Spirit of the age. [volume] (Woodstock, Vt.) 1845-1913, 1900-01-20
MURDER IN SECOND DEGREE.

MURDER IN SECOND DEGREE.
VERDICT IN THE BUGBEE MURDE
AT $50 p. m. Wednesday the jur.
in the case Of Selim NJ. Bugbee
charged with the murder of Rober
Emerton at Norwich on the cvenin,
of Nov. IS last, returned this verde
-'guilty of murder in the secone
degree"
The medical testimony continued
last week Friday afternoon with tn,
examination of DR.. o. W. Daley o
White River Junction, his testimony
corroborating the statements of other
physicians at the autopsy.
Harry Brown, liveryman at Han
over, testified that Emerton hadn'
been drinking on the day Of the
homicide. Corroborated statement.
Of McAulley and Connors relative to
the conversation in the barn at
Wilder on the night OF Bugbee's
arrest.
This closed the introduction of
testimony by the State, with the ex-
ception of some evidence in rebuttal,
and Mr.. Davis made the opening
statement for the defense. He said
he should show to the jury that Bug
bee killed Emerton in self-defense Sc.
"Therc is no question but that Bug
bee killed Mr.. Emerton, and in the
way described, that is. with a knife.
but that he did it to save his own
life there is also no question"
E. D. Harpin, assistant superin-
tendent at the state prison, was the
first witness for the defense. He
testified to seeing marks on Bugbee's
neck, which the latter told him were
caused by Emerton's attempt to
choke him. He also noticed other
facial injuries, though the skin was
not broken in any place. Said, in
answer to question by Mr.. Sar-
gent, that he thought there were no
marks which Bugbee couldn't have
made himself.
r. B. Pratt of White River juno
ton, who had charge of Bugbee at
the Junction lookup, testified that
he noticed marks on Bugbee's face,
which Bugbee said were inflicted by
Emerton.
John Armstrong of Norwic ties.
titled that Giles was drunk the night
of the tragedy.
Chauncey Smith and Newton
Chamberlain testified as to Emer-
toms soberness un the day of the
homicide. Said that Emerton hated
Bugbee and had threatened him.
On Saturday morning the re-
spondent took the stand and told his
story of the tragedy of Nov. IS.
Bugbee was not unfriendly with
Emerton and was not expecting to
meet him at Giles store the evening
of the homicide. Respondent went
into the store and spoke to Giles,
who seemed to be somewhat out of
sorts.
Emerton came in. l3ngbee greet
ed him in a friendly way, but Emer-
ton returned the salutation by striking
him on the back of the neck, throw
ing him down and kicking him in
the bowels. He got away from
grasp and just then Lin
ton came in and took Emerton out
to put up their horses.
AS soon as respondent could pick
himself up he went out and got on
his cart to drive away. Then, as
claimed, Emerton with
m oath pulled him from his fish
cart and as he went off he grasped a
fish knife from the rack near the
seat. With this he punched at
Emerton, who did not let go but
ried to choke him. He continued
o strike at Emerton with the knife
Until finally, when he himself was
lbout done tor, he made final
unge and Emerton rolled off-dead.
Bugbee denied making the state
nent attributed to him-that he was
,lad he had killed Emerton.
He gave his age as 60, and his
Burke, this state.
The prisoner replied to questions
without much hesitation, appearing
omewhat stolid and Indifferent
hough he broke down in describing
he tragedy expressing his regret at
Imerton's death.
Mondays session began at 3
'clock, when the direct examination
# the respondent was concluded.
He testified that Emerton caused the
marks on his neck and face at the
ime of the trouble in Giles store.
Didn't say he was glad he had killed d,
Imerton.
The respondent was then TUNED
yer to States Attorney ;'atgent,
,ho said that he did not believe he
AIRED to ask him any questions, and ..
risoner was not cross-eXamincd.
John Armstrong, Frank Foster.
Justine Rix, r. II. Osmer, Frank
elton, Frank Kendall and +. H.
argent, followed the respondent,
'eir evidence being mainly us to
disposition, habits, etc