Orleans County monitor. [volume] (Barton, Vt.) 1872-1953, 1899-10-02
COUNTY COURT.

The wheels of county court have
been turning more rapidly this week
Thus far four cases have been tried
The first being the case Of Killpa-
trick VS.. Grand Trunk r. Y. This was
an action for damages for injuries
received by the paintiff while in the
employ of the defendants Go. Itseems
that the plaintiff was at work with a
train crew making up train in the
defendants yard at Island Pond, that
the engine with four cars started from
one end of the yard to go the other,
and in so doing passed the plaintiff
who caught one of the cars as it was
passing at the rate of eight or nine
miles an hour. The plaintiff stepped
| from the track up on the styrup on
the side of the car and clung with his
hands to the ladder on the side, while
in this position he was carried under
| bridge and was knocked from the
car by stricking post in such man
ner that he fell under the train and
| had his foot crushed so as to render
him lame for life. The defendants Go,
| claimed that the accident was caused
by the plaintiffs own negligence, that
he knew Or should have known of the
| post which struck him and that being
charged with that knowledge his in
jury was caused by his contributory
| negligence by allowing himself to
ride in that position.
The jury found verdict for the
plaintiff to recover S17OO and costs,
also special verdict in which they
say the plaintiff was not guilty of
contributory negligence.
E. A. Cook and Geo. Young, appear
ed as council for the plaintiff and
Dale, from Island Pond and Chamber
lain from Berlin N. Fl. for the Grand
Trunk Railroad.
The next case tried was William Ell
Sails. VS.. James Boyle. This was an
action to recover damages for trespass.
The evidence tended to show that
during the spring of '96, the plaintiff
ordered the defendant out of his house
and told him never to come on his
premises again, that during the sum-
mer of '96, the defendant went into the
the plaintiffs g cornfield, and on an other
occasion picked berries on the plaint
ifs land but did no particular damage,
as the plaintiff said that during the
summer Of '99, the plaintiff had men
pressing hay at his barn and on two
hn 6ofn To bo
barn to witness the hay pressing pro-
cess. That the last time the defend
ant was there the plaintiffs wife came
out and ordered him away, and as he
did not go, at once she proceeded to
pound him severely with pitchfork,
and also to use the tines quite
freely, finally as the defendant did
not go the plaintiffs wife gave him
until four o'clock, (about one hour
afterwards) to go. Plaintiff said that
any particular damage except to in
jure his feelings.
The jury found a technical trespass
and returned verdict for the plaint-
iff to recover one dollar damages. |
Geo. Young, brought the suit and
J. w. Redmond defended.
This completed the trial of the civil |
jury cases, and the State then COM |
the trial Of cases on the Grim |
inal docket. The first was State VS.. |
Leslie Banister for selling, furnishing |
and giving away Intoxicating liquor
without authority. The States evil
dence tended to show that sometime |
last spring while working on the road
machine in Jay the respondent had
certain quantity Of Canadian high
wines and in some mysterious man
ner the men working with him, all
had drink from his bottle without
his asking any one to drink and also
his objection. The respond
ent did not give any evidence in his
own behalf but rested when the State
did. The jury found him guilty of
one offense Of giving away.
The States Attorney appeared for
the State and Geo. Young for the re-
spondent.
THE CIRCUIT CENT1ENNLAL.