The Somerset reporter., 1897-01-07
: j. COURT.


Blaine = yles. Hessenger.
Thar8dag, DeceaJer 3l-Eliza =. Nc
Laughlin VI. Thomas Wells. The
parties own al jOining farms ia GornYille,
and there is serious dispute between
them az 10 the dividing line between the
farms. Mrs. Mclaughlin claims Ger.
tain portion Of the land by right Of ad-
verse possession, even If the record does
not tally exactly with her claim. She
brings real action 10 determine what
shall be the true line, also suit for
trespass for damages.
On the other hand Wells cues Mrs.
Mclaughlin in trespass. The first &C
ton was the one tried. today The land
in dispute is about - rods wide in its
widest part Judge Turner Buswell was
| the surveyor appointed by the court and
he made plan of the land and explain.
ed it to the jury. showing where the
different parties claimed.
The verdict in tins ease was rendered
Friday. General verdict for plaintiff
| and special verdict As follows. What
do the jury find to be tie dividing line
between the lands of these parties An
swer: beginning at the northwest cor
ner claimed by plaintiff, thence easterly
or straight line to The maple tree at
the Molunkus road This line runs a
little To the south Of the line claimed by
plaintiff aud leaves the stone wall claim
ed by pltff upon the land Of defendant
(. \. Merrill for plaintiff. Danforth &
| Gould fot defendant
Ernest L. Upper of Starks, who has
been studying in the office OF Walton q
Walton, has passed creditable exami-
nation, and Thursday, was admitted TO
practice law in the courts of this State.
The reports of referees in Thomas W
| Downs VS.. James s. Morrill,. was hlled.
awarding plaintiff s34.2 - and costs.
Saturday IAN. mike Padham VS..
| Louis Vigue. Plaintiff claims that his
son, Arno Padham, was indebted to him
in the sum of $50, in January, 1892,
and in order to prevent the collection Of
the debt, fraudulently conveyed To the
defendent, certain real estate in Bing-
| ham, without consideration; that Louis
| Nigue, the defendant, the father-in-law
of AIno, took the deed of the real estate.
well knowing that Arno was indebted to
his father, and thereby fraudulently aid
| ing Arno in transferring and coneealing
| the property. Under the statute. if
defendant were guilty plainti1 would
! be entitled to recover twice the value OF
the property thus transferred.
Defendant denies knowledge Of the
debt from Arno to Nike. and claims that
Arno conveyed the property 10 secure
! Nigue for labor and money furnished bv
! Nigue 10 Arno and family.
In the case Of Padham vs.. Nigue. a
verdict WAS returned for the plaintiff.
for $543.34. q. W Cover for plaintiff.
Naltons for defendant.
The following criminal cases have
been disposed of by the county attorney.
all being mol pressed.
State vs.. VIII White; State rs. Will
! White: State VS.. !. VI. \ c. NJ. Hilton:
State vs.. Edward Pomlow; State Us. p.
b. White; State vs.. Martin Goliath
State IS. Wm. g. Chandler: State vs..
! Geo. B. FarCrieves State vs.. +. A.
| Palmer: State VS.. Homer NJ. Jones; state
VS.. Harry W. Wade. three cases. state
VS. Smith Whittier State VS.. Edward
! Bison; State VS.. Walter Pierce: State VS..
Geo. r. Pushor; State Us. Peter smith
State Us. f. H. symonds
Hoad9y, Ian. George Weymouth
VS. Alfred Weymouth. action on account
! for certain goods sold to defendant in
! the fall of lSSJ.
| Plaintiff had been in trade in Canaan,
and desired to close out his business.
! He therefore went TO Fairfield and pro-
posed to the defendant, his brother, to
sell to him bill of goods. an inventory
of which he presented to defendant. He
testified that he told defendant be would
make discount of - per cent. from the
cost of the goods, and that defendant
might have till any time the following