The Barre daily times. (Barre, Vt.) 1897-1959, 1912-02-07
TRY TO SAVE
A MURDERER
Arthur BosWorth's Case Before
Supreme Court Today
COMING ON Fyr-pTIONS
Bos \. cyMNo as Convicted in Chittenden
County Court of Killing Mae Labelle
at Essex Junction Last Sum
mer by Shooting.

The efforts to save Arthur Bosworth
from the gallows for the murder Of May
Labelle at the Essex Junction station on
June 7, 1911, occupied the attention OF
the Vermont supreme court at Montpe
lier to-day when the case came up from
Chittenden county court on exceptions.
Attorney General John G. Sargent and
! States Attorney H. b. Shaw of Chitten
den county argued for the state, and
| A. l.. Sherman was the attorney for Bos-
worth, the convicted man.
| Both Bosworth and Miss Labelle were
employed at the hotel in Essex Junction
! for a time, but when the former was
discharged he is said to have harbored
resentment against the girl, claiming
that she was responsible for his loss OF
position. He shot her five times on the
station platform and before several by
ISLANDERS could interfere.
The two points chiefly relied upon to
save Bosworth from the same fate as
Elroy Kent are; tll that the courl
erred in summoning the talesmen into
court before the panel was exhausted
which was contrary to procedure; and
" the exception taken to the charge
which was delivered by Judge A. A dali
who has since died. In this latter claim,
the defense declares that the charge to
the jury did not allow due latitude un-
der the new law respecting the right
OF the jury to determine for capital pun
ishment or life Imprisonment, as gauged
by the mental capacity of the respon-
dent.
The arguments in the petition for
new trial were started this forenoon and
viii last through the day.
Arguments were made yesterday in
the Essex county case Of Hattie Willard
Va. DIR. 4. +. Noreross. which has been
before the courts for long time. The
first trial was in 1905 and the verdict
for the plaintiff was $500 This verdict
was reversed and in the second trial
the verdict was $l,20B, which was al
firmed, a new trial being granted later
because Of the alleged misconduct Of
a Juror, This time the jury awarded
the ufdfHliH F-.ouU anu llAC tdHC SdllC
to supreme court at the last term on
exceptions. The court is now asked to
grant new trial for the introduction
OF newly discovered evidence.
Attorney Blake for the plaintiff ar
gued that a case can be made out at
another trial and asked that the case
he remanded. He cited numerous cases
bearing on the point and held that as
certain evidence was presented at two
trials and not at the fourth, it could
be produced at the next trial.
Attorney George l.. Hunt for Norcross
argued that the new testimony available
was purely expert in nature and that
not one of the witnesses had seen or
treated the fractured wrists on which
the case is founded. He held that two
motions OF similar nature could not be
pending before the court at the same
time. as is the case here. He character.
iyed the newly discovered evidence of
the plaintiff as being newly made" evil
dcnce. He said it was sought to change
the suit from grounds of negligent treat
ment to that of wrong diagnosis.
Prior to taking up this case, many
opinions were rendered by the court, as
follows:
In the Cbittenden county case OF State
Of Vermont against Sydney Snyder
Judge Watson's opinion reverses judg-
lrent. overrules demurrer, adjudges dec
laration insufficient and remands cause.
This is case from Burlington city,
court.
Judge RoweIl read an opinion in the
county case of n Myrtle Brad
lev against james S. Bentley and trus-
tees, affirming the Judgment of the low
ar court for the defendant. This case
involved bank deposit of $1,000.
In the Lamoille county case of Fife
and Child against Cate, in which the
decree of the court of chancery was
reversed at the November term, 1910,
findings filed later and The
"a So heard. a motion for rehearing being
made last october. Judge Rowell denied
the motion.
Viola Anger against Herman D. Web
,ter, case from Caledonia county, which
mas been before the court before, Judge
Haseltine's opinion adjudged the plea of
he defendant good and affirmed the
ieeree but reversed the decree dismiss
ng the bill pro forma.
The Essex county case of C. II. Green,
,dm., against A. j. Cross was continued
m request of L. p Slack of st. Johns
Jury, one of the counsel, and the Gale
lonia case of Martha Mason, exc'x,
against the New England Telephone
company was also continued