Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1906-02-16

witness testified to the contrary we find
that at the time of giving said checks.
and for some months after, he did not
know there was a bar connected with the
house, or that Intoxicating LIQUOR was
being sold therein; that he never was in
the bar, and never saw anyone going into
1t; that he usually went into the dining
room from the hall, ate his meal, and
went out
That there was not a word said at the
time said checks were given, or before or
after, about his protecting said Richards
or giving him immunity from arrest, and
we find that he never directly or indirectly
favored or protected said Richards.
No complaint was ever made to him
until about December 8, 1895, when he
learned that said Richards had a United
States revenue stamp as a retail liquor
dealer, and Immediately upon receiving
such Information, and on December 5,
1895, said Fits, as states attorney made
complaint against said Richards, as a
common seller Of intoxicating liquor, re-
turnable before w. S. Newton, justice
OF the peace, and on the same date said
Richards appeared, plead guilty, and was
fined 500 and costs which he paid
No further complaint was made to
said Fits but on August 20. 1896, upon
disclosure OF one Michael Barrett, who
was arrested fined for intoxication, and
made disclosure, said Fits, as states at
torney, made a complaint against said
Richards for selling, returnable before
said w. s. Newton, justice of the peace
and on the same date said Richards ap-
peared, plead guilty to two first offences
and was fined $50 and costs which he paid
Subsequently said Richards sold out to
his son-in-law, against whom said Fits
as attorney for the Law and Order league
made complaint to his successor, Charles
H. Robb.
AS attorney for the Law and Order
league, said Fits was active with other
attorneys and citizens OF Brattleboro In
preventing one Fred C. Gale (whose am
davft was presented with the petition)
from securing a license just across the
river, In New Hampshire.
At about this time (the exact date did
not appear) said Fred c. Gale obtained
the $3.50 check signed by said Fits either
from or by order OF said Richards and
threatened to sue the same.
On August 10, 1898, said Gale brought
suit against said Fits returnable before
F. G. Taylor. justice of the peace, al
Brattleboro, on August 20, 1898, declaring
In general assumpslt; on trial the speci-
fication was for the Fits check" and
the plea was payment. The case was
tried before said justice and jury on the
date of its return.
The jury returned a verdict through E
H. Putnam, foreman, for the defendant
to recover his costs and the court rendered
Judgment accordingly.
A few days before the date of trial, upon
the request Of said Fits, A. F. Schwenk
Esq, accompanied him to Winchester
N. H.,-about IL miles from Brattleboro
where said George z. Richards then lived
and in the presence Of said Schwenf, said
Fits told Richards that a suit had been
brought upon said Fits check" and
a rad xryHx ha LAT Col 10
to Richards that he knew II was paid
which Richards admitted. and said he lei
Gale have 1t because "he thought II might
help him some In his matters" Said
Schwenk further testified as follows
Fits asked Richards to come and tes-
tify; he said he would not; Fits says
isn't there some way you can let the
court know the check has been PAID; he
said II will authorize Schwenk to go in
there as my counsel and say to the court
that say the check. has been paid" and
did do that in court
Said Gale was present during the giving
Of the last quoted testimony but did not
testify.
1t appeared that said George r Rich
ards, was, during the hearing in the state
of Michigan.
The following kilograms, marked 'Ex-
hibit T. were received in evidence without
objection. and 1t was conceded that II said
Richards were present he would 80 testify.
ITO George e. Richards.
Union City. Mich,
did Fits pay you any cash. for his
check Of one hundred and thirty dollars
Answer.
ITO F. c. Gale.
mo. Just as 1t was when we left there
George e. Richards"
Upon careful consideration OF all the
evidence and circumstances before us
bearing upon the first specification in the
petition we and that no unprofesslonal
conduct on the part OF said Clarke c.
Fits has been established.
The s. A. Smith & Co. Collection.
We find that on or about the 10th day
Of February, 1898. the firm Of c. Bailey &
Ottinger, Bros. of Kinston, in the state
of North Carolina, sent to said Fits for
collection claim Of $500 and some in
terest against s. A. Smith & Co., OF Brat
tleboro, VT.
It appeared at once that the claim was
disputed, and suit was brought thereon by
said Fits. returnable to the Windham
county court; the writ bearing date Feb
ruary 90 1898, and the suit being entered
before the March term. 1898, Of said court.
The suit was a difficult one, certain
questions arising under the patent laws,
and as said Fits had at that time been
in practice but about one year he retained
Lavant M. Reed, ESQ. Of Below Falls, to
assist him, and duly notified his clients OF
such retainer
Such proceedings were had in the case
that judgment was rendered for the
plaintiffs, and on the 26th day Of Deem
Der, 1898, the defendants gave a check to
their counsel, Waterman, Martin & Hit.
in the sum OF sS9629 to pay the damages
and costs recovered against them.
The check was endorsed by said Water
man, Martin Hit to the order OF said
G. G. Fits; said Fits endorsed the check
and deposited It In his private bank ac-
count.
The evidence tended TO show. and we
ind the fact to be that said Fits. at
about 1S years OF age. went into the lime
business, that the enterprise proved a