The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1896-01-29

rant a verdict for the larceny of steer.
States Attorney 1. N. Chase and Willard
Harrington for the state.
EMMA e. BUFFUM APT, v. j. M. HAYNES
ESTATE, APEE.-James M. Haynes of st.
Adams died in December, 1894, leaving
will dsposing of large amount OF real and
personal property. This will was probated
in probate court. An appeal was taken to
county court, which ordered that 1t be GER
titled back to probate court. The heirs who
reside out of this state now ask that the
probate of the will be opened, claiming that
they did not have notice of the proceedings
in probate court, and wish leave to contest
probate of will on the ground that 1t was
made by deceased while under undue infu-
ence. Attorneys for the estate claim that
courts are conclusive. Watson & Finn
and Ballard & Burleson for appellant; Far
rDgton & Post for Haynes Estate.
CHARLES CLEMENTS ADMINISTRATORS v.
SARAH A. PUTNAM AND HENRY A. SAW
YER.-The orators seek perpetual injunc-
ton TO prevent the filling up of a four-foot
passage.way between the Clement building
and one of the Putnam and Sawyer build
.ngs in the city of Rutland. This strip OF
land is six OF eight feet below the level of
the sidewalk and is convenient access to
the boiler.room in the Clement building,
and, if filed, would be to the rear of the
Putnam and Sawyer building. Both parties
claim rights under deeds from John w.
Cramton. Defendants deed is dated Au.
gust ID, 1891. In orators deed, dated June
20, 1881, Cramton agreed never to build any
building or structure on the passage. way in
dispute, and the question is If the filling
with earth is violation of this condition.
Joel G. Baker for orator; III. A. Harmon for
defendants.
STATE v. ALBERT EMERY AND RICHARD
PsEo.- Respondents were convicted in
Franklin County Court for larceny of
clothes exposed to bleaching and drying.
The decision of the court rendered Friday
morning was that there was no error in
county court. Respondents take nothing
by their exceptions and were each SEN
fenced to three years in the House of Cor
rection and to pay costs Of prosecution.
BRIDGET FARRELL v. THE AMERICAN EN-
PLoYERs' LIABILITY INSURANCE COMPANY
The action was brought on an accident in
surance policy. The declaration alleges
that on July 1, 1898, Martin Farrell insured
in defendant company against certain ac-
cidental injuries, paying 40, the full
amount of premium, and accepted and re.
ceived his policy, and that at Clarendon,
on September %, 1893, he was struck upon
the chest with a large rock of coal and
fatally injured. Plaintiff is his widow. The
policy promised to pay one years wages,
" in the event of injuries resulting in the
death of Martin Farrell through external
violent and accidental means" The plain
S513.60 damages. Defendant claims vsri
ance between the policy and declaration, as
the policy was paid for by an order on the
Central Vermont Railroad Company and
not in money. Butler & Maloney for plain
| tiff; Joel G. Baker for defendant.
DOMESTIC AND FOREIGN MISSIONARY So
CIETYiET AL, APIS. ~. ISAAC l.. EELLs ET AL.
"A bill in chancerv. Orator claims Lydia
e. Conroe, late of Middlebury, made will
| on November Z, 1888, bequeathing plaintiff
house and lot, worth about 81 900. the use
of 81 900 in money and about $4,000 of per-
sonalty as residuary legatee; that there
were other legacies not lapsed to less than
That defendants, Eells and Sperry, are now
insolvent, they being the heirs at-law of the
| deceased and are now in possession of the
| property. 1t is charged that Eslls fraud
ulently got possession of the will on Febru-
airy IL, 1891, and burned it, getting posses.
sion while Mrs. Conroe was imbecile, and
| by fraud and undue influence. The society
asks for receiver, and an accounting, the
cancellation of the transfers of discharged
mortgages and that defendants be enjoined
from making further conveying or encum-
| bering property, and ask for decree of the
house and lot and 81, OOO-and that the resi-
due be ascert tanned and decreed according to
| will The defendants demurred, and were
sustained pro fOrma and without hearing in
county court. Their claim is that the pro-
bate court only has jurisdiction. @. M.
Wilds and W. II. Bliss for orator; Joel G.
Baker and Seneca Haselton for defendants.
STATE v. ELI GILBERT AND GEORGE BEL.
AIRE.-Both convicted in franklin County
Court of the larceny Of a steer valued at
$25: also found that there was no error in
the court below took nothing by their ex-
captions and were each sentenced to five
years in the State Prison.