The Newtown bee., 1903-05-29

they never heard Of it. In an ordinary
 case it would be of no effect. In tEe
 present case it has some force, to this
 extent, mental incapacity sufficient
 to constitute imbecility, would, in
 town of this size, naturally be a mat
 ter of notoriety and serve as a topic
 for discussion, which, in the absence of
 direct proof and knowledge of this con-
 dition on the part of the defendant,
 herein, would supply basis for an in-
 fluence unfavorable to them, which
 should at least have put them upon in
 quiry. The testimony of Dr Wade
 made more than passing notice. His training and experience as doctor en- titles his evidence to more than Ordi-
 nary consideration. He has treated the
 subject of this inquiry professionally, and has trusted her to care for his pa tients and administer their remedies,
 and although the time spent by him in her company is short he states em-
 phatically that he can determine
 from what he has seen that she is not
 imbecile. These are all the witnesses,
 other than the defendatS, for and against Mary Britton's imbecility, and
 like those on the former case, are un-
 able to give in detail but little of that
 upon which they base their several opinions. The fact that she can read
 land write is proved beyond a question: l but is not conclusive, as an authority
 on medical jurisprudence states that
 many imbeciles can do both and some
 are expert mathematicians. It is in-
 ferentially established by her actions
 that she appears to believe that the Injunction of the seventh command
 ment has no force, application or au-
 thority in regulating her conduct, con-
 sequently her amourS have burdened
 the town of New Fairfield with two
 illegitimate children, but this, also is
 not conclusive, as the refusal to ac-
 knowledge the authority of that con-
 mandment and the more positive re-
 Quirements of our statute laws, or the
 force of public opinion is not limited
 to imbeclles, by any means. During the examination inquiry has been
 made, whether she could understand
 the marriage contract whether or not she comprehended as whole all the ; reciprocal rights, duties and obliga- , tionS growing out of that relation, it must be evident from the statements made to Mrs Conklin, Mrs Wildman and MT Richmond, declaring her in- tentions of marrying Alfred Simons F because he was the father of her child and that he ought to support both the
 child and herself, would indicate that
 she had clear idea of some of the obligations that attached to a husband and father. Passing from this part of the case to the knowledge and actions = of Henry Backer relative to the case, , naturally the first inquiry would be- What was Backer's rela tiOn to Mary Britton? Practically he inherited he1 from his predecessor in office, anG from all accounts she proved very ] embarrassing heritage; The relations from the first were official, and as far , as any evidence to the contrary ap 7 pears, so continued to the present. In his anxiety to prevent a too rapid in. l crease in the population he attempted 3 to assume some control over her ac tions by placing her in the families o1 { Clarinda Durgy, Martha Conklin an6 Theron Richmond, with strict injunct ] ions to prevent her association witt s men. In doing this it does not ap s pear that he knew her to be imbecile t but that she was immoral was an un s doubted fact, and in this way he en q deavored to place obstacles in the patl t of her wayward impulses. As selec t ] man he supplied her with clothing ant . support as became his duty as admin + istrative officer of the town. The on ,, ly reason that can see for his bein, l. made defendant in this prosecution s arises originally from that disputes e conversation on the highway betweel j. Backer and John J. Treadwell, il f which Treadwell asserts an offer o l. s25 was made by Backer to get her mar ' ried, which is denied by Backer 0 heard from MT Richmond that Simon l. had been there and that Mary had ex D pressed an intention of marrying hin l. so informed Treadwell, and after tn r. exchange of some rancorous politica e amenities growing out of their oppos e ingI party aftiliation, informed Tread T well that perhaps she would be mar if ried before he (TreadwelD got hin r. Backer) out of office. Treadwell ad l, mits telling the substance of this con D versation to many, including the offe r of S25, and it was evidently reporte' l. until 1t became a common topic of con > verSation and undoubtedly inspire, d the question of Hendrick Wildman a / the meeting of the joint board on No r. vember 8. Backer and Wildman diffe l. materially as to what was said at tha 0 time. Wildman says he said: "Back e CT hear you have offered $25 for any l. body who will marry Mary Brltton r Now Uncle Theron will be just you j. customer. Backer replied. No, tha d he was no good, he is already on thi IS town" I said, "You go in York stat h and then come back here and you hay y two for one." He said, "Ill go tha e way. I've got a little thing set and d it works 1 am all right" Backer' 0 version differs from this materially e He gives the conversation as follows - "Wildman said, 'Backer, 1 heard yo1 t offered S25 if anybody would marr t Mary BrittOn.' l said No, but if vol