Bellows Falls times. [volume] (Bellows Falls, Vt.) 1856-1965, 1891-06-18
WINDSOR COUNTY COURT
Robert Elton Convicted and the Lyman
Clark Murder Case Begun.

WdUCi, was COuJluucu. EICuCu duu
Southgate for the respondent.
In state vs.. Otis G. Sawyer of Sharon,
charged with second offences in violation
of the liquor law, respondent was placed
under $1,000 bonds.
State vs.. Robert Fitton. This case has
excited wide spread interest, and was
attended by large audience. The charge
was perjury at December term, 1886, on
trial of case Fitton and wife VS.. Clarence
Whelden, to recover damages for the al
legged careless burning of tinshOp at
Proctorsville. On that trial Mr.. Fitton
presented in evidence an affidavit signed
by Wheldon, referring to this burning,
in which he states he knew no cause for
the fire ''except it was caused by my own
carelessness. 1t was claimed that this
clause was written in after the affidavit
had been signed and sworn to by Mr..
Whelden, and that this was shown by
the ink being paler, the writing cramped
and not corresponding with the re-
mainder of the writing. The respondent
did not testify. There was large
amount of evidence given as to his con
duct since that trial, as indicating his
guilt, such as fleeing the country, chang
ing his name, dismissing himself, twice
FORGETTING his bonds of $4,000, and seiz-
ing the aft iavit from the custody of the
clerk, in whose hands it had been placed
by order of court, and thus trying to
suppress evidence. The jury promptly
returned verdict of guilty. The prose-
cution was conducted by States Attor-
ney Stickney and w. E. johnson, and
the defence by N. Paul who was assigned
by the court to do that duty. The wit
nesses for the state were J. r. Pember,
county clerk, Gilbert A Davis, William
Batchelder, Sheriff w. S. Lowell, Deputy
Sheriff E. G. White, Sheriff Perry of
Walpole, N. H., Clarence Whelden,
Cashier johnson and Assistant Cashier
Wilder of Woodstock National bank.
In the case of state VS.. Robert Fitton,
charged with breaking jail, the respond
ent came into court on Tuesday morning
and retracted his plea of not guilty and
plead guilty. Sentence not yet imposed.
the respondent rendered plea of guilty
of so offences and the plea was accepted.
He was the liquor agent at Sharon and
it is claimed abused his trust. The
questions in the case are resolved into
questions of law, and one of them is as
to whether his prior conviction, which
was prior to the amended act of 1888,
can be taken into account in making
these so offences, of which he is con-
fessedly guilty, second offences. If they
are first offences, the court may sentence
to fine and imprisonment or fine alone;
if second offences, the court must SEN
tence to fine and Imprisonment. The
legal question is one of great Importance,
to the respondent at least. Respondent
is represented by William E. johnson
and Charles P. Tarbeli.
State VS.. David Andrews. This was
an Indictment for burning a dwelling
house in Chester with intent to defraud
the New England Fire Insurance COM
pany. The details are not of general in
taHest. The respondent has once previ-
ously been tried for arson in causing the
saline fire but escaped because of the fact
that he had an ownership, free hold in
terest in the property and therefore could
not be guilty of arson. The jury re-
turned a verdict of not guilty on this
charge and that places Mr.. Andrews all
right before the public. w. B. G. Stick
ney conducted the prosecution and
George l.. Fletcher, assigned by the
court, conducted the defence.
State VS. Josiah Wilder. This was an
Indictment for perjury in swearing that
he owed party $3.50 to get an offset in
tax inventory. Verdict guilty. Ex-
ceptions by the respondent, and case
passed to the supreme court. No SEN
tence was imposed. w. B. G. Stickney
for state, N. Paul for respondent.
State vs.. Lyman Clark. This case was
put on trial and a jury empaneled Mon
day afternoon, June Is, the jury being at
once taken to the scene of the murder
10 fol of TuncIau
morning. The defence is conducted by
Henry Ballard of Burlington, William
E. Johnson of Woodstock and John j.
Simonds of White River Junction. The
state is represented by w. w. Stickney,
states attorney, and w. B. G. Stickney
of Bethel late states attorney, who
worked up the evidence soon after it
happened.
The divorce case of Helen M. Fitton
VS.. Robert Fitton was heard last week.
l.. M. Read of Bellows Falls appeared
for Mrs. Fitton, w. G. French for the
respondent. The chief feature of the
defence. was the cross-eXamination of
Mrs. Fitton and her son by Mr.. Fitton.
Mrs. Fitton claimed a divorce for intol-
cradle severity and among other claims
one was that Mr. Fitton had kept pros
titute in the house for his own use; and
that the remonstranceS of Mrs. Fltton
were silenced by revolver held at her
head.
In State VS.. Robert Fitton, appellant,
prosecution for assault and battery,
was delivered to the court in discharge
of his bail, June u, 1891. Robert Fitton
has been sentenced to 10 years hard
labor in the states prison for perjury,
and to two years hard labor in the same
institution, for an attempt to break jail.
| The case of Joseph Enright, appellant,
VS.. William p. Dodge, got a black eye.
This was an action of trover for colt
on which plaintiff claimed chattel
mortgage, by reason of having mort
gage of the dam, The court ruled that
the suit was improperly brought, as by a
decision of the supreme court. the statute
pointed out the proper course of pro-
cedure which had not been followed in
this case and Judgment was rendered for
defendant. Joseph c. Enrigh for plain
| tiff, George l.. Fletcher for defendant.
| In State VS.. j. w. Minkler and Ann
Shrader, being an indictment for
adultery, the case was called for trial,
the states witnesses were ready, but the
respondent failed to appear and his
bonds were forfeited. Thereupon the
court ordered bench-warrant to issue,