The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1903-05-21
SUPREME COURT.


State VS.. Fred Cunningham, i'll which
the respondent was convicted III Barre
city court OF selling goods at auction
without license. The case was ar
gued on the question of constitution
atty of the law last term and now the
court holds that it is unconstitutional,
sustains the demurrer in the case,
quashes the indictment, and frees the
respondent. Opinion By Judge Hazel
ton.
In the Chittenden county case of
Robert Avery, IT., VS.. Vermont Elec-
trio Co., ct al, judgment was af-
firmed. In the lower court Judgment
was rendered dismissing the petition.
Opinion by Judge Munson.
The case of State VS.. Albert Shedroi
from Caledonia county, bedding with
out license, is of unusual interest IN
asmuch as two sections of the Yer
mont statutes are declared unconstitu-
tional by the decision. Shedroi is
Syrian peddler and was twice arrested
for peddling without license In the
first instance the indictment was
quashed, and in the second the in
formation was demurred to and the
case went to Supreme Court on the
grounds that the present statute,
provides that soldiers who served in
the civil war and were honorably dis
charged may secure peddler's license
without paying the stated fee. The
respondent claimed that this was i'll
violation of the fourteenth amend
ment to the constitution and the court
sustained this view BY this decision
sections 4732 and 4733 of the Vermont
statutes were declared unconstitution-
| al and without force. This opinion
was rendered by Judge Watson. The
| attorney in the case was G. @. Frye
of st. Johnsbury.
During the afternoon the lawyers in
attendance on court held meeting
and as the result w. H. Bliss, of Mid
| dlebury, presented to the court tes-
| timonial from the bar, expressing
their regards for Chief Judge Rowell,
who is now absent on account of i'll
ness, their regrets at his i'll health,
and assuring him of their prayers for
his speedy recovery. Acting Chief
Judge Tyler expressed the pleasure of
the bench at the action and said he
would forward the testimonial to
Judge Rowell.
An interesting and important case
from Franklin county was on trial
in Supreme Court Monday, it be-
inG entitled, Bellows Free Academy
of Fairfax and Trustees thereof and
Town of Fairfax VS.. Margaret B., Ed
ward A. and Susani B. Sowles. The
centre of controversy is large be-
quest under the will of Hiram Bel
lows, who, when he died in St. AL
bans, gave $50 shares of Chicago.
Rock Island d Pacific railroad stock,
Of par value 800, for the establish e
ment and maintenance of free school
in his native town of Fairfax. under
the name of the Bellows Free Acad-
envy of Fairfax, Vt. Besides the
stock, certain piece of land was
given. The will gave this property
to the town of Fairfax with orders
that trustees be elected to care for it,
and that when and not before the
fund should amount to $3.50, 00G a
building should be erected with $50, :
600, and the remainder be kept for a
permanent fund. In case the town
should not go ahead and accept the
bequest and look out for it then Mar
garet B. Sowles to take all of the es-
tate.
Mr.. Bellows died about 30 years
ago In 1878 an act was passed by
the Legislature incorporating the
Bellows Free Academy. Since then
the trustees under the act of incorpo-
ration have had charge of the funds.
A shot time ago the stock had in
creased in value and in amount so
that the trustees thought the funds
would amount to more than $3.50, 0C0.
They made arrangements to sell some
stock in order to get money to erect
the academy buildings. A Telegram
from E. A. Sowles, attorney Tor M.
B. Sowles stopped them. This liti-
cation resulted, the meaning of the
will being in dispute. The defend
ants claim that funds was meant
to include only the property outside
of the railroad stock. The defendants
have been enjoined from further
hindering the trustees in selling
| opoOhs a. "A. Ian aPpCdto tOi ohO
trustees and E. A. Sowles and Elisha
May for the defendants
The Caledonia county case of M. A.
Lewes VS.. John Crane 81 Sons was ar
gued in Supreme Court today. This
is suit for damages resulting, as the
plaintiff claims, from the negligence
of the defendant in supplying tackle
of insufficient strength to support a
swing staging on which the plaintiff
was working while clapboarding a
barn. One of the large hooks which
suspended the staging from the caves
of the barn broke and as result the
plaintiff fell and was injured. Ii
county court the plaintiff recovered
5000 and costs. Besides having excep-
tions to the admission of evidence an6
J to the charge, the defendant asks tC
! have the verdict set aside on the
grounds that model of the barn anC
staging hook which had been used
on the trial. somehow found their way
J to the jury room without the knowl.
edge of the defendants or being. ad
mitted in evidence as exhibits. Daley
d Goss and Dunnette d Slack for the