St. Johnsbury Caledonian. [volume] (St. Johnsbury, Vt.) 1867-1919, 1890-06-12
COUNTY COURT.
No Verdict i'm the Railroad Case.

were discharged late Friday after
noon, being unable to agree upon a
verdict. The first vote stood eight
for plaintiff and four for the Railroad
Co, but when discharged 10 to 2 in
favor of Geo. Ranney, Admr. This
necessitates a new trial which, it is
expected, will be had at the December
term, next.
The next case tried was that OF
Alex. Roy VS.. William Roy, his broth
er, for trespass. TO recover damages
| for standing trees cut by said William
Roy upon the land of said Alex. Roy,
amounting to $500. Both parties
residein Barnet. The evidence show
ed that there was dispute over the
boundary line, their lands adjoining.
| The plaintiff claimed his boundary
to be a line run by W. H. Gilchrist of
McIndoes and the defendant a line
| by +. M. Page of Groton, a difference
| of about Is feet at one end. The
jury established the Page line and
gave to the plaintiff $6.7O and costs.
Bates & May for plaintiff, Stafford
| & Hosford for defendant
The new docket was called Satur-
| day morning. The action at law are
| Samuel l.. Moore VS.. Frank d. Hill,
apt remanded from the last May
| term of the supreme court; William
M. Good VS.. Thomas Knox ct al;
Passumpsic Savings Bank VS.. George
p. Arthur; Samuel c. Trefren VS.. Solon
B. Wright; John H. George VS.. YER
mont Farm Machine Co., apt; Han
nah White VS.. William Steele, apt;
William A. Richardson VS.. Francis
Richardson; Lamkin & Foster VS..
Gauthier & Gilmore; Walter c.
Cheney VS.. George w. Woodruff; !;
Henry A. Porter VS.. Alice V. Porter;
Mark W. Cross & Co. VS.. Robert
Pettigrew; M. Helen Phelps vs.
Alonzo Brown, apt; Daniel Thomp-
son VS.. H. w. Doran & Co.; w. H.
Gilchrist VS. M. c. Warren & Tr.; v
V. Lawrence VS.. O. D. Cobleigh ct al;
George Van Dyke VS.. Wilder & Co;
Eli Dansero VS.. Frank N. Valley !;
Jonathan Ross & H. c. Ide, Exrs VS.
O. F. Bothell, c. w. Plaisted & E. S.
Freeman; Martin Goodno vs.
Smile & Whitney, apis; Arthur
Wilder, surviving partner, VS.. Lake
Road, two cases; First National
Bank of st. Johnsbury VS.. H. ]. Good
rich & Co.; j. Cloutier VS.. ]. Drouin; !;
c. c. Smith & Co. VS.. Ira w. Gun
ningham; w. H. Preston, admr. VS..
st. ]. & L. c. r. r. Co; A. ]. Cum
mings, apt. VS.. Edwin Smith &
Charles Smith; Carrick Brothers
Granite Co. VS.: Thomas ]. Brown,
apt; George w. Esterly & Son VS..
B. c. Mulvey & Tr., George w.
Howell VS.. Lewis H. Nelson & TT;
Luke & Mitchell VS.. Ira w. Cunning
ham; Walter M. Phelps VS.. Duncan
Campbell; ; James B. Mattocks, pro-
ponent of the will of Guy Douglass
VS.. ]. c. Waters, apt; Robert A.
Stevenson, apt. VS.. Hugh Cummings
Estate; George p. Blair, proponent
of the will of Leonard Johnson VS..
Mary Semple, apt; William Steele,
apt. VS.. Hugh Cummings Estate; In
Re Myrtella A. Pettigrew, Frank w.
Coochier VS.. Myrtle Coochier; Nellie
L. Hosmer VS. Benjamin H. Hosmer;
Selma Buzzell VS.. John p Buzzell; ;
Myrtle M. Colburn VS.. William M.
Colburn; Angelina A. Lund VS.. O. l..
Lund Charles O. Dennison VS.. Dora
G. Dennison; Ada c. Switser VS..
Henry Switser; David NJ. Clement
VS.. Martha A. Clement; Nettie ].
Scott VS.. David M. Scott
The suits in chancery are, Mary
Powers VS.. Winfield S. Masten &
Mary E. Masten, remanded from the
last term of the supreme court; Ma
tilda Hoyt VS.. Hannah P. Rawson,
ct ais, another remanded case;
Joseph Farrar VS.. Mitchell Goslant; !;
Mitchell Goslant VS.. Joseph Farrar
ct ux.; Sally Perkins VS.. Jacob Evans
ct ais. Joseph Drouin VS.. Joseph
Cloutier; Inez Goodall VS.. Rebecca
r. Ladd ct al; James Patterson VS..
George P. Blair, EXT; S. c. Trefren VS.
Solon B. Wright ct uxr.; Jonathan
Ross & Henry Z. Ide, Exrs., VS.. st. &
c. r. r. CO.; Passumpsic Savings
Bank VS.. John B. Parker ct ais;
Charles A. Bunker VS. William II.
Weeks; Ora N. Drew VS.. H. w. Stan
John Lynaugh ct ux.; Citizens Saw
ings Bank & Trust Co. VS.. Willard
Sylvester ct ais; Isaac Sawtell VS.
Union Meeting House Society; M. V.
B. Ha thaway VS.. c. E. Goodrich ct al
These cases reported last week as
set for trial have been continued: :
Aldricl & Remick VS.. Phil. J. & James
H. Baird, apis; Bingham, Aldrich &
Remick VS.. Phil. J. & ]. H. Baird &
Trustees; Drew, Jordan & Carpenter
VS. Phil. ]. & Thos. Baird & ]. H.
Baird and Tr.; David Silsby VS.. Tru-
man c. Fletcher ct ais.
TLa.a oooao loxo Ioo..
Ashley Bishop VS.. Herman Durkee ;
Charles p. Palmer ct ux., apis. VS..
Luther S. Jewett.
These cases on the old law docket
are set for hearing by the court: Joel
Roberts VS.. L. Chickering, apt; l.. P.
Poland VS.. F. 7. Bridgman & Tr.;
Henry McCole VS.. L. r. Varnum; ].
p. Miller VS.. William H. Lynds &
Tr., apt; Harris Lynds & Eliza
Lynds VS.. William H. Lynds & Tr;
A. ]. Wilcox VS.. Cate & Bunker;
William Bancroft VS.. Arthur Wilder;
w. ii. ii. Bingham, apt, VS.. Osborn
Wards Estate; George l.. Mathew
son vs. Angie P. Mathewson; Melissa
Cole VS.. Alvah Cole; Sanford Gray
VS.. Elizabeth Gray; r. L. Huntley
VS.. H. c. Bugbee, apt; Lyndon Mill
Co. VS.. Lyndon Literary Institute; !;
Aaron Gray I'd VS.. ]. & L. K. Fol
som; Otis L. Ford VS. N g. Ford;
Lillian Darling VS. William " Dar-
ling; and these of the chancery docket:
Sumner S. Thompson VS.. H. S. Root
& A. o. Harris, Exrs.; Jonathan r.
Darling, admr., VS.. Joseph & Helen
L. Kicker; Loren Aver VS.. H. c.
Hastings & o. M. Gallup; Robert
McLane VS.. James A. Whitehill; Lucy
HOODer We A1ey G. Welch e TOhu