The New York herald., 1879-12-11
Testimony Favorable to the
Reverend Prisoner.
THE QUESTION OF BIAS.
Counsel for the State Gets Flood Of
Tears for Answer
THE CLOTHES AND THE POCKET KNIFE.


Under Connecticut law wife may testify for or
against her husband. but cannot 6e compelled to
testify his favor. To-day she told straightforward
and apparently consistent story of her knowledge of
her husbands movements during the period of the
tragedy On minor points she hesitated. If to re-
call the facts, but on points OF vital interest her
answers were prompt and clear. As whole she
made good impression. and was listened 10 Win
curious interest she described the everyday oc-
currences about the house. in which her husband
participated on the day of the tragedy. She OBJ
served nothing in his movements that day to arouse
suspicion of any kind
On cross-examination Mr.. Waller. for the State,
put to Mrs. Hayden question of startling siguih-
cance and said to be entirely in the annals of Con-
nccticut criminal justice. He does not favor the law
under which the wife may be permitted to testify In
behalf of her husband. and. with marked emphasis.
made inquiry intimating that so devoted a wife
as the witness could not tell the exact truth IL it
tended to imperil her husbands life. The only
ply was a food of tears and the question was not
pressed. The policy Of putting question Of this
character is widely discussed tonight and opinions
differ materially By some it is criticised sharply.
In her direct examination Mrs. Hayden testified in
substance as follows-
I away from Rockland after Mr. Hayden's
,econd arrest and have been there but since.
merely driving through; 1 have made examina-
tion since left of the lines of sight; my husband
first arrested Friday, September G. 1873. three
days after the MURDER Mr.. Hayden went away on
Sunday morning to preach at South Madison and
returned Monday at half-past three O'Clock;
Mary Stannard came to my house on Monday morn
ing, at O'Clock; l talked with her fifteen min
utes. and she said that her reason for calling
that she had waited as long she could without
seeing and that she thought would want to
ale allaA abn
from Guilford. which unexpected to me; she
had told before going that she expected to stay
.or some time. if her child Willie got along WELL
but she said that he had been very trouble
some she had therefore come home hoping to
arrange to leave him at her fathers if she could do
the Studleys. her employers. would pay her bet
ter; again. her at halfpas nine passing my
house. going half mile away after butter; not
twenty minutes later she came into the house.
Beeming annoyed. and remarked that the people
absent; her third visit that day was at
four in the afternoons she asked tor a rake
and offered other for calling; Mr.. Hayden
had returned from Madison and sitting at the
dining room window smoking she asked him for the
rake and he went to the barn and got one; from
window saw him going to the barn; Mary did not
and sitting near me; Mr. Hayden after an absence
of u minute returned with the rake; Mary put the
baby in the cradle as she saw him co ming and both
OF us went to the door together: stopped at the
door. he being six feet away; in reply to question
he said he was in no hurry for the return OF the
rake. he having finished haying; there other
conversation between them; he came into the house
and Mary started home.
CONTRADICTORY TESTIMONY.
This story contradcts that of witnesses for the
State living in the opposite house. who swear they
Hayden and the girl go out together to tine barn.
and entering. remain together four or five minutes.
Mrs. Hayden meantime standing in the doorway.
1t is also claimed that Mary then told Hayden OF
After Mary went away he sat down by the window
again and resumed smoking as usual.
Great smoker, was hep
eyes, SIR, and the smile of the witness was
Joined in all the court room.
q. Did Mary 20 anywhere the barn that day,
either with or without Mr.. Hayden? A. No, sir; she
did not she again to house ut nine o clock
Tuesday morning. the morning OF the IN urder my
husband being then absent, aud borrowed pitch
fork; she got it in the barn aud went away; to my
knowledge she was not at our barn on Monday or
Tuesday other than as have Just stated: she made
q second visit that Tuesday morning. about ten
O'Clock. having been to the store; 1t her habit
to call at my house frequently, for encouraged her
and gave her many little articles useful to her; we
had frequently discussed religious subjects and
WHATS the object of this?" inquired Mr.. Waller.
only to show the relations with Mrs. Hayden"
replied Mr.. Jones.
She seemed to have interest in the subject OF
religion; we talked of it at this second visit Tues
day morning; my children went up the road to her
house with her, and, sitting at my north dining
room window, l usually watched for their return
from her house; saw my husbands carriage when
looking for the children; it was just beyond the
spring, but can't tell the exact spot, only that it
was little way up the road it remained still but
moment and then came along; my husband and
children in 1t. Mary was at the spring
when Hayden stopped When my husband returned
on Monday, from preaching in Madison he brought
some oysters pears and apples; we ate some of the
fruit and kept the remainder for preserving;
time We were out OF horse feed and needed some
groceries and some fulers earth, used for baby
powders Mr.. Hayden went away after these things
on Tuesday morning.
NOT COMMUNICATIVE
He did not tell me where he going; he often
did not, and seldom inquired about it; knew that
at this time my husband had an arrangement with
Mr. Mr Burton, IN Middietown, to pay Burton in prod
Mr. Hayden returned IRON Middetown, about
noon of the day of the tragedy. he brought
some feed. groceries and some poison; had been
much annoyed by rats all through our house and
we had talked about getting rid of them by using
arsenic; always objected to it az dangerous;
suggested "ratsbane." which thought different
from arsenic. and never knew tho similarity until
Professor Johnson stated il in this ria he told me
that he had bought arsenic. but 1t not until the
first sunday after the homicide; he was then under
arrest.
Lrhe subject of rats arsenic was not referred to
by the witness In any way in her testimony at the
preliminary trial.
first knew from the papers that he went to Mid
uletown Tor his purchases; speaking about 1t he
said he bought the groceries in Durham and then
earth aud arsenic.
Mr. wa!ier--l think must stop right here the
further narrative of these conversations. We have
permitted tito 90 so tar as an explanation Of the
buying or the poison and where bought, but his
declarations AFTER his arrest We think not ad-
missible
Mr.. watrous argued that tho conversation about
the entire transaction should be admitted. And IL
was the moro important because while MIR. HAYDEN
had put the arsenic in tile barn police functionary
employed by the State had testified that he had uot
found il there.
Chief Justice Park--we think the declarations are
not admissible.
after your husbands return from Middletowu
that noon what did he doY' inquired Mr.. Jones.
The witness gave history of his movements on
tins the afternoon of the murder.
He put away tho iecd and groceries,; then he
went out 20 the barn and there awhile: return
ing he opened the oysters with his pocket knife.
nSl A. tHn lnrYa nd m and ant
fed. IL IL with this knife that the State claims
Mary Stannard was stabbed, and upon whose blade
blood corpuscles were found.l lie had no other knife
To my knowledge; lie handed the knife to me after
opening the oysters, tolling him that wanted to
peel some pears; we had dinner at one o'clock. MIR.
Hayden holding the baby while ate he aftcrward
cleared inc table and did some other houscwork;
thc hour was then half-past one; he made up the
beds that noon he brought me an adm nstrator's
letter anu account OF my mothers estate; wo
10 sgh the latter, aud discussed IL for time;
after playing on the floor with the children, about