Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1903-09-04
WINDHAM COUNTY COURT.
Verdict for Plaintiff in Case of Ar
mour e. Co. VS.. j. j. Ward-Ad-
iourned to Tuesday.

Verdict for Plaintiff in Case of Ar
mour e. Co. VS.. j. j. Ward-Ad-
journed to Tuesday.
The September term of the Wind
ham county court convened at New
fame Wednesday forenoon, Sept 8.
Those present were Hon. Henry r.
Start. presiding Judge; Frank Worden,
Fred b. Pier assistant judges; John
II. Merrifield, clerk; A. w. J. wilkins,
sheriff: Anthony f. Schwenk. states
attorney; Charles S. Chase. reporter.
Prayer was offered by Rev. George
f. Webster of Williamsville. The call
of the docket occupied most of the
forenoon. Many cases were announced
as settled or continued. and the state
of the docket seemed to favor short
term. At the opening of the afternoon
session the grand and petit jurors
were sworn and instructed by the
court regarding their duties. Frank
f. Ward of Guilford was appointed
foreman of the grand jury. The work
of the grand jury will not be completed
before Friday.
Armour & Co., apis VS.. Jerome j.
Ward and NJ. L. Kirkwood The jury
was empaneled in this case Wednes-
only made against Defendant Ward
who lives at West Brattleboro. 1t APP
peared that in the summer of 1900
Ward engaged in the provision bust
ness at Schenectady, n. Y, with Kirk
wood under the firm name of J. j.
Ward & Co. Kirkwood lived at Albany
and Ward conducted the Schenectady
business. The firm bought their goods
largely Of Armour & Co. the Chicago
packers, whom they were owing some
$500 at the end of five or six weeks
after starting. The business was not
prosperous and the manager of the Ar
mour branch house at Albany from
which the goods were furnished. went
to Schenectady. there met Ward and
Kirkwood and demanded settlement
of his claim. This brought matters
to a head and it was arranged between
the parties that Ward and Kirkwood
should return to Albany all the stock
on hand which Armour & Co. had fur
nished them. and should turn over also
all their cash in bank, amounting to
about 1925. This left a balance due
Armour & Co. of $152.S7 after credits
for goods returned were given. Ward.
who was the only witness for the de-
fence. testified that he turned over the
CdSH Oh manu- anu IeluIDtu lllc SOOuS
to Armour & Co. on the express con
diton that this would effect his re-
lease from all obligations which Ar
mour & Co. held against them, and
that the manager of the Albany branch
office. Arthur H. Van Pet, made a di-
rect agreement with him to such effect.
Ward took no receipt on written agree
mant of any kind to show this. The
deposition of Van Pelt was the only
evidence used by the plaintiff. In this
Van Pelt stated that he made no agree
ment whatever to release Ward from
his remaining Indebtedness. although
Ward asked him for a release in full
Van Pelt further stated that he had nc
authority as branch manager for Ar
mour & Co. to compromise any claims
of this nature. He could only sell and
collect. All other business was done
from headquarters at Chicago.
The case went to the jury Thursday
morning at 11.30. At 9 o'clock p. m
verdict was returned for the plain
tiff for the full amount of claims
S152.S7, with interest. Waterman ant
Gibson for plaintiff F. d. E. Stowe anC
H. G. Barber for defendant
The case of C. o. Robbins VS.. JOSEPH
Richardson was expected to come OF
for jury trial Thursday afternoon. The
parties were present with their wit
nesses, but arranged terms of settle
ment during the forenoon
No case being in readiness for tria
court adjourned to Friday morning.
The county court adjourned this
Friday morning, until next Tuesda,
forenoon. Several cases which wer
expected to come to trial were set
tied. and there was no business il
sight, the grand jury not having re
ported indictments. 1t is eXpecte
that special train will be run fror
Brattleboro to Newfane on Tuesda
forenoon Immediately after the arriva
of the 9.06 train from the north.