Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1890-01-17
THE SUPREME COURT.
3 USlNESS OF THE JANUARY TERM
FOR THIS COUNTY FINISHED.
Two Important Liquor Hearings Last
Week-What Complaint Must Con-
tain-when City Court Exceptions
Must be FiIed-Other Questions.


questions were discussed in the Supreme Court
last week Thursday, among them being the
form of complaint in liquor cases and the
filing of exceptions in appeals from the
City Court. Judge Tyler has returned to
his home in Brattleboro without having
occupied the bench, owing to illness. The
court made good progress yesterday and it
is expected that final adjournment will be
reached this morning.
The first case heard was that of State
against John Clark, who was arraigned be-
fore the City Court on the charge of re-
opening bar room in the Hotel Chittenden
after the same had been closed as a nuisance
by order of the court. The court in issuing
the order to close the place did not follow
the statutory form, aud the respondent
raised the question as TO the sufiiciency Of
the order. The City Court adiudged the
order sufficient, and the respondent brought
the case into the Supreme Court. The case
was argued by States Attorney Foster and
Grand Juror Cushman for the State, and
}. A. Brown for the respondent.
The next hearing was in the case of
State against John j. Sullivan, who was
charged before the City Court with second
offence Of holding, keeping and possessing
nish or give away without authority. The
record offered by the State of a former
conviction disclosed that the respondent
was convicted of holding, keeping and pos
sessing intoxicating liquor with intent to
dispose of the same contrary to law TIL
respondent claimed that this did not prove
the allegation contained in the complaint.
The City Court held that it did and al
judged the respondent guilty of a second
offence. The respondent appealed to the
County Court whore Judge Ross affirmed
the judgment of the City Court and the
case was brought into the Supreme Court
on exception by the respondent. State S
Attorney Foster argued for the State and
j. a. Brown for the respondent.
The case of O. T. Ray against Clark \.
Rood was next considered. The plaintiff
moved to dismiss the defendants exceptions
to the decision of the City Court because
the exceptions were not filed with the
county clerk within 30 days after the final
judgment of the City Court. The question
is new one, as it has heretofore been the
practice to file the exceptions in the City
Court within 80 days. The exceptions were
based on the statute of limitations. o. 7.
Ray argued the case in his own behalf, and
by Henry Ballard for the defendant.
Most of the afternoon was occupied by the
arguments in the case of l.. Il. Hard
against q. a. Burton and ID. \. Burton.
This was an action heard by Gov. W. p.
Dillingham; as auditor, who found for the
plaintiff in the sum of Sl65i. The defend
ant thereupon took the case to the Supreme
Court. The main question of law in the
case was whether the assumption by one of
two Joint debtors of part of the joint ac-
count and without consideration therefor,
would release the two joint debtors from
that portion of the account $3.50 having
been assumed by DR.. Burton. Willard Far
rington OF St. Albans, argued the case in
behalf of the appellant, and f. r. Hard and
W. l.. Burnap for the Plaintiff.
inal Adjournment Reached Friday
Neutrality-suspicious. Announced.
The Supreme Court for Chittenlen coun-
ty came in promptly at 10 oclocl, Fri
day morning when these decisions were an
nounced:
In the case of Horace Tyler against the
towns of Essex, Jericho Cnderhill and
Wiliston the notice was held to be suffi-
cient and the plank where the horse was in
jurcd held TO be a part of the bridge; judg
ment of the County Court for SO for the
plaintiff affirmed, all the towns being held
liable; opinion by Judge Royce.
NJ. II. Alexander vs.. school district No.
6, in the town Of Fairfax, motion to dismiss
held to be not available, demurrer sus-
tained; plea held to be insufficient; defend
ant asking leave to replead, Judgment for
plaintiff for $40. 30 and costs reversed pro
forma and cause remanded for trial on its
merits; opinion by Judge Rowell
state VS.. John Clark, court held that the
place was not legally clos d, the order be-
ing insullic lent, complaint adjudged insult
ficient and quashed; respondent was dis
charged; opinion by Judge Rowell.
Il. d. Wheeler VS. f. Selden, court held
that the City Court excluded evidence that
should have been admitted; Judgment re
versed and cause remanded to the City
Court; opinion by Judge Royce
state VS. Emerson Austin intoxication;
judgm ent reversed; demurrer sustained,
complaint held to be insufficient, the word
li.aI'ar,.,i. o,,i,sio,, law r,,I,o raft
state VS.. Frank f. Hnniev. Judgment re-
versed: demurrer sustained; complaint ad-
iudged insufficient the word "foundn hay
ing been omitted. and auashed: RESPONDENT
,l;-,.l,.,..sl