Bellows Falls times. [volume] (Bellows Falls, Vt.) 1856-1965, 1901-01-17
VERMONT EVENTS.
Windsor County Court
DECEMBER TERM, 1900.

AASh' - As' oeoAet PANoANbS JuNSc'
Hon Milo S. Buck and Hon. Charles H
Markham, assistant judges.
Officers OF the Court.
Jay Read Pember, CLERK.
Charles P. Tarbell states attorney.
Daniel C. Jones, sheriff.
Levi B. Moore, high bailiff.
John H. Mmm,, reporter.
Our report last week closed with the
discharge of the jury on Tuesday morning,
January 8. 1t took until Wednesday TO,
the Ii is ants to rally from the shock and
sath,r the contending factions and the
court rested, but finally the case of the
Prosper Merrill trust was taken up. I'm.
der his will he appointed Hon. A. j. Far
20 OF E st Hampton. Mass, trustee OF
three funds OF S $1,000 each given to his
great or ,ndchildren who resided in
Spr" gil Id. Mass, giving as reason that
- these great-grandcbi dren resided in
Mssssrhus' tts, be thought best to appoint
a resld MT of Massachusetts as trustee.
The probate court refused to conf m this
appointment refused to turn over the trust
funds to Mr. Fargo for the reason that he
was not resident OF Vermont 1t wa.
conceded that Mr.. Fargo was in every way
competent. He had never declined or re-
fuse B, accept the trust but on the con-
trary, appeared in court and claimed his
accept n g of the same. The probate
court had appointed citizen of Wood
stock who was entirely competent but was
not accs pit BILE to the minor Or Ter guardian
and hence this appeal. The case was
argued by Gilbert A Davis in behalf of
Mr.. Fargo and by William E johnson in
spp,stion. The court decided as a mat
tor Of discretion, that the wishes of Pros
per Merrill 80 expressed in bis will ought
to be respected, ordered that A. j. Fargo
be app ,inted trustee and that the case be
csrti6 d to the probate court to carry out
this order After this judgment was an
NON ed Mr.. johnson told the court that
in bis opinion, the decision WAS correct
IL The cases from Chester between P. II
Robbins and Joseph R. Richardson jldg-
nent on he report OF William E johnson,
audit n, wa, announced in favor Of the
Robbins estate, and F. P. Mather, execu-
tor, W" held chargeable as trustee
Sticknty & Sargent appeared for P. H.
Robbins, administrator; GeorgeL Fetch.
er, Wat 4rman & Martin for j. R. Ricnard-
son.
The divorce cases pending between Luz
Their Foster and Kate Foster were con-
tinud
In re estate OF Ry'and Hardy, Uriel Rus
sell, clam ant, Henry f. Amsjen, adm,nis-
TRAITOR, appellant, appeal from commission
srs, the court, on the report OF William E.
joins n, auditor, rendered Judgment in
favor o. U'iel Russell for $2203SO debt
and $95.57 costs, this being larger sum
than was allowed by the commits sioners.
N. S Buck, w. B. S ickney and G.. A.
Dav tor plaintiff, j G. Sargent and S. E
EN- ry tor the administrator.
]. A. Bryant VS. Walter Brink, Bethel
ease. Judgment on report for defendant
for 81 SO and costs. Edgertou for plain
tiff. j j. Wilson for defendant.
In re Charles Clapp estate Judgment
on report was rendered against D. c Den
nison, administrator, for the sum OF $25O4
j. D Dennison tor administrator, II. II.
Blar chard for claimants.
John c. Cooli &c, collector Of taxes in
Plymouth, Vt, VS.. Warren Taylor and
trustee. This was an action to recover
taxes On the list of 1897-1898 1t was dis
covered that no recovery could be had for
q sum larger than the amount in the hand.
OF the trustee and the case was continued,
and Hon. j. L. Martin of Brat'leboro was
appointed to take the disclosure of tbs
trustee. Stickney and Sargent for the
plant fl. e. A Davis for defendant.
s r'h Miller VS.. j. W. Buemond. Action
on ree. Judgment on report for sum
found. G. L. Fletcher for plaintiff, c. HI.
Robb tor defendant.
j A. BRYANT VS.. Chauncey Chadwick, |
replevin. judgment for return of proper
ty replrv'ed and that def endsnt recover his
costs. Edgerton for plaintiff, j. j. VIII
son FIR defendant.
o M Parkhurst VS.. VIM. II Loveland.
q spr ngf Id case. Judgment on report of
ref e" tor defendant. E b. Finn for
plain'f. H H. Blanchard for def niapt.
job, 8. Rand. administrator, vs. Harper
Haxen, and j. Frank johnson, trustee.
The contention in this case was whether
Harper Hazen should be h.ld for meat
bill The court listened patiently to the
svi' eacs and discharged Harper Hasen
with ce'ts bat rendered Judgment against
johnson for &1015.1 IA but as that is prob
ably not collectible, the cash avails Of the
litie ion will be small. D. A. Piugree,
assisted BY j. C. Enright and E. z. Buck,
for pl.ir it'd, VIM. Bstchelder for defend
ant. Harper Hszan.
Calls Kidder, appellant, W. Allan
Dlnh.m. Thi, was an action to recover
So r cow sold defendant. Defendant
sst up claim that there was deceit in tine
sale o. the COW and returned it TO the plain
IA The evidence pro and con as to the
snaliti of the ccw WAS interesting to say
the |. ast. A majority of the court, who
knew best about cows, rendered Judgment
for defendant to recover his costs. j. j.
WHO, for plaistiff, F. G. Southgate for
defendant.
TIE case of Baker Lead Manufacturing
company of Worcester, Mas VS. E nest
Scott Peacock was tried on Friday, Sstur-
day AMI Monday 1t was an action on the
cas-. TOR alleged de get in obtaining two
bills of goods at White River Junction IN
the II Of 1899, by mis-statemens as to
the amount OF bis stock and liabilities. The
detail are not of public interest. So tar
the plaintiff ha. never been able to COLLECT
payne 1t for the GOO The court found
4ha &. ~ IL 60 1a