The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1897-12-08
Washington County Court.

Grace 1. Parker v. Taylor o. Parker and
o. II. Smith, trustee. General assumpst.
p. g. Camp entered as claimant In this
case there was verdict this term for plain
tiff for 1916 OF.
An entry on the docket to the following
effect has been made. judgment that
claimant is entitled to the fund in hands of
trustee less trustees cost and attorneys
lien to j. p. Lamson OF $63, and $75.75 to S.
g. Shurtleff.
j. A. Duplessis v. Jennie Dupessis. Di-
vorCe. Causes alleged adultery and intoler-
able severity. Marriage and residence
proved and bill granted for intolerable
severity. Petitioners residence is set up as
Moretown. w. A, Lord for petitioner.
James II, McNalley ". Ella ID. McNalley.
Divorce Petitioners residence is set up as
Montpelier. Heard Thursday afternoon.
Marriage and residence proved and bill
granted for adultery. f. p. Carleton APP
peared for petitioner.
A little matter OF Frank j. Eastman of
Mortified was quite recently brought to
the attention of the court by George E. Hol-
den. The claim of Mr.. Eastman was for
four days attendance and ten miles travel
as a witness in the case OF State v. Marsh
and Buzzell. His affidavit showed that he
was witness for the defence, and that in
the evening after he had testified Mr.. Plum
ley one of the attorneys for the State told
him to hold himself i'll readiness to come
back any time. The copy of the subpnna
which was handed him when he was UNI
moned was produced, and also certified
copy of the order of court in the Marsh
and Buzzell case which showed that an or
der was made that respondents be allowed
not to exceed thirty witnesses at expense of
| the State Mr.. Holden's Investigations
| tended to show that Mr.. Eastman was one
| Of the original witnesses summoned for re-
spondents, Marsh and Buzzell, though there
J were thirty-One names on the four subppnas
| for respondents which he found in the court
| files, all purported to be State subpBnas.
Mr.. Stanton, the assigned counsel for the
State, would not give Mr.. Eastman certif-
cate for his pay on the ground that the thirty
| witnesses for respondents for the State to
pay had been exhausted. Mr.. Holden had
the hearty support of Mr.. Plumley in this
matter. The court made no formal de-
cison but the full amount OF the claim, 81 CO.
was paid by County Clerk M. K. Smile
What are the essentials of State subpoena?
and does the expiration OF term of court In
effect constitute statute OF limitation as
regards payment Of witness fees against the
State to witnesses who have testified during
the term? are two of the interesting ques-
tions suggested by this incident.
Mary l.. LIE Clair v. Ellie LIE Clair. Di
vorce. Petitioners residence is the city Of
Barre. The bill was granted for wilful de
sertion and an entry has been made to the
effect that petitioner is decreed the custody
of minor child. I. R. Gordon for petit
Mary Rutterav v I,onis RutterAv. hi
vorce Roth PARTIES are from Montnelier
Marriage and residence proved and bill
Hnse and Rowland for netitioner. I,orf
and Carleton for defendant Leave entered
70 resuma maidan name 20 Warv Reodv
and the custody Of child Matilda flizabetl
was decreed To- netitioner
Arthur Prescott v. Alice l.. Prescott. Di
! fIad hv order ~ conf and constant NJ mar
ties MARRIAGE and residence nroved enf
Hill granted Tor intolerable severitv Tn tn,