Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1905-05-26
MRS. ROGERS'S LIFE
Arguments Of Attorneys Before
Supreme Court Judges
Atty-oen. Fits Reviewed Testimony Of
Each Affidavit to Show lnsufficlency for
New Trial.

!
Each Affidavit to Show lnsuffclenoy for
New Trial
hearing by the supreme court Of YER
mont on petition for a new trial OF Mrs
Mary II. Rogers, sentenced to be hanged
, for the murder of her husband, Marcus
K. Rogers, was held at Montpelier Fri
day. Thomas w. Moloney of Rutland
counsel for Mrs. Rogers presented af-
fidavits of physicians and other persons
to show that the doctors who performed
the autopsy on Rogers's body did not re-
port fracture of the skull at the base of
the brain, which subsequently was dis
covered Mr. Moloney then made an ex-
tended argument in favor of a new trial,
contending that the government had en-
deavored to prove that Rogers died of
suffocation, whereas it was possible that
the injury to the skull might have caused
death. He alluded to the confession of
Leon Perham, the alleged accomplice of
Mrs Rogers, who is serving a term OF
life imprisonment for that crime He
also spoke Of what he termed the low
order Of intelligence of Mrs Rogers. Of
insanity alleged to be i'm her family, and
OF her weak physical condition at the
time of the murder.
Mr.. Moloney stated that II violence suf-
hcient to fracture the skull was applied,
then the whole testimony of Leon Per-
for the conviction of Mrs Rogers. was
false. Mr.. Moloney claimed that Per-
hams affidavit in which he admitted
that he falsified- ito save his own neck"
made II plain that Rogers was not killed
In the manner shown at the trial Re-
garding the insanity theory, counsel cited
affdavits 10 show that Rogers had be-
lieved his wife insane, and had reported
II TO physician five days before he was
killed, and that two days before his death
this physician had examined her and
found her to be suffering from a form
of insanity. Attorney ]. II. Senter of
Montpelier also presented an argument
in favor Of granting the petition.
Attorney General Clarke c. Fits of
Brattleboro argued in behalf of the state.
opposing the petition for a new trial
Sheriff II. II. Peck of Windsor county,
whose duty II will be to hang Mrs. Rogers
II the sentence is carried out was present
at the hearing. and Gov. Charles j. Bell
arrived there in time to attend the after
noon session OF court In his argument
Attorney General Fits reviewed the testi-
mony Of each affidavit to show its in
sufiiciency for granting a new trial. The
contention of the state was. in brief, that
the fracture Of the skull of Marcus Rogers
was made by the physicians who per-
formed the autopsy, in removing the
brain. which they found to be normal
thereby disposing of the theory that
Rogers had received a wound on the head
severe enough to cause death; that the
evidence did not prove insanity; that
Mrs. Rogers was In Bennington all day
two days before her husbands death. thus
contradicting the evidence of the Hoosick
Falls On. " physician, who deposed that
he examined her for symptoms of insanity
two days before the murder and. lastly,
that the statements Of Leon Perham to
the effect that he has testified falsely In
the county court could not be relied upon,
the state contendng the Perham was
mentally weak and would give any desired
answer under duress
At the conclusion of the arguments the |
court took the case under consideration,
that its decision would be
later.