Middlebury register. (Middlebury, Vt.) 1886-1937, 1903-12-11
SLOW PROGRESS.
The Small Cases in the County Court Take
up Much Time.

case of Francis Downs and wife was still
Thursday afternoon and the opening plea
was made for the defence by Charles 1.
Button of Middlebury, Judge W. II.
Bliss of Middlebury followed for the
plaintiffs and Friday morning George E.
Lawrence of Rutland closed the case for
the defendants. Judge Tyler gave the
case to the jury at 10 o'clock and they
came in soon after the opening of the
afternoon session with a verdict for the
plaintiffs giving them $500 damages and
their costs.
When this case was got to the jury the
case of w. A. Chaflin, appellant, VS.. A.
D. Willard 81 Co., and trustee was
begun, Cushman and Sherman of Bur-
lington representing the plaintiff and
Frank L. Fish of Vergennes the defend
ants In this case the plaintiff brought
suit for 1852 OF for milk delivered at a
creamery which the defendants had
been running but it was claimed for the
defense that Willard & Co., had sold out
their interests in the creamery before
this particular milk swas delivered and
had so notified their former patrons.
The case lasted until Saturday afternoon
at 3: 45 when the jury came in with
verdict to the effect that they found no
cause of action and giving the defend
ants their costs. A recess was then
taken to o'clock Monday afternoon.
Just before 12 o'clock Saturday the
Grand Jury came in and reported two
indictments and two bills not found.
They said in their written report that
they had received no information of the
violation of the license law in this
county, and that the public moneys had
been properly expended by the various
towns. They also recommended some
Improvements in the county Jail with a
view to furnishing better light in the
lower regions. Foreman Lane announced
that the Grand Jury had completed their
labors, and they were thereupon dis
charged for the term.
Monday afternoon the case of Henry L.
Wood VS.. Hiram Stratton, appellant,
which had been assigned for that hour
was found to be not ready for trial and
at 3 o'clock a recess was taken until
Tuesday morning, when this case was
begun. 1t occupied practically all of the
time of the court during Tuesday and
Wednesday and was a horse suit in
which the plaintiff claimed damages for
false warrant of the beast, and the Jury
Wednesday evening gave the plaintiff
verdict for S25 damages and costs. Ira
H. LaFleur of Middlebury conducted the
case for the plaintiff and T. w. Moloney
of Rutland was the attorney for STRAIT
ton.
AS it looks now the term is likely to
end some time towards the close of next
week, as the probable criminal business
is small and mostly of little consequence.
Clerk Wainwright and the interested
attorneys have received official Motif
cation that the demurrer filed at the
Dec. term, 1891, to the declaration in the
case brought by Frank l.. Fish as receiv-
er of the Farmers National Bank of Yer.
gennes against the administrators of
Emerson Hollands estate, on the ground
the receiver of a National Bank could
not bring suit in his own name in
Court of law, had been Overruled and
the declaration held sufficient by the
Supreme Court. This case carries with
it several other similar ones and the
decision is big victory for Lawyer Fish,
who had pitted against him such cap
able lawyer as Joel c. Baker of Rutland
in Mr.. Bakers special line of good work,
Since the announcement last week
that the case of l.. c. Sturtevant VS.. j.
G. Nc Cullough had been discontinued
there has been much talk as to how the
case happened to be thrown out of court.
1t can be stated here on unimpeachable
authority that the case was discontinued
entirely on the motion of Mr.. Sturtevant
and his counsel and that neither Gov.
Mccullough nor any one for him ever
gave or promised to give so much as
one cent to procure the discontinuance
of the suit.