Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1888-04-03

sponGents were in Medfield at the
time of the stealing of the HsmaBt horse,
and the following new evidence has been dis
covered, none OF which was known either to
the respondents or their counsel before or
during the trial. viz:
Mrs. Harriet ). Hamaut of Medfeld will
testify that she is the wife of Charles Ham
ant Of Medfeld, that said Charles Hamant.
o~ing to physical infirmities, is unable TO
give his testimony, but that she remembers
taat her hush nd's horse and harness was /
stolen from his stable in Mcdheid between
the evening Of Feb. 2Ist and the morning of |
Feb. ed, 1875, and that there was quite an
excitem mt in the village next day over the /
robbery. She made memorandum of the
robbery on the almanac of that year opposite /
the date of the occurrence, and has the al |
manae in her posshssion and will produce IT, !
Also, that George ID. Hamant of MedheId, /
will testify that he is the nephew of
Charles Iiamant; that he remembers
when his uhcle's horse was stolen
on the night Of February 2lst, 1875,
and that there vas considerable excite
ment in the village on the ed that men
and teams we're out searching for the miss
ing team that suspicion at once attached to
David l.. stain and his associates. and that
while he cannot remember positively of see
NJ Stain himself, he knows that stain mast
have satls factoTily accounted for ms where
-bou on that night during the day OF the I'D
Also, that JohA /. Billiard, a credible cit
zen OF Medneid, will testify that he was III
STAINS -hoe chop on the morning that the
Hamant hors, stolen and that Stain talked |
over the matter OF the robbery; that he saw |
stain nearly every day at about this time and
that he knows that he vas not away from
home in February, 1878.
Also, that Miss Margaret Steele of Med
field. will testify that during the fall and
winter of ls71-s, David l.. Stain took but
ter and eggs of her at her farm in Medtield
that she in the habit OF seeing him as
often as once OF twice week during all that
time, AID knows that he could not have been
absent from home for any length of time i'll
November or February; that she distinctly
remembers the steahpg OF the fianant team,
and that Oh the Friday or Saturday (22d or
z3dJ after the theft, David l.. Stain was at
her house aud they talked about it.
Miss Steele will also corroborate Stain in
his testimony at the trial that {. +. Stain
left in 1876 and stole his brown overcoat and
will testify that she loaned him her fathers
gray oyercoat, which he wore till he bought
one for himself, and that the new coat was
black with velvet collar.
Also, that Marcus Gilmore of Medfell,
will testify that he was in Stains shoe shop
II MedtieId on Feb 20th, 1878 and saw and
talked v lth stain, also that he was there
again ON Feb. 10Th, and again saw and had a
talk with stain. He will also corroborate
the testimony Of Lizzie Moody, given at the
trial, where she stated that Stain gave her a
pair OF boots on the 10th or 2lst
Also, that Joseph Johnson, credible cit
zen of Medfed, will testify that he remem-
beers the stealing of the iiamant team, and
that there was great excitement in the village
of Mcdteld on the next day (22d) that men
and teams were out in search of the missing
! team that suspicion at once rested on Stain
| and hi. associates, aud that while he cannot
from positive recollection state that he saw
Stain himself, he knows that Stain in a salts
| factory way accounted for his whereabouts
| the night the horse was stolen. 7.'
| Also that Lyman A. Wiley "A farmer rcsid-
| ing a short distance from Medfeld village,
| will testify that he was in the village of
| Medheld either on Friday or Saturday, after
the Han.ant horse was stolen, (22d or 23d)
that he called at Stains shoe shop, saw Stain
and talked with him about the Hamant rob
berry.
Also, that James Buntn of Medheld will
testify that he resided in the village of Med
| held in February, 1878, and that he remem-
| bers the morning after Charles IIamant's
| horse stolen, that there WAS great excite
mcnt in the village of Medteld, and that he
| remembers distinctly of seeing and talking
with David l.. Stain on that morning, that
| Stain was out and about on the streets in
| Medheld Oh that day,
Also, that J. +. Allen, a farmer, residing
a short distance from Medfeld village, will
| testify that in February, 1878. he resided
| with his father in the town of Medteld on a
| farm. and that a part of their business Was to
| raise hens for the market; that on the after
| noon of the 2lst DAY of February, 1878, he
was in the village of Medteld with some
| hpus "A, the house of Mr. Wiswell. who
| lived next neighbour to ID, H. Stain that
| while there he traded some hens with Mr..
| " sweil for the first watch he ever owned,
| and male II memorandum of the transaction
"a The book in which he kept the account
W.th ms hens that hlle he was making the
rrade, y. l.. stain came out of his shoe shop
| bare heated and with his eobblers apron on.
and took part III the conversation Mr.. Al
| len has a book shDNirg this transaction aud
| the date of it, ami Viii produce II,
| Also, that Jeremiah JOHNSON, a credible
| citizen OF Medhed. will testify that he re-
members when the Hanant horse Was stolen
at that the morning after the robbery
| the 22ud he "as Ia the shoe shop OF ID. l..
stain. in Medueiu, and that STAIN told him
| ut the robbery. that lhis was the first time
H. had heard vi 1t, and that he and stain
| talked about the matter and discussed the
ga, stiuu az who II probably was that stole
the horse.
Aud the respondents aver that all of the
| evidence hereiu set iorth ~ this motion has
be'u discovered since the trial of the cause,
/ II
selves or their counsel before or during the
| trial That uClibcc they nor their counsel
were guilty of laches in not producing the
cuu,ure at the trm', had been herein
before more especially set forth, both the
respondents aud their counsel were diligent
and acted with entire good faith toward the
| Court aud the government; that counsel de-
voted several weeks p,ior to the trial in
| travelling both in Maine and Massachusetts,
| IN search of evidence, and that part of this
| work was done by counsel at their own ex-
| pense. That the bulk of tins newly dscov-
cred evidence is from witnesses who say
| that believing that the respondents would he
| acquitted, they refused, prior TO the trial,
to talk with any body about this case, for
Jhc reason that newspapers at that time,
were full of sensational stories. sometimes
representing, but more often mis-representing
statements made III favor of these respondents,
and generally throwing discredit upon any
person who made a statement favorable TO
the defence, but who, since the trial have
| consented to make known the facts within
their knowledge.
And the respondents aver that within for
weight hours after the verdict in this case
they, through their counsel. received some
forty letters and kilograms giving them in
| formation in regard t, this new evidence;
| that this was the first they knew of it, and
that no amount of effort or diligence on their
part could have discovered it either before or
after the trial but for this voluntary infor-
nation.
And the respondents say that the facts set
forth in this newly discovered evidence are
| all true according to their best ledge
aud belief, and that if they could have had
the benefit of it at the trial the verdict of the
| jury must have been different; that it was no
fault of theirs that they did not produce it at
the trial where fore they ask that your Hon
or will set day when these witnesses may