Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1903-05-28
Argued before the 6 oreme Court
by Burlington torneys
Yester ::
DECISIONS ExPl : ID TO-DAY
Believed Court Will Give Opinion on
Test Improvement Case This Morn.
tnR-Attornev Btown Argues
That Double Marking OF Bal.
lots Was Intentional.

Montpelier, May 27.-Two cases of State
interest We're argued to-day in supreme
court, one the mandamus case citing the
Barre x Montpelier Traction and Power
company into court to show it's right un-
der its franchise to raise it's rate of fare
from five to ten cents between Mont
pcler and Barre, and the other the Bur-
lngton maNoralty case.
The first case argued was Harvey Her
sey VS.. Northern Assurance company of
London. general assumpsit, from Wash
ington county The plaintiff who is ex-
MAYOR of the city of Barre, sued the de-
fendant company for the face value OF an
insurance policy of 5000 on certain prop
crty in the city of Barre which was
destroyed by fire. The defence was that
the plaintiff had violated certain con-
ditions of the insurance contract. f. L.
Laird for the plaintiff, j. w. Gordon
Tor defendant.
The Washington county case of city of
Montpelier and Frank NJ. Cory VS.. the
Barre d Montpelier Traction and Power
company was then argued by f. T.
Carleton for the city of Montpelier and
r. A. Hoar of Barre and r. r.. Brown
of Burlington for the defendant company
The plaintiff contended that under the
franchise granted to this railroad by the
cities of Barre and Montpelier and the
town of Berlin the company cannot
charge more than five cent fare and
it must give transfer tickets to all its
lines extending beyond the boundaries OF
the towns and cities named. In other
words. that it had three separate and
distinct lines between the terminus at
Montpelier and the ends of the line in
Barre. and that under its charter and
franchise whenever it crosses these lines
1t should give passengers transfer
ticket.
The defence claimed that the franchise
or contract between the company and
.,tfA A1.nt dior N
tho town of Berlin provided that it should
not charge more than five cent fare with
in the limits of any one of the three,
but that towns and cities had no right
"a regulate rates of fare outside of their
,v,n rnunicinalities
State OK rel. lanes T.. Burke VS.. Donly
Z, TIaxvIev was reached a half hour he
foro the noon recess Inasmuch as w L.
B,rnon ono of the counsel for Mayor
IIauIev could NOT a,riyo at Montpeier
,luti the noon train V. A. Bullard. coun-
col for Mr. Rurl,o tho relator made the
,ir., .rrument This case iS commonly
i,,,nvr as tho Rurlinrton mavoraltv case.
~ ~ - comnlaint for q writ of ouo war
,o,Itl a,ro,inty o,,t of tho c,oct,op nf nnvor
i,', % p,,rIi,otar ,Jarrh Iona
,,r ~ T.; ,.i, hriof n,,,,td IoreyaI,,
~ Nv - M +it,.', h,,ora " Sn,IL.
iio'i " ~, -, .ti, ,i .an,1i,
!'7' sPuc'' ~ 80 ,Iis,,,,''d o,idanno
~ NV N. NO. 81. t, ~ '' f,
n ,t.,.1a oi.,i,
%aIu iiNe iii'ue y! -, -"t la ~ ,i,
tnereol' were laIHe' peV""H, '"eH ulu Nv.
lnciude IN the return vi ti,c No'cS raS'
Tor MI burke fourteen local op' non -uel,i-
ocrauc votes that were oruereu ~ oe
counted ana returned for MN hV the m
spectors OF election III raid Ward' 'nat
with correct returns ior inns "ard m
stead of Mr. Hawley having plurallty
in that ward Mr.. Burke had majority
oi H. HAD the sorting anu counting oi
the votes been performed only by those
provided by law, had all others been oX-
cuded from going behind the rail while
the counting was being done, had In
epoctor Hbbard, as he threatened to do,
thrown out of the polling place the in
>ited guests who We're there disturbing
end preventing the orderly procedure of
The counting of ballots, had all this been
done the inspector and ward clerk would
probably have faithfully and correctly
diycharred their official duties and on
thc dav Of election lanes T. burke would