Orleans County monitor. [volume] (Barton, Vt.) 1872-1953, 1897-09-20

|
house with reference to Davis going il
to business; Davis told him that he hao
hired the store of Mr.. Nelson and
that Mr.. Nelson was to furnish hin
with money to buy goods. Had a
later conversation with Davis at his
store, Davis took out package OF
letters and said, ''I would like to have
you and your wife read these some
time, they are what give me the
$6,000." Gross examinations: Could
not remember what date this conver
sation was, but long before he brought
his suit of trespass, no one present
other than Davis and himself.
Blasdell recalled by Bates. Mr..
Blasdell testified that he had not been
on friendly terms with Davis for some
months past.
Mrs. Dow, Mr.. Nelson's sister, was
then called; she was visiting at Mr..
Nelson's when Davis and wife re-
turned from the West; had a talk
with Davis in regard to his going into
business. Davis said: sEI am going
to know how much money Mr.. Nelson
business" She went away and on
her return found that Davis had gone
into business. She asked him wheth-
er he had fixed up the business with
Moulton; he said, "No, Nelson is
furnishing the goods"
G. A. Drew then testified. Mr..
Drew runs a door, sash and blind fac
tory. He stated that he had had a
conversation with Davis some time
ago and that Davis told him at that
time that he owed Mr.. Nelson $4,000,
and that he would like to see him get
it.
Time was then allowed the plaintiff
to examine the letter known as tex
hibit No. H." which contained Mr..
Nelson's offer of Sc, ,O0O to Davis, Mr..
Amory Dawson was called and stated
that he had been engaged in business
with Mr.. Nelson for many years and
that he was familiar with his hand
writing, and said that he should say
that the $4,000" was not written by
him. In the cross examination he
said that the figure six was too erect
to be made by Mr.. Nelson, and that
Mr.. Nelson always connected his ciph-
ers and never left them off for the
cents.
Mr.. BIasdell was called. Said that
L. e., Sc
writing; said in regard to ''exhibit
11n that the s'6,O0O'' in the letter was
made by lighter hand than Nelson's;
in his judgement Nelson did not write
it.
In cross examination he said he had
seen the letter before he came on the
stand the first time; told the counsel
that he did not think Nelson wrote
that part of the letter.
Mr.. Dewey was called as an expert.
He stated that he was the cashier of
the Barton NATL Bank and had seen
very little of Nelson's handwriting;
had often made comparisons of hand
said that he was asked to
examine the letter and asked if the
words ''Or if that doesn't suit you you
may use the S6,0OO," were in Mr.. Mel
sons handwriting; said he had exam
ined the letter and had no reason to
believe it is not all in the same hand
writing and from what he knew of
Mr.. Nelson should say it was his. On
Nv OF
that he did not see any perceptible diff
ference in the figures, "6,000," and
other figures in the letter.
Mr. Wright, cashier of the Newport |
NATL Bank, was called. Has had oc
casion to examine handwriting some
what; had examined this letter and |
IN his Judgement it was all the same
handwriting. On oss-examination
said he was not familiar with Nelson's |
handwriting; could see one or two |
places where there might have been
erasures; the only difference that he |
could see in the ciphers was that they |
we're smaller and closer together in
jhe 6,OOO.''
P. J. Farrell was also called as an
expert. He is treasurer of the Orleans
County Trust Co. In his judgement
he letter was all in the same hand
writing. On cross examination he
stated that he could not see any diff
erence in the figures in the $4,000
md $4,000, except that in the $8,-
100, the ciphers were on for cents.
Geo. FL. Davis was allowed to tes-
,ify in rebuttal to Mr.. Blasdell's state
nent as to the letters being shown
lim in Davis store. He testified that |
be had never shown the letters to Mr.