The Barre daily times. (Barre, Vt.) 1897-1959, 1920-02-12
ATTORNEY-GENERAL
FOUGHT THE DELAY
But Judge Butler Decided
to Forego Imposing Pen
atty on Sc Counts of Lar
ceny, of Which Graham
Was Found Guilty in
County Court Last Week.

Sentence was not imposed to-day on
Horace F. Graham, who was last week
found guilty in Washington county
court on SO counts of larceny from tho
state of Vermont, and the mater will
90 to the supreme court The imposing
of sentence was stayed, as was the
mittimus. The case will 60 to supreme
court on exceptions, and it was stated
later that motion for new trial will
be made.
w. B. c. Stickney, attorney for the
respondent, stated that the defense
would file a motion at the proper time
and that, taking advantage of section
1896 Of the general laws, the case will
20 to supreme court on exceptions as
to the facts and the verdict. The re.
spondent asked for 90 days in which to
complete the exceptions. The court
conferred with Mrs. f. L. Laird, the
court reporter, and announced that the
length of time would be fixed later
The granting of the stay in penalty
was opposed by Attorney General
Frank C. Archibald. who stated that il
the 90 days time was given it would
carry the case, by the May term. He
believed this case was of so much i'm
portance that it should be advanced as
fast as possible. He saw no reason
why the stay in sentence should be
granted He stated a fair trial had
occurred and this should be handled
like an ordinary case.
Mr. Stickney said the imposition OF
sentence would prejudice affairs and
then he explained in a little more detail
the reasons why the respondent had
asked for a stay of sentence.
Mr.. Archibald failed to see how the
respondent profted by the stay and
again urged that the penalty be inn
posed.
Judge Butler directed that the judg-
ment on the verdict of guilty on the
counts of larceny from 96 to l5l, in
elusive be made, to which the respond
ent took exceptions.
He explained that an injustice might
be done the respondent in imposing of
sentence if the case should be reversed
tcnce had been imposed could not be
kept from the jury of new trial and
the court understood a motion for a
new trial will later occur. He referred
to the great Importance of this case
on each side and that with the whole
case going up" under the revised rules
OF procedure no injury could be done.
The motion for the delay was granted.
The respondent will rely on about
half dozen exceptions There were but
a few taken in the ease. the principal
OF which were As TO the omission OF tho
court 10 charge on certain grounds and
the exclusion of certain evidence rela
tive to advances and the custom as tho
respondent wanted to show it by testi-
mony in defense.
Hanley Case Next Tenn.
Following the decision in the Graham
case. some of the other state cases were
disposed of. The case of State vs.. ID.
T. Hanley is now set for the first day
Of the next term OF court Mr.. Hanlev
has asked for immediate trial on the
grounds that too long a delay has oe-
CURED already The state could not
get ready for this term and Mr. Arch
ibald stated that he did not want 20 try
any more state cases here this term
and that he had other matters that de-
manded his attention.
The case of State W.. G. O. Hale, al
legged murder will be disposed of by the
court this afternoon as far as this term
is concerned. Very probably it will go
10 the March term of court
The case of State VS. +. Martinez was
continued.