Middlebury register. (Middlebury, Vt.) 1886-1937, 1902-12-19


please the eX-benedict highly. w. II.
Davis represented the husband and the
wife made no defense.
AT the opening of the afternoon ses-
sion two more adultery cases were taken
up. These were State VS. George III.
Morrison and State with Minnie Tart.
They were rather old cases and Mr.
Donoway, stating that he did not believe
he would now be able to secure convic-
tons, recommended that they be not
pressed, which was ordered by the court.
Having worked hard all day up to
. 80 o'clock the court at that hour took
a recess to 8 O'Clock Wednesday morning.
1t turned out that Wednesday was
quite a field day and a considerable
amount of important business was con-
cluded or Initiated. The first matter
brought up at the morning session was
a motion for arrest of judgment made by
Judge Bliss in DR.. Bisbee's case. The
motion was based on substantially the
same ground as that made the day be-
fore for the quashing of the indictment
as defective, vitality so, in the fact that
the indictment did not allege that the
woman in the case was married woman,
an unmarried woman, or even "A woman
at all, and that the indictment did not
charge adultery. Judge Bliss argued
that the bail should not be placed too
high or beyond the ability of the respon-
dent to furnish, as commitment to
prison for any considerable length of
time would, in DR.. Bis bees condition, be
equivalent to sentence to death. He
thought, furthermore, that If the statutes
would permit of the imposition of fine
DR.. Bisbee might be able to pay a sub
stantial fine in place of undergoing i'm
prisonment. This phase of the matter
was not disposed of during the day, an d
later on the case of the State VS.. Emma
Waterman was formally ordered con-
tinued.
The case of the State vs.. Mabel Bras
sau, the lG-year, old girl who on Thursday
= of last week pleaded not guilty to an
V information charging her with adultery
i with Edward Barton. a young married
=. man of Middlebury. in Mddleburv on the
=. 18th day Of last November. was next
=. called up. Her cOur sci, f. w. Thomas,
q stated to the Court that the respondent
t wished to Withdraw her former plea and
+ enter plea Of guilty. The court would
V not allow this to be done until after the
: information had again been read to the
: respondent. which was done. The girl
n then pleaded guilty and the plea was al
Il lowed 70 stand. Side Judge Collins was
q not Lfltll IN court anu IuTlteG cOuSlupId-
: ton of the matter was deferred until he
# should be present. Later on in the fore
,. noon Judge Collins came in, and thereup-
:. on Mr.. Thomas asked that the respon-
dent be placed in the care of the probation
II officer until next June, that her conduct
:. might be observed and then reported
Il upon. Judge Bliss acting for the state
: said he thought Mabel ought not TO be
o committed to the charge of the probation
+ officer, but should be confined i'm some
:. institution. After consultation Judge
!. Haselton said the court did not think the
: young respondent should be placed In
n charge of the probation officer and for
n sanitary reasons did not think she should
Il be committed to the State Industrial
d school at Vergennes. The sentence of
Y the court was then pronounced and was
that the girl should serve not more than
d two wears and not less than one year and
U six months in the House of Correction
/ at Rutland. This is an altogether de.
Y plorable case, and if the unfortunate cir
a had had any proper bringing UP or any
: proper care from those who should have
!. given her care and direction in her child
n hood, she might perhaps have turned
l. out In different and wholly better way
/. The case of State VS. Sherman Yattaw
of Vergennes, on information for the
,s illegal furnishing of something to drink
:. was continued on account of the absence
~ of an important witness, on the motor
~ of Judge Bliss for the RESPONDENT.