The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1892-03-30
Washington County Court.

Liquor cases have constituted the bulk of
the criminal trials thus far, and there are
many more to follow. The states attorney
has set all such cases for trial, and it is ex-
pected that they will keep the court sup
piled with work for two weeks longer
Since our last report the following cases
have been tried:
State v. George P. Carpenter. This re-
spondent was indicted for the larceny OF
hand satchel, containing military dress
coat and sundry toilet articles, November
20, 1890. The states evidence tended to
show that on that date one Rudd, a cadet
student OF the Norwich University at North
field, left Northfeld in company with four
or FIVE other cadets on the evening express
train; that Mr.. Rudd had with him the
satchel which the respondent was charged
with stealing; that when the train reached
Montpelier, while the boys were singing,
playing on musical instruments, and having
general good time, the respondent boarded
the car; that he sat down by the cadets and
entered into conversation with some of
them; that, soon after the train left Water
bury, Rudd missed his satchel; that, though
assisted by the brakeman, he could not find
it; that, acting upon information received
upon the train, he telegraphed to Sheriff
Atherton at Waterbury, giving descrip-
was suspected of having puroined it;
that the sheriff visited the hotels and
made diligent search but was un-
able to get trace of the missing article;
that from information secured in the morn
ing he went to see Mr.. Clough, the LAWYER
who told him he had sen Carpenter at
Montpelier depot, but that he had nothing
with him; that he saw Carpenter get off the
train at Waterbury; that Carpenter did not
get out on the platform of the depot but on
the track on the other side, and Mr.. Clough
had his attention directed towards Carpen-
Il tl..t L.
kind in his hand; that Atherton then tried
to find Carpenter but coHld not; that in the
morning, Atherton called at Carpenters
residence and saw tracks leading away
from the house, and, following them, he
saw the respondent ahead of him, but not
within speakiug distance; that few weeks
afterward the valise was returned to Ather-
ton by some unknown person and it was re-
turned to its owner, who was reimbursed
for his expenses; that the value of the
satchel and contents was about S25. In
some mysterious way the jury got it into
their heads that the respondent was under
the influence of liquor when the crime was
committed. Possibly this idea arose from
the statement of Mr.. Dillingham; about the
case when the matter was first brought up
in court. The jury, after first retiring,
came back into the court and asked the
court whether if Carpenter was intoxicated
at the time it would be any excuse Judge
Thompson promptly disabused their minds
of any such impression, and the jury re-
tired. They returned again with verdict
of guilty of petty larceny, stating the value
of the goods to be less than seven dollars.
The respondent was sentenced to imprison.
ment for three months in the house of cor.
rection. u, S. Stanton, states attorney,
and John II. Senter for the state Lord &
Boyntou for respondent
State v. Robert A. Spencer The respond.
ent was prosecuted for the alleged offence
of having been found intoxicated in the lat.
ter part of March, 1891 1t is no offence in
Vermont to get drunk, the common idea to
the contrary Notwithstanding, but il one is
"found" drunk, then woe betide him.
This respondent was found drunk by one
Edwin Lane, four miles from Marshfield
village. Another witness, one Louis
Loungey, also testified as to Spencer's ine-
briefly. Notwithstanding Spencer denied
that % was drunk when he was found"
it was of no avail, and the jury said guilty"
Thereupon Robert was called to the witness
tand and asked to ell, under oath, where
he "got it," He said it was alcohol, and
was obtained of John Hazen & Co., of Man
chester, n H., and that it came by express.
G. w. Wing for respondent; Stanton for
state.
State v Peter G Dewey.-This respond.
ent was prosecuted for keeping a nuisance
in the village of Montpelier in a certain
store situated in the Selinas building, so
named Officers Cook and Heath, deputy
sheriffs, testified in relation to making a
visit to the place named about the 25th of
last July. AS they entered the respondent
was coming up from the cellar. Cook said
he had warrant to search the place, and =,
upon hearing that, the respondent at once
made a rush for a certain point about mid
way of the counter in the store, and pulled
string. The officers heard sound as of
water or some other liquid spilled Ex-
animation revealed what is called a
dump" 1t consisted in this case of
jar swung in pendulous position. A string
was attached to the jar, aud by pulling it
the jar was made to revolve completely so
that whatever was in it would be precipi.
tated to the bottom of hole in the cellar,
the LIQUID, whatever it might be, escap-
ing through pipe. AS the two officers
started to go down cellar, young man
standing in the store rushed ahead,
went down cellar, and threw down
a small pitcher containing liquid, which
examination showed to be whiskey. There
were also drippings of whiskey found in the
jar of the dump This, In brief, constituted
the states case. No testimony was put on
in defence. 1t was urged that no liquor
had been found there for which the re-
spondent could be held responsible and
that 1t did not appear that liquor was
kept there for sale contrary to the law.
In view OF arguments made to the jury by
counsel on both sides AZ to the propriety or
otherwise OF the law, the court charged the