Bellows Falls times. [volume] (Bellows Falls, Vt.) 1856-1965, 1899-09-20
Windham County Court.
(Deferred from last week

GDeferred from last week
Emma Howe, apt VS.. George B.Stanley's
estate.
AS stated in the last report this was an
appeal from the decision of the commits
sioners on George B. Stanley's estate dis
allowing the account OF plaintiff, who was
Stanley's daughter, for services rendered in
her fathers family after she became of age,
and for cash and goods furni. hed her father
in his lite time.
The account covered the year, 1885 to
1889 inclusive, and showed subsequent
credits which if allowed would prevent the
statute of limitations from running. The
testimony on the part of the defendant was
to the effect that while certain services were
rendered by the plaintiff as claimed by her
she had the privileges Of a home in her
fathers family, was cared for in sickness
there, and that there never was any under
standing between the parties that the servi-
ce. were to be paid for; that the charges
of the plaintiff, which were made in diaries
i
not made at the time that they occurred, but
had been written into the books since the
meetings of the commissioners to whom
they were presented in 1898; that the
credits which plaintiff relied upon to keep
her account alive did not represent frag-
ments which were made for application on
the claimed Indebtedness, but for other
specific purposes and consequently would
, not keep the statute of limitations from
running.
The case was given to the jury at 5 sc
P. NJ. Wednesday and verdict was re-
turned for the defendant an hour later. c.
, G. Fits for plaintiff j. L. Martin for de-
tendant
, Sylvester and Flora S Rawson VS.. Daniel
. Sherwin, A. 0. Coleman, E. M. Butler
! F. A. Ballard and Clarence Torrey Thu
was an action of trespass. Sherwin, Cole
man and Butler were selectmen of Jamai
ca in 1898. A certain Bridge known a
: the Ward mill bridge needed rebuilding
. and to avoid the necessity of bridg,
at that point the selectmen decided to built
= new piece OF road about 1870 yards lonl
: through the lands of the plaintiffs and En-
. ory Wilder. The contract for building
. was taken by Ballard and Torrey, two o
;, the defendants. The road was not full,
: constructed last year and at the last Marcl
meeting of the town it became an issue OF
which the old beard of selectmen were re
: tired. The new board have fenced up thu
road and the contractors not having hat
q their full pay are threatening suit agalns
y the town. The evidence on the part o
= the plaintiffs tended to show that they hat
:. never been awarded any land damages b,
the selectmen and had never given the Sc
llectmen or contractors PERMISSION to ente
the land that when they found that worl
on the road had been commenced they ha,
forbidden further work there; that tn
II fences had been torn down by reason @
n which their flock of sheep became unruly
: roaming through the neighborhood at will
Is destroying apples and other crops, tn
u sheep becoming injured thereby; that il
8 building the road through strip of wood
s land considerable quantity of good tim
. Der had been destroyed and that valuabl
slpasture land had been Injured in the con
II struction of the road that the whole pro
u lceedings of the selectmen in laying an,
o constructing the road were illegal, the Sc
J Ilectmen and constructors thereby subject
e ing themselves to personal liability in tn
7 matter OF damages.
le The testimony on the part OF the defend
o ants tended to show that the plaintiffs ha,
'es notice and full knowledge OF the laying Q
~ the road and told the selectmen in sui
nc stance that no claim for land damage woul
be made; that in fact plaintiffs suffered n
IS actual damage in the matter as the open
he ing of the road would render their Ian
vs. more accessible, thus more than counter
% balancing the damage to the land, whic
lie was very slight; that the action OF tn
s. selectmen was so far within the law and i
De line of their duties as town officers as {
free them from any individual liability.
The case is being closely contested b
Fits as counsel for the plaintiffs and Cud
worth and Waterman for the defendant:
OF The next case in order is the William I
IN Gould will contest from Townshend, whic
so will probably be commenced Ssturds
IN morning.
r. The docket seems to be strengthenin
m up and the term now looks to be good fC
" week or ten days more.
er