The Bennington banner. [volume] (Bennington, Vt.) 1858-1894, 1889-06-20

came LOT Nun WIN axe ne lDeDlD WOulu
hit him wi tie stick, Walder tn, n went
b1Ck ~ his w"Ik ard the two went to
piling the wood on the wagon. One
horse which MAS behind uuhi'C chez tart
ed to 60 by and Bent threw stick In
front Of the horse TO stop it and il struck
near Wal Ter who spoke rs if he thought
it was intended for hun. Bent told him
it was intended for the horse and not
him. No further trouble occurred until
all the wood had been transferred but
three large sticks and one small one, eX.
cept mat Roberts and Valdez had some
words which Bent did not hear and he
did not know that there was any reason
for trouble between them. just as
Bent was handing Roberts the last
small stick Ct WAS feet long and 3
or inches through Valdez came to.
ward Roberts with the AK and Roberts
struck him with the stuck about as hard
as he could Bent could not tell where
the blow hit Wa!der, who fell back two
or three feet and then gathered up and
came again with theaXe. Roberts picked
up the dTay pole, about ~ feet long which
lay between the dray and wagon and
struck Valdez. Valdez staggered back a
few feet an came again with the tx and
Roberts struck him on the head. He
went off sideways some distance and fell
down. August had run up the road
several rods and when his father fell he
called to his mother, who soon came
down. Her girl afterwards came out on
the bank and her mother told her to get
the gun and she would shoot them as
she would two dogs, Bent and Roberts
then pitched on the horses and loaded
on the remaining sticks and started for
home about as soon as they could. Bent
testified that there were three blows
struck by Roberts, not more than four
seconds from the first blow 10 the last.
Bent stood near Roberts and Valdez
while this was going on, but took no
part.
Bent's testimony was given in blunt,
straightforward manner and he never
hesitated for an answer though it might
tell against him. The worst feature of
1t was that he seemed disposed to treat
the whole matter lightly as il it were of
little consequence.
The respondent Roberts, who lie 90
years old, was placed on the stand and
his account of the affray was very much
like that of Bent. He gave what was
said before he struck Valdez. He first
asked Valdez if he knew what had be-
come of a wrench which Roberts had
left beside the road the other day. They
had some words and Valdez got mad
and said if Roperts would 60 out in the
road he would fight him if Bent would
go away. Roberts laughed at that,
Valdez kept swearing. Roberts said,
you didn't see the wrench ?" Valdez
said, IF you'll come out in the road III
fight you" Roberts said, 1T you keep
on talking you'll learn me how to talk
Dutch" Valdez said Cd D--n
| you, and as Roberts was putting on a
stick of wood, Bent said, Look out.
Bert" just then Walder'o axe came
down within six inches of Roberts.
Roberts then hit Valdez with the stick,
on the shoulder or arm, pretty good
blow. The rest Of Roberts testimony
was like Bent's only after Valdez fell
Roberts asked Bent what they should
do. Bent said they had better wait until
Mrs. Valdez came. When she came,
Roberts asked her if they should take
him home. She said, "I'll fix you
The girl came out on the bank, and Mrs.
Valdez said to her, Get the gun and
I'll shoot them like two dogs" Roberts
said they didn't want to have any
trouble with her, and they hitched up
as soon as they could and went home.
The Journals very full report con-
cludes Although the respondents are
tried together the jury may find differ
ent verdict in each case, and this YER
dict may be either murder in the first or
second degree, manslaughter or acquit-
tai. II the theory of self defense is fully
maintained by the evidence the verdict
should be acquittal. II 1t amounts to
only partial justification more force
being used than was justified by the cir
cumstance of the case, the verdict
should be manslaughter or murder in
the second degree. If self defense in
any degree is not found the verdict
should be murder in the first degree.
States Attorney Barber presented the
ment occupying an hour and a half. 1t
was clear and concise statement of
what the prosecution claims. Mr.. Van
Santvoord made a very able argument
for the prisoners and especially for
Bent, occupying most of the forenoon
Wednesday. Judge Munson followed
in very able, impressive, and we might
almost say convincing argument for the
prisoners, and the Gaze closed by MI.
Batchelder in another very able and elo=
quent presentation of the case for the
State
Judge Rowell has shown great ability
and fairness in presiding during the trial
and will no doubt give a clear, compre-
hensive and impartial charge and the
case will be gwen to the jury by Thurs
day noon.