Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1896-01-23
THE EVENING SESSION.
Major Grout Advocstes Capitalization by
Vermont Producers.

Montpelier, Jan. 22.--The evening session
opened at 1880 with a goody attendance
their being many ladies in the audience,
the Montpelier orchestra was present and
furnished music for the occasion. After
music by the orchestra the pre- sldont intro
duced Hon. Josiah Grout of Derby, VT,
who gave an address on the future pros
poets and possibilities of Vermont maple
sugar and syrup as profitable farm crop.
He said IN substance that he had never
attended q sugar makers meeting before
and felt that be was tho loser. He would
divide the subject into three heads namely
how to make more. better and get more
for it by puttingiit up in such form as to
reach the customer in the original package
which 1t does not now. He said that upon
good authority he had learned that the
buyers who came to Vermont ship to the
cities where 80 to 95 per cent of glucose is
added and on the remaining 8 or 10 per
cent pure maple added 10 give il the flavor
to sell more Of it. we should put It up in
such a manner as to defy adulteration.
lie would advise forming an association
which should have receiving station and
all sugar should so through this station
and should be sold by live salesman who
should travel through the West and In
time vanquish the glucose dealers who so
largely damage the Vermont makers in
terest. He advised cooperation and that
the expense would be small for the indi-
vidual maker as one cent a pound on
million pounds would make $4,000 and ne
thought the expense of the association
should not exceed $500 yearly. He closed
his remarks by advising those present to
think the matter over and make a study
of 1t for he believed they could benefit
themselves by so doing
Mr., Grout was followed by the president
Frank Kenfleld of Morrisvile, in discus
hn of ha ~
now due producers and probability Of re-
ceiving same. He said there were $3.50
sugar makers in the State who were
interested in this matter. There has been
great effort to obtain II but so far moth
ing had come of It, but he believed that
the time was near al hand when this boun-
ty would be obtained. 1t had been held
that the bounty law was unconstitutional
but two cases have been tried in Louisiana
and the decision of the courts show that
II is constitutional but the cases were ap-
pealed to the United States Supreme Court
and by the decision of that court we Will
know what we are TO expect as the Louis
lana claim is not as good as Vermont's,
Several members took part In tho discus
sion and many strong points in regard to
the subject were brought ont. A partial
list of the judges of exhibits was read and
after music by the orchestra the meeting
adjourned until $50 Thursday morning.
THE SUPREME COURT
Montpelier, Jan. 16,-In the Supreme
Court to-day the case of Tucker et al. VS.
towns of Eden and Lowell were taken up
In this case the court rendered judgment
to-day that the motion to- dismiss on the
ground of the improper signing of the
petition was insufficient, and therefore
overruled. The court thereby holding
that highway petitions should be signed
~ ha ola nf tra thew
originate. The court also appointed COM
missioners TO lay out and establish the
road. consisting of w. w. Miles, s. h.
Fletcher and s. r. Miller.
Fred NJ. Waite VS.. Alonzo Starkey. This
action is the result of a suit brought by
Mr.. Starkey against Mr.. Waite to re-
cover for labor performed whereby Mr..
Starkey attached some of Mr.. Waites
personal property, which Mr. Waite i'm
properly repevied, as tthe defendan
claims. he insisting that Mr.. Waite had no
action against him, but that he should
have proceeded against the officer who at
tached the property. Waterman, Martin
and HIT appear for the plaintiff and Fl. c.
Fits for the defendant.
Citizens Savings Bank and Trust COM
pany VS.. ii. f. Graham, assignee, ct al.
was the first case from Orleans county
and originally was an action OF fore
closure. Herbert p. Conner became in
solvent and gave Bates q May a promis-
sorry note, secured by mortgage as Sc
curity for prosecuting his claim of insol-
vency, who turned the note over to the
plaintiff bank, which now brings this
action against the assignee Of Mr.. Corners
estate; also making Mr.. Conner a party.
The question In the case being whether the
suit Of foreclosure can be maintained
against the assignee. Bates & May ap-
pear for the plaintiff and Graham, Cook
and Redmond for the defendants.
Mrs. Il. 8. Hancock VS.. w. f. Clark apt,
This is an action of assumpsit, brought
to recover dividends and interest due on
bank stock sold by the plaintiff to the de-
fendant. The original contract being that
If the shares remained unpaid for at Feb
ruary st1S93, that the plaintiff should
share In tho undeclared dividends and In