Herald and news. [volume] (West Randolph, Vt.) 1878-1943, 1896-12-31
WINDSOR COUNTY COURT.

On Thursday last recess was taken I'M
til Monday and state cases are now being
tried. During the interim, the following
business was transacted:
Fred X. Savage VS.. George w Hail. This
was an action OF general assumpsit to re.
cover the value OF a check for the amount
OF three hundred dollars. The plaintiff
produced the cheek and claimed il was
given to him for certain cattle that he had
sent to market, and which Tad been dis
posed OF by French. Instead OF giving
the cash received for plaintiffs cattle
French gave this check, which he claimed
had been given uim in due course OF BUSH
ness. tie said he had sent the check of q
Boston firm TO Hall, TO the amount oft225,
and owed him on their mutual account
s75. The defendant claimed a want OF
consideration. He testified that French,
being short, applied for an accommoda-
ton as he had in previous times that
French was to send a check from market
to meet the cheek given him by defendant.
The latter claims that French never sent
any check as promised and thus there WAS
no consideration. The case is with the
court" Geo. w. Fletcher for plaintiff;
Fred Z. Davis for defendant.
Fred II. Austin v. Wallace II, Campbell
and George l.. Greedy. This was petition
to vacate a certain justice judgment and
have an appeal allowed. The plaintiff was
indebted 10 the defendants and they bro't
suit in the winter of 1895. At this time
Austin was fugitive from justice, having
gotten into trouble in connection with
Mrs. Cora Smith. Austin claimed he had
no notice OF the bring ing of the suit, SER
vice being made by leaving copy OF the
writ at his fathers after he-younp Aus
tin-had left the state. At the hearing be-
fore Justice Chatiee at Rochester NJ NJ.
wilson and Austin, ST., we're present and
II was claimed by tue defendants that this
being so, the present petition would not
lie. But petitioner insisted that he had
been deprived of his day in court and
wanted hearing on his case. The case is
with the court. j. j. Wilson and March
Wilson appeared for the petitioner and w.
b. Z. Stickney and K. II. Edgerton for de-
PENDANTS.
The following divorce cases were heard
and bills were granted ia the cases stated:
Lewis f. Merritt VS.. Nellie M. Merritt.
Bill granted on the ground OF adultery.
VIM. Batchelder for petitioner.
Ida Andrews vs.. Willie Andrews, The
defendant IN this case was convicted of at.
rape last year and sentenced to
states prison for five years, fer which
cause tue bill was granted under the stat
ute. g. A. Davis for libellee
Sarah j. Colby VS.. Ferdinand Colby.
Cause alleged, wilful desertion and refusal
to support. G. A. Davis for libellee.
Orietta {. Foster VS.. Edward ID. Foster.
Bill granted on ground OF intolerable Sc.
verify. Stickney 4 Sargent for petitioner.
Nancy A. West VS.. Lorenzo o. West. Pc
tition for separate maintenance. Petition
er had LETT her husband for what she con-
sldered sufficient cause. He denied that
any real reason existed and was willing
now, as he always has been, to have her
return to her home and children, Enright
and Blanchard for libellee; Stickney and
sargent for libellant.
Margaret Proctor VS.. Perley Proctor.
PHI granted on the ground of desertion,
Enright and Blanchard for petitioner.
Kate Il. Bowen v. Charles l.. Bowen
Cause alleged, intolersble severity ana
neglect and refusal to support. This case
was contested and testimony Introduced /
% contradiction of petitioners claims
snright a Blanchard for libellee. Stick. /
ley and Sargent for libellant.
Alice l., Oiney V. Fred N. Olnev. Riu
yranted ON the ground of intolerable Sc. I
'erity- r. Z. Davis for petitioner.
Hiram L. Dickinson VS. Belle A. Dickin- /
on. Bill granted on the ground OF de-
ertion. Enright and Blanchard for IL
,ellee. ~
Emma Gage rs. George W. Gage. Bill
'ranted on ground of adultery. F.C 4
'outneate for petitioner, " no may resume
ier maiden name.
Agnes Morgan V. John B. Morgan.
.suse alleged, intolerable severity. n n
linn for petitioner.
FRANK Nj. bearing W. Nellie f. Dearinr.
'suse alleged was desertion. This was de. =
leo oy the wife, who claimed her hus
ahu nao sent her aSay aud had never
skeo ner 70 come back. The parties we're
larrlen in April, 1856. and had freouent
isagreements IN which il was evident
'eIlie could always "hold her own The
sse IS With the court. J. j. Wilson and
J D. wilson appeared for the husband
red Arnold fer The wife.
You u use Is less Of Harmless sosp