Spirit of the age. [volume] (Woodstock, Vt.) 1845-1913, 1911-08-19

This term did not, like Tennyson's
brook, run on forever. A final
adjournment was reached on the
forenoon OF August IL.
In. the case Of State VS.. Drown of
Chester, all the exceptions and
motions in arrest of the respondent
were overruled and the case passed
to the supreme court for further
consideration, and the bail of re-
spondent fixed at 5000. L. E. Sher-
win and Charles Batchelder for
respondent.
The case of Otis {. Sawyer VS..
Austin Howard was heard and
entered with the court. This was
an action to recover the amount Of
three notes. Wallace Batchelder for
plaintiff, William and Charles
Batchelder for defendant.
In the case OF William H. Frazier
VS.. Ray M. Baldwin, judgment was
entered to defendant to recover his
costs. This was an action of assump-
sit to collect taxes assessed in Spring
field, on the list of 1910, by trustee
process. The court found that the
town or village of Springfield had
complied with the law in voting and
levying the tax, but that the defend
ant on April /, 1910, was domiciled
in Dublin, N. II in which town he
was assessed in April 1910, and paid
taxes there. The court found that
defendant had not intended to make
his residence in Springfield Until he
got married in June, 1910. Charles
Batchelder for plaintiff. Davis &
Davis for defer tant. Exceptions by
plaintiff.
The case Of Frazier VS.. Wesley ].
Coville. was case to collect by
trustee process taxes assessed against
defendant in Springfield tax
assessed on the list OF April, 1910.
The court found that the defendants
home or place of residence April I,
1910, was in Weathersfield, on the
farm of which he owned one-third
and where he maintained furnished
room, kept his surplus clothing and
personal effects and was not in
Springfield, and rendered judgment
for defendant. Exceptions by plain
tiff. Charles Batchelder for plaintiff.
Davis & Davis for defendant.
In the case of Abbie Lockwood
VS.. Frank and Jessie M. LaDoux,
there was a contention as to whether
the defendants had paid for stock
of goods bought of plaintiff. The
court found for plaintiff to recover
$500 and interest and costs. Excep-
tions by defendant. F. c. Southgate
tor plaintiff. Davis & Davis for
defendant.
In the case of E. A. Stront & Co.
VS.. George G. Morse, the plaintiff
sought to recover 5000 balance due
for commission on sale of defendants
farm in Hartford. Ellis F. Eaton Of
Woodstock was the agent Of the
plaintiffs corporation and did the
busiress. There was written con-
tract that the plaintiff should have S
per cent. or all that was obtained
above $1,000. The farm sold tor
$1,000, but in order to make the sale
go Mr.. Morse had to 'throw in" a
pair Of oxen and other personal
to the amount of $500. The
plaintiff had already received $500
Of its commission. The court held |
that the "thrown in" property should
be deducted from plaintiffs commits
sion and rendered judgment for the
plaintiff for $500 Exceptions by |
both parties. F. c. Southgate and |
William Batchelder for plaintiff. |
Trainor for defendant.
State vs.. Intoxicating Liquor.
Philander Sargent, Claimant, Appt
This case was heard by the Court
IN July 18th. 1t appeared that in
Sov. 1910, Officers Kiniry, Taylor
md Cushman of Windsor, armed
With search, warrant, issued by
Justice Frank s. Hale, made search
# Mr.. Sargent's dwelling house in
and seized quantity of
and took the ardent before
Justice Hale, together with Mr.. Sar-
,ent
A hearing was had. but Mr.. Sar-
,ent offered no testimony in his own
'ehalf. He entered as claimant
+ the liquor Justice Hale sum
narily found that the liquor was
ept for sale contrary to law and