The Barre daily times. (Barre, Vt.) 1897-1959, 1922-04-29
OVER so OARRESTS.lNADE
AFTER POLICEMEN HAD
BEEN BADL Y BEA TEN UP
MONTPELIER
Leonard Doten Found Not Guilty Of
Selling Milk Without a License.

Selling Milk Without a License.
The jury in the citys case against
Leonard Doten for dealing in milk
without license returned verdict OF
not guilty about Is minutes after the
case was placed in their hands yester-
day afternoon, The validity of the
milk ordinance passed by the city did
not play part in the trial, as had
been expected, owing to ruling by
Acting City Judge H. G. Shurtleff that
the ordinance did not affect Doten's
license, which was granted before the
ordinance was passed.
Judge Shurtleff in his charge to the
jury gave them two questions to de
eide: /. Was the respondent in the
milk business, and 2, had he license
The consideration of the second ques
tion depended on an affirmative deci-
sion on the first, Judge Shurtleff
stated
Following the noon recess, Attorney
Carver moved for direct verdict for
the respondent, but Judge Shurtlcff de.
MED the motion.
Attorney Hunt, in his argument, first
read the provision of the city milk
ordinance providing that milk can not
be sold without a license. This ordi-
nance, he stated, was passed Oct. II /
1921, and took effect Oct. 20, 1921, |
On Jan. 30, 1922, Doten sold milk with
out license, he argued, on the ground |
that his license had been previously re-
Toked He read Doten's application
70 the Montpelier board Of health for
| license to sell milk, and stated that |
IN the face of such an application. the
'rottenest kind of milk" could be sold
~ a few occasions, since there was no
mention made of carrying on bust
less Of selling milk. The limitations
imposed by the city, he argued. were
till in state Of development at that
ime, and the license was granted be-
ore the ordinance OF Oct. Ii was
'assed, and, therefore, was controlled
My by the state law. Regulation by
he city in addition was granted by the
lst legislature, he stated.
To the statement that the license
Tas granted ''under the state law At
orney Carver objected as matter of
Nv, since the license was signed by
ity Clerk T. r. Merrill. who is clerk
{ the city council. Attorney Hunt
nswered with the argument that il
ne counci! granted the license, they
ionld have power to revoke it, and
nded by asking the jury whether a
ian who violated city ordinance
as guilty of nothing
He was followed by A. c. Theriault, Z
.torney for Mr.. Doten, who took up .
'veral different angles Of Mr.. Hunts d
'gument, and advanced other points c
his clients favor. $
He denied that Mr.. Doten was en-
lged in the business of selling milk, {
I'd argued that the city council could a
It revoke his license because it was c
anted before the adoption Of the I
ilk ordinance. In regard to the re- ;
ondents alleged refusal to have his p
rd tested. he argued that the state
'estock department. Ailed to ac- i
'owledge receipt of Doten's applica o
IN for nine months after it was sent
them.
J. Ward Carver argued for the re
ondent that he sold milk only in T
nnectiop with the running of his
rm. which he argued. was the re-
principal business. Mr.. Do
a had a license in force, and il could p
{ be revoked by the city council. he OF
yued, and stated that the board of Of
alth had never made any complaint &C
regard TO the milk he was selling. sa
Attorney Hunt closed by summing W
his former arguments. OF
Judge Shurtlef designated William be
own as foreman of the jury, but re
!. Brown asked TO be excused and th
lliam B. Turney was designated in es
place. The jury consisted of Will gr
m Brown, w. B. Turney, Robert
oss, Marshall l.. Wood, d. A. Perry, ia
INK c. Cory, Frank w. Nichols, an
liter c. Lamphere, d. J. Murray, M
,rge Stesart, George Smiley and sf
mes Pembroke. Frank Z. Lowe. Gle
o was drawn for the jury, was ex- sic
ed because he stated he had formed Br
opinion in regard TO the case. He ha
4 he considered the tuberculin test
farce w. J. Fisher, who was also Ne
wn. was not present because of dr.