The Rutland daily globe. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1873-1877, 1874-09-30

A. Mead, DR.. Lewis T. LawtOn.
The trial of John P. Phar for the muir
der of Mrs. Ann Freeze in Rutland on the
| 9th of June last, was commenced in the
Rutland County Court before Judge Hoyt
II. Wheeler, presiding, yesterday tues
day. morning at nine o'clock. The great
interest felt IN this case, not only in Rut-
land where the murder occurred but
throughout wide section of country here
abouts, causes it to be one of unusual i'm
portance to the public at large. For this
reason among others, we this morning Law
before our readers, to the exclusion of
much other matter, the full proceedings of
this trial, together with the minutest posi-
BILE report of the testimony of each and
every witness.
The prisoner occupied conspicuous po-
stion, and was represented by Messrs.
Drnton and Veazey and d. L. Nicholson.
The counsel for the state were States At
torney Z. ]. Ormsbee and Col. C. II.
Joyce.
The court room was crowded throughout
the entire day by spectators, both ladies
and gentlemen, the former filling the GAL
lery above, and the proceedings were
watched with the utmost attention by ALL
Even was this the case when the testimony
was being given of those whose statements
have already appeared in our columns at
the time of the inquest, and upon those
particulars of the case which seem, ap-
parently, to have already been settled in
the minds of most of our citizens. This
goes to show that the interest mani
tested at the time of the murder has not
abated as much as the time which has in
tervened would suggest.
The witnesses who were called on this
first day by the prosecuting attorney were
distinguished by the similarity of the state
ments made by them upon any one subject
upon which they were examined. This
was especially so upon the subject of the
fire and the incidents connected with its
discovery and that of the body. The tes-
timony adduced was most of it of a pre-
liminary nature and also that which has
before been published in our columns. The
witnesses examined numbered eleven and
the trial may be said to have been well be-
gun on its opening day.
THE JURY.
Much trouble was anticipated by out
siders in impaneling the jury but on the
contrary, but two hours were used up in
the task, and the result is an excellent jury
in every respect has been qualified to sit in
Judgment upon the prisoner.
Moses Hayward of Rutland was the first
name called. In questioning the jury, the
counsel on both sides exercised their right
| of peremptory challenge after due ques-
tionng. Mr. Dunton, Tor the defense ask
ed that, after the questions had been put
relative to the formation and expression of
any opinion of the case by the jurors, that
their ideas upon capital punishment be as
certained,a and cited case IN Massachusetts,;
leave was granted by the Judge. Mr.. Hay
ward said he did not know whether he had
formed or expressed any opinion upon the
case or not excused bv challenge of the
prosecuting attorney.
Lyman w. Fish of Ira, was the second
| one called and was excused by challenge
of prosecuting attorney.
Ezra Edison of Mendon, was the next
juror called, aud was excused by request
of the counsel for the respondent.
John p. Sheldon of Fairhavcn, supposed
he had formed some opinion upon the case
but did not think he had expressed any
opinion nor was he prejudiced so but what
he could try the case as presented on the
evidence. He was considered qualified and
was the first juror who took his seat.
Arden Il. Day of Ira, had formed no
opinion could not say as he had express
ed any was sensible of no bias in the
matter; had no conscientious scruples
which would prevent him from finding a
prisoner guilty the punishment for which
would be deatffsS He was finally excused
on his own request from the fact of his
being taxpayer in Rutland.
| Gamalel Gardner of Mddletown had
read the accounts of the murder in the
Rutland papers; had not formed any opin-
on upon the guilt or innocence of the pris-
oner never expressed any opinion was
sensible of no bias in the matter and had
no conscientious scruples in regard to CAPT
tai punishment. He~xas excused by pre-
emptory challenges of the respondents
counsel.