Orleans County monitor. [volume] (Barton, Vt.) 1872-1953, 1888-02-27
The County Court.

The case of Wright, administrator
VS.. Hovey was closed Tuesday morn
ing without argument, by agreemen
of counsel. Verdict for plaintiff t.
re, over about $500. Thompson anc
Burke for plff. !; Dickerman q Youns
for deft.
The next case was G. A. Drew OF
Barton VS.. Ill. b. Smith Machine Co.
of New Jersey. 1t was a suit brought
to recover the amount of freight
bill paid by the plaintiff on a machine
sent him for trial which was unsatis-
factory and returned. The defense
was no agreement to pay freight by
the company and an offset of return
freight on same machine.
@. A. Drew, the plaintiff, was the
first witness, and testified as follows
| live in Barton, Vt. April 1st, 1886,
l paid freight for the I'll. B. Smith
Machine Co. to the amount of $30.34.
l notified them of it by sending the
freight bill, and they have never paid
it. Cross examination They re-
quest, me in letter to pay bill.
The letter was dated Mar. 20, 1886 /;
and by another letter dated July g.,
1886. | don't recollect of anV other
request. We had very long CORE
spondence on this business. 1t was
paid on a planer and hatcher, and
sent at my request. l finally went to
New Jersey to see them, about Apr.
Both. l went to see the country, the
works and various other things. 1t
was a part of my business to see
them. l left Barton on Monday and
got there on Friday, April 30, 1886.
| had conversation with Kelley, the
vice president of the company. l
also talked with the master mechanic.
He showed me some pieces of machin-
cry and told me there was some of
my machine. | went right down to
see the works from the office. | went
alone and had some ideas of my own.
| knew what the irons pointed out
were. | talked afterwards with MIR.
Kelley and we talked about the re-
pairs. | made no replies to him in
regard to them. | told him about the
defects in the machine and ''annihi-
lated it to him until he stopped me.
He told me to try it and hoped it
would suit me. He did not say he
would send me repairs. | never
agreed to pay return freight. should
not have ordered a machine if | had
known Bickford was going to put one
in. / bought another machine and
put it in as soon as | ordered them to
take out theirs, about June 81, 1886.
1t was sent to me few days before
| set it up. 1t was simply a surface
planer. My memory not good. L
don't think | bought this machine I'M
til notice was given. / never saw the
repairs that were sent. In one sense
| understood | was to put on the re-
pairs and give the machine fair
trial. l never made any trial as to
how much l could plane in given
time. 1t was poor planer to plane
a thin board. | could not adjust the
bonnet. | demanded the freight bill
June 81, 1886. l called in j. w.
Murkland to see it work.
j. w. Murkland, Barton. L am a
machinist. | saw the machine. 1t
would not plane more than one board
at a time. The gearing appeared
cramped. 1t was a useless machine.
The links had bad combination.
The defense was composed of three
dispositions of the defendants in New
cS1oSN- 4HSll SNloSnCS CSndCu "
show new trade at time Drew was
at New Jersey. A large number of
letters were read which were written
by the parties. Only two or three
were important. One by Drew was
an offer of $400 for the machine set
down in Barton if it proved satisfac-
tory, and an answer taking up the
offer by the defendants. Also one
dated June p, 1886, telling the COM
pany that the machine was unsatis-
factory and to take it out, by Drew.
Also one from the company telling
Drew to ship to them, and saying
that they were sorry that he would
not give it a fair trial. Verdict for
plff. to recover about $33. Baldwin
and Thompson for plff. Miles and
Cook for deft.
The next case was suit brought
by Elijah Stone VS.. Town of Glover
to recover for support of a pauper.
Elijah Stone, plaintiff, sworn. AL
ways lived in Glover. l have kept
several paupers for the town of GLOW
er. l commenced to keep my mother
for the town about seven years ago
for Joseph Dwinell, overseer. She
had been pauper about two years
then. Dwinell brought her to my
house. kept her for Dwinell about
two years. G.. P. Bean was the next
overseer. That year l kept her with
some other paupers. l have kept her
ever since. The contract for 1883
was in writing. The contract was
that | was to have S1.50 per week.
Bean was so crooked with me that l
called for a written contract. 1t was
dated May %, 1888. The next
March meeting / made a new con-
tract to keep her on same terms as
1888. The March meeting 1885 l
made another contract which was the