Orleans County monitor. [volume] (Barton, Vt.) 1872-1953, 1902-09-15
COUNTY COURT.

IuO COuuUy COurU has D00u occupied
ever since the opening day with the
case Morissette VS.. @. P. r. r. Co.,
the grounds of which action were
stated in our last issue. This is the
second trial of the case, but with
much additional testimony. At the
former trial only the plaintiff intro
duced evidence, at the close of which
the defendant moved the court to
direct verdict in it's favor. This was
done; the case went to the supreme
court and was sent back for re- trial
1t is one of the most interesting cases
tried in Orleans county for number
of terms. The plaintiff claims to have
been injured on account of the near
ness of switch to the track. There
has been a great deal of Canadian
law introduced, together with the in
depreciation of decisions by the
Canadian judges regarding the dut,
of the master toward his servant.
The case will last the entire week. At
al. VS.. Edward M. Gallagher will be
taken up. This will be a somewhat
lengthy trial; it also is sent back
from the supreme court for re-trial.
In this case the plaintiff claims that
the defendant broke in and entered
his premises in Albany and cut and
took away large amount of timber
of different kinds. The case involves
old lot lines and markings on trees
together with great deal of local
history, therefore will consume a con-
siderable amount of time.
1t is expected that after the Clark
vs.. Gallagher case, the criminal work
of the county will be disposed of,
owing to the fact that Mr.. Graham,
the present States attorney, wishes
to be in Montpelier as soon as posi- BILE
to take up his duties as state auditor.
If all the cases set for trial are tried.
the term will be an unusually long
one. They are as follows:
Morrissette VS.. Canadian Pacific Co.,
case; Clark ct al. VS.. Gallagher, tres
pass; Bailey VS.. Leach, assumpsit;
Buskey VS.. Daley, case; Wood VS..
Dwire, bastardy; Burbank VS.. Stetson
and Allen, trespass; Brown and Bulls
VS.. Kingsbury, assumpsit; Lewis VS..
Wing, replevin; Morse VS.. Goodwin,
assumpsit; Wilson VS.. the Union
Mutual Fire ms. Co., assumpsit;
Miller, Trustee VS.. Lucy Bailey,
assumpsii; Miles VS.. Wilcox, trespass
and trover; Whitcher VS.. Sails, case.
The grand jurors gave final report
Thursday noon and were discharged
from further service with the
thanks of the Court for the
expeditions manner in which they
had done their work. They reported
ten true bills, one bill not found.
Their written report in regard to
fences around public burial grounds,
United States deposit money and con-
dition of the county Jail is as follows:
To the Honorable County Court
within and for the county of Orleans,
the Grand jury of said County would
respectfully report as follows:
1. We find the public burial
grounds and the fences around the
same all in good condition.
2. We find the United States deposit
money and the interest thereon has
been managed and discussed accord
ing to law.
8. We find the several towns have
collected and expended the State
school tax as provided by law.
4. We have examined the County
jail and find it much too small for the
present demands upon it, poorly
lighted, poorly ventilated and wholly
unfit for the use for which it was
designed in it's present condi-
ton. We fnd it insecure and unsan-
itary and disgrace to the County,
and we emphatically recommend
new Jail.
N. S. Rogers, Foreman.