Putnam patriot., 1914-01-30
SALE ORDERED Of Seventeen Horses Under Attach.
 ment
H. II. Davenport pIaintifi Ia lase


 A motion was heard in the common pleas court at Hartford Monday in the case of Henry H. Davenport of Pom fret vs James N. Upton of Manchester. The motion was for the sale of seven- teen horses under attachment by Mir. Davenport in suit returnable to the Windham county superior court. In support of the motion to sell the horses it was claimed that the keeping of the horses was continuous expense, 1t costing e5 cents day for their keep. An order for the sale of the horses was granted.
 From the testimony 1t WAS disclosed that MT. Davenport is now an iuspec- tor of highways in Windham county for the state highway commissioner, but back in 1910 he was In the horse business, and sold horses 10 Upton. Upton, apparently, did not keep his agreements as to payments, and on May 10, 1913, the writ in the suit now pending in Windham county was is- sued. On that same day the deputy sheriff started service under 1t. He at taehed nineteen horses, wagons, carts and harnesses and the real estate own ed by Upton. On May 12, 1918, John T. Robertson gave to the deputy sher. iii a receipt for the attachment and on the delivery of the receipt the personal  property attached was returned to Up- ton, and remained in his possession until last Thursday, when Mir. Robert surrender it, but the deputy sheriff said on the witness stand that there were but seventeen horses returned to him instead of nineteen which he had attached, and some of the personal property was also missing. The two horses, it was explained had been re- turned to Mr. Davenport and it was said that he had made an allowance for them on account of the original bill.
 c. w. Jenks, who is Upton's step son, put valuation of Sl, l92.50 on the personal propertytaside from the horses. The material part of the testimony given by Jenks was that on May 9, after the suit had been brought, Mr. Davenport called at Upton's home and as the result of that-yisiis he s-s'aid that it was agreed that the suit was To be dropped; that Upton then agreed as to the amount that was due DaVen- port, that is S3, ,3SSSl, and that Upton gave Davenport a note for the amount and an agreement was entered into by which Upton was to pay Sl00 month on the bill and that Davenport said that if Upton did not pay Sl00 month, but paid what he could, he would be satisfied, if the bill was paid within three years. It was disclosed that bad paid about S400 on account of the bill and it was said that since that time there have been no, further pro- ceedings in the action pending in Windham county.
 Upton and his wife gave corrobora- tive testimony as to the alleged agree ment.
 MT. Davenport admitted being at MT. Upton's house on May 22 and again in the early part of June. He admitted to the agreed amount of the indebtedness as disclosed by the paper MT. Burke had offered. He said that Mrs. Upton had disputed the amount of his bill. He went to the house to see about it, and they agreed as to the amount that was due so there could be no dispute about it. He denied he got a new note from Upton, but admitted that he agreed that if Upton would pay him S100 month on the indebted ness that would be satisfactory and he said that it was understood that If the payments were not made he was to take the property. He denied that he had made any agreement to withdraw the suit and the attachment. Upton had failed to make the payments as agreed, MT. Davenport said.