Spirit of the age. [volume] (Woodstock, Vt.) 1845-1913, 1896-01-11
WINDSOR COUNTY COURT.

the last of the jury trials. and at its
conclusion all the jurors were dis
missed for the term.
The following named respondents
were brought into court and received
sentences as under:
State VS.. French, larceny, three
years IN states prison. In this case
a motion was made tor new trial,
hut it was overruled.
State VS.. Severance, three years
in the house OF correction.
State VS.. Olnev, same sentence as
above.
On Saturday new State case was
entered-State VS.. Morris A. Bald
win. This was an information charg-
ing forgery. The crime alleged con-
sisted in signing forged name 20
certain checks on the White River
Bank. The respondent presented
the check at store, where it was
received in payment of bill of
goods, which not amounting to the
face of the check, the balance was
given in cash to respondent. 1t was
said on behalf of Baldwin that he
did not fully realize the import of
his offence. He was sentenced to
three and half years imprisonment
| in the house of correction.
On Monday afternoon court cases
were taken up. The following have
thus far been heard and disposed of:
Eliza A. Chapman VS.. Ada A.
Burs: This was an action of trespass
on the freehold. The parties live at
Springfield and are adjoining owners
of land. The controversy Is in re-
gard to certain lane adjacent to
both premises. The parties mainly
relied upon construction of their re-
spective deeds and oral testimony of
some of the sold folks" AS to where
a certain fence had or had not been.
The question involved was the title
of the plaintiff to the lane in ques-
ton, the nature and extent of the
title. 1t seemed as though the court
was about to hold that the plaintiff
held the fee, but the plaintiffs coun-
sci disclaimed anything but Il right
of way-an easement. Thereupon
the court gave the defendant judg-
ment. Fletcher for plaintiff, Davis
and Davis for defendant.
The following divorce cases were
heard and disposed Of
Flora l.. Austin VS.. Fred l.. Aus
tin. Cause alleged, desertion. The
petition was dismissed, the case not
being made out to the satisfaction of
the court. +. {. Davis for petit
TONER.
Russ VS.. Russ was similarly dis
posed of, but on motion of petition
er's counsel, J. D. Denison, the case
was entered "continued."
| Francis d. Brooks VS.. Eva
Brooks. Bill granted OH the ground
of dcsertion. ]. D. Denison for pc
titioner.
Minnie NJ. Beauregard VS.. Ozias
Beauregard. Bill granted for neg
lect and refusal to support. J. 6.
Harvey for petitioner.
Emma "A. Pope VS.. Arthur w.
Pope. Bill granted for intolerable
severity. S. E. Pingree and w. B.
c. Stickney for petitioner.
Nellie Downey VS.. Jerry Downev.
Bill granted tor desertion. ]. ].
Wilson for petitioner.
In the civil cases OF Hooper VS..
Dunklee and Chandler VS.. Ham
monds, motions were made for new
trials. In the first named the ground
was that the verdict was against the
evidence. In the second the same
ground was taken, and also because
plaintiffs attorney, F. c. Davis, had
divulged the verdict in the compan-
ion case of Adams VS.. Hammonds,
which the court had directed should
be kept secret lest it should affect the
disposition of the second case of
Chandler VS.. Hammonds.
Burying Ground Association of
Woodstock VS.. ]. w. Hagar: This
was an action to recover of the de-
PENDANT about $I2 expended by the
plaintiff in putting defendants bury
ing lot in suitable condition. The
lot was decided to Hagar in 1866, and
that year he moved away from
Woodstock. The location of the
ground where defendants lot was
situated was the lowest part of the
cemetery, and all the other lots near
it were raised up and filled in. De-
PENDANT was applied to a number of
times to fill his lot, but paid no at
tention to the requests. In October,