St. Johnsbury Caledonian. [volume] (St. Johnsbury, Vt.) 1867-1919, 1879-04-11
Phair Again Reprieved.

more communications from RADIX.
Phair Again Reprieved.
A STAY OF SIX DAYS GRANTED BY THE
GOVERNOR.
Especial dispatch to the Boston Journal
RUTLAND, VT, April 3. The hearing
before Gov. Proctor for a temporary
reprieve of Phair, took place here to-
day at las, a. m. Col. w. G. Veazey,
Hon. d. E. Nicholson, James C. Bar
rett, of Rutland, Phairs counsel, and
State Attorney Lawrence, were pres
ent. The hearing opened by an expla-
nation by Hon. David Nicholson of
Rutland, who stated that time was too
limited to get the question before the
Judges according to the act of 1873,
and on that account the counsel for
Phair were present in the Executive
Chamber. The prayer of the counsel
was relief to such time that the evil
dence could be presented to two Judges
of tie Supreme Court, that the evidence
discovered was such that there was
more than reasonable doubt of the
guilt of Phair, and that now there was
evidence to show that Phair was on the
train from Providence, June 10, 1874,
when it was shown by the Jew pawn
brokers that Phair was pledging the
murdered wOman's goods. 1t was a
perfect alibi, and Phair is now shown
to be not the E. F. Smith who was
claimed to have the goods in question.
Hon. Mr.. Nicholson presented Marshal
ID. Downing of Boston, to the Governor,
after which sworn statement, taken
by interrogatories at Windsor. and
sworn to by Phair. The statement is
substantially what has many times been
given.
STATEMENT OF MARSHAL D. DOWNING.
Following the reading of Phair's
affidavit the same testimony of Marshal
d. Downing of Boston, was read, in
which he states that after a most care
full consideration of the answers given
by Phair to his Downing's) interroga-
tories and the remarkable resemblance
of Phair to the Rutland mechanic he
met June 10, 1874, on the Providence
train, he made up his mind beyond all
reasonable doubt, that Phair was the
man he met.
The description given by Phair of
tho man he swears he met on the train
exactly describes Downing, both as to
dress and the way he wore his whiskers
and moustache during the summer of
1874. The questions were propounded
in the presence of Superintendent Rice
and Warden Cakes, and the examina-
ton was impartial and critical. The
Governor and Col. w. G. Veazey pro-
pounded several questions which Down
ing frankly responded to. Downing
states that he was positive beyond all
doubt that Phair was the man he met :;
that he went to Windsor on his own
responsibility, feeling it mere duty !;
that he ever was ready to go to Wind
sor, but Phair's counsel told him not to
do so without their presence, and that
he felt it the duty of Phair's counsel or
the state to summon him to see Phair
and make the test; that he had waited
till he could wait no longer, and then
decided to make the test; that thou
sands of people had urged him to go,
and he felt that he could not resist, no
matter what might be the public COM
ment, and that he knew nothing of the
guilt or innocence of Phair. He did
not know that he, Phair, was the man
he met on the train. He was here only
by the most urgent request of counsel.
He had no interest except that of hu-
mainly. He knew that mistake was
made by counsel in not making the test
early, and said Phair had urged him to
come and see him. He believed that
Phair, if he (Downing) could remember
anything in life, was the same man he
met on the Providence train. At the
close of the interrOgatOries by his Ex-
cellency, Hon. D. E. Nicholson opened
the argument for the petition,
PHAIR RETRIEVED.
The case was left with the Governor,
and after due deliberation he gave a
reprieve for six days. The following is
the full text of his reasons for grant
ing it.:
The application for reprieve for
John P. Phair rests upon the affidavit
of M. d. Downing, who yesterday visit
ed Phair i'll prison, and makes oath that
he is the man whom he saw on the
train from Providence June 10, 1874.
J His statement is positive to that effect.
While the fact that Downing has neither
of his own motion, nor by the procure
ment of Phair's friends and counsel
sought an interview with him, is not
, without suspicion, still it is claimed
that the condemned man is not respon.
, sible for this.
cannot in the few days before the
} time appointed for the execution, ex
anime and weigh to my satisfaction al
the evidence on the question of identi
. ty. Judge Pierpont, in giving the
opinion of the supreme court in Feb
r ruary last, says:
d, 81 quote from the printed report
e which | understand to be substantial,
correct. The testimony most relied on
o and which has done the most to brin.
q the case here, is that of Downing. |
e seems to us that it is important that h.
should be able to testify to somethin,
: that would be of use to Phair before W
t should grant new trial on the test
e mony. He has not sworn that Phai
j. was the man he saw on the cars, an
= we see no reason to suppose he woul
l. swear to that as a fact.n This seem
p to imply that if he had sworn that Phai
Ie was the man he saw on the cars
n might be of use to Pbair, He now doe
i swear positively on this point. In thi
:, view OF the case l think it nv duty t
ID give his counsel an opportunity to ar
rs ply to two judges, under the act {
n 1873. That act is, in my view, a wis
re one, and was designated to remove til
he consideration of questions like this frol