Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1903-10-22
Two Witnesses Describe the White
River Shooting ARRAY
In Detail.
EVIDENCE INTERESTING
Variations Differed from Those Of the
Plaintin-Only short Session Yes.
day-Grand Jury Mt Work.
Liquor Cases Discontinued

court reconvened at 2:3O o'clock this af-
ternoon after the Sunday recess and the
taxing OF testimony in the suit brought
oy samuel d. Wilson VS.. Percival w.
Ciemert to recover $4,000 damages for
alleged SANDER, was resumed The SLAM
Ger suit was not reached until after three
CLOCK but Judge wheeler was deter
mined not to lose time and would not al
low adjournment until six o'clock The
evidence to-day was very interesting
Two witnesses of the White River June
ton shooting ARRAY on which the case is
passed told the story in detail. Their mar
fations differed materially from the plain
tins story.
The case is still attracting great deaf
OF attention here and although there is
much repetition in the testimony the
court room is crowded each session
Judge Wheeler swore in the grand ju-
rQfs. The jury did not sit the first of
the term as usual as District Attorney J.
L. Martin was busy with civil cases.
TESTIMONY IN DETAIL.
DR.. Elmer E. Barrows of Hartford,
who was on the witness stand when ad
5ournment was taken Saturday morning,
was recalled this afternoon. The witness
had seen Goshen before the shooting. lie
thought the man was about the same
height as Wilson but a little heavier. The
wttne4B was asked n long list of ques-
lions to show the situation of the place
where the White River Junction shooting
ARRAY took place. He said that the juno
tion House faces an open square. In
front Of the hotel a piazza about eight
feet wide runs the whole length of the
building. A platform projects from the
piazza for the use of persons entering We
hicles- The hotel Is lighted by electricity
and large windows illuminate the piazza
enough so that persons can easily distin-
guish each other there. according to the
witnesses judgment.
DR.. Barrows was called to the hotel
about 80 minutes after the shooting. 1t
was Sunday night and the witness
thought that the stores which are in the
hotel building were not lighted. There
10 an arc light In front of the Junction
HeYse but the witness could not swear it
was lighted on the night of the shooting.
When Mr.. Clement spoke at White
River Junction the witness was present.
He oould recall in court parts Of the
speech. Mr. Clement referred to the leg
isl.tive blacklist and after commenting
upon It stated that spotter had been
brought to the village. an innocent man
killed. Mr. Clement blamed the mans
death to prohibition and he furthermore
said that the prohibitory law was respon-
sible for q. w. Morrow and the blacklist.
Or. Barrows also stated that Mr.. Glenn
ent said the man, who did the shooting,
had been indicted for manslaughter where
as he should have been indicted for muir
der The witness did not get any idea
from the speech of Mr.. Clements opinion
q, to the mans guilt. He had heard the
speech discussed but never in reference
to the shooting.
The witness had heard the plaintiff
talked about a good deal by all classes
before Mr.. Clement went to White River
Junction. He thought that Wilson'S rep
utation was bad even then.
In the cross-examination DR.. Barrows
oil hy A H.
son concerning the operation performed
upon Goshen and the course of the bullet
through the mans body. He said that
the operation was performed at the juno
ton House, about nine doctors being
present The witness did not assist at the
operation but he saw all of it. At the re-
quest of Attorney johnson, DR.. Barrows
here described In technical way the
course OF the bullet, using the attorney
person as a diagram. Witness could tell
almost exactly where the bullet entered
but he was not able to state exactly be-
tween which vertabrae it lodged as he
had not seen the autopsy. He thought the
course of the bullet might have deviated
after it entered the muscles back of the
intestines.
The witness could not tell whether the
glasses in the hotel windows, which 'front.'
ed on the piazza, were clean or not at
the time Of the shooting. The night was
{osgy, withn&ss was sure Of that. There
were two posts on the piazza. one being
near the oArriage steps.
Or. Barrows had first heard Wilson
character discussed about the time a cor
tain raid was made at Woodstock He
had previously heard that there was a
ep6tter in the vicinity. The witness was
In sympathy with Mr.. Clement during the
campaign.
He was able to recall! Mr. Clements
words about the Goshen shooting because
or hnrna
The witness thought he probably had re-
peated the words of the candidate for
governor about the shooting directly after
the speech. He could not recall that Mr.
Clement had used the words "A crank
prohibitionist ETC." referred to again
and again ir previous testimony but he
thought tho speakers views on what
the indictment should have been were
given during the speech.
The next witness called was Charles
II. Harvey of st. Adams. The witnesses
acquaintance in his home town was quite
a wide one with both political parties.
He had heard of the shooting and heard
II discussed before Mr.. Clement spoke In
st. Adams. He thought the plaintiff had
no general reputation except in connection
with the shooting.
The witness had heard the Clement
speech at St. Adams which was in May.
1902 He remembered in a general way
that Mr. Clement referred to the shoot
ing. The defendant had commented upon
the black list and then mentioned the
shooting, characterizing it as the result
of the prohibitory law The witness
thought that Mr.. Clement mentioned no
names in connection with the shooting.
THE witness stated that Mr., Clement
said substantially that the shooter had
been indicted for manslaughter when, ac-
cordinx to usual proceedings in a case
Of the kind he would have been indicted
for murder.
When cross examined Mr.. Harvey said
that the defendant in his speech referred
TO the plaintiff as the man who killed
Goshen. Witness was positive that Mr.,
Clement did not use manuscript during
more than half of his speech. He could
not repeat any of the speakers exact
words nor could he recall any reference
to the crank prohibitionist the respon-
sibility for the shooting, or several other
familiar parts of the gubernatorial can
didate's speeches. Witness declared that
Mr.. Clement was very earnest In this
part Of his speech
THE defendants next three witnesses,
William r. Conway Henry Bean and Au-
sust Winnegan, all Of Bellows Falls con-
tributed little that was new to the testi-
mnoy. They were questioned about Mr..
Clements speech at Bellows Falls but
thew could remember but little and At
torney Johnson did not think it worth
while to cross examine them.
ST. JOHNS TESTIMONY.
The most interesting testimony Of the
Say was that OF William st. John of
white River Junction. Mr.. st. John knew