The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1888-03-28
Washington County Court.

f. A. Preston rs. Clark King, admins
traitor. Trial of this case was begun
Wednesday morning of last week and was
an action of assumpsit for the collection of
taxes. King is administrator of the estate
of j. a. s. White, late of Northfield, and as
such administrator refused to pay the taxes
assessed against said estate by the North
field graded school district for the years
1884 and 1885. The taxes for the two years
were S404.D tits statute law that personal
estate in the hands of an administrator and
not distributed shall be assessed and set in
the list in the town and school district
where the deceased resided at time of death.
The fight is between the graded school and
Gouldsville districts The plaintiff claims,
and produced large number of witnesses
to prove, that White at time of death, re-
sided at the Northfeld House and also had
an Office at the depot in said graded school
district; that his business was there; that
he spent the bulk of his time there; that he
had no other home from the time of break
ing up housekeeping in the Center Village
in 1862 until his leaving town in December,
1870, on trip to the South, from which he
never returned alive that during which
time his wife and daughter spent their time
for the most part outside of Northtield, and
that when in town he saw them but little.
The plaintiff also asserted that the fact of
Whites estate being set in the graded
school district in the years 1884 and 1885
was priDld fdcie evidence that it was rightly
there. The defendant admitted that Whites
residence for the purpose of taxation was
at the time of his death in Northfield, but
claimed that it was in the Gouldsvile dis
trict. His most important witnesses were
Whites widow and daughter, who testified
as to their whereabouts between 1862 and
1870. They soon made it evident that they
had been in Gouldsville more than plaintiff
had credited them, at which place White had
made an arrangement for staying at his
(White's) mothers house: that when there
White came to see them as rule Saturdays
and Sundays, and stayed there nights that
they were in Gouldsville during the ten
days previous TO the time that White left
town for the last time. They also testified
that when they We're in Gouldsvile it was
| Whites home. Mrs, White testified that
when there she did Whites washing.
Arguments were commenced Friday morn
ing and occupied all day. The court, after
very fair and able charge, submitted the
question as to where Whites residence was
at the time of his death TO the jury, who re-
ported Saturday morning that they were
unable to come to an agreement 1t is
understood that the Jury stood eleven to
one and that the dissenting juror was NJ. e.
Chase of Roxbury. The court directed
verdict that the plaintiff recover S404. 80 and
his costs. Exceptions by defendant and
cause passed to supreme court. Johnson
and Plumley for plaintiff; Shurtleff and
Dillingham; for defendant. This concluded
the civil cases to be tried by jury at this
term of court.
Lucy j. Barnes rs. Calvin NJ Barnes, di-
vorce. This case is now pending. Hear
ing on motion of libelant for temporary
| alimony to maintain litigation was had
at the Pavilion chambers on Monday
evening, Motion granted and libellee or
dered to pay libellant 500 before March
81. I. j. Deavitt for libelant; ii cath &
Fay for libellee.
State as. John Crimmns Yesterday
morning respondent was brought into court
to answer to an information charging him
with an assault and battery in resisting
Deputy-sherif Davis of Northheld last Sat
urday. Respondent pleaded not guilty.
Bail was fixed at $780, John G.. Wing
appeared for respondent
State rs. Joel o. Rich. The indictment
was found by the grand jury at the last
September term and was brought under
section 42i0 of the Revised Laws, commonly
known as the bed-blanket act, charging
respondent with adulterous intercourse
with one Nora b. Warner in April, 1887, at
Northfeld Respondent fled general de-
murrer to the indictment, which was in six
counts, which motion was overruled, the
court holding the third and sixth counts
good On these two counts the respondent
was arraigned and pleaded not guilty
The state had good number of wit
ness, which, on request OF respondent, We're
examined separately and apart from each
other. 1--WE omit details.) AS the state was
nearing the close of its case it was dis
covered that the sixth count of indictment
was not in the copy of indictment furnished
respondent. The state therefore abandoned
that count and the third count alone re-
NAMED. The theory of the defence was an
alibi, Arguments will be closed to-day.
States attorney and S. @. Shurtletf for state;
Heath Fay and W. A. Lord for respondent,