The Barre daily times. (Barre, Vt.) 1897-1959, 1909-02-04
RIVET GUILTY
OF MURDER
Jury Took Only Half an Hour
To-day For Conviction
LOWELL, MASS, MURDERER
He Killed Joseph Gailloux a Year Ago
in Order to Get His Life Insurance
Money-was Convicted by a
Cigarette.

Lowell, Mass, Feb. 4.-After being
out half an hour the jury in Judge
IIitchcock's court today found Napoleon
j. Riyet guilty in first degree of the
murder OF Joseph Gailloux last Febru
ary 20. The motive OF the crime was
10 get the insurance on Ghilloux's life.
A cigarette stub was found by the body
OF the victim convicted Rivet. The ar.
guments in the case occupied all yeeter
day.
Previous to adjournment last night
the prisoner was asked If he wished ia
make any statement in his own behalf
and was told that il he wished to do so
the opportunity was his, at that time
II do not wish TO make any state
ment," said the prisoner.
The closing witness for the defense
IN the forenoon were Mrs. Alphonsine
Guibcault and Dina Rivet, sisters OF
the prisoner, who testified that he was
at home at 11:20 on the night of the
murder, and Nazaire Duchesne, who
said that when told the news of Gail.
loux's death at the Guilbeault house
the morning following the murder,
Rivet's manner did not change. The
government put on seven witnesses in
rehuttal.
Dist Atty. Hoggins opened for the
prosecution. He said in part:
This was secret murder, and the
Lowell police used every honest effort
TO learn who did the deed. There has
been no evidence to show that any ef-
fort was made to browbeat the accuser
or any of the witnesses. The common
wealth contends that the murder must
have been committed about II o'clock
Saturday evening, Feb 20. The first
question after a murder is, naturally,
who is benefited by the act. The ques-
ton in the murder of Joseph. Gailloux
was, who was the person to be bene-
Cited, and the answer is Napoleon j..
Rivet.
1T is agreed by Rivet and by his
counsel that Rivet and Gailloux were
together at 1890 p. M, Feb. 20. Rivet
was the only one who knew where
Cuiilonx was going after he left Rich
ards saloon that night. You must not
consider it against RiveH that he did
net take the witness stand, but ii he
failed to bring witnesses here to dis
prove statements made against him
then he must be held responsible.
"Fe maintain that Rivet intended
that night to get the benefit of the
policy which had been assigned to him.
The policy, by the terms, was in full
force and effect.
Il contend that Rivet did not 20 from
Richards liquor store to Durgle's shop
because he did not want to be seen BY
any one. There is no evidence that
Riyet was in Richards saloon after
10:f5 p. M, Feb. 20. A witness for the
defense said that at 1o:1a that night
Rivct was going toward Merrimac street
We contend that Rivet was waiting
around Moody and adjoining streets
that night for Gailloux.
I'VE contend that Rivet knew Gail
loux was in Daigie's shop. Rivet in.
tcnded to get GailIoux drunk in the
Office Feb. 20, and turn on the gas. That
was baked by boys returning from the
theatre. Having that in mind we say
that Rivet did not wait for the possible
return of the boys, but did fatally as.
sault Joseph Gailloux.
@We contend that to prove an talibi
Napoleon j. Rivet went to restaur
ant at once and ordered some beans. 1t
is i significant fact that the clocks Of
Gibault and Mainyille in the same house
were 10 minutes fast. Mr. Gilbault did
not mention that occurrence in the
lower court"