Essex County herald. [volume] (Guildhall, Vt.) 1873-1964, 1890-09-26

defendant claimed that on his arrival
at the house on the night in ques-
ton he found mattress had been
taken from his bed aud that he
went to the plaintiffs room 10
ascertain where il was, aud recciy.
ing no reply again demanded lis
whereabouts; still receiving no
reply he approached the bed took
hold of his stepmOther and lifted
her up in the bed, when she, point.
ing 10 the room adjoining, and in
which was the mattress, he let 60 OF
her and went his way. lie admitted
putting her out of the house on the
subsequent occasion, but denied
that he used as much force as wa,
claimed by the plaintiff. The de
fence produced discharge of tie
suit signed by plaintiff Daniel NJ
but the court ruled that thai
could not be available TO the de.
PENDANT IN the suit. The plea wa,
not guilty. The jury rendered q
verdict for the plaintiffs to recover
the sum of $500 and their costs
Bates & May, and Dale for pIff.
Storrs and Shaw for def. There is
a divorce suit pending in the name
of Elizabeth NJ. Smith vs.. DAME
NJ. Smith, also a petition in favor
of Daniel NJ. VS.. Elizabeth, brought
to declare their marriage null, boil
OF which cases were continued.
The case of State Va. Cutting, al
! indictment for the larceny of tub,
OF butter, was called, and on repre-
sentation of various mitigating cir
cumstances, respondent was senten
ced to the workhouse for term o
two years. The case Of State VS.
Allen, the Latter with many aliases
and claiming to hail from Sherbro"kr
ian indictment for burglary being
called, the respondent after arraign
ment pleaded guilty, and was sen
fenced TO the States prison for a
term OF two years. This sentenc,
was thus light on account of lii
youth.
The other cases heard and di.
posed OF were of such nature Al
TO be of no interest to the public
The important Beattie cases on tn,
chancery docket were continued
because owing to the great mass o.
evidence, Gov. Pingree, the specia
master, had not had time to max,
his report. One divorce was grant
ed, Mary A. Goddard VS.. JOSEPH
+. Goddard, the petitioner TO have
the custody of the MINOR children,
and allmony as per stipulation OH
file. Several were naturalized, and
several filed their application fol
naturalization papers.
A final call of the docket disclosed
o new entries, making a total Of 60
cases. Twelve cases on the old
docket were disposed of, and six OF
eight cases on the new, leaving the
docket for next term about the
same as for this term. The grand
jury made the usual report and
they did what has been done many
times bcfore-they called attention
to the condition of the grand Jury
room and the stairs leading to it,
representing that ingress and egress
was accomplished with the greatest
difficulty, and it is a we'll known
fact there is no ventilation to the
room, and that it is an unfit place TO
be occupied by such a body of men,
and we may add, that one of the
grand jurors says that he will never
serve as grand juror again under
the same Inconvenience and unit
ness of place, but will submit to
such punishment as the court shall
see fit to impose for a refusal to
serve.
Five indictments were found,
three of which were disposed of,
two against Cutting and one against
Allen. On the whole n very plea.
SAINT term was had. The bar were
especially pleased with the new
judge, and his manner of dlsposing
of the work. Judge Tyler is a
candid, painstaking and patient
man, and whatever disposition he
makes Of case, he satisfies the
parties that the case has been
carefully considered, that it is
thoroughly understood, and is
disposed of just as he thinks is
right. This was Judge Morrills
last term and the bar and the
people part with him with many
regrets. Both he and Judge Wallace
have acquired that experience, and
have that knowledge Of the wants
and circumstance of the people Of
the county as to render the presiding
judge valuable aid IN the great
variety of circumstances arising in
court. The court adjourned on