Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1879-02-12

formed from careful perusal Of the evidence in
the case OF John r. phair, who asked for new
trial, the court have declined to grant him one,
and he must be hung The following is the sub
stantal part OF the opinion Of the court, M deliv-
cred orally by Chief Justice plerpoint:
" In hearing this case we resolved in the outset
to receive everything offered as bearing on the
case This we did by reason of the peculiar cir
cumstances surrounding the case and that the re-
spondent might have the benefit Of everything
that he or his counsel conceived to be material in
his favor. We have received and considered
everything that was shown before the jury on the
trial at which he was convicted everything pre-
scented on his former petition for trial
everything before the legislature, offered as
| reason for enactiDg the law under which this pc
| ttion Is made, and all the new evidence procured
| for this hearing. refer 10 this for the purpose
| of saying that the course have taken in this
case IL not precedent for future applications Of
| this character
| " In this case it appears that at the September
term, A. ID. 1874, this respondent was indicted
and tried for the murder Of Anna Freese. That
murder like that for which he is convicted was
confessedly committed lie was tried and
vcted. lie brought his petition for new trial,
| and that was heard and denied now II IL again
brought to try to vary that result on the ground
of newly discovered evidence pertaining to the
| case.
THAT such n murder committed is not
questioned, and the whole force of the trial and
subsequent investigations has been directed to
the question Of whether the respondent was the
| party who committed the murder II he was
not, or there il reasonable doubt that he was, he
should have a new trial. The person who com
| mitted that murder possessed himself OF certain
personal property Of the murdered woman, such
as watch, rings, opera glass and half a shawl
| These things were by some person brought to
Boston and disposed Of there This murder was
| committed on the night of the Sth, or the MORN
ing the 9th of June This property late in the
afternoon OF the 9th of June in Boston. The
watch was disposed Of in Boston about five
| o'clock in the afternoon of the day OF the murder
If the murder was after twelve o'clock on the
Sth. Next morning the rest of the property was
disposed OF in Boston The party transporting
this property to Boston committed this murder
That party must have left Rutland by the early
train in the morning. leaving about four O'clock
as in no other way could he have got there to
dispose Of the watch at the time that was disposed
Of Nothing is shown that the property went in
separate parcels. This shows that the party who
took this property to Boston went on this early
train and bod somo,hi,,, q, A., ,r;,t ,,,a
"wbon ,o, os,aht,.,, IT,, t.o, - 49,,
,.,., A.. " VIZ .'o" '"'''
nrdor r.o ,a-..' ~ ..,. 49,, eo'''lil'eI ''.'
| po.,o,. ,,..,,aa h., ~ ,,ssr
,u.a ". rr. -, -, ., v ~,
a., p,a.,. -, - W., r -. ", "'''"
tr Go, ~, $40 - ''s n''''''
r,. -. = -
.r,. 49,, ,., ~, ~ .,' ''e''
| ,, ,,,t :, - -, ~ ~
| -, 80,
r0N ~ y, Wv "''o " =, - D"''' ''oppe' AZ ''''
.,'' '','' ''"' ""' rus ea'o'e' MS name uPo"
~, w '''e" w ''''' AVE. va "
~ w. 'As u'' ~ '"''V i'o"'
n' w ''''i '"'"i y, 'i' i'e''' "'n'e
~ 70 'i''n''''o'' '"'' '"e """ WIN
EN '"o p'op.'S ~ p0a'oH was '"e s'i'o man
wa" '''pP'' az '"o Au'.,ns iiou'e anu uiSposeu
" Wv O'' Piope''s' !" nv was .no p0'''" "no
oA '""' piope''S " pos'on Inc answer 10
'""' i'e'''o" 9o'"e' 'ie q"es''on vi VINO oo'n-
n''eu '''o "uiuu' an 'he parties WHO rece''eu
'"'9 properly =" nos'on 'es'''y Mi'h more OF less
.,'' ene'' NAV "'., was '"'s man ine'r at
en'''" was '"'eu " 'iie iao' vi 'iie inuruer III
10" u"Ss' ""i 'eio'e 'i'e means Vi iueh''nc'.'oh
they could ever identity a man with whom they
had dealings, the circumstances were such as to
render their naturalization of Phair reliable.
They all testify with more or less positiveness
that that man was Phair
"Ihere is also the handwriting on the pawn
ticket, where the name Of f. f. Smith is signed
and the same name on the hotel register and the
name written by Phair We have these names
written under different circumstances with diff
ferent objects in view, so far as the writer was
concerned. Comparing these names so written
no man of intelligence could come to any other
conclusion than that they were written by the
same hand. That Phair went to Boston on the
four o'clock train Is conceded He claims he did
not stop in Boston, but went to Providence, and
came back from there and was on his way back
to Vergennes, to which place he had ticket,
when arrested If Phair went right through to
Providence and did not STAY all night in Boston.
he is not the man who disposed of this property,
and registered at the Adams House What is
there to show that he went to Providence There
is evidence tending to show that he went from
one depot to the other in Boston. There is no
evidence from any person who testified to seeing