Middlebury register. (Middlebury, Vt.) 1886-1937, 1908-06-05
ADDISON COUNTY COURT
Plenty of Business on Hand-Five
Cases Against Railroad
Rooked

u .Noi ii7N NV 10 the CIlti JuuBe pTtShiIiR,
and the assistant Judges are Hon. E. A.
Fl Id of Panton and Hon. Frank c.
Dyer Of West Salisbury. The other
officers of the court are Rufus VAIN
wright, Eq, of Middlebury, clerk; Olin
A. Smith of Addison, sheriff. with fifteen
deputies: Leroy c. Russell of Middebury,
States Attorney: Miss Ella NJ. Ballon of
Rutland, Photographic reporter: Charles
E. Pnney of Middlebury, treasurer;
Thomas Wilson of New Haven, n. w.
Foster of Whiting and William Noonan
of Addison, county road commissioners;
and DIN A. Smith, probation officer.
Among the attorneys present during
the day from out of town were Elk. Gov.
E. j. Ormsbee and j. w. Atwell of
Brandon, P M. Meldon and Robert A.
Lawson of Rutland, Wallace w. Rider
and A. G. Benedict of Bristol. Frank l..
Fish and F. w. futile of Vergennes. and
]. E. Cushman, Rufus E. Brown, NJ. G.
Leary, John j. Enright and j. w. Page
of Burlington.
Rev. w. H. Washburne offered the
prayer and Sheriff Smith made the
proclamation for the opening of the
County Court and Court of Chancery.
The cases on the jury calendar were next
called and the following ten were marked
for trial: Chester H. Broughn, by his
next friend, appellant, VS.. L. o. Allen;
Raymond Mumley VS.. the Rutland Rail
road Company D. j. Long VS.. the
Middlebury Vermont Marble Company;
Florence Cota's administrators VS.. the
R,ttI nd DOLL n
VS.. the Rutland Railroad Company !;
John w. Hodges and William G. Gee vs.
S. G.. Tidsdale, appellant o. G. Huntley
VS.. the Rutland Railroad Company |;
Charles w. Otis VS.. the Town of Bridport
appellant; A. P. Needham VS.. the Boston
and Maine Railroad Company.
The following cases were marked set
tied and discontinued: Eula May Hill vs.
Abraham Williamsons administrator,
appellant; William Melain VS.. Frank G..
Lavarn; John H. Barron ct al. vs. H. E.
Hack, and S. G. Gibbs VS.. A. J. Green
wood ct al.
These cases were continued: John A.
Agnew & Co. vs.. R. E. French ct al. and
trustee, the Brandon National bank and
Noah Lathrop VS.. Frank G. Lavarn.
These cases were left open for the time
being: Cornelia Slows administrator,
appellant, VS.. Nellie g. Barnard's admin
istrator; Patrick Simon VS.. S. w. Hindes
and H. H. Hickok Thomas 2. NoonaD S
administrator VS.. Martin Fuller: Joseph
Blaze VS.. Will and Eddie Hodson, and
George H. Hallock VS.. Hubbard C. Potter
The case In re Will of Caroline w.
Rogers, John @. Adams ct al, contest
ants and appellants, was taken from the
jury calendar and set for trial by the
court This case involves some Sc, 900 or
81, 900 worth of property in risburgh
and has already been twice tried by jury.
The first trial resulted in the sustaining
of the will proposed and the second trial
in December last-resulted in disa
greement
In the case In re Will of Huldah n.
Brevort DIN, Marian McKinstry, pro-
ponent and appellant, a motion was made
for change of venue in behalf of the
proponent. Judge Powers did not think
the reasons suggested warranted the
sending of the case to another county
for trial, and in the afternoon denied the
motion without prejudice, and the CASE
was continued.
On the court calendar the following
cases were set for trial: H. B. Hagar
Administrator, VS.. A. G. Freegard anc
Estate of Calvin Norton VS.. Sarah w
Freegard's executor, trustee; S. d. Keye.
and Co. VS.. George E. Farr; ALFRED
Laduke VS.. James NJ. Meacham, appel
liant; S. c. Dixie VS.. Frank G. Lavarr
and George H. Blood VS.. Alex Bearor
These cases were entered, settled anC
discontinued: Ben Vincent vs. Luther
Varney, appellant, and George LathroE
VS.. Ed. Keton, ct al.
The general law docket was mex
called. Twenty-three criminal cases
were marked for trial and Is petitions
for divorce were set down for bearings
The two most important criminal cases
are indictments against w. o. Cutler
train dispatcher at Rutland, and Georg,
Murray of Rutland, the engineer of til,
gravel train which ran into the north
bound morning accommodation train, neal
Vergennes, with such disastrous results
on the first of December, 1906. Agains
one George Phillips there are five inform
atoms, three charging larceny and thu
other two burglary. Phillips is under
stood to be beyond the jurisdiction of tn,
court. The remaining criminal case
are mostly small affairs, the offence
being fishing contrary to law, shooting
deer out of season, breach of the peace
and such like. The cases of State VS.
w. u. simpson ana state VS.. Ernes
Cameron, both for illegal fishing, wer,
mol pressed on the recommendation o
States Attorney Russell, and the case o
James Ella, appellant, was ordered mo
to be brought forward, the responder
now being in the hands of the probation
officer
Many of the civil cases on the genera
docket were continued. The following
were entered, settled and discontinued
James w. Peck VS.. A. E. Brown
appellant William Doaner VS.. Jan
Smith, ct al, appellants; Ann Smith vs.
William Doaner, appellant ; d. j
Ormsbee VS.. Emerson Perry's admin
strator byAdelaide A. p Hunt, appellant
Levi c. Manley VS.. Gustavus Manley
: appellant Felix Bodette VS.. Henry T
Bodette; Jacob Canton vs. F. Landol
and Sons, and the International Har
vester Company, by its agent, George R
Waite VS.. William H. Farnum. Severa
, MAMA loft oman In tho cosa n