The Barre daily times. (Barre, Vt.) 1897-1959, 1920-10-06
UILLIAMS VERDICT g
VAS SUSTAINED
Vermont Supreme Court Orders Execu-
tion of Judgment, Finding No
Error in Lower Court.


e, at the first days session of the Octo.
Der term of court, which convened
Tuesday morning. In this number il
the case Of the state VS.. Frank G. Will
liams, former bank commissioner, NAL
feasance in office Justice l.. p. Slack
in reading the lengthy opinion in the
Williams case, stated that there was
no error in the proceedings below, that
| the respondent takes nothing by his
exceptions. Let execution be done"
In the lower court Mr.. Williams was
fined $500 and costs, having been
| found guilty of the offenses with which
he is charged.
| Justice Slack went into detail upon
the 80 odd exceptions that the defend
ant took as to the results, admission
of evidence and the refusal of the
court to allow certain evidence to be
| admitted.
He gave history of the case and
ruled that the admission of evidence
| before the time that the statute of
limitations expired. did not apply:
therefore, evidence showing shortage
before that time was admissible. He
defined closely the difference between
wilfull neglect and common neglect
and went on to show that after the
matter was called to the bank COM
missioners attention in 1918 there
should have been no neglect in the
effort of the commissioner. He took UP
the testimony of the different wit
nesses, showing their bearing upon the
evidence as introduced in the case;
said that this evidence was admissible;
that the books used by Mr.. Pratt were
memorandas and that they could be
used to refresh his memory; that the
reports were good evidence because
they were Vermont public documents
that when certain outstanding orders
were called to Williams attention it
became his duty TO investigate; it was
one OF his duties to make true re-
port of conditions and that an honest
report should have been made by him
of the conditions of the accounts in the
office.
Other opinions read were; Benning-
Payne, Judgment affirmed, the plaintiff
having received Sl575 damages in the
lower court; state vs. Eugene Sargood, |
assault, exceptions waived and judg |
ment affirmed, state VS.. Bryon Petit |
bone, exceptions waived, judgment that |
nc error occurred in the proceedings |
below, and that the respondent takes |
nothing by his exceptions.
Chittenden county: John w. Wright |
vs. Pscifque Guilmette, Judgment re
verted and cause remanded; Essex |
county: Joseph Goupiel We Grand |
Trunk Railway Co., Judgment reversed |
(the lower court ordered verdict for |
the defendant, Marshall brothers VS..
Canaan, exceptions dismissed; Frank |
lin county: Fred Bombard We. Park |
Judgment affirmed; Orange |
county. Rose May Daley VS.. Alden
Bond. bastardy, Judgment affirmed,
petition for new trial dismissed with
costs.
Orleans county: State VS.. Ward
Prouty, breach of peace, which involved
some trouble with his mother in-law,
Judgment that no error occurred in the
below. and that the re-
spondent takes nothing by his excep-
tons. let execution be done He re-
,eived an Imprisonment sentence and
was placed on probation, and fined $3.50
md costs.
Rutland county: James Greene, ct
II vs. Arthur Helme. ct al. Judgment
affirmed this was over right of way
o a cottage on Lake st. Catherine
shores, in which the defendant won in
L. l., hoTl 1
Il al. VS. Samuel n. Hangar, ct al,
Judgment affirmed and cause remsnded
which was a verdict for the plaintiff
Ia recover $685. Rutland Railway
light and Power Co. vs.. Burditt broth
rs. Judgment affirmed, which was in
avor of the defendants
Windham county: C. P. Underwood
s. S, J. Cray, petition for new trial
dismissed and in Cray VS. Underwood
he same entry with costs to petitioner
n each case.
Windsor county: lnez Norton VS. P.
Z Green, decree affirmed and cause
emanded, which was for the plain !
iff: Margie Gates, claimant vs.. A. G. |
)ewey Co, Judgment that award with {
ost in favor of the plaintiff and certi. I
ed back to commissioner of indus
ries: G. j. Sargent VS.. Frank Shep- ,
I'd Judgment affirmed, which was in ]
avor OF the plaintiff. e
Washington county: Russell y. Hol /
on vs.. r. v, Hassom, decree affirmed, t
nd cause remanded: A. A. Bianchi VS.. q
F. NIillar. Judgment affirmed in -
avor of the defendant, over an auto n
iobile accident in Barre; Robert Stew. I
rt vs.. the Barre and Montpelier Trac- e
ion and Power Co.. Judgment affirmed, a
living Stewart verdict Of $500 for b
n arm injured. when q pole hit him,
lille he was riding in a trolley car on r
street; Nat Page VS.. 7.
Cave. jr. decree affirmed and cause q
,manded (this case has been three
mes in the COURT. II. G. Hayden vs..
l. A. Hoadley, ct al. judgment re-
rrsed and cause remanded this was s.
YER the charging Of the jury; Cabot v
!. St Johnsbury. judgment affirmed, Q
i was over Cabot recovering from +
!. st. Johnsbury. Judgment affirmed, b
aylor and children. verdict was for c
le defendant the Lyndon case is h
milar. the facts being almost identi- "
ii. Harry =. Hawkins vs.. H. G. vii u
N. Judgment reversed and cause re Al
anded tthis was over an error in the 81
press rates in a shipment from Lyn y
,nville 20 Montpelier. N
As a result Of the many cases taken 81
7. il leaves on the published docket g
Gently issued, Addison county. none;
snnington. one. and one 20 be added, y
,ledonis. Is; Chittenden. -. EsseE. u
70. Franklin. two; Lsmoillo none.
-ange. two: Orleans. nine; Rutland,