Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1897-10-08
WINDHAM COUNTY COURT.
Closing Work of the Session.
Verdict of sI202 for Chas. +. Perry---
Court Cases---DivOrces GrRnted---Ad-
jOurnment Tuesday Night.

Charles F. Perry Us. Vermont Farm
Machine Company. This was an action
for 5000 damages for an injury received
by plaintiff while operating a machine in
the shop of defendant company. The
plaintiff produced evidence showing that
on Sept. 2, 1880, while in the employ of de-
fendant company in its shop at Bellows
Falls, he was set to running a machine
used for pressing stamps and cutting dies !;
that the machine was entirely new to him
and was of dangerous character to an un-
skilled operator; that he was shown the
method of operation, which was by means
of foot treadle, the machine being set in
motion by placing the foot on the treadle
an stopped by removing the foot from the
treadle; that he was not furnished with a
wire or hook for removing the pieces from
the machine, but was obliged to take them
out with his fingers; that he proceeded to
operate the machine as instructed, remOv-
ing his foot from the treade with the ex-
pectation that the motion would cease, then
putting his fingers under the cutter to re-
move the pieces when the cutter came
down, catching his right hand and taking
off three of his fingers near the second
joint; that he was laid up for some time,
subjected to large expense on account of
the accident, and that his earning capac-
ity was diminished thereby; that the ma
chine had been long time in service, was
badly worn, and was defective; that of
this fact he had no knowledge at time of
accident, and was not instructed fully as to
the dangerous character of the machine in
its then condition.
The evidence on the part of defendant
was to the effect that plaintiff when set to
work on the machine was very fully in
structed as to its use was told of its danger
ous character, and was furnished with a
hook for taking the pieces from the ma
chine; that had he used this hook as
directed the accident could not have hap
pened, even though the machine had been
defective as claimed; that plaintiff did not
take his foot off the treadle at time of ac-
cident; that while running the machine he
was cautioned by other employees of the
shop that he was operating recklessly; that
the machine, although somewhat worn,
was then and is now in safe operating con-
dition; and that the accident was solely
the result of plaintiffs carelessness.
The machine was produced in the lower
part of the court house, and the court and
jury instructed by defendant as to the
method of operation at the beginning of
chine examined by expert mechanics, who
testified that the machine in its present
condition was defective in that it would
occasionally revolve once or twice after the
pressure was removed from the treadle.
This testimony was favorable to PLAINTIFF s
claim, or at least made it possible that his
foot was removed from the treadle before
placing his fingers under the cutter at the
time of the accident.
The defendant then wished to have the
machine examined by-experts in its behalf
TO offset this testimony, but it was finally
agreed to let the jurymen do their own eX-
perimenting and draw their own conclu-
| sions after stating the case. While argu-
ments were in progress counsel for plaint-
| iff announced to the court that defendant s
witnesses were then in the lower room oil
ing and adjusting the machine, apparently
| for its better working when the jury should
examine it. Counsel for defence prompt
| ly denied any improper intent on their part.
| The court stated that such a course was
improper. Verdict for plaintiff in the sum
of $1292.
Robb and Waterman, Martin & Hit for
plaintiff; Judge Read for defendant.
The defendant saved several exceptions
| in this case and it is understood that it
will be carried to the supreme court. The
| question is considered a very important
one, for if the verdict is sustained it will
| open up a new and almost unlimited source
of liability to all Vermont employers OF
labor. This was the last jury trial and
the jurymen were discharged. Monday
and Tuesday were busy days in the hear
| ing of divorce cases and other court busi-
ness. Several cases were heard on reports
of referees and judgment rendered on
their findings. This method of trying
causes seems to be gaining popularity, as
an unusually large number were referred
the present term. The expense to the
state in ordering jury trials is $75 per day
or more, while the state pays the referee in
trials before him So per day and expenses
The case of West VS. Beers and trustee
had an extended hearing before the court,
resulting in judgment for plaintiff fol
substantially the amount of his claim
SAL Al and costs. Waterman, Martin &
Hit were counsel for plaintiff; Fits fol
defendant.
A spirited contest was promised in tn,
case of Mary K. Ward VS. Myron Ward OF
a petition for the custody of children, bu
after proceeding some time it developed
that defendant, with children, was in part
unknown, and the court ruled that he wa
not entitled to be heard in court. To thi
ruling Judge Read, defendants counsel
took exceptions, which were allowed, ant
the case was passed to the supreme court.
In case Probate Court VS. Horatio G. Wor
den and Elliot johnson to recover on
probate bond given by defendants in mat
ter of the guardianship of Will Taylor
judgment was ordered against Horatio L
Worden, defendant, for $975 so.
In the several cases of Vermont nationa
bank, d. S. Pratt and others against A. +
Kelley ct ais, and trustees, judgments wer
rendered for plaintiffs, and A. E. Cudwortl
was appointed commissioner in matter o
the trustees.
The Watertown Wagon company wa
rendered a judgment against r. W. Angie
on certain promissory notes in sum o
1868. go and costs.
In case Timothy Gay & Co., Apis, VS.
Edward A. Tyler's estate it was arrange'
between counsel that Gay & Co. and othe
of Waterman, Martin & Hits client
should be paid in full, and the appeal from
report of commissioners was Withdrawn.
In case of Crosby & Adams VS.. K. A
Tyler's estate, appealing from report o
commissioner on claims for damages TO
termination of Brooks House lease, tn
allowance of commissions in sum of $3.50
was affirmed, with interest.
In the two suits of Windham County Saw
ings bank VS.. John H. Brigham ct ais