Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1899-01-27
SUPREME COURT DECISIONS
victory for the Village School
District

| In the Case In hegeFu y" INV
of Public Money---VillaRe VIII "e'
About s2OOO---PIaintinWi Wins In Long
Contested sherman-Estey Organ COm'
pRny case.
The supreme court in session at Mont
heller this week, rendered decisions IN
three local cases, the one of the greatest
public interest being that in regard 10 lhe
division of the public money between the
graded school district and the town school
district The village wins and will receive
approximately $1,000. 1t is probable that
a part of this sum will be used in fitting up
recitation rooms on the third floor OF the
High school building, and that there Will
be no further movement the coming year
in regard to new school buildings.
When the town system of schools was
made compulsory by the act OF 1872 tue
graded school districts were exempted
from the provisions Of the law, leaving
BrattlebOro with the village district and
the town district, the latter including all
of the town outside the village. Before
that time the public money which includes
an income from the Huntington fund, the
state school tax and interest on United
States deposit money, had been divided
among the various districts in each town,
one-h half according TO aggregate attendance
and the balance equally among the dis
tricts. Upon the coming in force of the
town system law there was no further di-
vision in towns not having graded school
districts, but it was provided that in towns
having such districts the division should
be between the town district and graded
school district according to the aggregate
attendance at schools kept by "duly IL
censed" teachers.
BY special act passed in 1890 the pru-
dental committee of the Brattleboro
graded school district were granted power
TO license teachers for said district with or
without examination, II they saw fit, and
subsequent TO that time the teachers of the
district had been licensed by the commit
tee, very few being qualified as provided
by the general law.
At the first division of public money af-
ter the town system went into effect Judge
Wheeler, chairman of the town district
committee, insisted that the division should
not be made according to aggregate attend
ance at all schools for the reason that if the
special act Of 1890 was inforce6, by its pro-
visions, the village district should have no
greater share in the public money than be-
fore the passage of the act, and he further
contended the act was repealed by the gen.
eral school law Of 1890, which was passed
six days after the special act.
Up to April, 1897, the division was
made on the same basis as before 1892,
considering the town district as IL districts
which 1t contained before the town system
took effect. AT the division in April, 1897,
the committee of the village district appear
ed with counsel before the selectmen, who
l.; 81,
insisted that the division should be made
upon the aggregate attendance, and that
teachers holding the committees certi6-
Gates should be considered duly qualified
This was contested by Judge Wheeler for
the town district, but the selectmen decided
in favor of the village, whereupon the
town district brought bill in chancery
10 reverse the selectmen's decision, and pro-
cured temporary injunction restraining
the payment to the village district of the
amount divided to it by the selectmen.
The cause was heard before Chancellor
Ross at the September term, 1897, Wind
nam county court of chancery, and he de-
clded IN favor of the town district. The
village district appealed to the supreme
court, where the case was argued last Nav.
ana on tuesday last the supreme court
rendered its decision, reversing the decree
OF Judge Ross, and granting the village
district the full amount it claimed. There
are covered by the supreme court decisions
four divisions of the public money. those
OF September and April, 1897. and of Anril
and September, 1898. The village district
gains about $1,000 by the decision. not in.
Guiding anything due from the town dis.
trlct on account of error in the division |
prior to 1897
Waterman ~ Martin appeared as conn
sci for the town district and C. G Fitts
NJ Haskins and L. NJ. Read for the VILLAGE |
district Nse
The long'contested case of Sidney II |
sherman VS.. the Estey Organ comnanv |
was hnally ended on Tuesday, when the |
supreme court affirmed the Judgment Of |
tne last term of the county court In favor |
OF the plaintiff for $1,000 and costs. This
SUIT was begun in July, 1894, and was
tired three times in the county court. and
Ia nas oeen IN the supreme court as many
.ines: Slnce 1t was started the plaintiff
nj, SHERMAN, two of his principal wit,
H TI, o. n. Herrick and Miss Wheeler Of
,iH one OF the defendants, Gov.
I uiler, ana TWO OF the defendants conn.
9eef r. W. otoddard and G. b. Hit. have
"J' hC question involved in |
Tue SUIT was the right to certain lnmbar
ana ~ wood In Chesterfield, n. H.. which n
M. Waite had mortgaged to Mr. Sbarm u
ana afterward sold to the Estev Orasn
company. Each party claimed the ti,Is 90
~ Tue other defective. c. C. Fits and
NJ Read for plaintiff, Haskins q Schwon -
ana waterman q Martin for defendoOtn
Nth, The case of Andrew R. Gregg Va Nae.
WINS, which was decided in favor Of 'a asa
defendant at the March term of The " non Tue
y court in 1897, was argued in The Jun am
9reme court last October, and on last TT Tr su'
lay Judg &c Thompson, for the co nSs . ues,
~ opinion affirming the Judgment ~ tSu
, % court, The plaintiffs connssI a. . sIe
~ ieave TO file motion for reSrcnm aSS-
us was granted, and the motIon IS,II ~.
,fgued some time during the present i ter DC
u court; The suit was bronsbt 'eitl
S SSGyer IT., the amount of note of S,oS No
v ' zen the defendant claimed was n.,S Ivy
= = fltts, IT, NJ. Read and X Has paiu. ".
ne plaintiff, Waterman d Martin for 10, Ior
GRANGE NEWS