue
therefore we do not want it paid, but would
prefer the money TO use" g. w. Porter for
plaintiff; Pitkin & Huse for defendant.
j. G. Griggs u.s. Belle Seldom, appellant
The case was tried on the report of ref
cree and Judgment was rendered on said re-
port for the plaintiff. The following are the
facts: Plaintiff is a merchant residing in
Waterbury, VT, and is dealer in boots
shoes and leather The defendant is a mar.
ried woman living at Burlington, Vt. and a
sister of one William j. Gibson, who for
merly lived at johnson, Vt, where he (the
said GibsOn) formerly carried on custom
business in boots and shoes, manufacturing
them for custom trade. He subsequently
removed with his business to Jericho vt
His stock in trade while at johnson
and in Jericho his tools and stock, were
purchased for him by the defendant, who
took a bill of sale for them and paid
for them, and subsequently, both al
Johnson and at Jericho, the said Gibson
carried on the business, acting as the agent
of the defendant in so doing The agency
was created by parol. By the arrangements
between Gibson and the defendant the de-
PENDANT was to furnish to the said Gibson
funds or stock to carry on said business, and
out of the said business the said Gibson
was to support his family and have the
profits, but the defendant was to have
enough out of said proceeds to pay whatever
she had advanced and also to pay said bill
of sale, and if there was anything left sale
Gibson was to have the remainder. The
business was carried on by the defendant
the said Gibson acting as defendants agent
Orders for stock and leather were given tC
said Gibson or defendant upon different par
ties for stock, and were used by the said Glib
son, and sometimes stock was purchased by
Gibson himself Gibson had no express au
thority to purchase goods upon the credit o
the defendant. The business was adver
tised in the paper as the business of the de
PENDANT. On several occasions Gibson haC
ordered goods of the plaintiff in his OWE
name, and they were sent to him by eX
press, Q. o. ID. On the 9TH day of June Glib
son went to plaintiffs store in Waterbur,
and presented the following letter to plant
iff from the defendants