Herald and news. [volume] (West Randolph, Vt.) 1878-1943, 1905-12-28
Windsor County Court.
December Term. 1905.

w llman ID. Ailard, charged Win the KILL
ing of a man named Mccormick Dec. 2,
came on for trial on Tuesday, Dec. 10. pur-
suant TO assignment, and on Friday last
verdict OF guilty OF murder in the second
degree was returned. Respondent was at
once sentenced to Imprisonment in states
prison during the period OF his natural
life.
The incidents Of the matter are so fresh
in the public mind that a detailed state
ment would only be a reiteration Of old
items. In substance the case as developed
on trial was about as follows
About the middle OF November, or
little later, there came to the Allard house
a wandering wood-ehopper named Me-
Cormick, an Irishman over six feet in
height, and about As years old. He had
slight acquaintance with Milman Allard,
and came there as he said to get him to go
into wood-chopping job with himself
soon as the winter was
sufficiently advanced. The Allard family
consisted OF the accused, man Y years
old, and pensioner OF the Civil war; his
wife and two children by a former mar
rage OF the wife. The Allards had been
married about six years, and seemed to
live happily together, unless the old man
was crossed in any way, then there was
rumpus; but this happened very seldom
he was given his own way IN about every
thing, or he was ugly.
Mccormick continued to stay at the
Allard house and on Dec. LIST, Allard had
come by express case OF one dozen quarts
OF whiskey, for which in part the money
of Mccormick paid. AS soon as the liquor
arrived they commenced to drink it-that
is, the two men. On that day both got
very drunk, and were both abusive OF Mrs.
AIlard. That night, fearing violence, she
fastened the door of her bedroom with
spikes, and in the night was alarmed BY
int
room. She could bear him talking with
her husband, who did not In the least try
to have Mccormick desist. Unable to get
into the bedroom the man went to bed in
the kitchen with Allard.
In the morning OF Saturday, Dec. I'd,
the drinking bout was resumed; both men
were badly under the influence OF liquor,
and both at times during the day made
threats against Mrs. Allard, who endeaY-
ored to have them stop drinking. About
in the afternoon Gertrude Sprague, SIS
ter OF Mrs. Allard, came and persuaded her
to go away for awhile, so Mrs. Allard TAX
ing her two children went to the Hoising-
ton house a short distance from her own
residence.
About an hour after she left, II occurred
to her that she ought to go back and look
at her fires and she went home, accompa-
MED by two young men OF the Hoisington
family. As they neared the back part OF
the Allsrd place, dark object was seen
lying on the ground, which soon assumed
the outlines of human body. The fore
most Hoisington boy cast the light OF MS
lantern ahead and a CHASTITY sight was
presented. The dead body OF Mccormick
Law there, its feet on the back piazza, the
head out on the ground, battered and
bloody.
The two young men fled to the village
OF Bridgewater to inform the authorities.
A In 70 for he
she knew to be the author OF the crime
that had evidently been committed. She
went into her house, but Allard was not
there; she came out and proceeded up the
road to the next house-Charles Spragues.
There she found her husband, and said,
"What have you done@ He replied, HE
threatened me, and no man threatens VIII
man Allard in his own house and lives.
He struck at me with stick, and ! hit
him over the head and stunned him, then
dragged him out and thought II didn't
finish him, he would come to and lick me;
so got the axe and finished him."
Several witnesses were present in the
Sprague house when Allard went there,
bloody-handed, from the homicide. some
one asked him, "Where's your old
tramp ?" To which he replied, 1--WE fixed
him so he won't trouble anyone for year
or more; I've killed him." Then he sat
down by the kitchen fire and began TO NIL
his pipe. About ten minutes later his
wife came and the conversation above re-
corded occurred.
The state introduced other evidence cor
roborating the foregoing. Cross examina-
ton OF some of these witnesses brought
out the fact that deceased had threatened
Allard and his wife and others in the
house. The prosecution also showed by
several witnesses that Allard had made
statements similar in substance 10 the one
tad az IA &nraUna hnuaQ-
and to Mrs. Allard.
The medical testimony of the state
showed that the death of Mr.. Mccormick
was due to fracture OF the frontal bone
which was smashed into pieces ana those
driven into the brain. Death must have
been instantaneous. The skull was eN-
hibited to the jury and where the forehead
bones should be was large cavity. On
post norton examination II was found
that there were two bruises on the head
over the temporal muscle above the right
ear. These were from blows that would
be sufficient to produce INCONSISTENCIES,
but not death.
The trend OF the evidence in defense was
as to Allard's mental condition. In 1877
he was charged with poisoning horses, and
was not prosecuted on account OF the
respondents unsound mind. He was com
mitted to the asylum at Waterbury and
remained there ten months, when he was
discharged as cured. several WITNESSES
were called who gave their opinions that
Allard was OF unsound mind. The main
witness was DR.. w. S. WATSON of the
Waterbury asylum. He had for a day or
two before this trial watched, observed
and examined Allard. DIR. WATSON was of
the opinion that Allard was of low mental
qualification and weak intellect, added to
this he was growing OF less mental vigor
by reason Of advancing years. The doctor
was OF the opinion, however, that Aslard
had sufficient mentality to distinguish be-
tween right and wrong, and II not under
the influence OF Intoxicating liquor, 10 act
accordingly.
The state put in no rebutting evidence
and the case was argued by states Attor-
ney Chas. Batchelder and by +. X. Buck
and j. G. Enright for the respondent.
Attorner- General Fits closed for the
state, and on Friday morning Judge Miles
charged the jury. The charge was a model
of clearness and conciseness and occupied
half an hour in delivery. The jury re-
turned a verdict at p. n, a. above stated,
and sentence was at once passed.
There are but few exceptions in the case
and it is doubtful II il goes to the supreme
court.
The jury in the Allard case consisted Of