The Brattleboro reformer. (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1907-1912, 1910-07-08
GETS VERDICT OF
$3.50 AGAINST TOWN
Frank o. Carpenter Brought Suit
For Sll2.5i.
FOR WORK DONE ON HIGHWAY.
Case Tried Yesterday Before Justice L.
II. Lynde and a Dummorsten jury
Which Brought in Verdict After 10
Minutes Consideration.

Minutes Consideration.
The suit Of Frank q. Carpente
against the town Of Brniilcboro afic
/ four eoniinuances was brought 10 tria
before Justice Lewis II. Lynde oi
Dummersion ia the municipal eour
room Yesterday and after an all da'
session the Jury gave the plainiih
| Judgment TO recover $3.50. An appea
was taken by r. l.. Barber appearing
for II, q. Barber. who was associate
with 4. H. Carpenter as counsel for th'
town. The plaintiff was represented
by Gibson a Waterman. The suit grew
out Of certain work done on a highway
near the home Of Frank q. carpeniel
In December, 1905, and the plainiiil
J contended that the work was done up
on n verbal contract made by him will
Carleton NJ. Hamilton. at that time road
commissioner. The amount OF the bil
presented by Mr.. Carpenter was sll2.oi
divided into several items, among
which were items for labor by himself
and his brother. George Carpenter. and
tiff's land by reason of its use while
the damage that resulted TO the PLAIN
the piece of road in question was being
constructed. Court opened at clock
Yesterday morning and the following
men from Dummerston were empanelled
as a Jury: &. X. Crosby, +. G. Tenney,
A. T.. Robbins. W. II. Leonard, A. q.
Norcross and Frank O. Downes. Mr..
Tennev was the foreman. As the mat.
ter in question concerned the town Of
Brattleboro IL was necessary TO secure
a Jury from out Of town. Constable
Chauncey !. KnaDp, was the court OF,
iiccr. Miss Katherine q. Dunlevy ana
Miss Florence Skinner were the. report
ers of the testimony. The witnesses
who testified were c. NJ. Hamilton, +.
q. Carpenter. Thomas Doyle, W; a..
Harris. George Carpenter. X. n. Hes
cock. John =. Sargent. Frank Marlin
and G. T.. Mann for the plaintiff; The
defense called W. I. Walker and Viii
liam III. Vinton, selectmen at the time
the road in question was built. j: 4.
sargent. who succeeded Mr.. Hamilton
ms road commissioner, c. Nj. Hamilton
and John Calvin.
The testimony introduced by the
plaintiff was to show that the plain
tiff did make contract with Mr.
Hamilton, the road commissioner, TO DO
the work despite the statements made
by the old board of selectmen that
thew knew nothing of such contract.
Mr.. Doyle was put on the stand by the
plaintiff to corroborate the statement
of the plaintiff that such an agreement
was made with Mr.. Hamilton. Mr.:
DOYLE had distinct recollection of
hearing such conversation.
The testimony of the other witnesses
presented by the plaintiff tended to
show that Mr.. Carpenter did the work
for which he sought pay. The original
bill presented by the plaintiff was found
TO have certain notation or figures made
upon it which the plaintiff claimed had
been done by Mr.. Hamilton, the retir-
ing road commissioner, in company wlth
J. p. Sargent, the new commissioner.
This evidence was introduced to show
that the town, through its road com
did acknowledge its liabii-
ity and had attempted to divide the
cost of the bill presented by Mr.. Car
penter between the plaintiff and the
town. This was done, the plaintlif
attorney claimed, on the ground that
the town believed that certain por.
ton of the work done by the plaintlf
should be borne by Mr.. Carpenter ac-
cording to an agreement with the PLAIN
tiff to that effect.
The defense entered general deni'
al as to its responsibility in the matter
and sought to show by the testimony
Of Mr.. Walker and Mr.. Vinton that no
contract ever existed between the town
and Mr.. Carpenter for doing the work
that the plaintiff performed. There
was no denial that the plaintiff did
such work but the contention OF tne
defense was that he did so upon his
own responsibility and solely because
he was the vitally interested party IN
having certain changes made IN the
road and that such changes enhanced
the value of his property by giving
him better road to market and en-.
abled him to have his mail delivered
laily by rural carrier. Many ex,
hibits were introduced in the form of
bills and drawings includ-
ing a copy Of the familiar colored post
,ard of the Carpenter homestead IN
apple blossom time:
In summing up for the defense "A. I.
Carpenter went carefully over. the tes,
timonv introduced on both sides. and
insisted that the contentious of the
plaintiff had not been sustained by the
evidence and that the jury should fnd
that there was not such contract IN
existence as Mr.. Carpenter claimed. II.
G. Barber for the defense said the Jury
should decide between the testimony OF
he plaintiff as to the existence OF such
a contract and the testimony OF Mr.
Walker and Mr.. Vinton. Mr.. Baroer
laid special stress upon the standlng
Of both of these former selectmen in
the town and said that their tes-
timony should outweigh that of the
plaintiff. Mr.. Gibson summed up FOR
the plaintiff and said that no one de-
MED that Mr.. Carpenter performed the
work claimed in his bill and he. called
Il nranosterons for any one to believe |