The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1892-03-23

the error in the hundred dollars in Septem-
Der was his, and he explained that he had
given defendant credit for the same deposit
twice. The clerks and officials Of the bank
testified that their daily balance had at no
time during the period in question been
overrun a hundred dollars. On cross-exam-
inaton they admitted that, in case any one
in the bank had stolen hundred dollars
that had been paid in, and no entry had
been made on the bank books of the de-
posit, no error would appear on balancing
cash and accounts at the close of the days
business. The jury found for plaintiff
SSS57. Martin q Carleton and G. w. Wing
for plaintiff; Boyces for defendants
State " Josephine Yatter respond
ent pleaded not guilty to an indictment
charging her with committing the crime of
adultery with one Omer Miller on the Goth
of July, 1885. The main witness relied upon
by the state to prove the allegation of the
indictment was Sheriff e. W. Howe, who
testified that by pre-arrangement with
some party, whose name was not disclosed
he was called upon to board the night train,
north, at Northfeld on Sunday morning
July 26, and watch the movements of two
persons whom he would see on the train.
One was Mrs. Yatter, the other Omer Miller;
that soon after boarding the train he saw
the parties named; he saw the parties of
whom he was in search, and observed their
actions; that they were sitting together
bndJ rs bne JTdlU dDpTOdCHeu N1OuJ-
pelier junction, the parties separated, the
woman retiring to the watercloset, and
Miller retiring to the other end of the car,
with his satchel in his hand, looking out of
the window; that that was the relative pc.
sitions of the parties until after the train
passed Montpelier junction, soon after
which he saw the parties again, and that
when they were near Middlesex, or at all
events before reaching Waterbury, he saw
Mr.. Miller take up the child, and, followed
by the woman, go into the sleeping car,
where they retired to a berth; that he went
to berth in the same car, few seconds
after they went to theirs; that soon after
the train left Waterbury the witness looked
past the opening in the curtains and saw the
parties in THE act of unlawful intercourse
Witness placed the occurrence before the
train went over the bridge across the
Winooski river from Duxbury into Bolton.
1t was necessary to prove that If the of
fence was committed as alleged, that it took
place in Washington county. The river at
the point named divides that county from
Chittenden county. The defense intro
duced the evidence of the court reporter
taken in the case of State v. Omer Miller as
tending to show discrepancies in Mr..
Howe's testimony as given in September,
1886, and as given now A witness named
Abial Humphrey testified he was on the
train in question and got off at Waterbury
with friend. When he got on again and
passed through the car, he saw the respond
ent in one of the common cars. Evidence
was also introduced as to the speed of
trains between Waterbury and Bolton.
Robert Whalen, locomotive engineer who
has run over that part of the road said he
had run it on the night train in trite over
five minutes. The ordinary running time,
counting stops, was twenty-five or twenty
three miles an hour. 1t was also shown
that the fast train-the Montreal express
would run from Montpelier Junction to
Waterbury in eleven minutes. Train.
dispatcher Magiff of the Central Vermont
railroad stated this particular train was
seventeen minutes late at Mortified, and
reached Essex junction on time. The jury
was out but short time, and returned a
verdict of not guilty.