The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1896-04-01
WASHINGTON COUNTY COURT.
SUMMARY OF CASES TRIED THE
PAST WEEK.

STATE v. DAVID SPICER OF MARsHFIELD.-
For breach OF the peace. This case was
continued.
STATE v. INTOXICATING LIQUOR, Michael
Butler, claimant, Apt. Judgment that
liquor seized be returned to claimant.
STATE v. BERT BISHOP, for disturbing
school, v. George Columbo, Apt, for keep
ing Intoxicating liquor with intent to sell, v.
John Scampini, Apt, also for keeping, were
mol pressed.
SMITH, WHITcoMB & Cook v. G. H. Hum
TON GRANITE CoMPANY.-An action in gem
eral assumpsit on note and account OF
about 1925. Judgment for plaintiff. Clerk
to assess. The parties are Barre firms. It.
j. Martin for plaintiff; K. w. Bisbee for de-
PENDANT.
STATE v. GEORGE NICHOLS OF NORTH
FIELD, for selling intoxicating LIQUOR, on
motion of States Attorney Stanton was mol
pressed. The companion case for liquor
nuisance, in which the evidence was exactly
the same, was tried by jury last fall, result
ing in an acquittal
EMMA JEwETr v. w. G. PECK AND CHAs.
H. DANA, TRUsTEE.-Plaintiff, who resides
in Nashua, N. H., obtained judgment by
default against the principal debtor. The
| case was continued as to the trustee. The
action was brought in general assumpsit to
| recover ION a note said to amount to about
| $500. Defendant and trustee reside in
Woodbury.. j. P. Lamson for plaintiff; j.
| H. Senter for trustee
STATE V. AURELIAN NJ CLARK for being
| found intoxicated at Cabot on September
| 20, 1896, occupied the larger part Of Friday.
I Respondent denied having drank any liquor
that day and claimed that his condition was
| due to Indigestion, and also to having taken
| quinine pills, which he had taken for fever
and ague which he had contracted during
the war. The. jury returned a verdict OF
not guilty. j. p. Lamson for the state w.
A. Lord and A. d. Kimball for respondent.
STATE v. MICHAEL BUTLER.-This was a
case for keeping Intoxicating liquor with in
tent to sell. Respondents house on Main
street, City Of Barre, was raided in the
evening of November Is, 1895, by Chief OF
Police Warren Rowland, assisted by Dep.
uty Sheriff II. o. Camp and Constable and
Special Policeman George w. Smith, who
seized and carried away part OF bottle
of whiskey which they found in the pantry.
They also found aquantity of empty bottles
Of like character in the cellar, and barrel
Of sweet cider, which they left. Evidence
was introduced by the state Of prior raids,
and the frequency OF visitors to the house,
to show the character of the place. The
defendant denied that the place was one Of
public resort and claimed that the whiskey
found was for his own use. He took the
stand in his own behalf. The jury returned
a verdict of not guilty. States Attorney
Stanton and j. p. Lamson for the state; j.
w. Gordon and W. W. Lapoint for respond
emit.
STATE v. FRED FoRTIN.-Responden was
charged with criminal assault upon Lula
Jerome, eleven years old, the daughter OF
Joseph Jerome, whose parents reside in
Montpelier. The incident occurred in Far.
rar's grocery store, Main street, Montpelier
at about 10: 80 o'clock Sunday forenoon
December g. 1895. The girl was the only
J., witness for the state to the main occurrence
:, She went into the store ,or the purpose Of
l buying some oysters and crackers. She ap
[ | peared greatly frightened when she reached
home Respondent was in charge Of the
store at the time as a clerk. He took the
e stand in his own behalf, and denied having
made the assault, and testified that the CIR
bought and paid for the oysterA- ana crack
ers, and, taking some candy FROM the case
left the store. The jury returned >Serolc
OF guilty. Respondent was sentenced to>sl1
= months in the House OF Correction and tt
j. pay costs of prosecution. States Attorney
h Stanton and j. H. Senter for state; +. l.
Il Laird and W. A. Lord for respondent
: STATE " HARRY L. WoRTHEN, APT, OF
/. MoNrPELIER.-This suit for having OBJ
tanned suit of clothes of W. E. Adams o
Montpelier under false pretences, came OF
for trial Thursday morning Adams testi
o fed that he let respondent have the clothe,
q on the evening of January l. 1896, charging
them to respondents father, George L
= Worthen of East Montpelier, on respond
l. ents representation that his father hat
given him authority to use his credit. Tit
d goods were sold for $40. Actual cost t,
!. Adams, including thirteen cents for a pal
of suspenders, S763. George L. was mott
e fed of the transaction by Adams, that even
ing, by letter. He denied to Adams having
- given his son this use of his credit a few
n days later, but in cross-examination it wa
If developed that he had given his son tn
=, right to have goods charged to him TO
I necessary things, but said that he had ex
n, pected him to 60 to different store. Hi
testimony so weakened the states cas-
that, on suggestion of Judge Ross, State
IN Attorney Stanton caused a mol pros to b
entered. 7. r. Gordon for respondent.
y