Middlebury register. (Middlebury, Vt.) 1886-1937, 1904-07-08
COUNTY COURT.

pending and the dockets were pretty
well cleared up when the final adjourn
ment was taken
Court came in at 8 o'clock Friday
morning after recess from Wednesday
noon. when the case of the first National
Bank of Bristol VS.. George A, Scar
borough and others, as trustees, was
resumed. This case took up nearly all
of the day Friday and was not finished
until after / o'clock Saturday In this
case the parties summoned as trustees of
defendant Scarborough disclosed that
they had no funds on credit belonging to
Scarborough, and large share of the
time of the defense was given up to
efforts to show that Mr.. Scarborough
had nothing with which to pay judg-
ment if one were given against him.
there was no consideration for the note
which Scarborough signed jointly with
Henry G.. Mullings. When the decisions
were rendered Saturday this case was
marked with the court" and the judg-
ment will come in vacation, w. W.
Ryder of Bristol and P. NJ. Meldon of
Rutland for the plaintiff; Cushman and
Russell of Burlington and Middlebury
for the defense.
In the afternoon of Friday the case of
John Donah of Shoreham was called up.
This was an information charging breach
of the peace by simple assault, the time
and place being in January last at Shore
ham, since which time the respondent
has been in Jail here under bonds, with
the exception of the last four or five
weeks, when he was in the State asylum
for the insane at Waterbury, the res
pondent having developed symptoms of
what some people thought to be insan-
ity. Donah pleaded guilty to the charge
of simple assault, which had been toned
down from the original charge of assault
with intent to kill, and was sentenced to
serve not more than three months and
not less than two months and twenty
days in the House of Correction at Rut-
land. Ira. II. LaFleur appeared for the
respondent.
Friday evening just before the recess
for the night, a number of cases on the
chancery docket We're taken up and
DEGREES of foreclosure, with the custom
airy years equity of redemption, We're
entered in several cases.
Upon the coming in of court Saturday
morning the divorce cases which had
been heard but in which decisions had
not previously been rendered were dis
posed Of These were:
AIDA Lowell VS.. Julius Lowell heard
June 25 Bill granted for desertion.
Ira H. LaFleur for the petitioner: un-
contested.
William H. Kingsley VS.. Electa H.
Kingsley. Bill not granted but case
continued and petitioner given leave to
amend petition by the insertion of other
causes. Judge w. H. Bliss for the
petitioner; no contest. Case heard
June "a.
George Downey VS.. Nellie Downey.
Heard June %. Bill granted for adul-
terry. w. w. Rider for petitioner; no
appearance for the wife.
Eta NJ. Grant VS.. Walter F. Grant.
Heard June %. This was the case COM
ing down from Lincoln in which intol-
cradle severity and refusal to support
were set up. The court felt disinclined
to grant the bill on the evidence pre-
sented, but intimated that the petitioner
had perhaps a good case for divorce on
another ground, and the case was con.
tinued with permission to the petitioner
to amend, and the whole matter left
open. Mr.. Rider for the petitioner. Nc
contest.
Flora W. Mack vs. Arthur II. Mack
Heard June "a. Bill granted for deser
tion. Charles F. Kingsley of Salisbury
; for the petitioner and again no appear.
ance for the husband.
When the Bristol Bank VS.. Scar
borough case had been gotten out of the
way the following matters were dis
posed of:
Frank +. Farmer VS.. Town of Sails
bury, appellant Heard June q. Judg
ment that the town is liable for DR.
Farmers services and the whole bill
claimed allowed. Cushman and Russell
for the plaintiff; Kingsley and Frank l.
Fish for Salisbury. The defendant tow
will take the case to the supreme court
William w. Rider VS.. George Swnyer
Heard June "a. Two notes given il
1890 and aggregating SlS5, which, witt
, accumulated interest, amounted to abou
S400. The claim of the defense was tina
4 the notes were outlawed, while tn
: plaintiff claimed that the signature o
the witness to the signature of the make
of the notes, who signed by mark, wa
also a signature to the body of the notes
thus keeping them within the statute Q
limitations for IA years. The court too
this view of the matter and held tn
notes to be witnessed notes and so nc
barred; and the judgment was for tn
plaintiff to recover the amount of tn
notes. Mr.. Rider, the plaintiff, wa
). assisted by Judge Bliss, and j j. Wilso
of Bethel and f, L, Fish represented til
defendant.
Emma C. Eldridge VS.. Joel II. Luci
ct. al. Heard June 27. This was or
ginally petition TO the probate court