Orleans independent standard. [volume] (Irasburgh, Vt.) 1856-1871, 1869-11-09

tence. He could not vote for the bill
under his present information in re-
gard to the case.
Mr.. Dickey of Bradford said that /
if this bill is passed, we should set a
precedent which might be referred !
to in futnre cases, and we should be
very cautious how we act. 1t seemed
to him that the fact that the jury did
not convict the father of the crime OF
murder, when he was thought to be
equally guilty, should be no reason
for committing the sentence of the son.
He wished to ask of Mr.. Wood if he
thought that Horace R. Plumley was
guilty of murder.
Mr.. Wood replied that he thought
he was, and that the other two Plum
leys were equally as guilty of murder.
That the verdict was a compromise
resulting in a verdict of murder
against Horace R. Plumley, and a
verdict of manslaughter as to his faith
er and brother. Mr. Wood further
explained circumstances connected
with the case, and the charge of the
Judge to the jury.
Mr.. Edison of Mendon said that the
Judge distinctly charged the jury that
if they found one guilty of murder,
they must be all convicted of the same
offense; that they had great difficulty
in empannelling jury to try the case,
and it was only after several efforts
that they succeeded.
Mr.. Hinckley of Chelsea said it ap-
peared from the statements made be-
fore the House that Horace r. Plum
ley is a man below mediocrity, and he
understood that the chaplain of the
State Prison had said that he regard
ed him mentally below par, and he
thought no particular credit would ac-
crue to the State by hanging fool.
Mr. Joyce Of Rutland said he stood
in a peculiar position, having been
counsel for the Plumleys on the trial,
and now called to act on the question
as a legislator. He believed, howey-
er, he could act in accordance with
his oath and vote for the passage of
this bill. He believed that statements
already made were true, that nine
tenths of the people Of Rutland Coun-
ty are in favor of committing the SEN
tence. This was not to be a prece-
dent in future cases, as each case
must stand on its own merits. Cases
have already arisen before the legis-
lature, but in every one of them there
had been some particular feature ap.
plicable to that case alone. He be-
lieved that the act of shooting was
wholly in Sclf-defence, and he had la
bored to make twelve men believe as
he did, but only one of them was so
convinced. He then reviewed the
facts in the case as they appeared on
trial. and urged upon the House that
in view of those facts it was but an
act of Justice to Horace R. Plumley to
commute his sentence to the same as
that Of his father and brother, who
were equally or more guilty than Hor-
ace-imprisonment for life. He said
there was no doubt about the facts il
the case; the chaplain of the State
Prison had said that he was a man
below par, and never ought to be
hung; that the judge who sentenced
them had said that the sentence o.
Horace ought to be commuted, and
had promised to make statement o.
: the case to the committee if he was
here. He thought this just one of the
kind of cases intended to be reached
by the provisions of the Constitution
Mr.. Wheelock of Berlin wished tc
be informed if it was regarded by the
people in Rutland County that Horace
r. Plumley was fool.
Mr. Wood of Fairhaven and Mr.
Hinckly of Chelsea said that they die
not regard him as fool, but as mar
below mediocrity. and not on pal
with other men.
Mr.. Garfield of Arlington said ht
must be governed, not by his sympa
thies, but by due regard for the goo(
of the State in securing the execution
of our laws. If the fact was as ha'
been stated, in regard to the respon
sibility of this man, it would have beer
made to appear on the trial, anC
would have been taken into accoun
in making up the verdict. If he wa
not responsible for his acts he ough
, not to be hung; but if he was respon
sible for his acts, and was guilty o
murder, the sentence Of the cour
, ought not to be interfered with. HI
: thought the provision of the constitu
ton was intended to apply to case
where some new testimony had beer
+ discovered that would mitigate th'
crime. As the case now stands, h
must vote against this bill, as he ha(
I seen no reason for reversing the sen
tence of the law.
Mr.. Bull of Hancock appealed t.
+ members to make the case one fo
. immediate action if Horace r. Plum
ley now stood before the House OF
the gallows, and one vote would saw
f him from death and commute the sen
+ tence to Imprisonment for life, h
] thought that vote should be given.
. Mr. Nichols of Dandy said he hac
! read the whole testimony in the trial
and came to the conclusion at th'
time that Horace r. Plumley ough
1 not to be hung; that if he was, who'll
neighborhood ought to be sent tt
State Prison for life. He should IA
vor the Communication OF the sentenc,
: asked for in the bill.
:. INDUSTRIAL PROGRESS Blacl
4 / -, tC nd.