The Rutland daily globe. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1873-1877, 1877-04-07


change of venue, whereby my case could
have been thrown into Bennington county
for trial. The judge was petitioned with
out delay and in response offered, as his
opinion, that the case could be as fairly
tried in Rutland county as In any other.
Disappointed in this, l then petitioned the
court for continuance of my case to the
next term of court, and this was not
granted. The court then assigned me
counsel, which had not been able to pro-
vide for myself, and then pressed my trial
80 close that ha1'very little time in which
to defend myself against the strongest
prosecution the state could possibly get to
bear on the case. My counsel, Messrs.
Dunton and Veazey, we're at the time 80
very busy in other law business that they
were obliged to acknowledge their inability
to give my case anything Ike the attention
necessary for proper defence. But the
trial was on and 1 could do no more than
submit to what followed. hadn't dollar
with which to employ detective to inves-
tigate the strange work which two schem-
ing reward seekers had for three months
carried on with the evident intent of Sc
curing my conviction and the $4,000 re-
ward, without any regard for justice. On
the other hand, as is we'll known, the pros
ecution was armed with all the wealth and
power in the state, and worse than all, it
was aided by perjured witnesses, which
made nothing impossible for it to carry.
My counsel were very able and honorable
men, who in their efforts to defend me,
worked for the true ends of justice, re-
gardless of the mighty dollar, which SO
often defeats it. These gentlemen well
understood before undertaking my case,
that, unless was acquitted, | would not
be able to pay them one cent for their
labor. Still, this did not hold them aloof
| from their best endeavors to defend me
under circumstances wholly unfavorabe
and discouraging. They expressed regret
at my not having means 10 employ proper
persons to inquire into the character of the
Jew pawnbrokers who were brought from
from Boston to Rutland, and pretended to
| identify me as being a man who had sold
them a watch and other articles which
were found in their possession and after
wards identified as the property of the I'M
| fortunate woman. The claim ret forth by
| the prosecution on the trial was in sub
stance as follows That on the 9th day of
June, 1874, Ann Il. Freeze, of Rutland,
| Vermont. was murdered, robbed and her
| household burned to the ground that on
the same day a watch, opera glass, shawl,
and so on, belonging to the murdered wo-
man, were pawned or sold in Boston, hy a
man giving the name of Z. L. Smith, st.
| Albans, Vt. that this man registered under
| that name at the Adams House in Boston,
where he stopped on that day and night,
and that the man L. f. Smith and John p.
| PhaIr we're one and the same person. That
| a certain room in the Adams House was as
signed this man by the clerk of that house,
aud in which was found ladys half shawl
the next day after his departure from the
house; and that the shawl had been identified
as the property of Mrs. Freeze. That the
| handwriting on the hotel register resem-
bled and corresponded exactly with my
hand, and that there could be no mistake
but what it was mine.
THE TESTIMONY ASALYzRD.
The clerk of the Adams house, when
asked if he could recognize me as being the
man who stopped at his house under that
name, said that looked like the man, but
he would not swear positive that was the
man. That his seeing me led into the hall
| between two officers and handcuffed might
have led him to think so. This man was
not Jew, but apparently gentleman. A
Jew was then called, who swore positive
that was the man who had sold him the
woman's watch for $50, and that he had
given pawn-ticket for the same. Another
Jew swore that looked to be the man
who had sold him Masonic finger ring for
$5. Still another Jew that / was the man
who had offered finger rings for sale at his
store and that he had declined to buy them
Another man swore that looked to be the
man who had pawned with him lady't
shawl and opera glass for $40. When ask.
ed if he could not be mistaken as to identi-
ty, he said he could not unless in the case
of twins. The next and last of the SOCIAL
ed Boston witnesses was one Smith, an ex-
convict who had served a term in the Mass
achusetts state prison. This man testified
to his having seen me crossing some street
in Boston ON the same day these Jews
claimed TO have bought the womans jew
els. j. G. Thornton and N. s. Stearns OF
Rutland were the reward seekers and 60
called detectives, who brought these men
to Rutland to identify aud testify against
me. And how in the world they were in
duced by them to do such thing is a mat
ter which as yet / am unable to understand
1t was certainly piece OF work which
can never recognize as honest, and / an
satisfied that the men never swore an iden.
tty on me voluntarily, from the fact thst
was not the man whom they dealt with and
they could not honestly have done such 9
thing. This Thornton and Stearns had
forty eight witnesses subpnnaed aguins
me on the trial, and from the majority Of
them was elected the most of the evidence
for my defence. And in all the testimony
the prosecution endeavored to elicit from
these so-called witnesses, there was not 6
being who could come forward and say
that they had ever seen or known of my
having been in the murdered woman's com
pany after the evening of June 9th. L
was shown on the trial that the woman
was seen alive and well by her neighbors
on the 7th and 9Th days of June, and thai
she was supposed to have been murdered
on the 9th. My trial commenced on thu
second day of October, 1874, and continu
ed until little past II o'clock on the nigh
of the 9th, when the jury, after being GU
less than two and one-half hours, came il
and rendered a verdict of murder in III
first degree. Exceptions were then taker
by my counsel and the case went to the su
preme court on petition for a new trial
The supreme court convened at Rutland
the latter part Of January and heard m,
case on the Sd day OF February. Thi
court refused me new Trial and offere
an opinion that L had had fair and I'm
partial trial, and that if new trial wer
granted me there would probably be som
scheme gotten up to clear me.
CHIEF JUSTICE PIERPoINT ACCUSED OF PRE-
JUDGE.
To say that l was disappointed in til
| decision of this high court does not expires
/ it; for l had hoped for redress from thi
, court, and think now as / did then tina
z Chief Justice Pierpoint must have beel
= strongly prejudiced against me. My res
son for thinking thus are founded o
the fact that the judge is resident of tn
place where my former trouble occurre
t and was the judge who sentenced me
: prison at the time. The court, after refus
ing me a new trial, then sentenced me t.
T be hanged on the first Friday in April, 1871
o Rafora uaaainU cantQnpn the nOurf innuiTe