Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1894-05-24

tiff, Bates and May for the defendant
In the case of State VS.. Fred Seaver, apt.
from Caledonia county the respondent, who
is the proprietor of the hotel at West Con
cord, and in County Court was convicted of
illegally selling Intoxicating liquor and
came up from disclosure and sentenced to
pay a tiue of 800 and f2G. 10 costs, the ex
ceptions have been waived and judgment
affirmed.
The case of State VS.. Josiah H. Wilder
from Windsor county was called up this
morning by w. W. Stickney, counsel for
the respondent, and read an affidavit of a
physician to the effect that his client was an
old man of 16 years of age, and in such a
physical condition that his presence
in court would be dangerous to his
health Tho respondent resides in Ludlow.
The motion was opposed by w. B. c. Stick
ney, assigned for the State The case was
continued The court granted an order
permitting the counsel TO investigate as to
the physical condition of the respondent
before the October term of this court The
respondent was indicted in 1883 for perjury
in making out his inventory given to the
listers, and was convicted after trial in
1891.
MONTPELIER. May 10 The case of
George Van Dyke VS.. Wilder u Co., is
from Caledonia county. Plaintiff under n
contract with defendant delivered in 1892 a
large quantity of logs on the cars at Mcln-
does Falls, Vt, at Sll per 1000 feet, the
controversy being over the method of meas
urement to be used. The referee found that
the plaintiff ought to recover of defendant
S14S1 IS, and the County Court sustained
the finding of the referee to which the de
fpnI L
peared for the plaintiff and Bates a May
for the defendants.
In re Martin H. Goddard estate. f. G
White assignee appellant is a Windsor
county case and was argued this forenoon
The case shows that in 1890 one j. n. Har-
ris operated wood working establishment
in Ludlow and purchased of one Chapman
about 81, 900 feet of hard wood boards 1t
appears that Goddard had been accustomed
to assist Harris financially and Chapman re
ceived two checks of Goddard of SlOS each
and services to the amount of SlSG, which
We're applied on the lumber. The question
in the case is whether the Goddard estate is
liable for an order of $500, given from Har-
ris to Chapman on Goddard and which God
dard never saw, but verbally promised to
pay. G. A. Davis appeared for the God
dard estate and W. W. Stickney for the ap-
pellant.
First Congregational Meeting House So
ciety VS. town of Rochester. from Windsor
county, is an action in assumpsit and was
argued this forenoon. 1t appears that
March 6. 1919. the defendant town leased of
the plaintiff the lower floor of the Congre-
cation meeting house and have since used
the same in lieu of town hall. One of the
conditions Of the lease was that the town
should he at the expense f one third of the
outside repairs of the sad house and belfry.
In 1870, the society tore down the old bel
fry and erected a new one at an expense of
about 5000, and claimed of the town one
third of the expense The town claims that
the new structure cannot be considered as
repairs under the terms of the lease Plain
tiff recovered $3.50 in County Court W.
b. c. Stickney appeared for the plaintiff
and Dillingham; and Huse for the defendant
MONTPELIER. May -. Tile two cases of
First National bank of Chelsea, G. :. Emery
cashier, VS.. j. &. Fits and same VS.. II. NJ.
Miller and J. G.. Fits were both heard to-
gether this forenoon, and are from Orange
county. The former suit is an action in
trover and the latter an action of replevin.
j. X. Darling appeared for the plaintiff
and A. NJ. Dickey and j. H. Watson for
the defendant.
In the case of State of Vermont vs.. \.
I. Clark the respondent was convicted at
the June term of 1892 of three first offences
of selling intoxicating liquor. This case
was heard at the last January term of this
court and 10 decision given at that time
The decision was rendered to-day: exceptions
sustained, verdict set aside aud cause re
manded for a new trial.
The case of David A. Brodie vs.. Edwin
l.. Ripley,from Chittenden county is now be-
ing argued and is an action on the case for
alleged fraud OF defendant in selling to
plaintiff 30 shares Of stock OF the Eckersou
Printing Press company, a corporation char
tered and located at Oneouta. y. Y Plain
tiff obtained a verdict in County Court of
$3.50 damages and costs f. b. Taft. L.
+. Wilbur and W. 7. Dillingham; appear
for the plaintiff and W l.. Burnap. Seneca
Haselton and T. L. Wales for the defendant.
The judgment in the case of Henry Bal
lard VS.. William +. Allen from ChttenIen
county was affirmed,