The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1896-02-12

renewal Of 1920 %, provided the plaintiff in
the suit against the Robinsons sustain their
case and find the above amount indebted to
them. In the trial in County Court plaintiff
recovered 1855 SO damages. The defendant
excepted to the admission in evidence of
the docket entries in the suit OF Dale v.
Robinsons, showing decree for orator and
amount for which rendered, 1t being con-
coded that no formal decree had ever been
drawn up, the court ruling, pro forma, that
plaintiff might show what actually occurred.
The docket entry showed that the stipula-
ton for decree was filed September 81, 1894,
nd decree as per stipulation on Ale. In
this stipulation it was agreed that Dale was
owing the Robinsons $55330, and was
signed by the solicitors for orator and de-
fend ant. Another exception OF the defend
ant in this suit is that the court charged that
plaintiff was entitled to recover the amount
given in verdict instead of 1926 80, the
amount of the property which defendant bid
Off. I. j. Deavitt and Z. A. Heath for
plaintiff; Dillingham;, Huse & Rowland for
defendant.
Town SCHOOL DISTRICT OF BARRE v. B. B.
COOK AND GRANITE SAVINGS BANK g. TR UsT
Co., TRUsrEE.-In 1892 defendant, as treas
urer OF district No. IL, town of Barre had in
his hands $572.25. OF this sum S486 so was
public school money and the residue was
received from taxes. The district was abol-
ished by acts No 20 and 81 OF that year on
fendants protest. voted to divide the money
in his hands among the taxpayers of said
district and appointed a committee to make
the division. The district owed water
bill OF 1878, for which an order was given
and defendant paid it. The COMMITTEES ex-
pended S18 about the business, for which an
order was given and defendant paid same.
The statute creating the town school dis
trict provided that IL was to pay all other
indebtedness then outstanding against the
district, which Indebtedness was for the
erection of school buildings in the district.
Said committee drew orders on defendant
to the various tax payers for balance of
$3.50 80, which orders defendant paid. Prior
to the payment Of ths $l8 order plaintiff
demanded of defendant personally the
money in his hands as treasurer, notifying
him that it claimed same. After this suit
was brought defendant requested one of
said committee TO collect back from the tax
payers so paid by defendant what was paid
to them, and at time of trial S322,93 had
been collected. To County Court il was
held that the action should have been
| brought against district No II instead of
defendant, and rendered Judgment that he
| recover his costs. Defendant comedies that
| the funds belonged to plaintiff after district
/ No. ii had settled its pecuniary affairs, but
denies the personal remedy against him
self. Plaintiff claims that district No. II
| ceased TO exist as a corporation April /,
| 1898 except for settlement of its pecuniary
! affairs, that the vote Of the district to divide
the money was void and that defendant is
personally liable. j. W. Gordon for plain
tiff; s. G. Shurtleff for defendant
STATE V. FRED BRUoE.-Responden was
Indicted for breach OF the peace alleged TO
have taken place at Barre, August 3, 1894,
| by assaulting II. A. Rugg. He was tried at
the September term of County Court, con-
| victed and sentenced to four months in the
House of Correction and to pay costs, taxed
at SS4 49, Respondent who is serving his
sentence at Rutland, was not in court as his
presence had been waived by his counsel.
Respondent claims prior conviction before
A. M. Jackman, justice of the peace at
Barre. On this complaint, which was
started by o. B. Boyce, town grand juror of
| Barre, respondent was arraigned August /,
1894, and pleaded not guilty. The case was
continued by the justice to August 3, and,
on that date, to August 6, on which date
Justice Jackman made the entry; "By
agreement of the attorneys the case to be
held open." Boyce died about June l,
grand Juror of Barre, was called in to rep
resent the state, and respondent appeared
before Justice Jackman pleaded guilty and
was fined So, and costs, S451, which he
paid, which conviction he now claims was
bar. The state contends that the justice
could not adjourn, continue or hold open
his court beyond three months, while four
teen months had elapsed in this case, and
in consequence there was no life in that
prosecution. Also as Bisbee was city grand
juror he had no authority to appear to rep
resent the state, as the case was started by
a town grand juror. States Attorney Zed
s. Stanton for state; j. w. Gordon and w.
A. Lord for respondent.