Herald and news. [volume] (West Randolph, Vt.) 1878-1943, 1901-08-08
Windsor County Court.
June Term. 1901.


4, Court finally adjourned al noon Saturday
last.
The jury was discharged for the term on
| Thursday afternoon of last week. The last
two cases tried were:-
State VS.. Edward p. Skinner. This was
a prosecution for an alleged violation OF
the prohibitory law. The evidence OF the
had a shop, or market, in the village OF
Windsor, and that ne kept there and sold
soft drinks. The state claimed that re-
spondent also dispensed a drink known TO
the sophisticated as 'lager BEER
Twenty witnesses were called and sworn,
but only about half of them testified, and
those swore only to the taking OF ginger
pop, ginger ale, sarsaparilla, root beer and
soda pop. The nearest the state came to
showing anything approximating slayer
beer was that one witness called for some
light colored drink, called Little Daisy
which the witness observed did taste some
like lager, but its pop was the pop like
unto the pop of ginger pop. The witness
frequently bought half dozen bottles and
carried them home. Deputy Sheriff ''Jimn
Kiniry made a search of the respondents
premises recently, but found nothing I'M
lawful. At the time OF this search respond
ent made the statement that ne had kept
and sold lager beer some time ago, but
bad not had any for some time. Five
young boys obtained nine bottles OF hop
beer, which they drank in seven minutes
and thirty seconds. Two hours later two
Of the boys were in the room of one OF
them and sang and laughed.
This, in brief, was the tenor of the show
ing by the state; the respondent put on no
witnesses. but made motion that the
court order an acquittal. The court asked
the prosecution If il desired to go to the
jury. Mr. Attorney thought there was ev-
idence, but allowed IL was very slight and
lac did not strenously oppose the motion.
SO the court granted it and directed the
foreman Of the jury TO say 'not guilty,
which he did, and Skinner was discharged.
State vs.. Harold Burgess. The respond
ent is youth OF II and the charge against
him was assault with intent to commit
rape upon young woman at West Hart
ford on June 22d last. 1t was at a lawn
party for the benefit Of the band Harold
and the young woman, two or three years
his senior, strolled from the scene OF the
lawn party towards the depot. On arriv-
ing near the store Of VIM Munsell, and al
the spot where the wagon Of the respond
en-, was, he and the girl got up into the
wagon and sat there "a visitiu After
some Is or 20 minutes be made an improp-
en- proposal 20 the young woman; she said I
NO, sir, and they visited a little longer I
Then she got cut Of the wagon and Harold 4
got out They stood little while in the
immediate vicinity and he repeated his 1
She said "nO SIR again. At /
his time Harold took her gently by the I
arm, and the two had some words which 1
attracted the attention Of Mrs. Munsell so 1
hat she eXcla med, 'sWhat's going on 4
here What kind Of a performance do
-ou call this ~ This broke up the seance
md the young couple separated, going in
different directions. The young man de-
Ned any assault and denied having any
,uch intent as that charged. The young
woman testified that he used no force and
hc had no idea that he intended 10 use
my; nor had she made any complaint 10
my person Of his conduct. The jury re-
urned a verdict of breach OF the peace
which was In effect that he was guilty Of
nipple assault, He was fined s25 and the
ost Of the prosecution. The fine and costs
we're paid States Attorney Chas. p.
'srbell, assisted by A.G. Whitman, pros
euted and the respondent was defended ,
" Pingree & Pingree. III
large number Of old state cases have
zen taken off the docket by entries Of
Ioile prOsequi OF not to be brought for
.ard. About hundred state cases in all !
ave been finally disposed Of, and there ,
My remains on the old docket II, and Of
hese il is doubtful whether more than
ne viii be actually tried The following
d
state vs.. Desc, fishing in posted waters,
espondent pleaded guilty and was fined
80 and costs.
State VS.. Hiram Blanchard. Respond
mt pleaded guilty and was sentenced TO
in states prison not less
nan two and not mere than two and one
Alf years
State vs.. Joseph X. Hutch Of Wood
Iock. Respondent pleaded guilty 10 a !
barge of cruelty to animals in driving
Orse that was CALLED under the collar.
med 10 and costs. G. A. Davis bespoke
be clemency OF the court on behalf OF re-
pendent.
state vs.. DR.. E. b. Mack Of Woodstock. ,
shing in forbidden waters. Fined $50
nd costs-in all so.
State VS.. Emma DeCamp Goff; adultery.
discontinued on account of death OF re-
State vs.. Albert LeCiair and Belle
trong; blanket act. Bonds called and
,rfeited and cut down to as. In two
against each respondent for
iultery-a nolle prosequi was entered
state VS.. |. {. Thompson; defauding a
otel keeper, onattempting to do so-for
be bill was pad after the arrest of re- {
1ondent. Fined SO and costs.
state vs.. Ernest johnson, assault. Re-
Iondent pleaded guilty to breach OF the ,
sace and waE-hned 30 and costs.
state VS.. Frank Coutermarsh. Respond
II pleaded guilty to larceny Of harness.
to the house of correction for
ne year-eiC5tteen months.
State VS.. MEdor CDutermarsh. Same Of .
nse and same sentence.
State VS.. frank Merrill. Two cases for
1rglary OF the kelleher store and c. v.
spot at Bethel In each case two-two :
40 half wears.
State VS.. IRVING Pixley; rape. Respond
IT was sentenced to imprisonment in
ate's prison not less than seven nor more
ian ten years.
The following divorce cases were heard
lring the week
Lila Godda vs.. Noah Godda. Bill
ranted On the ground of desertion and
eglect and refusal to support. F. c.
for petitioner.
Orissn Dimmick VS.. Mary A. Dimmick.
i'll granted on the ground OF adultery.
E. Emery for petitioner.
Jenaie Parish vs.. George Parish BDAl
-anaed for desertion. A. G.. Cox for Pc
tiOner.
Arthur Burelle vs.. Aoile Burelle. Rg1l
ranted on the ground of desertion. T.. q.
lam for petitioner.
Jennie W. Farr VS.. Frank n. Farr. Bill
-anted on the ground of adultery. A-G.
OK for petitioner.