St. Johnsbury Caledonian. [volume] (St. Johnsbury, Vt.) 1867-1919, 1877-05-04
PHAIR.
Another Reprieve Granted.
The Governors Reasons.

THE LEADING FACTS IN THE TRIAL RE-
VIEWED AND THE BEARING OF THE
NEW EVIDENCE IN THE CASE.
Gov. Fairbanks has granted Il re-
prieve to John p. Phair until the first
Friday in April, A. D., 1879. The pur-
pose is to grant Phair an opportunity
to make application to the Supreme
Court for IL new trial, on the ground of
newly discovered evidence. Under the
existing statute, the time within which
a petition for new trial on this ground
can be brought, is limited to two years
from the rendition of the original judg-
ment, which expired in Phair's case, in
February last. Relief in this direction
can, therefore, only be afforded him by
special act of legislation extending the
time. The next Legislature does not
convene until the first Wednesday of
October, A. D., 1873. Hence the ne
cessity of granting so long Il reprieve.
\ petition for new trial in Phair's
case, if brought in Rutland county,
could not he brought until the session
of the Supreme Court in that county
for the year 1879, which begins Jan
uary 25th.
The action of Gov. Fairbanks in
granting this second reprieve, is con-
e L..
vested in the Executive by the consti
tuition as stated i'll his letter to Phair,
denying his application for Il reprieve,
which it will be remembered were sub
stantially us follows: that this power
of pardon and reprieve were not lodged
in the Executive to be exercised capri
ciOuSly, but Olly upon good and sub
stantial ground-not to override the
courts and defeat the ends of justice,
but only in furiherance of those ends
PhaH'S case as now presented, seems
to come clearly within that class of
cases in which executive interference is
not only justified, but is demanded.
1t is not necessary that Phair's limo
cence shall be established-it is snf-
ficient if IL reasonable doubt be raised
us to his guilt. This is the test to be
applied by the Supreme Court in grant
ing or denying the application for Il new
trial. The newly discovered evidence
is such, if it can stand the scrutiny OF
judicial investigation as to raise such
doubt.
In order to see the precise bearing OF
the new evidence upon the case, it is
necessary to state somewhat briefly,
some of The leading points established
by the prosecution on trial.
1t was established that Mrs. Frieze
was murdered on the night of June 9Th
or ON the morning of June 9th, in hel
house in the extreme outskirts of the
! village of Rutland-that her house was
discovered to be on fire at about half
past six on the morning of June 9th
that some person on the afternoon OF
said day, left in pawn with divers pawn
brokers i'll Boston, several articles be-
longing to the murdered woman, and
sold them.
1t was impossible to account for the
articles being in Boston at the time
they were pawncd unless they were
taken there on Il morning train which
| left Rutland at 4:30 A. NJ. Phair was on
that train.
1t was proven that on June 10th at
! 10 o'clock A. NJ, some person left in
pawn with James G. Pierce at 25 How
ard street, shawl and opera glass, con-
ceded to have been the property of the
murdered woman. This person took
the shawl from valse similar to the
one Phair had with him on this Journey
He said the articles belonged to a lady
at the Adams House who wanted ten
dollars to get home with. He signed a
pawn contract "E. F. Smith, st. Adams
Vermont" which was left with Pierce
and was put in evidence.
On June 9th, at about O'Clock P. NJ.
man registered himself at the Adams
House as ''E. F. Smith, st. Adams. Vt, ,
and was assigned room No. 81, was
seen by the clerk at about ten O'Clock
in the evening and occupied his room
that night. A half shawl conceded to
have been the property of Mrs. Frieze
was left by him in his room.
The name E. F. Smith, appears the
second registration for tea, though there
were some thirty entries subsequent to
his Oh that day.