USA > Connecticut > Litchfield County > The bench and bar of Litchfield County, Connecticut, 1709-1909 : biographical sketches of members, history and catalogue of the Litchfield Law School, historical notes > Part 16
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34
LUCIU'S H. FOOT MURDER.
On the morning of March 4th., 1856. Lucius H. Foote, a tavern- er of Woodbury, was found brutally murdered, under the horse sheds of the Episcopal Church in the center of the town, and his whole body frozen stiff, showing that he had been killed the evening be- fore. Circumstances strongly pointed to Edward E. Bradley, as being the perpetrator of the crime. He was arrested on this sus- picion, and after a hearing before Justice Bull, bound over, withont
1
WILLIAM COTHIREN.
151
HISTORICAL NOTES
bail to the next Superior Court to be held at Litchfield. A Grand Jury was summoned, and a true bill for the crime of murder was found. The trial of the accused on the indictment commenced at Litchfield on the 14th., of April, before Judges William L. Storrs and Origen S. Seymour and a Jury, Hon. Gideon Hall, State's At- torney, Hon. Charles B. Phelps and William Cothren, Esq. ap- peared for the State, and Hon. Charles Chapman of Hartford, Gideon H. Hollister and Henry B. Graves, Esqrs. appeared for the prisoner. Not only very nice questions of circumstial evidence, but other intricate questions of law, were involved in the case, and the trial excited a more general interest than any case which has been tried in this county. On the tenth day of the trial the presid- ing Judge charged the jury, and on the eleventh day, they having failed to agree on a verdict, after having been sent out for several times, the papers were taken back, the jury discharged, and the prisoner remanded to jail. The jury stood five for conviction of murder in the second degree and seven for acquittal.
At the September term of the Court the case came on again for trial. It was commenced October 3rd., 1856 before Hon. David C. Sanford and Hon. John D. Park, presiding Judges with a jury. After a careful and laborious trial for twelve days, the jury again disagreed and were discharged.
On the 14th of April. 1857 he was again arrainged for trial be- fore a jury with Hon. William W. Ellsworth and Hon. Thomas B. Butler as presiding Judges, and after a trial of fourteen days the jury again disagreed. Soon after this result the State's Attorney entered a nolle prosequi and the accused was discharged. Mr. Cothren published a complete report of the trial.
MATTHEW MORRIS MURDER.
On the 17th of July, 1861. Woodbury was again startled by the announcement that another murder had been committed there. Matthew M. Morris a very respectable citizen became engaged in a quarrel with one Charles Fox, was stabbed by Fox and the knife at the last thrust, entirely severed the main artery under the collar bone on the right side, called by the doctors the vena cava. Fox immediately hid his knife in the corner of the yard where it was found the next morning, almost covered with blood. Fox took his scythe and started for Roxbury, but was detained by a neighbor till Sheriff Minor arrested him.
After an inquest, Fox was bound over for trial to the September term of the Superior Court, 1861. Judge Ellsworth presided over that Court. Gen. Charles F. Sedgwick and Wm. Cothren, ap- peared for the State, and Gideon H. Hollister and Henry B. Graves, Esqrs., for the defence. After the evidence on both sides had been introduced the judge called all the counsel to the bench, and told them that in his judgment the crime amounted to manslaughter and no more; and that if it pleased them to agree to that view and
152
LITCHFIELD COUNTY BENCH AND BAR
would waive argument, he would immediately so charge the jury. The counsel cheerfully acceded to the suggestion of the distinguished judge, who immediately charged the jury in accordance with his views. The jury retired, and in a few minutes returned with a ver- (ict of manslaughter, and Fox was sentenced to ten years imprison- ment in the Connecticut State Prison.
DRAKELY MURDER.
Again Woodbury was the scene of a sad murder. On the night of August Ioth., 1886 Robert Drakely shot his wife through the heart after she had retired for the night. He was a young man, not twenty years old and had been married only a few weeks and was, as he claimed, jealous of his wife for the attentions she be- stowed on a small child that boarded with them. He was of a good old family of very respectable people but had become disso- lute and dissipated and committed the act while in a drunken frenzy. He was bound over to the Superior Court by Justice Skelly and taken to the jail at Litchfield. At the April term. 1887 of the Court the Grand Jury indicted him for murder in the second de- grec. In September, 1887 he was arraigned and plead not guilty. He was tried before Hon. David Torrance and a jury. The prose- cution was conducted by Hon. James Huntington, State's Attorney and Arthur D. Warner, Esq .; the defense by Henry B. Graves and William Cothren, Esq. The defense was that the accused from various reasons was not mentally or mortally responsible for his acts. After an exhaustive trial and the charge of Judge Torrance the jury retired and in about ten minutes returned with a verdict of guilty. Ile was sentenced to State Prison for life and died a few years after commitment.
BERNICE WILITE, MURDER.
In the carly part of 1850 the people of Colebrook and vicinity were startled by the report that Bernice White, an elderly gentleman living near Colebrook River, had been murdered. In a short time four men were arrested for the deed, named William Calhoun, Lorenzo T. Cobb, Benjamin Balcomb and Henry Mennasseh, the latter a half breed Indian. After the preliminary hearing they were bound over for trial to the Superior Court at Litchfield. 1 Grand Jury found a truc bill against each of them and they were brought to trial at the August Term 1850. There was so great a crowd of witnesses and interested spectators that the Court was obliged to adjourn to the Congregational Church to hold the trial. Two Judges presided, Chief Justice Church and Judge Storrs. Calhoun and Balcomb being minors, Charles Chapman, Esq., of Hartford was appointed guardian ad-litem of Calhoun and Origen S. Seymour for Balcomb. Upon their arraignment Balcomb plead guilty and the rest not guilty of murder in the first degree.
HENRY B. GRAVES
I53
HISTORICAL NOTES
After a long trial Calhoun and Mannasseh were found guilty and Cobb was acquitted. The guilty ones were sentenced to be hung on the second Friday of July. 1851. One of them, Cobb, died in jail and the other three finally had their sentences changed to im- prisonment in State Prison for life. After serving there some years Balcomb died in prison and Calhoun and Mennasseh were par- doned out, it having been fairly proved that they had no hand in the actual commission of the deed but were only accessories after the fact. Calhoun died somewhere in the west and Mennasseh died in the Farmington town house. He is said to have been the last of the Tunxis Indians.
WILLIAM HI. GREEN TRIAL.
The trial of the Rev. William H. Green of Cornwall for murder excited a very general interest.
In 1865 Mr. Green resided in Centerville. N. Y., in the character of an itinerant Methodist preacher, and about that time he married a woman with whom he lived several months occupying with her the parsonage of the parish wherein he preached. In 1866 he abandoned this wife and married a young widow who had a small amount of property amounting to some twelve or fifteen hundred dollars. In the spring of 1867 he came to Connecticut and took the stump for P. T. Barnum who was then running for Congress on the Republican ticket. He was esteemed a very powerful preacher and his political arguments were eloquent and convincing, he also lectured on temperance and was an evangelist and held re- vival meetings in different places. After a time he joined his sec- ond wife's brother in West Cornwall and engaged with him in the general country store business. Mrs. Green was in feeble health with consumption and grew rapidly worse. On the evening of May 6, 1867 she was attacked with spasms and died just after midnight. From certain suspicious circumstances and subsequent conduct of Green, suspicion was aroused to the cause of her death. About the middle of June her body was exhumed and the stomach and liver sent to Prof. Barker of New Haven for examination who found traces of strychnine in those organs. Green was arrested and sent to Litchfield for safe keeping without a mittimus and of course was not locked up. While under keepers here his brother-in-law called upon him and informed him of the result of the analysis. Green concluded that his residence at the jail was not desirable at least on his part and made his departure therefrom unknown to the authorities and was for a few days in parts unknown. In a few days he reported at West Cornwall where he was formally arrested and attempted to save the State the trouble and expense of three trials by cutting his throat with a pocket knife in which he was not entirely successful. He was bound over to the Superior Court for trial and in November 1867 was tried for the crime and convicted
154
LITCHFIELD COUNTY BENCH AND BAR
of murder and sentenced to be hung on December 4th., 1868. His case was carried to the Supreme Court and a new trial granted him on the ground of newly discovered evidence. In January 1869 he was again before the Superior Court and the new trial resulted in a disagreement of the jury, but in September of that year the third trial was had and the jury returned a verdict of guilty of murder in the second degree. He was sentenced to State Prison for life September 25, 1869. where he died.
JAMES LE ROY.
The career of James LeRoy, who received in 1850 at the age of twenty-five years his third commitment to the State Prison for the term of fifteen years upon his plea of guilty to seven different burglaries committed in or near Winsted and New Hartford in the years 1849 and 1850, is in many respects a remarkable one. From his boyhood he seemed to have nothing but a criminal instinct. When arrested in 1850 he was placed under keepers who fell asleep and he not enjoying their society departed from them. He had hand cuffs on and disliking them, proceeded to one of the scythe shops, broke into the shop and set one of the water grindstones running, and ground the shackles from his wrists and then secrete.1 himself so that he was not found by the officials for several days, although they were constantly on the alert for himn. After his release from the Connecticut State Prison he was engaged in practical observations in the management of prisons in other States and in 1877 under the name of James Whiting was sent to prison for theft for three and a half years, and died in prison. He made in 1850 a confession of his exploits which was published.
WOLCOTTVILLE BURGLARS.
On the night of November 1876 the warehouse of the Union Manufacturing Company in Torrington was broken into and a large quantity of manufactured goods carried away. The burglars stole a hand car from the section house and started towards Bridge- port on the Naugatuck Railroad track. When it passed through Waterbury the watchman at the depot informed Superintendent Beach of the passage of the car. Mr. Beach immediately had an engine fired up and started in pursuit, and just before reaching Ansonia at about half past four in the morning the engine struck the hand car and threw it from the track. Stopping the engine they found fifteen pieces of woolen goods scattered about, but the occupants of the hand car had fled, but were tracked in the snow and soon arrested. They were lodged in Litchfield jail and had their trial before this Court December 6, and 7. 1876 and Franklin Johnson, William C. Davis and William C. Davis, Jr. were con- victed of the crime and received State Prison sentences. It was a case that excited great attention partly on account of the mode of capture and the novel method of transit. The whole evidence
اكسس وار
augustus 26. 7mm
155
HISTORICAL NOTES
was purely circumstantial and tlie defense was not only denial by the accused but a fairiy proved alibi presented. The skillful prose- cution conducted by the State's Attorney Huntington and G. H. Welch, Esq. with the adroit defenses presented by H. B. Graves and the large attendance at the trial makes it a noted case.
LIQUOR TRIALS.
From the Litchfield Enquirer of April 29, 1880 we take extracts which will illustrate the great battle which was fought in our Courts in the prosecution for the illegal sale of intoxicating spirits at about that date :
"With all its victories in the moral field, temperance has hereto- fore met defeat or but partial success in the Courts. Even in high teetotal times, when the people were electing Prohibition Governors and Prohibition Legislatures, we have seen rum-seller after rum- seller brought before juries, their guilt conclusively proved, yet escaping justice by acquittal or disagreement. The old prohibitory Statute of 1854 in this County at least was an utter failure. Of the dozens we have seen tried under the act we can recollect but one conviction. Under Local Option there has been a marked change, particularly of late years, and especially since the popular feeling against the liquor traffic has been intensified by the Blue Ribbon movement. There can be no doubt, too, that Litchfield County is very fortunate in her State's Attorney, an officer who never shirks or slights his duty, whether it is a rum-seller, or a sheep stealer that is brought to the bar of the Superior Court for trial. Of late years, therefore we have seen several convictions by juries, but in this County, rum and justice have never been brought face to face so sharply and with such decisive defeat-indeed such utter rout, demoralization and capture of the liquor interest-as the past week has witnessed." After stating the trial of a certain case which was most strongly contested by State's Attorney Huntington, H. P. Lawrence and W. B. Smith for the prosecution and H. B. Graves and A. H. Fenn for defense but resulted in convic- tion of the parties, the article continues: "The prisoner was very much overcome and went home completely broken down and took to his bed seriously if not dangerously ill. On Thursday the Win- sted Temperance men began to reap the benefit of their victory. Dealer after dealer came up to make such settlement as he could. The terms were the same to all. All costs must be paid and an obligation given that they would quit the traffic. On Friday after- noon the Court adjourned for the Term with the following record of progress for about six days work on liquor cases :
Three convictions with fines and costs amounting to about $500 and one hundred and six cases settled for $2,664.II and one man in jail.
Messrs. Forbes, Holmes, Lawrence, W. B. Smith and others are to be highly commended in their wonderfully successful assault of what has so long been considered the last strong-hold of the liquor traffic, the Glorious uncertainty of the law !"
156
LITCHFIELD COUNTY BENCH AND BAR
MASTERS VS. WARREN.
One of the important civil cases tried in this Court came from Warren.
Nicholas Masters, while riding horse-back in the eastern part of the town, was thrown from his horse by reason of its breaking through a small wooden sluice or bridge and received serious in- juries, having his neck nearly broken and for some years carried his head turned partly around and also received- some other minor injuries of not so serious or permanent a nature.
His attorneys, Graves and Hollister, brought suit against the town of Warren for damages, claiming ten thousand dollars, the writ re- turnable to the September term. 1856. A long exhaustive trial be- fore a jury was had at the November term, 1857 in which the plaintiff recovered thirty-five hundred dollars. Some very inter- esting questions came up during the trial regarding the taking of depositions by the defendant without notice to the plaintiff and also in the charge of the judge to the jury of a statement made by the judge of matter outside of the evidence. An appeal was taken to the Supreme Court of Errors by the defendant claiming a new trial which the Supreme Court did not grant and final judgment was rendered against the town at the April term, 1858 for three thousand five hundred and eighty-seven dollars and fifty cents damages and costs.
The story is told in connection with this case that Dr. Buel one of the expert witnesses for the plaintiff testified that he examine 1 the plaintiff and found him suffering from tortochlorosis of the neck. Mr. Hollister in his argument indulged in the high sounding word frequently, portraying the sufferings of his client during his lifetime from such a terrible complaint. One of the defendant lawyers soon after met Dr. Buel and asked him what that big word he used meant. "Stiff neck." was the answer. "Why didn't you say so in Court said the lawyer. That word cost the town $1500."
ROBBINS VS. COFFIN.
In 1883 an action from Salisbury wherein Samuel Robbins sued the administrator of the estate of George Coffing.
The points of law involved were important and the amount in- volved was about $70,000, an unusually large sum for this Court and the attorneys engaged were of the highest rank in the State.
George A. Hickox, who then edited the Litchfield Enquirer, re- ports it as follows: "The management of the case by the noted counsel on each side respectively, was looked on with much interest. Judge Warner made an excellent opening argument for the de- fendants, on whom the burden rested to prove their various de- fenses. Then followed John S. Beach, with a very clear quiet statement of the plaintiff's claim. Most interest was naturally felt
Y
MILES T. GRANGER.
I 57
HISTORICAL NOTES
in the argument of Ex-Governor Hubbard, who followed Mr. Beach. The elegant forcible style of his address showed all the polish of his first class literary work, and the weight of his oratory was made doubly effective by his remarkable power as an actor. It was worth while studying the use he made of an old pair of steel spectacles he wears, to damn the defendants claims or enforce his own. The way they fell on the table was made to express the ex- treme of confidence or the extreme of disgust. They came down with the weight of a sledge hammer in emphasizing the one or the other view. His mode of handling a law paper spoke volumes. In- deed we have heard as fine rhetoric and as fine oratory in a law court, but never combined with such acting. Mr. Perkins closed the case with a very telling exposition of the evidence in connection with the position of the defendant." The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff to recover $67,633.33 damages and costs.
In connection with Brother Hickox's discription of the conduct of the trial it may be proper to add that this was the last argument in a law court that "Dick" Hubbard ever made.
HIGGIN'S ESCAPE.
One of the most interesting and exciting matters that have arisen in modern years, related to the escape of Richard Hadley a prisoner while being transported to the State Prison in Wethersfield in the year 1883 .- Higgin's alias was Richard Hadley.
The following extracts from the papers of the time will give full details as well as some interesting history:
When James R. Higgins escaped from the wagon in which he was being taken from Litchfield to Wethersfield to serve out a ten years sentence for burglarly it was supposed that he had been fur- nished with a key to his handcuffs by his counsel, Henry H. Prescott of Litchfield. A. T. Roraback of Canaan, W. B. Smith of Winsted, and Dwight C. Kilbourn of Litchfield were appointed a committee to obtain evidence to be presented to the court at Litchfield touch- ing Mr. Prescott's connection with the affair. Mr. Smith, of the committee, was at Wethersfield on Tuesday and obtained the fol- lowing statement from Higgins :-
I first met Harry H. Prescott of Litchfield soon after I was ar- rested, in Litchfield jail. He was my attorney in the superior court in that county. When I called him into the case he agreed to help me to get away from jail, and I was to give him $250. Not having any money I was to give him some stolen bonds as security. The bonds were stolen from the savings bank at Woodbury, this state, and the total amount was $7,500. I put into Prescott's hands $6,400 in bonds. The understanding was that if I got out he should have the bonds. He was to give Paddy Ryan and others who came from New York to assist me in breaking jail all the points about jail, also the use of his office, and in short was to act as a general
158
LITCHFIELD COUNTY BENCH AND BAR
?
go-between to aid me in escaping from jail. The understanding was that Prescott was not to negotiate the bonds and was to keep the matter quiet until Howard, my pal, who was arrested with me, and I had escaped. Prescott told me that he went to New York to see Ryan at 154 East Twenty-third street, and that Ryan was afraid to have anything to do with him in the matter. Later he told me that he had been to New York again, but did not see Ryan. Soon after Prescott brought me a letter that was sent to him by Ryan and written by Farley, one of the Ryan gang. The letter inquired whether Prescott was all solid and to be trusted. After reading the letter I burned it in the jail stove. I sent a letter through Pres- cott to Ryan saying that Prescott was straight and to be trusted.
The following Sunday, after he had been to New York, Prescott came to me and stated that he had taken the bonds to the bank parties and had got something over $400 for them. As I had ob- jected to his doing anything about the bonds until I had made my escape, I was angry when I found that he had given them up. At that time he gave me $15 and in a day or two gave my wife $200. I could not get anything more out of him. I afterwards found that he received about $1,200 for the bonds, but I could not get anything more out of him. My friends of the Ryan gang did not appear and I found that I had to depend upon my own resources. I continued to find fault because Prescott would not give me more money, and at last he said to me, about two weeks before court opened, that if I would keep still he would get me a key that would fit my hand- cuffs, and I could escape either when on the way from jail to the court house, or when I was being conveyed to the state prison if I was convicted. Howard and I talked it over and concluded to make the attempt to escape when we were being conveyed to or from the court room. Prescott brought us four handcuff keys that fitted my handcuffs and two small keys, like dog-collar keys; also two files. I had the four handcuff keys in my pocket all the time during the trial. The two other keys I filed and gave to Howard. One of the files 1 kept until I escaped, the other I left in the jail. When Pres- cott gave me the keys he told me that he knew that four of them would fit any handcuff in the jail. They did fit without any filing. When we were taken to the court room to plead Howard was handcuffed to me and the sheriff took my right wrist in his nippers. While we sat in the dock, Prescott came up to us and said: "Why did you not escape on the way over ?" I told him that Howard might have got away, but I could not. Prescott replied: "That's right. You had better wait and get away together." While I was in the Litchfield jail Prescott gave me a revolver loaded with five cart- ridges, also ten cartridges afterwards. He gave them to me in my cell, 1 think on the afternoon of the day I was sentenced. I wanted the revolver and he did not want to give it to me until after I had received a visit from my wife, so that it would appear as if she had
WELLINGTON B. SMITH.
159
HISTORICAL NOTES
furnished it to me if it was discovered. I asked him if he had it with him, and he said he had. I then asked him to let me see it. After making me promise to give it back to him, he let me take it. I examined it and then handed it back. At 4 o'clock Thursday evening. after I was sentenced, he gave me the ten cartridges. The revolver was a "Young America" or "Young American." I don't remember which. It was double-acting, had five chambers, and was of 32 caliber. I did not know where he got it. I don't remember whether he told me he got the keys from a man in Litchfield, or whether he said he was going to get them of some man there. I understood that the man was an officer or had been one. The last time I saw Prescott before my escape was when he gave me the ten cartridges on Thursday. He then cautioned me not to use the revolver, shook hands with me and wished me good luck. After my escape I pawned the revolver in Baltimore. I had it tied be- tween my legs the Saturday morning when they started to take me to Wethersfield. I was on the back seat of the last wagon, which the sheriff was driving. Howard was in the first wagon with the deputy.
Mr. Prescott was present while the latter part of this statement was made. and afterwards cross-examined Higgins without material- ly shaking his statement of the case."
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.