New-York tribune., 1905-11-28
MRS. ROGERS To DIE.
Her AppeaL Denied by United States
Supreme Court.

Washington Nov. 27.-The Supreme Court OF
the United States to-day affirmed the decision
OF the United States District Court of Vermont
in the case of Mrs Mary Mabel Rogers. who
is under sentence of death for the murder OF
her husband. The effect OF the decision will be
to place the responsibility of dealing with the
case again in the hands of the State authori-
ties and if in the mean time neither the Gov
ernor nor the State courts take action in Mrs
Rogers's behalf her execution must occur on
December s. next The court held In effect,
that it without jurisdiction on all the
lcints raised. The opinion concluded with an
order that the mandate issue at once This
will obviate the raising of the question Of
possible postponement of the day of execution
In his opinion Justice Day laid no stress on
the sex of Mrs. Rogers. but dealt with the case
on purely legal grounds Reciting the facts in
the case he took up the various efforts made in
the woman's behalf. holding each in turn to be
Ineffective.
The case came to the Supreme Court on an
appeal from the refusal of the United States
District Court Of Vermont to grant to Mrs Rog-
ers a writ of habeas corpus after the Supreme
Court of the State had refused new trial. The
charge against Mrs. Rogers is that of numbering
her husband by administering chloroform at
Remington VT in 1902. She tried in De-
cember, 1903. and sentenced to death. The case
has attracted much attention on account OF the
defendants sex and because of the many narrow
escapes she has had fro n paying the extreme
penalty for her crime. Her execution was fixed
for February 8. 1906. but the Governor Of the
State, on February l. granted a reprieve until
June 9 When it seemed that she must in
evitabIv be hanged on the day fixed the Gov
ernor on June 1, again came to the woman's
rescue moving the date up to June %. The last
reprfeve was granted on June %, to permit an
investigation by the federal courts
The various reprieves granted by the Governor
were seized upon by the attorneys of Mrs. Rog-
ers to support their plea for absolute release.
They contended that these stays of execution
and the fixing of dates for hanging by the
States chief executive other than the day
named by the trial court Illegal and that
her detention in prison under them amounted
to deprivation Of her rights under the consu-
tuition
Mrs Mary A. Rogers convicted of murder
In the first degree on December O. 1903. at Ben
nington. Vt The alleged motives for her crime
were her affection for another man and desire to
secure the insurance on her husbands life. with
which to take up housekeeping with her lover.
She gave her husband Marcus H. Rogers. chloro-
form after meeting him for the pretended purpose
of reconciliation. While embracing him she ad-
ninistered the drug. She was aided by Leon Per-
ham and Stella Bates The body of Rogers was
thrown into the Wilamosac River
Under the Vermont law a session of the legis-
lature which meets biennialy, had to occur before
the sentence of death imposed on Mrs Rogers
sought and after the Governor had reprieVed the
murderess the case was carried to the Untea
ii will be the first inction the capital penalty in
Vermont IN a dozen years