The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1892-03-23
Washington County Court.


defendants and one Larned, deceased
promised to pay. The facts of the case as
claimed by plaintiff were about as follows
In the winter of 1888 the Woodbury. Granite
Company was engaged in quarrying and
manufacturing granite. Some time in the
late fall of 1888, the company entered into
an arrangement with Gibson, Milliken and
Larned for the sale Of a certain amount of
granite, to be delivered on board cars at
Hardwick; that the Woodbury. company Is
located about six miles from the railroad
station at Hardwick, so that granite sold
would have to be hauled to that point; that
Gibson Milliken and Larned were inter-
ested in or members of the Ryegate Granite
Works; that Mr.. Gibson, being at Hard
wick, teephoned to L. w. Voodry, super
intendent of the Woodbury. company, to
come to Hardwick. He went there, and an
interview occurred between the two in re-
lation to the purchase of some granite. No
definite arrangement was made at that time
A little later Mr.. Gibson was again at Hard
wick and saw Mr.. Voodry, and after an in
terview the two went to Woodbury. and
looked over the granite there. Further talk
was had about the proposed purchase, and
Voodry then informed Gibson that the Rye
gate Granite Works would not be accepted
as paymaster. Voodry declined to sell
granite to the Ryegate Granite Works, but
would sell If Gibson, Milliken and Larned
would give notes for the granite. Gibson
thereupon said he would get the other two
men and come out again. AT this interview
Gibson had a list of stock quired that he
showed to Voodry. This list was taken by
Voodry to Charles Watson, president of the
Woodbury. Granite Company, who was in
formed that the three men named would
come to the Woodbury. quarry at GER
tain date and he (Charles) was re-
quested to be present. Pursuant to
that arrangement, the parties met and
then entered into was that the Woodbury.
Granite Company was to furnish the Rye
gate Granite Works certain amount of
stone, for which the defendants and Larned
agreed to pay. In accordance with this ar
rangement, the stone was shipped to the
value of $2,6SS, 1t was delivered in the
winter OF 1SSS-S9 and its delivery was hur-
ried up on one or two occasions by COM
municstions from Gibson. The Wood
bury Granite Company succeeded in
getting all the stone delivered by April,
1899. Thereupon the Ryegate Granite
Works sent to Alfred K. Watson two notes
representing the sum above stated. Alfred
e. Watson was the clerk and treasurer of
at Hartford, Vt. When Alfred received
these notes he had no knowledge or in
formation in relation to what the trade was
that had been made as to the giving of in
dividual notes, or notes endorsed by them
as individuals. When the notes were sent
there was also sent list of stock as re-
ceived by the Ryegate Granite Works,
which list was made by that company, Mr..
Watson acknowledged the receipt of the
notes, and said he would look over the ac-
count as sent. Pending this examination
by him, the Ryegate Granite Works failed,
and all their property was attached. This
failure occurred within few weeks after
the receipt of the last consignment of stone
from the Woodbury. Granite Company.
Then Alfred Watson learned what kind of
notes were agreed to be given, and went to
see the defendants about it, asking them to
then sign the notes, which they refused to
do After the failure of the Ryegate Gran
lite Works, another company was formed
which took the property of the old company
and continued the business. The defend
ants, who were officers in the old organza-
ton, together with Larned, were also con-
nected with the new company so formed
and Gibson and Milliken were still
connected Herewith. On the part of the
defendants it was claimed that the visit
of the defendants and Larned to the
Woodbury. Granite Works was not to
make any purchase of stone, but to
look at the way in which the Woodbury.
Granite Company had its quarry shielded
over for the winters work; that during this
visit some talk arose about prices of gran
lite, and that Mr.. Gibson said to Voodry,
The Woodbury. Granite Company charge
us more for stock than is charged to Car
rick Brothers of St. Johnsbury," and that
in reply Voodry said that if the Ryegate
Granite Works would give as large an Or
der as the Carrick Brothers gave, the Wood
bury Granite Company would give them
the same prices. Mr. Gibson and Mr. Mil
liken said they would be short of money
along in the winter and could not give a
large order, as they required all their cash
then to pay current expenses. Mr.. Voodry
then said the Woodbury. Granite Company
could use the notes of the Ryegate Granite
Works just as well as the cash. The atten-
ton of Charles Watson was called to this
remark of Mr.. Voodry, and Charles Wat
son, president OF the plaintiff company,
said that would be all satisfactory that they
would be willing to fill an order and take
the notes of the Ryegate Granite Works in
pay therefor. No order was given at that
time, as Voodry and Watson wanted to
communicate with Alfred K. Watson, which
they did, and shortly afterwards a letter
came from the latter to the Ryegate Gran
lite Works, giving prices for the stock re.
ferred to, and this offer was accepted by
the Ryegate company. The stock was
shipped, and on the 8th of April, 1885, AL
fred Watson was at the Office of the Ryegate
Works and figured up the granite that had
been received by the latter and agreed upon
basis OF settlement; that the Ryegate
Granite Works thereupon executed its notes
for the amount due and sent them to Alfred
Watson, who kept the notes over two
PENDANTS that the notes were not satisfac-
tory; that on the 10Th of June, 1889, Alfred
Watson went to see Mr.. Larned and Mr..
Milliken, and, showing them the notes,
dohOu 'hcii IL bhcy saw NAMES thereon,
and that they informed him they did not
he then asked them if they did not agree 10
endorse them, and they informed him they
did not; that at this time the Ryegate
Granite Works was in insolvency; that in
September, 1889, Alfred Watson proved
these notes in the insolvency court of Cal
edonia district against the Ryegate Granite
Works, and later received a dividend
thereon. The vital question in the case
was whether the sale of granite was made
to the Ryegate Granite Works or to the de.
PENDANTS. This question the jury decided
in the latter view, and found for the plain
tiff in the sum of 81, 724.51 damages and
costs W. b. Q. Stickney and j. p. Lam
son for the plaintiff. Alexander Dunnett
e. w. Smith and g. w. Wing for defe n
dants.
Granite Savings Bank and Trust Company
v. III. o. and Orissa Camp.-This was an ac-
ton of assumpsit in which plaintiff sought
to recover the amount OF certain promis-
sorry note for $500, executed and delivered
to it by the defendant, III. o. Camp, and his
mother, Orissa Camp. The execution of the
note was admitted but the defendants