Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1866-04-20


was well known to him, and that he saw
him at a time and place wholly inconsis-
tent with his presence in WiIliston at the
time OF the murder. He told you further.
gentlemen. that the brother Of the res
pendent Ward had come on from New
York, and that he was present in this
courtroom II 4 man who, if Hayes
story is true, was with the respondent on
Sunday, and accompanied him TO Albany
on Monday. is now in Court, why is he
not brought on the stand? The only
possible explanation Is that the defence
dared not put him on, because they know
this story is false. Itwas plain from this,
as well as from this mornings evidence,
that the defence, 70 protect hired lssas-
sin. had brought on a witness who they
must have known was going TO perjure
himself. But leaving Ward 10 his fate,
we come 10 Potter. To convict him Of
the charge in the indictment, it Will be
necessary for YOU to find him connected
with this crime in such way as TO show
q couspiracv with Ward TO secure the
death Of sally Griswold. And so much
l deem 10 be proved beyond a doubt Al
the circumstances about Ward-his sud
den appearance here, an utter stranger 10
every one-his lack Of business TO call
him here-his disappearance Immediately
after the murder, show that he came IL
PURSUANCE Of an arrangement with some
one. The circumstances further show
that he must have been sent Tor by ChEs.
Potter. whether through lie agency Of
DR.. Ham Potter, or in what way,
il j. not for me 10 say. Here the
3 .
Potter's part comes III. As TO that We
have shown that In lS4G Mrs Potter was
constituted the heir-at-law Of EphrIm
and Sally Griswold. After her marriage
they lived elsewhere till last spring, when
the Potters came 10 STAY with Mr. and
Mr. Griswold. Mr.. Griswold tells Us
that his wife wEs an eXcItahie woman. I'M
patient of opposition. \ difficulty he
tween her and the Pott Is arose, which
came To- personal violence on one occa-
sion The embitterel feeling increased
until Mrs Grlsvold determined and took
means TO GET the Potter- ont Of her house.
But why. we are asked, should murder be
committed q cure property winch would
at any rate fall % the Pottars IL tlmes
Did they not know That by VIII the pro-
perry might tIsllv be- made % take an-
other direction: But tie defence tell Us
this deed must have been done by
stranger 20 the premises II familiar
with the house. they say, why did he not
get IL al the east window, which was nm
fasteneds That window was close 20 Mrs.
Gnswolds bedroom. and too high from
the ground 90 be reached without some
thing to climb ON. The fact that the
man entered through the kitchen door
shows familiarity with the premises, and
had the old lady not been aroused and
met him IN the kitchen. l have no doubt
that l- would lave passed directly "a ler
bedroom and murdered her in her bed
We are also told that robbery must have
been the main object How So: Had
the fame of Sally Guswoll'> wealth
reached New York. What was there IL
few spoons and little jewelrv to
tempt O professional burglar from
New York q tie quiet country town
Of WIllstou. The idea j. preposte-1us.
II it was only robbery. why was not the
TEST OF the house rnsackeI No these
men were sharp enough T. study the CIR
cumstances which would tend 20 conceal
the character Of the crime. and the cir
cumstances show that II j. for this the
robbery was committed. How WAS q
perfect stranger 70 know but what Potter
and all the rest Of the family were il the
house II was necessary 90 the success
Of the plan that they must Doe away. Pot
ter took II upon him % see that the coast
was clear. The Arrangement 20 90 70
Canada was not made before Friday. On
Sunday morning the Information was CON
veyed % Ward that the time had come.
and IL performance OF his share Potter
goes on 10 Sheldon with his family In
due time he Is arrested. His trial APP
proaches. II innocent would he be con
irving how he could pay the sheriff 20 do
his duty? OF course. when his money
was thrust back on him. he said Le only
wanted q fair trial What else c0ull lie
have said
Again, gentlemen, .lll I would allude
to SO painful q subject only from q sense
Of duty Is there u0 conclusion u be
drawn from the introduction OF perjury
That the counsel for tine defence should
have permitted il can only be accounted
for by the supp1S.tion that they were de-
mented 10y consciousness Of the guilt Of
the respondent
Gentlemen, / viii not further weary
your patience. I have. doubtless, omitted
many minor points, but If 30 It l. from DO
knowledge that any Of them would tell il
favor Of the respondents. / have nothing
against them. have only the interest il
tins case that you have. % See 20 it that
the majesty of tie law is not violated.
and that the community Is protected from
such atrocious crime. Your duty is sim
ply - weigh the facts under tle ius-ruc-
tons Of the Court. and 20 say guilty OF
not guilty. The Law viii provide what
shall follow.
TIE JUDGES cHiEsE.
Chief Justice Pierpoint remarked. il
opening, that much time had already
been occupied in the triL. and that be-
should not long detliu the jury. Tie
respondents Ward and Potter ale iuiict-
ed for the murder OF Mrs Gri.wold
Though the indictment j. against them
Jointly. II viii be competent for YOU o.
md one guilty and the other innocent
There Is no question that a murder was I
The question is. was either I
or both of the respondents eulltyof II. Ii /
Is conceded that Potter was not present I
at the deed. But il Is claimed that while .
Ward was the perpetrator that Potter was
a participator III II.
The first question. and Iu sense the
main one, Is If Ward was iheperpetIator:
II not the prosecution fails also rs 20 Pot
ter. This Is solely question Of fact for
the jury to determine from the evidence.
The testimony Is fresh and has been fully
on.
In Judging Of the question Of identity
the jury must remember that identified
hon Of persons under such circumstances !
IS commonly matter Of more or less M