Windham County reformer. (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1901-1906, 1905-11-10
THE ROGERS APPEAL ARGUED,
U. s. Supreme Court Pays UNUSUAL
Standardization Monday.

The Washington correspondents VI
the Boston Globe reports as iomows
concerning the arguments IN me MAY
Rogers case before the u >. Suprenne
court ut Washington Monday, NOV, o.
The appeal of Mrs. Mary Mape,
death for killing her HUSBAND
near Bennington, VI, In 1908,
was argued In the supreme court
of the United states to-day. ana the
case was then taken into consideration
by the court. Atty Gen. Fits OF yer,
mont represented the state ana Tracy
l.. Jeifords of this city ana Ihoii,us
w. Moloney OF Rutland appeared io'
Mrs. Rogers. A.,
The argument was opened by MI
Jeffords, who occupied 20 minutes III
u statement OF the case. and IN SET
ting forth the grounds for the aP-
peal ... ~,
Several of the points raised were SO
novel that he was fairy poihDaru.u
with questions from the bench, nearly
every Justice taking part In the quiz
zing, Justice Holmes In particular,
was persistent In his queries. ana
chief Justice Fuller and Justices Har-
| Ian. Brown, Brewer. White ana Peck
ham took turns in asking questions
concerning the claims made by couh , !,
sci of the procedure In the case anu
the ground for interference by the leu
eral courts. :, ,
The present appeal Is from the Y. .
district court for the district OF YER
mont which after Mrs, Rogers hau
been sentenced for murder, ana thrice
reprieved by the governor or vernon.
declines to release her on writ oil nap
cas- corpus. The grounds upon when
I 40. 70 lie
which were argued To-Day were iou'
in number as follows:
First, that Mrs. Rogers y deprived
of her liberty and subject to the pun
ishment of solitary confinement WITH
out any statute authorizing such pun
ishment. and without any sentence
of any court directing such punish
ment. and therefore without due pro.
cess Of law. Mr.. Jeffords pointed ou'
that the law fixes the term or SOLITARY
confinement at three months. whereas
she has been already subjected u
confinement 3ia months In excess
thereof, separate and severe PUNISH
ment in addition to the death penalty
and in violation of her rights undel
the federal constitution.
Second. because the state supreme
court. having taken jurisdiction of thu
failed to comply with the law by or
dering a stay of execution and by FIX
ling new date for the execution. TN
governor had no right to fix such
day The sentence of execution oil
Dec s. counsel contended. is therefor
void
Third. the failure of the state L
maintain an appellate court In Ben
nington county as provided by TN
constitution deprived appellant of he
rights to be heard by court Of com
petent jurisdiction, and the establish
ment of the supreme court IN WASH
ington county gave the people OF tina
county privileges not possessed by IN
: reople of the other 10 counties OF IN
state. In support of this contention
counsel cited the Peterson case.
Fourth. that the governor. havin
ordered her execution on Dec. 3. Will
/ THE appeal was pending In 'sa fedora
district court. that action Is void.
Attorne"- General Fits replied I
the several contentious OF opposin
counsel. his principal point being tina
no federal question is involved In an
way i'm the appeal. or II any had bee
dragged In they should not be con
sidered because not raised In the coui
below, as the law required He quot
ed numerous decisions by this coui
lin support OF his arguments.
Mr. Moloney, in closing the case, oc
, cupied an hour and a half. and Xix
his colleague, was subjected to a con
tinuous fire OF questions from tn
bench. The court paid unusual atten
ton to the arguments all through tn
case.
It Is the general opinion that
view of the nearness of the date fXe
for Mrs. Rogers's execution. Dec.
the court will hand down its decisio
next Monday