Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1910-10-07
BRATTLEBORO LOCAL
THINKS TRIAL JUDGE ERRED.
Central Vermont Road crltlclses Judge
Taylor's Ruling in Llsle Carpenter Case
Writ Of certlorar Sought

Central Vermont Road crltoses Judge
Taylor's Ruling In Llsle Carpenter Case
Writ Of certorarl Sought.
A new moye was made Wednesday in
the suit of Isle NJ. Carpenter against
the Central Vermont Railway company
which is suit to recover damages in
the sum of $4,000 for injuries received in
railroad accident. Counsel for the
railroad company, Clarke c. Fits,
brought a petition In the supreme court
for writ OF certiorari commanding the
county court to send up the records in
the case in order that the judgment of
the county court may be reviewed. Glib
son & Waterman are counsel for Mr.
Carpenter The petitioner in the case
before the supreme court, which is en-
titled Central Vermont Railway com
pany VS. Lisle NJ. Carpenter" filed pc
tition with the county court for a change
Of venue, submitting afiidavits and news
papers which IL was claimed showed that
such sentiment existed in this county
against the railroad company on account
of the recent strike that an impartial
trial could not be had in Windham
county, wherefore 1t was asked that trial
be had in some other county. Objection
also was made to the affdavits in behalf
OF Mr. Carpenter. on the ground that
they were not expressions of fact but OF
judgment. Judge William H. Taylor de-
MED the petition for a change Of venue.
In his ruling Judge Taylor said that he
rejected from consideration all express
sions Of opinion and all statements APP
pearing to be hearsay. He failed to find
that there was reason to believe that the
case could not be tried impartially in
this county, and said. Il am not unmind-
full Of the fact that the evidence discloses
state Of mind on the part OF consider
~ In In,
lions Of the county, notably in Brattle-
boro, inimiCal to an impartial trial; but
the test Is not whether there Is such a
state OF feeling in some locality within
the county" He said he was not con-
WINGED from the evidence that much pre-
Judice against the road existed in the
county outside Of Brattleboro and that
the inference OF prejudice from enforced
suspension Of business was fully met by
the testimony of business men and others
throughout the county in a position to
know the trend OF public sentiment in
their localities. He said further that the
newspaper articles In evidence contained
little criticism Of the road or its officers
and might well impress the readers with
the belief that the railroad company was
acting fairly with its employees
The company complains that the judge
erred in his findings i'm 10 particulars.
among them being the following: In the
failure 10 rule that il a prejudice against
the railroad likely 20 impcru its chances
for AN impartial trial exists In any con-
siderable portion of the county the venue
should he changed; In his failure to rule
that the prejudice imperiling the chances
Tor an impartial trial need not exist
throughout the county hut that the COM
pany Is entitled to have freedom from
such prejudice through substantially the
whole county; in his failure 10 rule that
gHr....