Middlebury register. (Middlebury, Vt.) 1886-1937, 1892-06-17

nNe hours IN an effort to come to an
agreement and finally came into court
shortly before o'clock with verdict
for the plaintiff, giving him 81 damages
and his costs. The Jurors found Smith
guilty of only the second allegation made
against him by Ledwich. that is, of adj
vising or persuading his wife to leave
him and breaking up his family. This
verdict was surprise to nearly every
body and was practically defeat for
both parties. The plaintiff had sued for
$1,000 and the jury gave hun that much
less only $500. When the Jurors first
retired they stood to 1 for a verdict in
favor of smith and later on one ballot
stood 10 to the same way But it was
roasting hot in the jury room, they strip
ped off everything but their shirts and
trousers and argued away, until finally,
as matter of Representation, they
compromised all around and agreed upon
the verdict above noted.
Another case was got on trial prompt
~ after dinner Monday. 1t was Frank
Whttemore VS.. Charles IIagan, and was
Il replevin suit. New Haven furnished
the parties to this case also. Three years
ago lIagan owned an old mare and kept
it for some time at Whittemore's. He
went away to Massachusetts. leaving the
mare with Whittemore, and the latter
claimed that he had made a trade for her
by which he was to own the mare and
pay for her by raising two colts from
her for llagan and deliver them to him
when they were each four months old.
He did deliver the first colt at that age,
but when the next one was three months
old Hagan reappeared upon the scene,
year ago. and took away both the colt
~ no ~
ined the mare. IIagan denied ever max
ing any such trade with the plaintiff and
claimed that Whittemore was only to
have the use of the mare for her keep,
that she was still his and that he could
take her away from Whittemore when
ever he liked. WhittemOre and his seven
witnesses swore to one story and llagan
and his nine witnesses gave another.
which was an absolute contradiction of
it, some of the witnesses swearing that
the thing was exactly this way and 9th
ers that it was exactly the other. The
trial lasted all the afternoon, when the
evidence was completed and the argu-
ments were made. The court made
few remarks to the jury Tuesday morn
ing. and they came in after consulting
only about ten minutes. with a verdict
in favor of the plaintiff They gave him
- damages and costs, only nominal dam
ages being asked for. W. W. Rider of
Bristol appeared for the plaintiff and
Mr.. Wilds represented the defendant.
The next case to he brought to trial
was Thomas Morrison's administr traitor ct
al. vs.. Eleazer Shattuck and it was be-
gun directly after the arrival of the mail
train Tuesday morning. 1t Is a Starks-
boro case and involves the title to about
II acres of not very valuable noun
tain land lying in that town. In isis
one Page Morrison decided to his brother,
Nathan Morrison, a parcel of land of
which the land IN dispute is claimed to
have been part. In 1889 Nathan Nor
rison transferred the land by deed of
trust to Thomas Morrison: and How
ard Clark. as administrator of the estate
of Thomas Morrison, who died two years
ago, is the plaintiff The plaintiff claims
to own the land not only by title deeds.
but also from having been in unquestion-
able possession for more than 10 years.
There WAS some little CONTROVERSY be-
tween the parties dozen years ago. it
is true, but it did not amount to much
and was soon settled. Soon after Thorn
as MorrisOn's death Shattuck cut timber
and wood on the lot amounting to SO to
500 and claimed to be the owner of the
land. Shattuck's title. it is claimed, is
derived though succession of deeds run
aiming back to a short time after Page
Morrison executed the deed to Nathan
in ISIS. when Page decided a piece of
land which the plaintiffs claim con-
tanned the seven and one fourth acres
now in dispute. to parties from
whom Shattuck claims a title through a
succession of deeds. The plaintiffs want
their title to the land confirmed and ask
damages for the wood and timber cut ON
the lot by the defendant. The case has
occupied the time of the court since Tues
day forenoon and will last the rest of
this week, if not part OF next. large
share OF the male portion of Starksboro :
people have been here during the week
and all seem to take great interest in
the case, which is extremely dull to the
ordinary court attendant. The testi-
monv is all about deeds. records, bound
aries. maps, surveys. angles. meridlan>
and other dry and embarrassing matter-
and there has been nothing so far to re-
lieve the dreary and unbroken monotOnN
of the proceedings. Messrs. Rider OF
/ Bristol and Wilds of Middlebury are
counsel for the plaintiffs, while the in
terests of the defendant are looked after
/, by John J. Enright and W. l.. Burnap
of Burlington. The evidence for the
plaintiff was all got in before the noon
adjournment Thursday, and the defense
began to put in their testimony in the
afternoon.
There are four more cases on the jury
list To come to trial aud they will take
up about two weeks. One of them alone
will probably last a week. That Is
Phelps b. smiths executor vs.. Nancy
NJ. Smith, appellant. This case has been
assigned for trial on July IS. The court
have been considering the ACCESSIBILITY OF
taking a recess to that date immediately
upon the conclusion of the case now on
trial, in order to give the farmers among
the jurymen a chance to go home and &c
their hoeing and haying: but the matter
has not yet been settled. Many of the
iurymen want the recess to last unit
the first Monday in August, to give
them more time for having, and the re-
cess may finally he taken until thai
time, although it may not begin at the
end of the case now before the court. Ii
case the recess is to some day in August