The Bennington evening banner. (Bennington, Vt.) 19??-1961, 1905-06-16
Strong Evidence Against the Accused Brought Out
At the Johnson Trial Yesterday
Solomon Johnson, Aged 81. HobbIed Into Court on Two
Clutches To Help State Convict One Son Of Murder.
inc the Other, Ills Fathers Favonte

Manchester, June l6. 10 the trial la
the case Of Fred Johnson charged with
the murder Of his brother. Jay, had
been concluded yesterday afternoon
after the testimony Of his father. Sol.
oman johnson, vas taken, The case
against the respondent would have
been a dark one. In fact. the most
dangerous evidence which has Sc, been
introduced by the state il that 81 the
aged father who was on the stand over
an hour and half yesterday after.
noon. This witness stated positively
that bis son, Fred, turned around an a
deliberately Cred three times a. his
brother with bis revolver. Mr Jonn.
son. however. could not see Jay at
that time owing 90 the position 81 the
window ont of which be witnessed the
affair
Up 30 the time this evidence was ad-
United DC was supposed that the shots
we're fired while the respondent was
facing away from bis brother aud
while be vas sunk into the deep snow
ON the side Of the roadway. Noi only
did the father testify that they were DE-.
ed after Fred had turned around but
also that Fred took several steps 10.
ward his brother before firing. Il will
be remembered that Jay was shot 10
the back so that he must have beer GO
Ing or Ut least facing away from Fred
when the latter fired the three shots.
This together with the statement OF
tho mother, that Fred refused to come
10 her home and see the body Of his
dead brother when she earnestly re.
questel him 10 do so and several
other less important points brought
out by the state make the case appear
dark for the accused.
On the stand, the greater part Of
yesterday afternoon. was Soloman
johnson the father. lie is - years old
and crippled to such a degree that it
is necessary for him TO use two crut-
ches and apparently in poor. health in
other ways. He was most peculiar
witness, repeating nearly all the ques-
tions before giving his answers and
then responding 10 characteristic
manner which would have caused
laughter had the subject been less SER
ious.
Without hinching or attempting in
the least 70 evade the questions he
gave answer after answer tending to
show the respondent guilty OF murder
in the first degree.
In substance, his testimony was re-
lative to the agreement of the mother
and father with the brothers, Jay and
Fred that the latter should have the
farm and in return take care of the
old people, how that Freds manner
changed after this, that he refused TO |
stay at home or even to board there |
although he was repeatedly urged to
do so, of the quarrel and fight on Feb
81 and OF the events which led up to |
the shooting. He was an eye witness
of the shooting and described without
a tear in his eyes, the running of Jay !
TO the piazza and his death which fol-
lowed within a brief time.
The testimony tends to show that
the respondent, although he did not
express it verbally. was angered when
the home property was decided to his
brother. That transaction, 1t would
appear, was the beginning of the
trouble which ended fatally.
The story goes back for several
the parents both old and in
firm desired to deed their place to one
Of the sons on condition that he would
care for them as long as they lived.
Fred told them to sign the place over
10 Jay if they wanted to but here, as
the evidence of Mr. Johnson showed,
ended Fred's good feeling toward the
family.
After that, his manner, which spoke
louder than words, was far different,
and although his father offered him
board until spring and 500 in cash he
refused the offer and went to live with
his sister, Mrs Benson, a short dis