Spirit of the age. [volume] (Woodstock, Vt.) 1845-1913, 1905-11-11

Il
lin Inn, invited guests of
EM ma the judge, who had laid
asiue uS judicial dignity and coude-
scended to mingle with us lesser lights
in friendly soclabllty over our pipes.
Franklin Inn was a relic of the Colo
NAL days and its quaint style of archl-
lecture aud antique furnishings gave
to it a peculiar fascination. All the
court officials since the incorporation
Of the old country had been entertained
there, and during the Revolutionary
war Washington and Pulaski had been
among its distinguished guests. About
its rooms clustered memories of the
misty past-tradltlons of the time when
the county seat was Il centre Of COM
merce and the stage coach the connect
ing link with the outside world
The night outside was cold aud
stormy, and the wind blew in fitful
blasts. We sat in a circle before the
fire with our legs stretched out toward
the hearth and were in a mood for a
story when the Judge, reaching over to
the andlrOns and knocking the ashes
from his pipe, remarked: This muir
der case which comes mp for trial to-
morrow reminds me of one that was
tried here years ago. was q young
man then-tOo young for iudge-and
it was my first term on the bench.
Lawyers were not so plentiful as they
are nowadays, and when Judge Hamp-
ton died, leaving vacancy. there were
few available men for the place. !
had served one term as States A tor-
ney, and w3s just beginning the Sec
ond, at the time the vacancy occurred
and to my surprise my friends urged
and secured my appointment"
We were all attention now, delighted
to hear n story of personal exper-
fence of this noted criminal lawyer.
Il firmly believe" continued the
judge, "and think you gentlemen will
agree, that there are many cases where
circumstantial evidence, however COM
plete the chain of circumstances, should
not convict When 1 was States At
torney 1 believed just as firmly that
circumstantial evidence should convict,
but the events which transplred in this
case were tangible proofs to the con-
trary, aud they were instrumental tm
my stepping down from the bench
later in life to plead for the life of
prisoner whom ever / believed to be
innocent.
This case was one in which the evil
dence was wholly circumstantial, and
the defendant failed to set up an aliDi;
in fact, he admitted his presence at
the time and place of the woman's
mysterious disappearance. but there
was a lack of motive, or, rather. a
doubt as to 'the motive of the crime.
'"The parties to the suit were natives
of this town, of respectable and we'll
TODD families, and the mystery as to
the disposition of the body of the al
legged murdered woman made the case
one of the most noted in the annals of
the county. was personally ac-
quainted with the parties; in fact, we
had all been schoolmates together,
which rendered it doubly hard for me
to sit in judgment on the case.
Tom Downing and Mary Eastlake
were lovers, and while there was no
public announcement of their engage
ment, 1t was generally conceded among
their friends that they were soon to be
married. Bill Kendall was also in love
with Mary, but as Bill was the black
sheep in his family-drank and gam
bled to excess-Mary gave him the
'mitten' and bestowed her affection
wholly upon Tom. Bill left town soon
after this affair, and of late nothing
was known of his whereabouts.
According to Toms evidence on the
night of Mary's disappearance she and
Tom were out riding. and instead of
going to church, as was their invarla-
BILE custom, they drove down the river
road. 1t was spring time, and allured
by the balmy moonlit night they drove
on unconscious of distance or time UNI
! til they reached Beaver Run, lonely,
densely wooded spot seldom visited ex-
cept by hunters or wood choppers in
the winter season. Here they stopped
to enjoy the wild woodland scene,
Mary leaning on the railing of the
bridge watching the reflections and
shadows in the brook while Tom went
down the bank to get drink of the
pure spring water. While thus engaged
Mary was seized by two masked men,
and after a desperate struggle she was
carried away by them.
Notwithstanding the fact that Tom
had always bene known as an upright
and truthful young man, his story of
the kidnapping Of Mary was not to be
believed. There was no apparent rea-
son why any one should want to carry
Mary off. A heavy rain storm had
washed out the footprints at the scene
of the struggle, leaving no trace of
the kidnapers, but bits of Mary's torn
clothing were found in the vicinity.
Tom had no proof of his story, and as
time passed-he was not indicted until
the September term and then his case
was put off until the December term
and no trace of Mary or the kidnapers
had been found, the belief that Tom
had murdered her became firmly fixed
In the minds Of the people.
But, as | have said. there was no
substantial proof of motive for the
act. A witness whose reputation for
veraclty was none of the best, testified
that he had met Tom and Mary on the
river road that night. and that he had
heard them quarrelng. and that Tom
had declared he would kill her. Tom
denied this evidence in toto. did not
believe this witness. and in my charge
to the jury instructed them to give the
defendant the benefit of the doubt, but
they didn't, and brought in q verdict
of murder in the first degree.
Friday, the last day of the term,
had been an unusually busy day, and
the sun was just setting, casting long
dusky shadows across the court room,
when instructed the sheriff to bring
u'op, nnuntnoy In fn, .,,os