Herald and news. [volume] (West Randolph, Vt.) 1878-1943, 1904-12-15
Windsor County Court.
December Term, 1904.

.
assigned for Dec. "a, unless it should be
reached sooner by the conclusion of the
other jury business.
| At the afternoon session, the petit jurors
| were called and sworn. Judge watson
/ briefly instructed them in regard to their
duties under the oath they had taken.
| The following jurors were in attendance:
! Andover, sFrank Johnson.
Barnard, Owen o. Adams.
! Bethel, sRollin ellison, e. +. Noble.
| Bridgewster, sClifton r. Pinney.
| Cavendish. Charles e. Hagar.
Chester, 'Daniel B. Chandler, FHenry
| A. Adams.
Hartford, George c. Brockway, #. l.
| Palmer.
Hartland, Charles N. Moore.
Ludlow, Jesse spaulding, Frank Martin.
Norwich, George H. Stiekney.
Plymouth, Milo L. Carlisle.
pOmfret, LucIan f. Gilbert.
Reading, Carlos Bryant.
Rochester, Norman c. Harvey.
Royalton, 'Henry Pierce, John b. Good
rich.
Sharon, George w. Baldwin.
Springfield, Henry A. Blanding, flames
z. Way.
stockbridge, Charles II. osgood.
Weathersheld, Asahel b. Warren.
Weston, James n. Waite.
West Windsor, Eugene w. Eastman.
Windsor, Austin L. Weary, Luther c.
White, Jr.
Woodstock, o. o, Thompson.
Excused.
Later in the afternoon, the first civil
cause for jury was called and trial begun.
This was j. F. Colston VS.. VIM. W. Bean.
The plaintiff lives at Hartland and de-
PENDANT at Randolph. The plaintiff
worked for Mr.. Bean, and at different
times lent him money. As surety, Mr..
Bean gave Colston bill of sale Of certain
wagons and sleighs The amount OF
indebtedness Of Bean to Colston was s292.
When Mr.. Colston came to get the wag
ons, he learned they were mortgaged to
Wn. II. Dubois OF Randolph. The plain
tin claimed that Bean represented the
vehicles to be free and clear OF encum-
brance. So the plaintiff lost his money
and this suit was to recover for the loss,
which plaintiff claimed was by reason Of
the fraudulent statements OF the defend
ant in regard to the sleighs and wagons.
The defendant did not deny the indebted !
ness, but insisted that at the time OF Civ |
ing the bill OF sale he notified the plain !
tit Of the Dubois mortgage. The defend |
ant went into insolvency and the prop /
erty, under the Dubois mortgage, was held /
thereon. No general verdict was found /
by the jury, but in answer to the special /
enquiries submitted to them, they found 4
that Dubois gave defendant the right to /
sell the property covered by the mort |
gage and that at the time the bill OF sale |
was given TO the plaintiff be was informed |
by defendant Of the Dubois mortgage,
but did not know of ii IN any other way.
Under these findings, the court will prob
ably direct judgment in favor OF the de-
PENDANT to recover his costs. j. c. En-
right and e. X. Buck for plaintiff; j. ID.
Denison for the defendant.
the next case was that OF Roswell Bel
KNAPP vs.. Albert Billings, an action to re-
cover for injury received in an assault and
battery by the defendant, in which the
plaintiffs wrist was broken. The plain
i'd resides near the village OF Perkinsville
and is a day laborer. In July, 1901, the
defendant came to him to get him to as
sist in haying. He worked for defendant
J few days and on July 18th was on hand
II 1880 IN the morning. The defendant
expected the plaintiff at 5 o'clock, and SO
when plaintiff did come, defendant ac-
used him OF working at some other place
md coming to eat at his-defendantis- |
place. Belknap replied that IL defendant
vas not satisfied he Belknap-would 90
home again. Words were passed back and
orth and suddenly the defendant iumped /
It the plaintiff, grabbed him and carried
him TO the back piazza and threw him out
m the stone steps, breaking his wrist, as
he plaintiff claimed. After doing this.
defendant made the plaintiff go in and get /
Inner and then made him work at having I
he rest OF the day. In the evening be was
aid off and went home. The overseer ~ !
ne poor OF Weatherstield sent him doc. /
or. On the part of the defendant, it was
tanned that the remarks he made to the
'laintlh were in fun and that plaintiff got 1
mad and used proiane and insulting Ian
uagei that the defendant ordered him
ut ana he would not go, using more pro- /
anity. SO the defendant just put him {
ut, not using more force than was neces-
airy 10 e1pel MN; that he was not hurt, y
ny came IN and ate good dinner. The I
efendant was corroborated bv AN Ms :
lmily; the plaintiffs version was corrob-
rated by fellow hired man named Steele.
u an interview between the overseer Of
ne poor ana the defendant, the latter had
freed to pay s75 damages. and gave note
'r that sum, signed by himself and his
lother. The note was not paid when due
no plaintiff elected to bring this suit .
lther than sue the note. The jury found q
y lne pIalntlh IN the sum OF s75. &c.
j.. Davis Son for defendant. Il
Monday afternoon was taken mn the case
! Dr. Z. {. Ellis vs., Daniel Durkee. The =,
lalntlH lives at Somerville Mass de- -
ndant at Pomona, Cal. Both were for
erly residents OF Windsor county. The Al
alntlt Is native Of Barnard. defendant :
south koyalton. A jury was empan- ~
leo and the case was started when de "
ct was discovered in the declaration "
lalntih asked leave TO amend ana II was In
anted, ana then defendants counsel
~ they dld not think they could 90 on
ith the case under the amended desJaso Gu
on. They were given until Tnssds,, 20
ornlng TO see what they could do. Tbe1 a.
eey asked to have the case continued ul
mn J. wilson and w. b. c. Stirknev - liz
aintif; farbell & Whitman ara n n,