Oxford Democrat. [volume] (Paris, Me.) 1833-1933, 1909-03-23
John P. Penley Found Not Guilty.
The Outcome of the Trial in the Supreme Judicial
Court Last Week.


turned home. There would also be Q
second portion to the evidence, which
J would show that Leonard returned home
} that Friday afternoon earlier than h'
! had testified, and that things at tn.
: Leonard place that afternoon were mol
just as bad been represented.
/ About twenty witnesses were sworI
, for the defence. Sumner II. Wardwell
, of Minot, cattle buyer, testified tina,
with two men from Connecticut he stay
ed at John P. Penley's on the night Of
Oct Sth and again the night of Oct.
9th, fixing the time by the dates OF
checks drawn on that trip. He was not
there during the day on the 9th.
Other witnesses who testified were
Mrs. Nellie o. Penley, wife of John P
Penley; Archie Y. Swan, the hired man
Melvina Leonard, the hired girl; Peter
Billings, near neighbor; Alphonso Bill.
ings, son Of Peter Billings, who was at
work at his fathers on the afternoon OF
Oct. 9th; Mrs. Ethel Thayer, daughter
of Peter Billings, who lives with her
father; Russell Rowland, who is EN-.
ployed at Mr.. Billings; George b. Nc.
Keen, and Mrs. George H. McKeen,
neighbors who live near by. All these
gave testimony to Mr.. Penley being
at home, hauling up wood from his
pasture lot a short distance back of his
buildings, and burning the brush, dur
ing at least some part Of the day. A
number of them stated that they saw
him there at some time after dinner,
somewhere from one to two o'clock, and
a number of them also saw him and
Archie Swan when they started for
South Paris about four o'clock, while
some of them stated definitely that they
saw him at some time between those
hours. L. Fred Pike Of the Blue Store,
South Paris, testified to selling Archie
Swan pair Of trousers late in the after
noon of that day, and Fred N. Wright. a
South Paris grocer, testified that Penley
was in his store about five o'clock, and
made trade to exchange some potatoes
for other goods, fixing the time by en-
tries made in his books the next day.
Called to the stand, John P. Penley re-
lated his doings on the 9th of October
substantially as had been told by the
other witnesses, stating that he was on.
wood and burning brush; that he did
uOt icdNo buo PkCmtoCc uhti h0 ohu
Archie Swan went to South Paris about
four o'clock.
He stated that he was at the Leonard
place for a few minutes on Sunday,
Sept. goth, and that was the only time
he had been there since he moved from
that neighborhood three years and half
ago. he stated that he never bad
black suit in his life; that he did not
own black shirt last fall; that he al
ways wore soft hat or cap, never stiff
ha' /; that he never owned gun that he
knew of, and never had cartridge belt
on: that he had never been in the house
alone with Ethel Meggs; and that he had
never committed any outrage upon her
or injured her in any way.
Both Mr.. and Mrs. Penley were sub
jected to long and seaching cross
examination by Mr.. Barnes, without
elicting any material change from their
direct testimony.
Miss Agnes NJ. Brown of Paris Hill
testified that on the afternoon of Oct.
9th, in company with Mrs. E. L. Paris,
she left Paris Hill for South Paris about
2 o'clock, and few minutes later met
Fred Leonard going toward his home,
near the road that turns in to his place.
Mrs. Maurice A. Newton, who lives in
the next house to the Leonards on the
south, testified that on the afternoon of
the 9th of October, she was picking ap-
pies in their orchard north of their
house, where she could see the Leonard
buildings. She heard the Meggs girl
crying quite hard for quite little while.
Looked over to see II she could see her
out doors, but could not. Saw man
come out of the house, and do some
thing out doors, and witness here Illus
trated what he was doing, STOPPING over
and going through the motions of scrub
bling. Questioned as TO who it was, she
said she called it the owner of the
place, Fred Leonard.
Mrs. Newton was given quite long
cross examination by Mr.. Barnes, and
appeared somewhat excited. She adj
mitted that she had not mentioned this
matter until a few days previous, and
then only to the counsel for the defence,
and In answer to question by Mr..
Wright, said that she had not done it
because she did not want to be mixed up
In the affair in any way.
This was the last witness for the de-
fence and the defence rested at the ad-
journment of court Thursday noon.
After dinner Thursday something like
dozen witnesses were called by the
state in rebuttal, number of whom had
not testified previously. Two matters
of more importance than others we're
brought out by the rebuttal. One was
from the testimony of Mr.. and Mrs.
Henry Maxim, who live at the junction
of the East Oxford and Hebron roads,
| Just out of South Paris village. Mrs.
Maxim testified that on the afternoon
of Oct. 8, a little after four O'Clock, she
saw q woman drive by alone toward
South Paris village whom she had seen
before but did not know. She asked her
husband who 1t was and was informed
that it was Mrs. Nellie Penley, and Mrs.
Maxim identified Mrs. Penley in the
court room as the woman. Mrs. Maxim
stated that she put the fact down in her
diary under date of Oct. 8, and had re-
Gently referred to 1t aud confirmed the
date. Mr.. Maxim also testified to the
fact of Mrs. Penley passing the house,
and his wife making inquiry.
Three witnesses from West Paris and
vicinity were put on, who testified that
the reputation of Archie Swan for truth
and veracity, 10 the community where
he lived, was bad. One of the witnesses
was his stepfather. These witnesses
stated on cross.examination that for
some years they had not heard his truth
fulness called in question.
Other witnesses contradicted witnesses
for defence on some point Of their testi-
mony.
For the defence Mrs. Penley, who had
previously testified that she was not
away from her premises on the 9th of
October, repeated that statement, and
Melvina Leonard, the hired girl, testified
to the same fact.
The arguments in the case occupied
the rest of Thursdays session, each side
being allowed an hour and quarter.
Mr.. Wright for the defence made strong
and able argument, contending that a
wall of defence had been thrown around
his client so high that no ladder could
surmount it. For the state Mr.. Barnes
|, made brilliant and affecting argument
Friday morning Judge Cornish gave
his instructions to the jury, first noting
, with pleasure the close attention which
they had given the case. He stated
briefly the rules of law which must
I govern them in their decision, and made
| very clear review of the essential
i. features of the evidence and the con
tentions of each side. It was a simple
, complete, orderly and impartial review
, of the case, occupying with his pre-
l..