Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1899-02-02
SUPREME COURT.
Three Members Admitted to the Vernon
Bar-Cases Argued,

Montpelier, Jan 26.-Upon the converting
Of Supreme Court this morning, w. Wish
art of Barre and Arthur V. ID. Piper of
Brattleboro, who have been aking exam
nation for admittance to the bar and who
have passed their examination, were made
attorneys after the oath had been admin
istered Upon them by Clerk NJ. L. Smile.
Bernard S. kittridge, formerly a ~practic-
ing attorney in Ohio. but now a resident
of Woodstock, made application to the
court at this time to be allowed to prac-
tice in this State n his application was
granted.
The first work to be taken up by the
court to-day, in the way of hearings, was
the parallel cases from Franklin County,
in the matter of the village of Enosburgh
Falls, William a Kendall, petitioner, and
in the matter of the same village with Mill
ton A. Kent. petitioner. Attorneys Nc
Feeters and Harrington appeared for the
petitioners and the firm of Wilson and
Hall represented Enosburgh.
These cases are appeals from assess
ments of $22. 81 in the case of Kendall and
S42.15 In the case of Kent which were made
by the trustees OF the village of Enos-
bugrh Falls for the construction of sewers
on Church and st. Adams streets upon
which the petitioners had property adult
ting.
The cases were heard at the last Sep
iiib u III lllt tollIlillSSlOItI ItIoIl,
petitioners exceptions and their motion to
re-commit the report. The exceptions
were over-ruled, motion denied and judy
ment rendered dismissing the petitions
with costs to the petitioners. To all of
this The petitioners excepted and the cases
brought to this court.
The next case was an Orleans county
case of the town of Westfield VS.. the own
of Coventry, apt, in which the plaintiff
was represented by Attorneys Young and
Annis and the defendant by Redmond.
1t is AN action in assumpsit for the sup
port of a pauper tried at the September
term of County Court resulting IN a judg-
ment for the plaintiff on an agreed state
ment of facts and to which the defend
ant excepted and his exceptions We're al
low ed and the case passed to the Supreme
Court.
The agreed statement SHOWS that the
pauper, Margaret Berry, resided in Gov
entry Gore for 20 years next previous TO
April !, 1895, supporting herself Il fam
lily, and was a resident on that date when
No. 2S7 of the acts of 1894, annexing Cow
entry Gore to the town of Newport, took
effect. This act makes no provision for
the support of paupers. SO the question
is, what, under the statutes is the law
with respect to paupers when a portion OF
one town is annexed TO another town and
the act of annexation Is silent on the sub
ject- This suit is brought by the plaintiff
town to recover from the defendant town
for the support OF Margaret Berry.
Another Orleans county case followed
that of w. l.. Locke VS.. A. Il. Post ct al,
Young appearing for the plaintiff and Red
mond for the defendant. The case came
up from last September's term of County
Court on plaintiffs exceptions to the judg'
ment that the homestead was exempt
from trustee process. The cause at issue
is that Post sold his homestead to a thirl
party and took notes in part payment fol
the same. Locke, a creditor of Post
brings a trustee process against Post II
an endeavor to obtain these notes bu'
Post denies his light to do SO under tn,
statute relating to the bringing OF truste,
processes against homestead property.