Volume 9 — New Hampshire Reports

Case. The first count in the declaration, after the usual averment that the plaintiff was of good fame, &c. alleged that the defendant, on the seventh of August, 1835, maliei-ciously, and without probable cause, made and swore to a false and malicious complaint, which was then set forth at large, addressed to Charles W. Woodman, Esq., one of the justices of the peace, &c,, and in which the plaintiff was charged with stealing four oxen, the property of the defendant.

This was an action of assumpsit for $500.00 money had and received, and $50(t00 money paid, laid out and expended. The plaintiffs, in their specification, claimed to recover $425.00, with interest on the same from October 10, 1832.

This was a writ of entry, to recover seizin and possession of certain land situated in Chester. The land was originally owned by Thomas Coffin ; and on the 17th of August, 1827, he mortgaged the same to John Coffin, to indemnify him for his liability as surety to said Thomas on a note to Merrimack County Bank, and a note to Moses Coffin ; also, for the payment of a note of T. & E. Coffin to John Coffin.

This was a writ of entry, brought to recover a tract of land in Sandwich, and was tried upon the general issue at August term, 1837. It was admitted that tenant was once lawfully seized of the demanded premises.

This was a writ of entry, brought to recover a tract of land in Strafford, in this county, and was tried at January term, 1837, upon the general issue, and a verdict taken by consent for the demandant, subject to the opinion of the court upon the following case. For many years previous to the year 1834, A. N. Hill had been in possession of the demanded premises.

Indictment for publishing a false, malicious, and defamatory libel upon Lyman B. Walker, at the time solicitor for the county of Strafford, in the form of an address, or petition to the Senate and House of Representatives, containing allegations that said Walker was intemperate, incompetent to the discharge of the duties of his said office, had misconducted in many instances, and that his character was notoriously immoral, and praying for his removal from office.

Assumpsit upon a joint and several promissory note, signed by the defendant and one Jethro Sanborn, dated May 17, 1827, payable to plaintiff, or order, on demand, with interest. The defendant pleaded the statute of limitations. In order to take the case out of the statute, the plaintiff offered evidence, that a few days before the commencement of this suit, the defendant came to the plaintiff’s attorney, and requested to see tjbe note, which was exhibited to him.

This was a writ of entry, brought to recover a tract of land in Tuftonborough, and was submitted to the decision of the court upon the following facts : Park Dewitt, being seized of the demanded premises, by deed dated May 10, 1833, and recorded May 13, in the same year, conveyed the same premises to the demandant in fee.

Assumpsit for money had and received. On the trial, the plaintiff produced the following memorandum in writing, viz : “ Borrowed of Noah Martin, for the Co., one hundred and fifty dollars. C. Cutler.

Assumpsit upon an account annexed, for boarding and nursing one George Pickering seventeen days, in March, 1832. Upon the trial, it appeared in evidence that the plaintiff was an inhabitant of Gilmanton, and that said Pickering, who had his legal settlement in Barnstead, was sick at his house, and unable to. support himself, at the time mentioned in the account.

This was debt against the defendant, a justice of the peace, to recover of him a penalty of $30, under the statute of December 23d, 1820⅜ for demanding and receiving of one Stephen Leighton greater fees than were allowed by law, for the copies of a ease in favor of Geo. S. Evans against said Stephen Leighton, which had been tried before said Walker, and carried by appeal to the court of common pleas. Plea, nil debet.

Debt upon a bond. The writ in this case was served upon Smith only, and. a return of non est inventus was made as to the other two defendants named in the writ.

Trespass, for five hundred logs. Plea, the general issue. It appeared in evidence that one Samuel C. Shapley, having a large number of logs on a tract of land in Farmington, made a written contract with the plaintiff, as follows : “ I hereby agree to haul, for S. C. Shapley, all the hemlock and spruce logs he has now fell on his lot, to the river, by or before April, 1835, at five shillings per M., provided he does not sell them on the lot—the said Shapley to cut the logs.

Writ op entry, to recover a tract of land situated in Barrington. The defendant pleaded the general issue. It appeared from the evidence, that on the 3d day of Jan. 1817, the defendant, being seized and possessed of the demanded premises, mortgaged the same to Stephen Paul, to secure the payment of a promissory note.

Trespass, for breaking and entering the plaintiff’s close, in Sutton, and cutting and carrying away his rye, there standing and growing. The cause was tried upon the general issue, with a brief statement of the facts upon which the defendant relied as an answer to this action.

Thespass quare clausum fregit. The defendant pleaded the general issue, and filed a brief statement, setting forth that one James Emerson was tenant, in common with the plaintiff, of the close described in the declaration, when the trespasses complained of were committed, and that, after the commencement of the action, said Emerson released to the defendant said trespasses.

Thespass, for taking and carrying away, from the possession of the plaintiff, a two horse wagon.

Covknant. The declaration alleged, that on the 20th of June, '1835, by an indenture made between the parties, the plaintiff demised to the defendants one complete set of stereotype quarto bible plates, made for the plaintiff by Luther Roby, and also the stereotype plates of a concise geography, &c., (with divers other plates, which were enumerated) to have and to hold for the term of twelve years, yielding and paying therefor the yearly relit of $400, in half yearly…

This was an action on the case, for erecting and continuing a dam across Blackwater river, in Boscawen, and thus overflowing the land of the plaintiffs from 26th January, 1833, to 1st January, 1834, when this action was commenced. The cause was tried upon the general issue, and verdict taken by consent for the plaintiffs, for $1 damages, subject to the opinion of the court upon the following case.

Assumpsit, founded on account annexed to the writ, and upon a promissory note which appeared to have been given by the defendant for the articles mentioned in the account. The defendant appeared by guardian; and the defence was, that at the time of executing said note, and at the time when the articles were charged, the defendant was under guardianship.

This was an indictment for perjury. The indictment alleged that on the 26th of August, 1836, one Joseph Lou-gee made a complaint in due form of law, before Caleb Sleeper, Esq., one of the justices of the peace for the county of Merrimack, against Thomas Sweat. William Knowlton, and Amos Peaslee, for an assault made by them upon one Joseph Lougee, Jr., for false imprisonment of the said Lougee.

This was a writ of entry, to recover seizin and possession of a tract of land, situated partly in Dunstable and partly in Hollis, containing about twenty-four acres. Held: Blood having conveyed by warrantee deed, that if the land conveyed by him extended to the tenant’s land, and was bounded upon it, it made no difference whether the submission and award were before the execution of Blood’s deed, or after-wards.

Assumpsit. The defendant pleaded the general issue, and paid into court under the common rule $7. When the cause wa.s called to be tried, the plaintiff elected not to take the amount brought into court, in full satisfaction of his demand, and the cause was opened to the jury.

Assumpsit, for the support of William Otis, a pauper, alleged to have his settlement in the town of Hollis, which was admitted. It appeared that he was committed to the gaol in Amherst on the 2d September, 1835, by virtue of an execution ; where he has ever since remained, in close custody: and that he has been, during all that time, apparently without any property, and has, to all appearance, stood ill need of relief as a pauper.

Case, for that the defendants, on the 1st January, 1832,in consideration that the plaintiff promised the defendants to pay them the sum of $42.40, bargained and sold to the plaintiff 848 lbs, of lean pork; and, upon making said bargain and sale, the defendants warranted the pork to be wholesome and free from any taint.

Writ of entry, to recover seizin and possession of a tract of land in Bedford, being the former homestead of the plaintiff.

Debt Upon a bond made by the defendant’s testator, William Read, and dated May l,.1792, in the sum of £150, with condition that the defendant's testador should save the plaintiff’s testator, Matthew Parker, Jr. harmless from any demand of any person or persons on certain land conveyed by Samuel Senter to. the said Matthew Parker, Jr. William Read, the father of the defendant’s testator, died previous to 1769, having devised his real estate to his sons William and Zadock,…

Petition for partition, alleging that the plaintiffs owned, in common with the defendants, forty-one and one third forty-eighth parts of two certain lots, or parcels of land, in Deer-ing, which land is particularly set forth in the petition, and is described as being two gore lots of land, one numbered 41, the other situated immediately north of it, in said gore.

Case, against the defendant, as sheriff of the county, setting forth the issuing of a writ of attachment in favor of the plaintiff, against one Daniel May—a delivery of the same to Pliny Whitney, a deputy of the defendant, for service— an attachment by him of certain personal property—a recovery of judgment in the suit, and a delivery of the execution within thirty days to said Whitney, for the purpose of being levied upon the property attached—with an averment that Whitney…

Trover for a sulky. It appeared in evidence that the sulky formerly belonged to one William Pope, of Bellows Falls, in Vermont, and was there used by him, and known as his property. On the 2d of May, 1837, Pope sold it to the plaintiff, at Keene, in this state, where the plaintiff resides; and the plaintiff paid him the value of it, procured repairs to be made on it, and used and let it with his other carriages, he being the keeper of a livery stable.

Case for slander. The defendant pleaded the general issue, with a brief statement as follows : “ The plaintiff will ‘ take notice, that the defendant, on the trial of the above ‘ issue, will give in evidence, and prove, that the several ‘ words, alleged in said declaration to have been spoken of ‘ and concerning the plaintiff, are true.” On the trial of the case, the plaintiff, to rebut the evidence introduced by the defendant to shew that the matters alleged were true,…

Replevin. The writ was directed to the sheriff of the county of Cheshire, or his deputy, or either of the constables of the town of Swanzey, in said county, commanding them to replevy certain chattels belonging to the plaintiff, now distrained by Elijah Carpenter, of Swanzey aforesaid, sheriff, &c.; and it was served and returned, in the usual form, by John Foster, deputy sheriff.

This was an action on the case for slander, tried at the October term of the common pleas, on the general issue, and a verdict found for the plaintiff.

<p>The facts in this case sufficiently appear in the opinion of the court.</p>

Writ of entry, to recover a tract of land in Unity. The premises were part of the original right of Mesheck Weare. The tenants pleaded the general issue. On the part of the demandant, it appeared, that on the 13th of June, 1818, Joshua Huntoon, and Daniel Huntoon, being then in possession of the land demanded, conveyed it in mortgage to one Cyrus Barnes, to secure the payment of a promissory note.

Trespass, for taking sundry articles of bedding, household furniture, and wearing apparel. The writ was dated December 26, 1835. The defendant pleaded the general issue, with notice of a justification, as deputy sheriff.

Assumpsit, upon a note or contract, signed by the defendant, as follows, viz. “ For value received of Timothy Eastman, I promise to pay him two shares in the Claremont Manufacturing Company, said shares valued at two hundred dollars each.

Case for the escape of one David Peavey, committed on mesne process. To show the arrest, the plaintiff introduced the original writ, with the return of the officer thereon, which stated that he had arrested the body of said Peavey, and committed him within the gaol in said county, and had left with the keeper thereof a copy of his return; but did not set forth that he had left a copy of the writ.

This is trespass, for assaulting and imprisoning the plaintiff, Sept. 21, 1836, and restraining him of his liberty, until he paid a large sum of money. The defendant justified, as collector of taxes for the town of Croydon.

This was an appeal from the determination of the commissioner of insolvency on the estate of Ephraim Carpenter. In the year 1819, Carpenter, having his settlement in Charles-town, and standing in need of relief, applied to the selectmen of Charlestown, and was maintained by said town from that time till the year 1833—during which period the sum of f>667.74 had been expended for his support.

Assumpsit, on a promissory note, dated the 15th of November, 1836, for the sum of $>436.91, payable to the plaintiffs, or their order, at the city of Boston, in Massachusetts, on demand and interest. The defendant admitted the making of the note, but contended that it was illegally obtained, and void.

Whit of enthy, for land in Dorchester, submitted to the determination of the court on a case stated.

Debt, against the sheriff of the county of Coos, for an escape.

Covenant. The declaration alleged that the defendant, on the 23d of September, 1826, by his deed of lease, duly executed by the defendant of the one part, and the plaintiff of the other part, for the consideration therein mentioned, did demise, lease and to farm let to the plaintiff, his heirs and assigns, a certain tract of land, lying in Haverhill, &e. —to have and hold for the term of nine hundred and ninety-nine years from the date ; and that the defendant covenanted…

Case, alleging that the plaintiffs, on the 3d day of March, 1836, sued out a writ of attachment against one James Rider, returnable on the first Tuesday of May, 1836, and delivered it to one Daniel Batchelder, one of the deputies of the defendant for service—-that Batchelder, on the 4th day of March, took the body of the said Rider, and committed him to the gaol of which the defendant was keeper, and made due return of said arrest and commitment—that said action was entered,…

Assumpsit, for the support of one Betsey Bawley. There was evidence that the pauper was the wife of John Bawley, jt\, who was born in Methuen, in Massachusetts, August 31. 1752.

In Chancery. The bill stated that previous to the month of May, 1828, the plaintiff owned one undivided half of certain cloth-dressing and carding works, in Lisbon, with one Richard Gookin—that in said month the defendant purchased out the interest of Gookin, or his heirs, and the plaintiff and defendant entered into a copartnership, to carry on the cloth dressing and carding business—that said contract was not reduced to writing, but that the terms of it were, that the…

This was trespass, for taking and carrying away one ton of hay, the property of the plaintiff, on the sixth day of November, 1835, and was tried on the general issue, and a verdict rendered for the plaintiff.

This is an action of trover, for the conversion of a cow, on the 6th day of May, 1836. In December, 1832, one Eli Goin made an open and public sale to the plaintiff (his mother) of the cow in question, and at the same time it was agreed that the said Goin should keep the cow until called for by the plaintiff, and pay her a fixed sum by the year for the use thereof.

This was an action of assumpsit, founded on account for five months, 7⅜ days work and labor, performed by the plaintiff, at the defendant’s request, at $⅝10 per month. There was a second count, of quantum nicruit. The defendant plead the general issue, and gave notice of a set-oif.

Writ of entry, to recover seizin and possession of a tract of land, situate in Canaan. Plea, the general issue. It appeared in evidence that the demandant had been in possession of the demanded premises about twelve or fifteen years prior to 1830, or 1831, and that in one of those years he sold, and conveyed by deed, to one Gordon Burley, a lot of land adjoining the demanded premises.

Petition for a new trial. The original action was commenced before a justice of the peace, in favor of the respondent, against one Matthewson as principal, and the petitioner as his trustee. The action was once continued. On the day to which it stood continued, the petitioner failing to appear at the hour, his default was entered, and the justice left the place.

This is an action of assumpsit against the defendant, as surviving promiser of one William Siyfield. The first count sets forth a note, dated December 12th, 1828, for the sum of $219.20, alleged to have been “ made by the said Little and Siyfield,” and payable to the plaintiff, or order, on demand, with interest.

Assumpsit, for money had and received. The plaintiff filed a specification, claiming to recover upon a promissory note, in these words : For value received we jointly and severally promise to pay Stephen Savage, in official capacity, twenty dollars and thirty-four cents, the first of January next. Dalton, July, 1834.

Trover for 5000 lbs. of salts of lye. The parties both claimed title to the property under one David Bean, who, at the time of the transaction hereafter mentioned, was a resident in a place called Letter B, in the state of Maine. It appeared in evidence that previous to the 26th of August, 1836, said Bean owned a farm at that place, on which was a potash, and that he had there cattle and other personal property.

Assumpsit, to recover expenditures made for the repair of a mill dam, in pursuance of the statute giving authority to repair, where such property is owned by joint tenants, or tenants in common.

Trespass, alleging that the plaintiff was possessed of a clothing mill, and machinery for cloth dressing and wool carding, and of a certain flume, constructed to convey water, so as to work said mill and machinery ; and that the plaintiff was entitled to the use of water, conveyed by said flume, for said purposes; but that the defendant wrongfully and illegally cut away and removed said flume, so as to deprive the plaintiff of the use of said mill and machinery.

.Assumpsit, on a note dated February 4, 1836, for $26.60, payable to one E. A. Crawford, or order, on demand, with interest. The action was submitted to the determination of ’ the court upon the following statement of facts. Sometime previous to the date of the note, James H. Johnson & Co. held a note against said Crawford, for about eighteen dollars, to pay which Crawford handed the defendant that sum, to be delivered to them.

Replevin of two cows, property of the plaintiff. The defendant plead the general issue, with a brief statement, alleging that the said cows were taken damage feasant in his enclosure, and had been impounded by him ; and that he had taken the proper measures of notice, appraisal, &c., under the statute, and claimed a return of the coavs.

This is an action of trover, brought to recover the value of one hundred and ten sheep, the conversion of which was alleged to have been on the 24th of October, 1836, and 110 pounds of wool, conversion alleged on the 30th of June, 1836. The plea was the general issue. The taking was admitted, and that a demand was made by the plaintiff of the wool and the sheep, on the 24th of October, 1836, and the defendant refused to deliver the same.

Trover, for a promissory note of $50, and four other notes of $100 each, all made and executed by one Henry Hanson, on the 29th of October, 1834, and made payable to the plaintiff, with interest. The defendant pleaded the general issue. It appeared in evidence that the plaintiff had sold a farm to Hanson, and received the above notes and a mortgage back, in payment and security for the same.

Assumpsit on the following contract: “ Mr. Grinfill Blake agrees to purchase from John Crown- ‘ inshield and Richard Crowninshield three thousand acres ‘ of land, at fifty cents per acre, or a larger quantity if he ‘ pleases, the lots at said Blake’s selection in any of the said ‘ lands ; all beyond the 3000 he is to have at ten per cent. ‘ less than the first named.

In ChanceRí. The bill, which was brought by Frances Parsons, by John Smith, her next friend, against George H. Parsons and John Gilman, stated the marriage of the said George H. and Prances, October 3, 1826—that they lived together at Exeter, in said county, until about the 15th of November, 1831—that having but small means of subsistence, and becoming embarrassed with debt, he absconded, and left her, with one son, a child of said marriage, then about one year old, and…

In Chancery—for relief against a fraudulent mortgage. Held: that by the common law an estate made by fraud should be avoided only by him who had a former right, title, interest, debt or demand.

Assumpsit. The plaintiff alleged in his declaration that on the 30th of June, 1831, he was in the defendants’ service, as agent and clerk in their manufacturing establishment, and the defendants… Held: the court rejected the evidence. A verdict having been returned for the defendants, the plaintiff moved for a new trial. If the ruling is sustained, it must be on the statute of frauds. The contract when made was not a contract in relation to lands.

Assumpsit. I. For money had and received. 2. Setting forth that the defendant, on the 28th of February, 1820, being indebted to the' plaintiff in the sum of 0418.10, for so much money had and received of one John Rogers, for the plaintiff's use, in consideration thereof promised the plaintiff to keep the money, and pay the same to the plaintiff when thereto specially requested, and averring a special request on the 30th of July, 1835.

Assumpsit, to recover a balance alleged to be due the plaintiff, upon the sale of a yoke of oxen. It appeared in evidence that about the middle of April, 1837, the defendant purchased of the plaintiff a pair of oxen, and passed to him in payment forty dollars in bills of the Chelsea bank. At the time of the purchase the bank had failed, but this was unknown to the plaintiff, and it did not distinctly appear that it was known to the defendant.

Assumpsit for the support of Vowell Willey, from 21st of January, 1836, to 26th March, 1836. On the trial it appeared that the relief had been furnished to the pauper within the period specified in the writ, by direction of the selectmen of Northwood, and that they had promised, in behalf of the town, to pay for the same.

This was an action of assumpsit, commenced July 8,1837, upon an account annexed to the plaintiff’s writ, amounting to $44.38, for services rendered by the plaintiff, as a physician, to the defendant and his family. The several charges in the account were between the dates of April 30, 1820, and November 20, 1825. The defendant pleaded the statute of limitations, to which the plaintiff replied, alleging a new promise.

Assumpsit, to recover for repairs made upon the brig Augusta by the plaintiffs, between Oct. 22, and Nov. 17, 1835. It appeared in evidence, that prior to March 13,1835, the brig Augusta was owned by Charles Cushing. On that day he executed a bill of sale of the vessel to the defendant, and left the same at the custom-house in Portsmouth, where it remained until March, 1836. At the time it was executed the vessel was absent on a voyage to the West-Indies.

In Chancery. The bill alleged that in the month of November, 1832, the parties were seized and possessed of certain lands in Kensington, as tenants in common ; and, being desirous to have partition made of said lands, they entered into bonds to abide the award of T. L., S. T. and J. W. S., by them chosen to make partition ; that the arbitrators, after hearing the parties and examining the lands, declared to the parties their opinion in relation to the manner in which…

This case came before the court upon an agreed statement of facts, It appeared that the Portland Stage Company was a corporation established by the state of Maine, and has not been incorporated in this state.

The declaration filed in the probate office was debt upon a bond of the intestate, dated September 28, 1807.

This is a writ of entry, to recover five acres of land in Epping. Jones pleaded special-non tenure. S. Plumer, jr., disclaimed, and the other defendants pleaded the general issue. The demandant is the widow of John Straw, and has lived on the land in controversy, with her husband, for about forty years next preceding his decease, which happened seven or eight years since, and she remained there after his decease a year or more.

In Chancery. The bill stated that one Abraham Wendell was, on the 25th day of April, A. D., 1828, seized in fee of a certain parcel of land situated in Portsmouth, and on that day conveyed the same to one Dorothy Wendell, upon the condition that if the said Abraham Wendell, his heirs, &c., should pay his promissory note, dated April 26, 1824, for the sum of $2243.19, payable to said Dorothy, in five years, then the deed should be void, otherwise in force —that said Dorothy…

Case, against the selectmen of Exeter, for illegally assessing the plaintiff for certain shares owned by him in the Phoenix Factory, so called, being a corporation for the manufacture of cotton goods, in Peterborough, in this state. All the property of the corporation, real and personal, was duly taxed to the corporation, in Peterborough, and the taxes paid for the years for which the taxes in question were assessed against the plaintiff on his shares.

Assumpsit, upon a promissory note of the defendant, dated September 24, 1831, payable to Sally Smith, or order, and by her indorsed to Cynthia Greeley, and by said Cynthia, and her husband Edward D. Greeley, indorsed to the plaintiff. The declaration also contained a count for money had and received. The signature of the defendant was admitted.

Assdmpsit, for $90, money paid, and money had and ’ received. The writ was dated February 21 ⅛ 1837. Plea, the general issue, by guardian, the defendant being a spendthrift. On behalf of the plaintiff it was proved, that on the 12th of February, 1836, the defendant exchanged horses with one Samuel Baldwin, and agreed to give him $75, and the plaintiff and one Reuben Sargent signed a note with the defendant to Baldwin for that amount.

Case. The declaration alleged, that on the 26th day of May, 1830, the plaintiff owned and was possessed of a large quantity of palm-leaf and chip hats—that a conversation was then had between the parties about the defendant’s purchasing the hats of the plaintiff—that the plaintiff, not knowing whether the defendant was of age, enquired of him whether he was of full age or not; and that the defendant, well knowing that he was an infant under the age of twenty-one years, and…

Debt, upon bond to the plaintiff, as sheriff of the county, dated January 31, 1833, with a condition, “ that whereas the said Benjamin Badger had commenced an action of replevin against Daniel R. Carter, for six cases of shoes, containing six hundred pairs of sale shoes, belonging to Benjamin Badger, said to be distrained or impounded by the said Daniel R. Carter, as in said writ is set forth, which action is to be heard and tried before Wm.

Case, for that the plaintiff, on the first of January, 1831, was, and still is, possessed of a fulling mill, situate on the southerly side of the Cocheco river, and of a dam across same, and had a right of drawing such portion of water from above said dam as was necessary to full such quantity of cloth or skins as the plaintiff might have occasion for; and averring that he had occasion for water to full ten thousand yards of cloth, &c., annually.

Indictment against the town of Gilmanton, for not repairing a certain highway, beginning at the dwelling-house of Joseph Fifield, and running to Gilmanton line, between said Gilmanton and Sanbornton ; submitted to the determination of the court upon the following statement of facts. There is a bridge across the waters between the towns of Sanbornton and Gilmanton, about thirty-seven rods long, and these waters are the Sanbornton bay.

Debt on judgment rendered by John Frost, Esq., a jus-tiee of the peace in the state of Maine, September 6, 1834. By the record of the judgment, produced on the trial, it appeared that the action was entered on the 14th of October, 1833, and was on an account.

This was an information filed by the attorney general at the January term of the court of common pleas, in this county, in 1838, in which information it was alleged that there having been occasion for a new highway in Dover, application to lay out the same was duly made to the selectmen of said Dover, and they refused to lay out the same, whereupon a petition was duly presented to said court to lay out said highway, and the same was duly and legally laid out by said court,…

Trover for six cords of wood. Plea, the general issue. It appeared in evidence that the defendant and one Charles Fulker owned land adjoining each other, and that the plaintiff, by permission of said Fulker, cut the wood in controversy, near the lines of said lots, and, as the plaintiff contended, upon said Fulker’s land.

Assumpsit upon a promissory note, dated May 8, 1835, for |221.53, in six months. On the trial, it appeared that before the note became due, the defendant failed, being at that time indebted to the plaintiffs in other demands which were due, and the plaintiffs and other creditors commenced suits, and attached the property of the defendant.

Assumpsit, for money had and received. It appeared on the trial, that the plaintiff, having a case pending in the court of common pleas, summoned the defendant to attend as a witness, on the Monday following the third Tuesday of April, 1836, at Rochester, and paid her two dollars, as fees to compel her attendance.

This was an indictment against said Howard, for arson, in burning the dwelling-house and out buildings of one Thomas Andrews, in Freedom, in said county. The testimony of John Thompson, George Hodgdon, and Mrs. Betsy Towle, was introduced on the part of the government, to sustain the prosecution.

This was an action of trover, for 1000 yards of calico, and 100.000 of white pine shingles, and was commenced by writ returnable at the January term of the court of common pleas, A. D., 1837. At that term the plaintiff had leave to amend ; and in December following, the plaintiff’s counsel delivered to the defendant’s counsel the new, or amended count.

Tbespass, for an assault and false imprisonment on the 1st day of July, A. D., 1837. The action was commenced before a justice of the peace. The defendants pleaded severally the general issue. It appeared in evidence that the defendants were selectmen of the town of Madbury for the year 1836; that they assessed a list of taxes upon the inhabitants of said town, among whom was the plaintiff, and committed it to Nathan Brown, collector of said town, for collection.

This action was assumpsit for the use and occupation of a farm in Alton, called the Jewett farm, from the last day of March, 1830, to the first day of April, 1835.

This was an action of assumpsit upon a note dated July 27, 1835, for $>220, payable to John Barker, or order, in sixty day, with interest, and endorsed by the payee. The cause was tried upon the general issue, when it was admitted that the defendant made the note, it appeared that the note was given to secure the payment of the price of a certain share in the Man* estate, in Great Britain, conveyed by Barker to Davis.

Case, alleging that the plaintiff, on the 1st of January, 1832, was seized of a certain mill, and mill privilege, situated in Meredith, and known by the name of the wears mill, and had a right to the use of the river, or outlet from lake Winnepissiogee, to run in its natural channel from said lake, for the use of the mill ; and that the defendant, contriving, &c., erected a dam on the river below the mill, and thereby caused the water to flow back upon the wheels of it,…

Indictment against the respondent, for committing the crime of adultery with one Huldah Vittum, the wife of Amasa C. Vittum, of Sandwich, August 10, 1837. To prove the marriage of Huldah Vittum with said Amasa, the government introduced a copy from the records of Sandwich, duly certified, which is as follows : “Mr. Amasa C. Vittum, and Miss Huldah Wallace, both of Sandwich, were married January 31, 1828, by Jeremiah Furber, Justice Peace.

Indictment, alleging that the respondent, on the 31st of January, 1828, married Amasa C. Vittum, and afterwards, during the life-time of her husband, was guilty of adultery with one Levi Wallace, on the 10th of August, 1837, at Sandwich, in said county.

Trespass, for taking and carrying away two oxen of plaintiff, August 24th, 1837, and for taking and carrying away two other oxen of plaintiff, August 28th, 1837.

Assumpsit, upon a promissory note dated May 10, 1837, for the sum of $250, payable to one Lewis Perry, or order, and by him endorsed to the plaintiff. The defendant, Prescott, filed two pleas of usury.

This was an action of assumpsit for money had and received, and was tried upon the general issue. It appeared in evidence that the plaintiff and defendant, with six other persons, were members of a society called Bible Lodge Society, No. 27, in Goffstown, which society possessed funds to the amount of two hundred and fifteen dollars and sixteen cents, which were in the hands of the defendant, as treasurer.

Debt upon bond, dated August 16, 1828. The defendants craved oyer, and set out the condition of the bond, which recited that Thompson, one of the defendants, had been appointed a deputy of the plaintiff, who was then sheriff of the county, and provided, among other things, that if said Thompson should, at the expiration of six months from date, and of every six months thereafterwards that he should continue in office, and at the expiration of his term of office, render to…

Assdmpsit upon a promissory note, signed with the partnership name of Dunklee & Carter, and by the individuals constituting the firm. The defendants pleaded in abatement the pendency of another action in favor of the plaintiff against them, sued out at the same time with the said writ, and for the same cause of action. The plaintiff, in his replication, alleged that the other action was not commenced and pending at the same time this was commenced ; on which issue was joined.

Debt on a bond, given with the condition that one Bradbury Scriggins, who was then under arrest, on an execution issued in favor of the plaintiff, should, within one year, take the oath prescribed for the ease and relief of poor debtors ; or, in default thereof, should surrender himself up to the creditor, in the manner prescribed by the laws of this state.

Assumpsit against the defendant, as indorser of a promissory note, made by Carr and Lunt, of Philadelphia, on the first of February, 1837, for the sum of §892.04, in eight months, payable to the defendant, or order, and by him indorsed to the plaintiff; alleging a presentment at Philadelphia, October 4, 1837, and notice of non-payment to the defendant. There were also counts for money had and received, and for money paid.

Assumpsit, for the purpose of recovering money expended by the town of Henniker, for the support of Abigail Green-leaf, and Mary Greenleaf, paupers, alleged to have their settlement in Weare, submitted to the determination of the court upon the following statement of facts. Nathan Greenleaf, the father of the paupers, and from whom they derive their settlement, had his settlement in the town of Weare previous to 1803.