POOR MARY STANDARD! 
A FULL AND THRILLING STORY 
OF THE 
CIRCUMSTANCES CONNECTED WITH HER MURDER. 
History of the Monstrous Madison Crime. 
THE MOST MYSTERIOUS OF ALL THE CASES 
WHICH HAVE BAPTIZED CONNECTICUT 
IN BLOOD. 
THE ONLY TRUE AND RELIABLE ACCOUNT. 
THE CLAIRVOYANTS WONDERFUL STJM. 
NEW HAVEN: 
STAFFORD PRINTING COMPANY. 
1879. THE SAD AND HORRIBLE DETAILS. 
Mary Leaves her Home for the Berry Field. 
Her Father Finds her Body ; her Throat Cut and her Hands 
Crossed 
The Thrilling Story of the Inquest. 
Rev. H. H. Hayden’s Arrest and Painful Separation from his 
Family. 
The Trial before Justice Wilcox in Madison. 
Sensations in the Court Room. 
The Experts find Human Blood on Rev. Mr. Hayden’s Knife. 
Susan Hawley and Mrs. Studley tell how Mary Stannard 
Accused the Preacher. 
The Remarkable and Abrupt Close of the Hearing. 
Rev. Hayden Rearrested and Imprisoned in the New Haven 
County Jail. 
How the Medical Experts Repeatedly Exhumed Mary Stan- 
nard’s Body. 
The Finding of Arsenic in her Stomach. 
The Indignation of the People of the Surrounding Country. 
How the Methodist Clergymen Sustained Rev. Hayden. 
The Minister in Jail. 
Other Particulars of Exciting and Engrossing Interest. MARY ST ANN ARD’S MURDER. 
In the history of crime, rarely in these latter days has any- 
thing occurred in this, or any other state, that has so excited 
the attention of the whole country, and caused such a shock 
to the moral sense of the community, as what is known in 
almost every household in Connecticut as the Madison mur- 
der. The experienced novelist might stretch his vivid imagi- 
nation to the utmost, and not devise a plot into which should 
enter so much to stir the sympathetic heart profoundly. 
Poor Mary Stannard ! While her innocent but fatherless boy, 
little Willie, still lived, with the undeserved shadow of shame 
above him, to cloud his young life, it seemed hardly credible 
that there could exist one so pitiless and inhuman as to bring 
him new misfortune. When Mary Stannard’s lifeless and cold 
form was found in the path, no wonder that the spectator was 
aghast with horror! That spectator was no other than her 
own father. Was there ever a scene more pitiful or more 
dramatic ? Tenderly her body was borne back to the home 
she had left with the flush of health on her face, a few hours 
before, and the wail of her doubly bereaved boy echoed 
through the home of death. Such a wail might appall the 
stoutest and hardest heart. It was at once a wail and an 
appeal to that terrible God who saith “ Vengeance is mine ; I 
will repay.” 
So far as is now known, Mary E. Stannard was last seen 
alive a little after one o’clock on the afternoon of Tuesday, Sep- 
tember 3, 1878, and by her father, Charles Sylvester Stan- 
nard. About six o’clock of the same day, Mr. Stannard found 
her lying dead, with her throat cut—the jugular vein being 
entirely divided. Mary left her father’s house, which was in 
Rockland or North Madison, in the town of Madison, the next 
station beyond Guilford, on the Shore Line railroad, taking 
with her a tin pail, and saying that she was going to the “ Big 
Rock,” about a quarter of a mile distant, after berries. 
When her father, becoming alarmed at her absence, made 
search for her and found her body, she lay on her back, 
a little on her right side, her hands crossed over her 
stomach and her head thrown back, undoubtedly the same 
position into which it was forced, that her throat might be 4 
reached by her murderer. The tin pail she brought with her 
was ’ying three or four feet away, turned upside down, and 
when afterwards examined, no berries nor berry stains could 
be found inside of it. When Mr. Stannard first saw his 
daughter, he cried, “ Mary !” as he ran towards her. He got 
no answer ; and hurrying to her side, touched her hands and 
face and found they were cold. He then started for help. 
The first house he came to was that of Francis P. Mills. 
From there the terrible news soon spread, so that in a short 
time there stood around the body of the unfortunate girl her 
father, Mr. Mills and his two sons, Frederick and Burton, N. 
R. Burr, Luzerne Stevens, Sylvester Hawley, and other neigh- 
bors, to the number of about a dozen. Among them was the 
Rev. Herbert H. Hayden, the Methodist minister of the place, 
and Mary’s pastor. A search was at once instituted for the 
weapon with which the murder was committed, but none was 
found, and as the daylight was fading and some rain was fall- 
ing, the search was adjourned till the next morning. The 
body was taken to the late residence of the deceased, and 
Justice Henry E. Stone notified. He summoned a jury of 
inquest, and there was also a post mortem examination made 
by Dr. Rufus W. Matthewson, of Durham, at about three 
o’c’ock Wednesday morning. He found, besides the throat 
wound, a wound on the right side of the head, jagged and 
star-shaped, and apparently made by a blunt instrument. 
All day Wednesday the interest in the terrible tragedy was 
on the increase. Thursday it was the same, and the suspicion 
seemed to point only in one direction. In whispers neighbor 
told neighbor of the awful rumors in circulation, until but one 
man’s name was in everybody’s mouth, coupled with the mur- 
der. It was plain that matters were approaching a crisis. It 
came when Grand Juror Charles S. Stannard (not related to 
the afflicted family), in pursuance of what he believed to be 
his duty, came down from North Madison, and at two o’clock 
Friday morning, aroused Justice H. B. Wilcox from his slum- 
bers with a request that he should sign at once a warrant for 
the Rev. Mr. Hayden’s arrest. Mr. Wilcox was shocked at 
the trouble that was menacing his beloved pastor, and he told 
the Grand Juror that he had sat under Mr. Hayden’s preach- 
ing the Sunday before, and heard him preach a very good 
sermon ; it did not seem possible the minister could be guilty, 
and he would rather sign his own death warrant than that ar- 
rest warrant against Mr. Hayden. At sunrise the Friday 
morning after the Tuesday afternoon upon which the murder 
occurred, Deputy Sheriff Hull went to North Madison and 
arrested Mr. Hayden, taking him at once down to Madison. 5 
The parting of the minister from his wife was very painful. 
She had but recently given birth to a child, her third, of 
which all are living, and she was very weak. But few knew of 
his arrest, and scarcely thirty persons were present at the 
Town Clerk’s office, where the hearing occurred. Mr. Hay- 
den was perfectly at ease, showing no excitement whatever, 
and plead not guilty to the charge on which he was arraigned. 
The examination was continued until the following Monday, 
Mr. Hayden being meanwhile placed in the custody of William 
Miner, the well-known ship builder, of Madison. The next 
day, Saturday, the newspaper reporters flocked to Madison to 
interview Mr. Hayden, but while perfectly willing to talk upon 
any other subject, he persistently refused to discuss the mur- 
der, and has continued of the same mind since, except when 
on the witness stand. To show the general feeling with refer- 
ence to the accused, it will do to quote from the Hartford 
Courant of Saturday, September 7. It said : 
“Of his guilt, as the case appears now, there can be very little doubt; and it looks as if 
he was led through fright to commit the murder, and yet did it in so bungling a manner as 
to make it almost impossible for him to escape suspicion and arrest.” 
What the circumstances were that led so many people to 
believe in his guilt will be given later in this account. 
Monday morning, September 10, the hearing began at Mad- 
ison, in the Town Hall, located in the basement of the Con- 
gregational church, before Justice Wilcox. For the State 
appeared Judge FI. Lynde Harrison, of the Court of Common 
Pleas, and James I. Hayes, of New Haven. The Hon. James 
P. Platt, son and law-partner of the State’s Attorney, was also 
present, intently watching the proceedings, that he might keep 
the State’s Attorney fully posted in all the details of the 
hearing in this famous case. For the defense appeared L. M. 
Hubbard, postmaster at Wallingford, but whose law office is 
in New Haven, and Samuel F. Jones, the noted Hartford 
criminal lawyer. It is reported that the latter gentleman was 
engaged by leading Methodists of Hartford to defend Mr. 
Hayden, solely because of the assertion in the Courant that 
Mr. Hayden must be the guilty one. Messrs. Plarrison and 
Jones were well matched so far as ability was concerned, both 
holding high rank as lawyers ; but Mr. Jones came into the 
case with a criminal experience unequalled in the State, and 
entered into the defense with an earnestness and zeal that had 
hardly ever failed to prove successful in the past. The court 
room was a low-ceilinged, stifling, dirty room, almost a cellar, 
and so dark that kerosene lamps had to be kept burning all 
day to furnish light. There was no chance for fresh air to 
circulate. For nine days, in this close room, was the hear- 6 
ing in progress, and each day’s proceedings were given in 
detail by the leading newspapers throughout the country, the 
New York press being represented by reporters sent up, who 
remained throughout the trial. Interest never flagged, and 
each and every detail of the terrible affair was eagerly sought 
for with the greatest anxiety. The leading illustrated papers 
gave pictures of Miss Stannard and Mr. Hayden, and the 
scene of the murder ; and in many other ways was shown the 
great interest that had been excited. While the hearing was 
in progress, the accused minister was in charge of a town offi- 
cer, in whose house he slept each night. 
WHAT LED TO MR. HAYDEN’S ARREST. 
Probably the best way to give the reader a correct idea of 
what the trial brought forth, will be to give the important parts 
of the testimony of each witness. But first it will do to pub- 
lish the facts and rumors that led to Mr. Hayden’s arrest. 
Mary Stannard had the reputation of being a very simple, 
easy-minded girl. She was easily influenced, and a designing 
person could find in her an obedient tool after a proper as- 
cendancy over her weak mind was obtained. This was known 
to every one in the neighborhood where she lived, so that 
when, a year or more before her death, she gave birth to an 
illegitimate boy, the father being a young married man now 
residing at Wallingford, there was more of pity shown for her 
than usually falls to the lot of unfortunate girls. Indeed, in 
her case, no one accused her of having a particle of vicious- 
ness in her composition, and her unfortunate plight was the 
subject of general commiseration, and every effort was made 
to encourage her and raise her up, as well as to strengthen her 
and prevent future disgrace. She was cared for in her humble 
home during confinement, and, it is said, her young friends 
sought by every means in their power to show that, in their 
estimation, she had been more sinned against than sinning. 
The infant thrived, and in time the bitter sting of the disgrace 
passed away from the young mother’s mind, though the mem- 
ory was ever there, as was shown at times in the future. She 
knew that she must not fold her hands and idle away her time, 
however, but must labor for the support of herself and her 
fatherless one. She sought service among the neighbors, and 
was ready at any time to do any labor, no matter how menial, 
that would result in her being able to contribute to the family 
fund, that herself and child should not become a burthen. 
Thus it was that she became, an inmate of the Rev. Mr. 
Hayden’s house. Mrs. Hayden was not a very strong woman. 
At times she sought help in her household labors. Mary 7 
Stannard was quick and willing. She was often sent for to 
do washing and aid Mrs. Hayden in other ways. During 
Mrs. Hayden’s confinement Mary was also in constant de- 
mand. Finally she was hired to work during the winter of 
’77, coming in December and remaing till March. Mr. Hay- 
den, the neighbors thought, was too much interested in Mary. 
There were scandalous stories of meetings in lots and other 
unfrequented places, evenings. The stories, no doubt, grew 
as they were repeated. Very few in North Madison but heard 
them. There was one story that flourished for a time, about 
the minister going to an oyster supper with his wife, one even- 
ing, Mary remaining home. During the evening, Mr. Hay- 
den, according to these stories, excused himself from the 
supper, and returned to his own house. During his absence 
it is alleged that he was guilty of improper intimacy with 
Mary Stannard. August 18, 1878, Mary went to live with 
Mrs. Jane Studley, of Guilford, and eleven days afterwards, 
she, having acted in a desponding manner, and so attracted the 
attention of Mrs. Studley, confessed, in reply to questions by 
that lady, that she had been criminally intimate with the Rev. 
Mr. Hayden, beginning one night in March, 1878, and she 
believed herself to be five months advanced in pregnancy, and 
that he was the father of her unborn child. Mrs. Studley, 
being a woman of considerable experience, examined Mary, 
and found two well-recognized signs of pregnancy, and be- 
came convinced that Mary was in that condition. Mrs. Stud- 
ley then advised the girl to go home, see Mr. Hayden, and 
ask for assistance in some form. Mary accepted the advice, 
but first wrote a letter to her half-sister, Susan Hawley, at 
Rockland, containing another, enclosed for Mr. Hayden. She 
told Mrs. Studley, before sending the letter, that in it she 
asked Mr. Hayden to come to Guilford and take her to New 
Haven for an operation, and then to return her to Mrs. Studley 
for any sickness that might follow. Susan Hawley got the 
letter the following Sunday afternoon ; but in the meantime 
Mary had been sent home by Mrs. Studley, for reasons given 
below, and she secured the letter before Susan ha.d delivered 
it to Mr. Hayden, and burned it, saying to Susan that she could 
see Mr. Hayden in person, now that she was home, and tell him 
all she had written. The letter was mailed Friday night, August 
30, and after that Mrs. Studley told her son of its contents 
and all that Mary had told her, including the proposition to 
come back to Mrs. Studley and recover from the contemplated 
operation. Mr. Studley said no such thing must occur at his 
house, and bade his mother have Mary ready to go to her own 
home at Rockland, Sunday morning. He drove her over 
himself. 8 
In addition to these facts which, through Mary, had come 
to the knowledge of the Studleys, she told her half-sister the 
whole story of her trouble, repeating that Mr. Hayden was 
the father of the child which, she then thought, would be born 
in a few months. Before the coroner’s jury Susan Hawley re- 
peated what Mary had said, and to a committee the jury sent 
to see the Studleys, they told the same story, Mrs. Studley not 
knowing that Mary was dead at the time. The final result of 
the statements of these three witnesses, added to the many 
rumors in circulation, was that Mr. Hayden was arrested for 
the murder. Following is given the substance of the testi- 
mony of the principal witnesses for the prosecution and de- 
fense. Many of the witnesses were recalled several times, and 
to make a more connected account, the story of each witness 
is given without break: 
mary’s father’s testimony. 
Charles Sylvester Stannard was the first witness summoned 
at the hearing, which began Monday, September 9, six days 
after the murder, and which was not finished until the 26th of 
the same month, though the court only sat nine days. There 
were many delays, caused by the prosecution following up 
new evidence and securing witnesses. While the lawyers are 
getting ready, and the six Madison Justices of the Peace are 
taking seats on the little platform in the low hall, beside try- 
ing Justice Wilcox, all eyes are turned upon the minister. 
The New Haven Union said : 
“ A fair view was now obtained of the accused, the Rev. Mr. Hayden, as 
he sat near the platform or arose to welcome numerous out of town friends 
who pushed through the crowd to greet him. He is of short stature, with 
pointed chin-whisker, rough, red face, betokening exposure to the weather, 
and a good head of dark hair, inclined to curl, and combed down low on 
his forehead, giving him the appearance of being very low-browed. He 
was dressed in black and carried a small boquet in his hand, which he often 
applied to his nose. He did not seem nervous nor cast down, but moved 
about easily, greeting his friends with a pleasant smile. His age is 28, and 
he looks far more the farmer than the minister, the only sign of the latter 
profession being the white tie he wore. His coat or vest did not button up 
to the neck, but left a fair expanse of clean linen visible. Altogether he 
had a sort of boyish, unministerial appearance, was not at all ill-looking, 
and looked very little like a murderer. This, from glimpses of him before 
the work of the examination begun, and while he flitted from friend to friend 
in the rather feeble light of the lamps.” 
Finally, all being ready, and the court quiet, Mr. Stannard 
took the stand. He was a small, hairy looking man, his whis- 
kers and hair long and uncared for. He was about 40 years 
of age, of low size, rather deaf and dull of comprehension. 
He testified that after his daughter had gone berrying, as al- 9 
ready stated, he went to a meadow near by and stayed there 
raking hay for some time. He came back to the house be- 
tween four and five o’clock. Noticing that Mary had not 
returned he began to get concerned about her, and started out 
in the direction in which she had gone, calling out her name 
at intervals. He did not find her, and at half past five or six 
o’clock he started out again, fearing she had got lost. Finally 
he found her as already described, lying dead. After alarming 
the neighbors, help was secured and the body removed to the 
house of witness. The body lay on a board in the yard of the 
house until three o’clock the next morning, when the jury met. 
After the inquest the body was carried into the front room. 
“ Did you ever see that before ? ” Mr. Hayes asked, holding 
up a checked sun bonnet clotted with blood. 
The witness looked at it in a stolid manner, and answered 
that it was his daughter’s, and he saw it when it was found 
under her as she lay dead. Further on witness said Mary had 
not told him of her supposed pregnant condition, nor did he 
know or imagine anything of the kind. 
Cross-examined by Mr. Jones—Witness said when the de- 
ceased came home from where she had been living at Guilford, 
the Sunday before the murder, he asked what the matter was, 
but had no unpleasant words with her about her coming home. 
He never said he would not have her in the house if she came 
back in the same condition as when she had the child before. 
In his family, the Sunday Mary came back home, were Susan 
Hawley, his stepdaughter, Mary Stannard, the deceased, and 
her little boy, and Benjamin Stevens. Witness said that Mr. 
Stevens was a single man who lived nearby, and he had slept 
at Mr. Stannard’s house off and on, often remaining there a 
week at a time. He employed Mr. Stannard to help him in 
farm work, and the two used to get up together in the morn- 
ing and start out for the day’s work. The forenoon of the 
murder, Mr. Stevens came to the house while witness was at 
work in the field, and remained for dinner. He left shortly 
after Mary, and witness did not see him again until the next 
day. 
DESCRIBING THE POST MORTEM. 
Dr. Rufus W. Matthewson of Durham, the nearest town to 
Rockland, was the next witness. He testified that at 3 a. m., 
Wednesday, the morning after the murder, he conducted the 
post mortem examination “ by lamp and lantern light.” He 
first described the jagged head bruise, and gave it as his opin- 
ion that it was made before death, and would have been suffi- 
cient to have stunned her—to have knocked her down if she 10 
had been standing up. The throat wound was more of a stab 
than a cut. It cut the internal jugular vein, and almost sev- 
ered the carotid artery. The larynx was partially divided and 
gaped open. In such cases death is almost instantaneous. 
The instrument used must have been a pointed one, and the 
wound made was about an inch deep and two inches long. 
Witness judged that when this wound was made she lay on 
her right side, for the blood on her clothes was all on that side ; 
afterwards, it would appear, she was rolled over on her back 
and her hands crossed. Understanding that she was reported 
pregnant, the witness examined the womb and found it per- 
fectly natural and no signs of pregnancy. He had no doubt 
but that the deceased was murdered, and had not committed 
suicide as at first reported. 
At this stage Judge Harrison, for the State, asked for an 
adjournment that the body of the girl might be disinterred, a 
careful examination of the wound be made, and the proper 
organs examined to find traces of poison which it was reported 
had been administered. 
Mr. Jones opposed a postponement. It was not fair. His 
client could not afford to pay for delays caused by the State. 
If another post mortem was needed, let it begin that night, 
but not delay the trial. 
Mr. Harrison replied that it would be better for the accused 
that the present examination be thorough and exhaustive. 
“ Common criminals can seek loop-holes of the law to crawl 
out of, but the Rev. Mr. Hayden cannot afford to do it in his 
position. Let that girl’s body be dug up and the stomach be 
examined. I am informed that Mr. Hayden purchased poison 
in a drug store that day in Middletown. Is that poison in the 
dead girl’s stomach ? ” Counsel concluded that he could, with 
time, get witnesses from Middletown, who saw Mr. Hayden 
and the girl in Middletown together. 
Mr. Jones wanted no hints made darkly, but stated broadly. 
He admitted that his client did purchase rat poison in Mid- 
dletown the day of the murder. He submitted that the trial 
ought to go on, for it was a wrong to him to keep him in un- 
necessary suspense. 
Mr. Harrison replied, and threatened that if the court did 
not give the State an adjournment, the State would have to 
throw up the case for the present, and the result would be that 
a new warrant would be issued for Mr. Hayden and the whole 
ground gone over again. 
Justice Wilcox ruled that the case should go on. He saw 
no cause for an adjournment at this stage. 11 
susan hawley’s testimony. 
Susan F. Hawley, half sister to the murdered girl was the 
next witness, and the one the State’s lawyers most depended 
on. She was not a very bright girl, and it was easy to see she 
was fully convinced Mr. Hayden killed her sister; nor did she 
seem to care who knew it. In addition to what Mary had told 
her, which was exactly the same as that told the Studleys of 
Guilford, she had told her that she had seen Hayden the day 
after she came home, and told him of her supposed condition, 
and that he had promised to get her some medicine that week ; 
that after Hayden came back from Middletown, the morning 
of the murder, he signed her (Mary) to meet him by a spring 
near by ; that she went and he told her to keep up good cour- 
age, for he had been to Middletown, seen a doctor, got some 
“ quick medicine,” and if she would meet him in an hour by 
the “Big Rock” he would help her; and finally, before she 
left with the pail in her hand that Tuesday afternoon, she told 
Susan she was going to meet Hayden for the purpose of keep- 
ing her appointment with him. All this Susan Hawley was 
ready to swear to, and it can be seen she was a very important 
witness. But there was one thing that might close her mouth 
on the witness stand. She could not tell what Mary had told 
her. That was hearsay evidence, and the defense made a 
point that such evidence was not admissable. As will appear 
later, Justice Wilcox so ruled. 
Miss Hawley began her testimony by telling of the inti- 
macy that existed between Mr. Hayden and Mary, and of his 
taking her to Middletown in his team one time, that she might 
purchase calico and other articles. Witness then told of Mr. 
Hayden’s calling at the Stannard house the forenoon of the 
murder on his way home from Middletown, whither he had 
driven via Durham, to make various purchases. The minis- 
ter asked for a drink of water. There was something said by 
Mr. Stannard about the water being too warm and not fit to 
drink, but Mr. Hayden answered that it was good enough. 
Then he got into his buggy and drove towards his home, 
which led him past the spring. In the same direction Mary 
started with a pail, at the same time, to get water for cooking- 
purposes, she said, before leaving the house. The witness 
said Hayden had beckoned to Mary to go to the spring when 
he was at the house, but witness did not see the beckoning— 
Mary had told her of it. 
Now began the contest, which lasted through the whole 
trial, as to the admissibility of this hearsay evidence. Its ad- 
mission would undoubtedly result in Mr. Hayden being bound 12 
over and that his counsel took the same view, would seem to 
be shown by the fight they made against its being heard. 
Mr. Harrison claimed the evidence was admissible according 
to law. This Mr. Jones denied, and both gentlemen read 
from the authorities to support their respective claims. The 
difference between the counsel seemed to turn upon whether 
the declarations of the dead girl were too far removed from 
the crime to be admissible as evidence. Mr. Harrison said : 
A GRAVE ARRAIGNMENT. 
“ We are prepared to show, if this testimony is admitted, 
that three or four days before the murder she wrote the pris- 
oner a letter concerning her condition ;t hat she had asked him 
for help, and that it had been the advice of friends to go to 
him. We can show that her last words on earth, except to 
her murderer, were that she had an engagement at this spring 
to meet Mr. Hayden, and she is seen going forward. We can 
show that she and he were both absent from the sight of any 
one for an hour or two, at the same time on the same day, and 
that during that time the murder was committed. Are not, 
then, these declarations of hers, that we ask to have admitted, 
closely connected with her murder ? I think, and your Honor 
must admit, they are.” 
Mr. Jones denied that the dead girl’s statements, made sev- 
eral hours before, that she was going to meet this man, were 
admissible. These declarations were too remote from the 
murder to be admitted into this trial as evidence. 
Justice Wilcox thought the testimony should not be admit- 
ted, and he accordingly ruled it out. 
The defendant’s lawyer now began at the witness, and elic- 
ited that until the death ot her sister, witness was on good 
terms with Mr. Hayden ; that Hayden’s children frequently 
visited the Stannards, and the forenoon of the murder, when 
Mr. Hayden stopped there, the children were there and he 
took them into his buggy ; that witness did not see Hayden 
beckon to Mary, nor did he speak to her before she took up 
her pail and started for the spring; that all witness knew of 
the oyster supper was what she heard from others—she was 
not there. 
Mr. Harrison took hold of the witness again, and she swore 
that it was Mary herself who told her that Hayden beckoned her 
to go down to the spring, she (Mary) sitting in the front room so 
that she could see him as he sat out in his carriage. Later in 
the trial witness was recalled, and she said that the Monday 
morning after Mary got home from Guilford, and the day be- 
fore the murder, she went down to call on Mr. Hayden. He 13 
was away, and she went in the same direction twice more 
during the day, once for butter to a neighbor’s, and once to 
Mr. Hayden’s to borrow a rake for her father. Mary took 
some laudanum Monday afternoon—not quite a teaspoonful— 
to quiet her nerves, she told witness. It was the Sunday 
forenoon Mary came home, that witness first learned that the 
deceased thought she was in trouble. Five minutes before 
Mary left to go berrying, she took a towel, which was after 
death found in her pocket, folded it up and took it with her, 
all in witness’s presence. 
The letter which Mary sent to witness from Guilford, with 
one enclosed for Mr. Hayden was next taken up. Mr. Harri- 
son stated, by way of explanation, that the letter, though 
mailed Friday night, had been in some way delayed, and Mary 
had reached home before it. This being the case, she had 
destroyed the letter for Mr. Hayden, as already told by the 
witness, while she had kept the letter which Mary had sent to 
her. The latter part of this charged Susan Hawley to deliver 
the enclosure to Mr. Hayden and to not let her father see it. 
Mr. Harrison wanted to show, if this letter was in 
evidence, that Mary was intimate with the minister, to the 
extent of writing him a letter. This was an act, a something 
done ; and counsel thought His Honor could, and ought to, 
admit it as evidence. Mr. Harrison quoted at length from the 
trial of the Rev. E. K. Avery of Bristol, R. I., in 1831, before 
the Rhode Island Supreme Court, to show that letters, even 
more remotely connected with the case than this one from 
Mary Stannard to her sister, were admitted, and eminent 
counsel for the defense did not object. 
The history of the celebrated Avery case is as follows. 
On a chilly morning in December, 1832, a farmer of Tiverton, 
R. I., found the body of a young woman suspended by the 
neck from a stake which projected from a haystack. In a 
pocket in her dress was the following letter : 
If I am missing inquire of the Rev. Mr. Avery, Bristol. He will know 
where I am gone. S. M. Cornell 
The Rev. Ephraim K. Avery was a Methodist minister, who 
lived in Bristol, R. I., and preached in Fall River. He was 
about thirty-five years of age, fiad a wife and children, was a 
popular and effective preacher, and of excellent reputation. 
A coroner’s jury, hastily assembled, pronounced that Miss 
Cornell had committed suicide, and that a married man (mean- 
ing Avery) had, by his wicked conduct, driven her to the act. 
THE AVERY HORROR. The people of the vicinity were not satisfied with this verdict, 
and the authorities instituted a rigorous investigation. That 
investigation showed that Avery had been intimate with the 
murdered girl, that she had been seduced, that he had been 
seen going, one bitterly inclement night, toward the lonely place 
where the body was found, and that he could give no satisfac- 
tory account of his whereabouts at the time the crime was 
supposed to have been committed. Avery fled, but was cap- 
tured in a friend’s house in Massachusetts, the father of the 
late Senator Sumner being a party to the arrest. The trial 
excited absorbing interest throughout the whole country. 
Jeremiah Mason conducted the defense, and the jury acquitted 
the prisoner. Avery went to Ohio, where he became a farmer, 
and where he died a few years ago. The mystery of Sarah 
Cornell’s death was never solved.] 
Mr. Jones argued, in reply to Mr. Harrison, that the letter 
didn’t amount to anything unless it was brought home to the 
man. It was the receiving of the letter by Mr. Hayden that 
would make such letter admissible. 
Justice Wilcox thought the letter was not admissible, but 
woulcl take the advice of eminent counsel during adjournment, 
and deliver his ruling the next day. To aid the Justice, Mr. 
Harrison asked him to submit the case thus to those from 
whom he might seek advice : 
14 
“ The State having proved the fact that Mary came from Guilford to North 
Madison on Sunday, in a condition which led her to suppose she might be 
in trouble ; and having proved the fact that she went to Mr. Hayden’s house 
on Monday morning before 8 o’clock ; and having proved the fact that 
Mary had an interview with Mr. Hayden on Monday afternoon ; and having 
proved the fact that she did have an interview with him Tuesday morning 
near the spring—the State offers to show that on Friday Mary wrote 
upon a sealed envelope the Rev. Mr. Hayden’s name and address, 
and enclosed it in an envelope addressed to her sister at Rockland, with 
instructions enclosed to her sister to deliver the enclosed envelope, with 
her own hands, to Mr. Hayden without her father’s knowledge. Also, that 
Mary arrived home on the Sunday before the letter was received by her 
sister ; that some time after her sister had opened the letter, Mary took 
the envelope addressed to Mr. Hayden, destroyed it, and said she would 
see Mr. Hayden the next day herself. The above, the counsel claimed, he 
had a right to introduce as tending to show an intimacy between them, and 
a motive for the crime.” 
Mr. Harrison, having begun with the letter, continued his 
statement of all the ruled out hearsay evidence in the case, 
and asked that Justice Wilcox submit the whole to some Judge 
of the Superior Court, and get an opinion as to its admissibil- 
ity. Mr. Jones then insisted that Justice Wilcox submit the 
following on behalf of the defense at the same time he sub- 
mitted Mr. Harrison’s : 15 
“ The defense do not object to any declaration made by Mary Stannard or 
any body else, provided those declarations were made in the presence of 
the defendant. The declarations sought to be proved hv the State cannot 
be introduced to affect the defendant, unless upon one of two grounds, 
viz.: First, that they were made in the presence of the defendant, or sec- 
ond, were so connected with the thing done—the res gestae—to wit, the hom- 
icide. That the declarations sought to be proved if made at all, and as 
claimed by the State, were at a different time and a different place than 
where the homicide was committed, and part of them in another town. The 
defense object, upon the same ground, to any letter, note or memorandum, 
claimed to have been written by her, and which the State admits never 
came to his knowledge. That all of his offered evidence is hearsay in its 
character and must be excluded. The defense have asked the prosecution 
to give them some authority for their claims, and the only authorities offered 
by the State are two pamphlets published by private parties, sensational in 
character, published by no authority, and whether truthful reports or not, 
nobody can say. The one is a report of the trial of the Rev. E. K. 
Avery in Rhode Island, issued in 1833, the other the report of the trial of 
Edward E. Bradley in Connecticut, in 1857. The defense claims that while 
those books are no authorities, even they do not teach the doctrine claimed 
by the State. The defense claims that whether the testimony offered proves 
much or little, its introduction must be governed by the same legal rule.” 
The next day Justice Wilcox reported that he had consulted 
the Hon. George H. Watrous (at that' time attorney for the 
Consolidated railroad, now its president), and in a conversa- 
tion, necessarily brief, owing to the lateness of the hour, Mr. 
Watrous had dictated, as his opinion, the following, to the 
Justice, referring to the letter in dispute : 
“ It is very remote on the question of motive, but does tend 
to show a secret intimacy between the accused and the de- 
ceased, and should be admitted if its character could be 
proven.” Justice Wilcox, in accordance with this advice, 
ruled as admissible evidence the testimony that a letter to Mr. 
Hayden was sent by Mary. The witness (Susan Hawley) was 
again examined, and she testified that she received the enve- 
lope shown in court, addressed to herself, the day Mary came 
from Guilford. It was addressed to witness, and on opening 
it she found it was from Mary, and contained a sealed enve- 
loped addressed to Mr. Hayden. Witness said when Mary 
came home that Sunday, she told her father she left Guilford 
on account of trouble about her (illegitimate) boy, but pri- 
vately she told witness the reason already given, saying 
among other things, “ she was in a bad condition and wanted 
to see a person in Rockland. She came home to get out of 
her trouble. She wanted to keep it private from her father.” 
BENJAMIN STEVENS ON THE STAND. 
The next witness heard was Benjamin Stevens. The de- 
fense had not .been idle while the State was investigating and 
working up the case against the prisoner, and for a time the 
friends of Mr. Hayden held that there was far more reason to 16 
accuse Mr. Stevens of the murder than Mr. Hayden. He was 
often at the Stannards’, and the day of the murder left the 
house just after the deceased, and going in the same direc- 
tion. Then he was a drinking man, and there was only his 
own word that all that fatal afternoon he was home alone and 
knew naught of the terrible tragedy. So, too, it was currently 
reported by many that Mary’s father, becoming aware of her 
supposed pregnancy, might' have committed the murder to 
prevent the repetition of the disgrace that had once before 
fallen upon the family from the same source. But later devel- 
opments led all suspicion awav from the two ; the father 
because he knew not of his daughter’s supposed condition 
before death, and Stevens because he was an old family friend 
and co-worker with her father, 61 years old, worth $10,000 or 
more, and a widower who could readily have married her if he 
had been the author of her trouble. He had no motive. 
And so, to repeat, later developments have taken away from 
Benjamin Stevens a great deal of the interest that was attached 
to him at the time he testified when he was under suspicion 
himself. He was closely examined, but told a straightforward 
story, clear in the main, and seemed to be a rough, yet honest 
old fellow. He testified among other things that Susan Haw- 
ley kept house for him two years. When Mary spoke of going 
for berries that Tuesday forenoon, he told her there were 
some near the “ Big Rock,” and she left to go there about one 
o’clock, he following on his way home fifteen minutes or more 
later. He did not see her alive afterwards. He got home at 
two o’clock, spent the afternoon looking after his cattle, etc., 
and then lay down, and had no knowledge of the murder till 
the next (Wednesday) morning. Then he saw Mr. Hayden 
among others, and he spoke of the Stannard family or Mary, 
being subject to insanity, but witness said Mary was a good, 
smart girl, and he didn’t believe she was insane, though her 
mother had been “ out of her head for a spell.” 
Henry E. Stone, who presided at the coroner’s inquest, tes- 
tified that he called Hayden in to testify, and he said to the 
jury that he first saw Mary that Monday afternoon ; that she 
called at his house and appeared to be melancholy ; he did not 
ask nor did she give the cause of her melancholy. Hayden 
next saw her at her own house Tuesday morning, next at the 
spring and next, a corpse ; he was, he told the jury, doing- 
some work in the swamp at the time of the murder. Witness 
did not reduce Hayden’s nor any of the others’ testimony 
before the jury, to writing. 
James I. Hayes, of New Haven, testified that he was an 
attorney, and was employed by Grand Juror Stannard the Sat- 17 
urday afternoon after the murder, to assist the prosecution. 
Sunday afternoon he carefully inspected the scene of the mur- 
der, and his attention was first attracted by a rude seat of 
stones near by where the girl’s body was found. He remarked 
at the time, to the Grand Juror, that the girl might have sat 
there before the murder, and casting his eye around, it fell 
upon a stone as large as both his shut hands, one end broken 
off, with the edges jagged, and seemingly covered with blood. 
He called the Grand Juror’s attention to it, and picking it up 
gave it to him. The stone lay just thirteen paces from where 
the body was found. The stone was given to Mr. Harrison, 
and he gave it to Professor Moses C. White of Yale College 
for examination. The theory of the State is that Hayden 
struck the girl as she started to run, inflicting the deep cut on 
her head, and stunning her. Then kneeling over her, he turn- 
ed her head to one side and cut her throat. 
Dr. F. A. Jewett, a physician and surgeon at New Haven, 
in actual and constant practice since 1840, next testified that 
with his son and Dr. M. C. White, he, at the request of the 
prosecution, made a post mortem examination of the body just 
a week after the murder. He found substantially the same 
wounds as detailed by Dr. Matthewson. The skull was unin- 
jured ; it was removed and the brain found in a like condition. 
The lungs, heart, spleen, kidney and intestines were found in 
a normal condition. No other injuries were found on any 
other part of the body, except that the aesophagus had been 
cut, at the time no doubt the other neck wound was made. 
The liver, stomach, uterus, bladder, rectum, and vagina were 
removed and placed in a new, clean jar, for further examina- 
tion. In answer to a question, the doctor said he could not 
reconcile himself to the idea of suicide—it was murder. Who- 
ever did the murder must have had some knowledge of 
where the blood vessels were. Later Dr. Jewett testified that 
further examination showed no signs of pregnancy nor any 
sign that an abortion had been performed upon the deceased, 
nor did it appear a rape had preceded the murder. 
Mrs. Eliza Mills, a mild-mannered, extremely nervous lady 
of middle age, who has never fully recovered from the fright 
resulting from the Wallingford tornado, which passed over a 
section of country near her, told her story in a thrilling man- 
ner. She lived north of Mary Stannard (whom she knew for 
eleven years) and had been at her house the afternoon of the 
murder, about two o’clock. She was going home on the road 
near where the body was found, when she heard a shrill scream 
which caused her to cry to her little boy, who was with her, 
“ Hark ! ” Terrified, she listened. “ If I had thought at that 18 
time it was a human voice, I should have gone there, weak as 
I was. I went home, and as soon as Mr. Stannard came and 
told my husband of her body being found, I said : ‘ That was 
Mary Stannard's voice I heard ; it was her last scream.’ When 
I got home 1 looked at our clock and it was just twenty-five 
minutes to four o’clock. The clock was about fifteen minutes 
fast, a.i I it look me about five minutes to walk home from 
whe v I hom d the scream.” Francis P. Mills, husband of the 
form iv witness, testified that his wife returned that afternoon 
between three and four o’clock. Soon after came Mr. Stan- 
nard with the news of the finding of the body, and Mr. Mills, 
with eight or ten others, hurried to the scene, and helped carry 
the body to Mr. Stannard’s house. 
THE MINISTER’S BLOOD-STAINED KNIFE. 
• 
After vain attempts to get an adjournment, that the State 
might look into Mr. Hayden’s visit to Middletown, as well as 
give Professor White more time to examine a knife of .the 
prisoner’s, which had been given to him, Mr. Harrison finally 
put the Professor on the stand to show that he needed more 
time to complete his examination. The scene that followed 
was very dramatic, and both lawyers and spectators were 
worked up to a high pitch of excitement. Professor White 
began by testifying that he had received a knife to examine 
microscopically, at the same time producing a common two- 
bladed jack-knife. Mr. Harrison requested the Professor, at 
this stage, not to let the knife pass out of his hands. Mr. 
Jones objected, and asked that the knife be handed to the 
Court. Mr. Harrison was willing to let the Court take the 
knife, but it must not go out of the Court’s hands. Mr. 
Jones insisted that the Court rule that the counsel for the de- 
fense had a right to take and handle the knife—not taking it 
out of court. Justice Wilcox ruled that the knife, if put in as 
evidence, must be open to all to see and handle. “ Then,” said 
Mr. Harrison, “ I withdraw the knife at this stage.” 
“ Now,” said Mr. Jones, sharply, “ I insist that the Court 
order the witness to deposit the knife as evidence.” “ Don’t 
you do it! ” exclaimed together J. P. Platt and J. I. Hayes, 
eounsel for the State associated with Mr. Harrison. 
Mr. Harrison told Professor White, who during the fore- 
going had held up the knife between his forefinger and thumb, 
in plain view, “ Please close that knife ; wrap it up in the pa- 
per ; now put it l ack in your pocket.” 
Mr. Jones arose in high dudgeon, and in rather violent lan- 
guage denounced Mr. Harrison ; that gentleman showed 19 
temper in his reply, and for a time words that counsel claimed 
were insulting, passed between the two gentlemen. One ac- 
cused the other of blackguardism, and for a while there was 
great excitement, the Justice rapping vainly for order, until 
the lawyers cooled down somewhat. 
Mr. Harrison said he would ask the Professor a few ques- 
tions, just to show the importance of his testimony, and why 
the knife should be so jealously guarded at this stage. 
Mr. Harrison—Have you, Professor, examined that knife, 
microscopically ? 
Dr. White—I have. 
Mr. H.—What did you find on the blades ? 
Dr. W.—Blood. 
Mr. H.—Animal or human blood? 
Dr. W.—Human blood. (Sensation.) 
Mr. JJ.—Have you finished your examination yet ? 
Dr. W.—No, sir. 
Mr. Harrison now claimed that the knife shown was the 
knife of the accused, and it was shown there was human 
blood on it. The State wanted more time to examine it. Mr. 
Harrison insinuated that if the defense took the knife, it 
might be tampered with. 
In great indignation Mr Jones arose and uttered a scorch- 
ing tirade against Mr. Harrison using very violent language, 
which he claimed was fully justified by Mr. Harrison’s “con- 
temptible insinuations.” At this time all was uproar in the 
court room. In conclusion Mr. Jones said : “ Now I ask your 
Honor to order that knife into the custody of the Court, sub- 
ject to the order of the Court.” 
In reply Mr. Harrison denied any intention to reflect on 
any one—he only feared something might happen to the knife, 
and he wanted it said when this case went before the Supe- 
rior Court, that the knife had not been out of the custody of 
this witness. In reply to the Justice, Professor White said 
that handling the knife might displace the blood on it. The 
quantity on it was small, but he was positive it was human 
blood. Witness then went on to describe his search for blood, 
the method pursued and the result, so far as he had gone. He 
also examined blood corpuscles from the stone found near the 
murdered girl by Mr. Hayes, and from the sun bonnet found 
under her, and they corresponded nearly in size and exactly 
in appearance. Later in the trial, Dr. White said that he had 
found but a small drop of dried blood on the knife, but had 
not yet completed his examination. He had examined Hay- 
den’s hat and found no blood on it, and with the naked eye 
could not see blood on other portions of Hayden’s clothing. 20 
To offset Dr. White’s testimony, further on in the case, Dr. 
Leonard J. Sanford, Professor of Anatomy and Physiology at 
Yale College, was called by the defense. He, too, was famil- 
iar with the microscope, and he would not have expressed so 
confident an opinion as did Dr. White, that the blood found 
on the knife was human blood, with so few corpuscles to found 
it on. He would need three times as many to examine before 
he would express an opinion. Dr. Sanford also testified that 
he examined Hayden’s shirt and trousers, for the defense, and 
found no blood upon them. 
THE MIDDLETOWN DOCTOR’S TESTIMONY. 
Dr. Leonard Bailey was called by the State, as a very im- 
portant witness. He lived at Middletown, and was an old 
friend of Hayden’s, and he it was, the State claimed, Hayden 
saw the forenoon of the murder when he went to Middletown 
to get, according to Susan Hawley, a “quick medicine” that 
would relieve Mary Stannard of her supposed trouble. Dr. 
Bailey, when first put on the stand, said he met Hayden in 
Middletown before the murder—the day he could not remem- 
ber, but at about nine o’clock in the forenoon. He asked the 
witness a few questions, as he often did, about family matters, 
but these questions witness refused to answer, exercising his 
privilege as medical adviser to the accused. The witness 
answered, however, that Hayden only consulted about his 
wife’s condition (she had lately been delivered of a child), and 
nothing was said about any other female. When Dr. Bailey 
was again put on the witness stand, despite the objections of 
defendant’s counsel, Mr. Harrison asked if Mr. Hayden didn’t 
ask witness that forenoon, in Middletown, in substance, if it 
was possible for a woman five months pregnant to have her 
regular periods. Witness replied that some question was 
asked, which he could not recall in full, but it referred to hem- 
orrhage or menstruation, and the Doctor thought it referred 
to Hayden’s wife, for he first asked : “ Do you have many 
cases like my wife’s ? ” The witness, in answer to further 
questions, said that when Mr. Hayden resided in Middletown, 
he seemed to take great interest in anything connected with 
the practice of medicine, and he was always asking such ques- 
tions. Mr. Jones brought out, on the cross-examination, that 
the subject of Mrs. Hayden’s troubles was first broached by 
the Doctor himself, that forenoon. 
Mrs. Jane Studley, when on the stand, was not allowed to 
tell what Mary said to her about Hayden, Justice Wilcox 
MRS. JANE STUDLEY AND SON TESTIFY. 21 
making the same ruling as he did with reference to Susan 
Hawley’s heresay testimony, and asserting that he consulted 
eminent legal lights in the matter, and they endorsed his rul- 
ing. Witness, however, did say, that she had examined Mary’s 
left breast and found it hard, and on making a second exami- 
nation afterwards, found it had grown still harder. In addi- 
tion, Mary’s underclothing was examined and found discol- 
ored, but not as usual. Witness and Mary both thought the 
latter was pregnant, judging by the appearance of the breasts, 
and Mary grew very despondent before witness sent her home. 
Edgar Studley was also debarred from giving hearsay evi- 
dence, so all he could tell was that he directed an envelope for 
Mary, to Susan Hawley. (In this, it is asserted by the State, 
did Mary send the letter to Hayden.) 
Burton Mills, a boy, was present with those who first went 
up to help carry home the dead girl. He then ran down to 
Hayden’s house to tell him that “ Mary Stannard has cut her 
throat, or some one has.” Hayden appeared to be reading 
something, bnt he at once got up, and the couple being joined 
by Luzerne Stevens, Hayden’s next neighbor, proceeded at 
once to the scene of the tragedy. The three walked pretty 
lively, and the only words exchanged were when Stevens said 
it was a sad affair, and the miniscer answered yes. 
C. E. Scranton was the witness who heard Mr. Hayden, 
among others, say there was no doubt it was a case of suicide, 
at the time the body was first reached by the neighbors. Wit 
ness told of Hayden riding around with him for two hours 
while a jury was being summoned, but nothing particular 
relating to the tragedy took place during that ride. Witness 
also testified that Hayden took hold of deceased’s head and 
shoulders to help lift the body on a board to carry it home. 
Andrew Hazlett was the witness who testified that the 
morning after the murder Hayden met him and asked him if 
any one was suspected. Witness replied that there was only 
a surmise and Hayden passed on. 
Mrs. Luzerne Stevens and her husband substantially testi- 
fied that they saw Hayden drive away from home early the 
morning of the murder, in a top buggy, and alone. At 11 
a. m. he returned in the same carriage, and with him his two 
children. He was next seen about 4 p. m., coming through 
his lot, walking “ considerable ” fast, just as rain began to 
sprinkle. He had on his working clothes—farmers’ straw hat, 
check shirt, and pants of similar cotton material, and no coat. 
Mrs. Stevens saw Mary Stannard pass her house twice that 
fatal forenoon, each time accompanied by Hayden’s children. 
Mrs. Stevens’ cross-examination brought out an important 
fact in the prisoner’s favor. She was intimate with the Hayden 22 
family, and often saw the minister on the floor playing with 
his children. She knew of his little boy cutting his fingers 
more than once with his father’s knife, and once witness had 
occasion to talk to Mrs. Hayden about the danger of allowing 
the boy to play with his father’s knife. 
from hayden’s house to the murder. 
The Rev. Joseph Wilbur Gibbs, who took Mr. Hayden’s 
place as pastor of the North Madison Methodist church when 
the latter began preaching at (South) Madison, lived 
near the Haydens and Stevens. To get from Mr. Hayden’s 
house to the place where the body was found, a person would 
have to go a third of a mile in an opposite direction and cross 
three highways. To get from Mr. Hayden’s wood-lot (where 
he said he was at the time the murder must have been com- 
mitted) to where the body was found, witness thought a per- 
son could keep in the woods most of the way, “ and it’s my 
impression, if I tried, I could keep out of sight the whole 
way.” To walk from Hayden’s house to his wood-lot, then 
through the woods and bushes to where the body was found, 
would take an hour, or two hours to go and come, wasting no 
time. Witness afterwards said there was a trifle more direct 
and less exposed route, where a person would be hid by trees 
and bushes most of the time, except when crossing an open 
meadow, when he would be in sight of the houses of Mr. 
Hayden, Luzerne Stevens, Joseph Stannard, and Fillmore 
Scranton, for a few minutes. 
Sheriff Hull thought to come from the scene of the murder 
to the potato patch, where Hayden was seen after the murder 
by Mrs. Luzerne Stevens, would consume about twenty-five 
minutes. 
Sylvanus Butler, civil engineer, of New Haven, made a to- 
pographical map of the whole locality. From where the body 
was found to the spring, by the path, was 2,000 feet, and the 
distance from where the body was found to the potato patch 
was about 3,200. It would take fifteen to eighteen minutes to 
walk the distance. One road crossed in going this distance 
was ten or twelve feet wide ; the other road was the one 
Hayden lived on, and the distance across it and the open 
meadow near by, was 210 feet. There was enough water at 
the spring to allow a person to wash the hands and face if de- 
sired, and it was convenient. Edward B. Stannard, Sylvester 
Hawley (who was Mary’s half-brother), and Odell Stevens, 
walked, on a trial, and pretty fast, from the potato patch to 
where the body was found, in just twelve minutes. 23 
MARY SAID TO MRS. HAYDEN : “ OH, DEAR, fivE A GOOD 
MIND TO KILL MYSELF.” 
Without any preliminary flourishes, but in a plain, everyday 
sort of way, Mr. Jones, senior counsel for the defense, put 
Mrs. Hayden on the witness stand, the afternoon of the sev- 
enth day of the trial. While she stood up that her rocking 
chair might be moved forward for her to sit in while testify- 
ing, for she was still an invalid, the spectators were enabled to 
get a tolerably good view of her. She was quite a good-look- 
ing young woman, of full face, clear complexion, and dark 
brown hair. She seemed very weak and embarrassed in the 
beginning, and spoke very low in answer to the questions from 
her counsel. It seemed as if she would break down before 
her examination was finished, but she managed by a great 
effort to continue through. Any reference to her husband’s 
faithfulness to her, affected her almost to tears, yet she firmly 
denied any belief in his inconstancy. She was moved once 
or twice so, at some allusion to her home or children, that she 
wept, yet when her counsel kindly suggested that she retire 
for rest or air, she replied that she preferred to continue on 
the stand. Not a person who saw or heard the poor woman 
as she sat there testifying for two long hours, whose heart did 
not throb with sympathy, and there was an almost universal 
regret that one so true and pure as she showed herself, should 
be placed in such a terrible position. When the young wife 
detailed the struggles and trials of her first years of married 
life, and how she and her husband toiled and worked to secure 
a home, there were but few dry eyes in court. The implicit 
faith of the wife in her husband’s innocence, and the noble 
trust she has shown in him through all the great ordeal, has 
made many friends for him, and caused many others to hope 
that, if only for her sake, he may come out of the dark valley 
vindicated and unscathed. 
Mr. Jones began by warning Mrs. Hayden that she was not 
compelled to answer any of the questions that might be 
asked. She replied with firmness : “ I am willing to testify 
to all I know of this matter.” She continued : I am 29 years 
of age ; I am not now in good health ; my last child is only 
six weeks old ; I have been married seven years ; I was mar- 
ried in Carver, Mass. ; I first went to live at East Greenwich, 
where my husband was studying at the Seminary ; we were 
married during his vacation ; we lived there two years and then 
moved to Middletown ; we lived there about two years, Mr. 
Hayden attending college there ; I think in April, 1875, we 
moved to West Rocky Hill ; he then left college and took 24 
charge of a church, remaining till April, 1876 ; we then re- 
moved to Rockland, where he was appointed by the presiding 
Elder to preach in the Methodist church ; he preached one 
year ; he did not preach from August, 1877, till he began to 
preach at South Madison ; since living at Rockland I have 
taught school fifty-two weeks (in two years) ; my husband has 
also worked at carpentering for various persons, and worked 
on the little farm we had ; my husband’s indebtedness at Mid- 
dletown for his education has been partly paid : my first child 
was born at East Greenwich, my second in Middletown ; Dr. 
Bailey attended me in Middletown ; I then had female troub- 
les, continuing through confinement ; my husband has always 
seemed fond of me ; I have never (weeping) seen any reason 
to doubt it; I first knew Mary Stannard the first summer we 
lived at Rockland ; she was recommended to me by some of 
the neighbors as a good girl to work ; she first came to my 
house at my request, I having heard she had become inter- 
ested in the prayer meetings, and wishing to talk with her ; 
she came to work for me first in April, 1877, at my request in 
person, she remaining till July 3—the time I was keeping 
school; each night she went to her own home ; in December, 
1877, she again came to work for me, remaining until March ; 
during that time she remained nights at my house, my hus- 
band then teaching at South Madison, only coming home Fri- 
day nights, returning Saturday afternoons in time to preach 
Sundays ; she only worked regularly for me these two times, 
though she has worked for me occasionally since ; she came 
at all times at my request, I only sending another for her on 
one occasion, when my child was born ; the other times I 
think I went for her in person ; she has worked for other 
neighbors as well as me ; during all that time I never noticed 
any familiarity between her and my husband ; I do not know 
of my husband going often to her house, nor of often walking 
with her: she rode in a carriage three times with my husband 
to my knowledge ; twice it was I who caused her to ride ; 
once I asked my husband to take her to Middletown, that she 
might purchase needed articles, she having taken care of my 
house for me ; she showed me calico on her return that she 
said she had bought ; I think she thought much of me ; she 
came frequently to my house for milk, eggs, and anything I 
happened to have that I thought she would like ; I first knew 
she was dead that night, Luzerne Stevens’ little daughter 
coming in and telling me of the body being found ; my hus- 
band at once went out and went up to the scene ; he came 
back about 8 o’clock in the evening; I was nervous about the 
matter for I was in feeble health ; he said he was going away 25 
again, and I asked him not to go and leave me ; he went, how- 
ever, with Henry Stone, about io o’clock that night; I don’t 
know what time he got back for I was in bed ; the Sunday 
before the murder he was from home at South Madison preach- 
ing ; he returned about 3:30 p. m., Monday, bringing some 
fruit and oysters in the shell ; there was about a peck of oys- 
ters ; I saw Mary that Monday morning about 7 o’clock ; she 
came to my house, I suppose to make a visit ; she always 
came down to see me when she came home after an absence; 
she remained twenty minutes or so ; went to the well and got 
me a pail of water; I think she asked me for some milk ; I 
saw her again about 9:30 a. m., when the children came run- 
ning in and told me she was passing ; she stopped in coming 
back and said she could not get some butter she had gone for; 
she stayed fifteen minutes and then went home ; she came 
again about 4 p. m., for the third time that day ; Mr. Hayden 
was then home, sitting in the dining room, smoking ; she said 
her father wanted to borrow a rake ; Mr, Hayden went to the 
barn and got it: she, meanwhile, had taken up the baby for a 
while, then laid it in the cradle and stood talking to me ; 
nothing passed between Mr. Hayden or Mary except what I 
heard, and it referred to the rake ; at neither of her previous 
visits did she inquire for my husband ; the Tuesday morning 
(of the murder) I saw her twice ; she first came, my husband 
being absent, and borrowed a pitchfork ; she came again about 
10 a. m., on her way back from the store, and told of having 
to make two trips that day to make purchases, when one ought 
to have been enough ; she never intimated to me of any im- 
proprieties with my husband ; that Monday afternoon, as I 
have stated, my husband got home about 3:30 o’clock ; he 
worked some about the house, picking up stray chips and 
doing odd jobs ; on Tuesday morning (of the murder) he went 
away between six and seven o’clock, he said to buy some oats ; 
I told him I wa ited some molasses and sugar to preserve the 
fruit (pears) he had brought home the day before ; he returned 
about 11 o’clock, having taken the children into the wagon on 
his way home ; I sat that forenoon by the window watching 
for him to return, and saw the carriage top as he passed the 
spring ; he brought home some molasses, sugar and fuller’s 
earth for the baby ; he was dressed in his good clothes ; I had 
done nothing about dinner, and he helped get it ready ; he 
opened those oysters, using the large blade of his jack knife, 
as he had often done before ; I made tea and toast, and we 
had dinner that day at about a quarter to one ; the pears I had, 
were not peeled, and he handed me his knife to peel them 
with ; I put it on the shelf over the wood-box, where it lay, 26 
so far as I know, till the middle of the afternoon ; I got 
through dinner and put up the dishes not far from 1130 o’clock ; 
after dinner he made up the beds, and then we discussed an 
administrator’s letter in relation to my mother’s estate, and he 
signed it ; he smoked, too, and played on the floor with the 
children ; I think then it was about a quarter past two o’clock ; 
then he said he must go over in the swamp and throw out 
some wood (to a place where it could be got at for cartage) ; 
I sat by the north dining room window and watched his de 
parture, as I had often done ; the children went with him to 
the fork of the road ; I saw him go along the right hand road 
and past Burr’s barn, out of view ; I next saw him about 4 
o’clock ; he had been gone an hour and three-quarters ; I saw 
him in the potato patch ; he called for Emma (his daughter) 
to get him a basket, and he picked up some potatoes and 
brought them in ; he was home from that time till the news 
of the murder came ; he looked as usual ; he hauled from the 
swamp the next morning two loads of that wood he said he 
had gone down to throw out ; I peeled those pears Wednes- 
day forenoon, while he was after the wood ; little Jennie Ste- 
vens saw the pears besides myself and husband ; Mrs. Talcott 
Davis (a neighbor) preserved the pears for me, I having sent 
for her to come ; with her came her daughter ; from the time 
Mr. Hayden had opened those oysters with his jack-knife till 
I used it to peel the pears, it lay on the shelf over the wood- 
box ; after peeling the pears, I put the knife back, and when 
he asked for it Wednesday afternoon, I told him where it was ; 
Wednesday, Lennie, my little boy, while my husband was in 
the swamp lot, got the knife ; I opened it for him that he 
might play with it, as he had often done before ; he used the 
large blade, and I don’t recollect that he ever used the small 
blade ; Mrs. Luzerne Stevens has uttered warnings against 
our letting the boy play with that knife ; he has cut his fin- 
gers several times, and I have done them up in rags ; Mary 
Stannard has done up my boy’s finger, cut with that same 
knife ; it’s not later than two months ago since he last cut his 
finger : I have seen blood upon the blade and handle of the 
knife from those cuts ; I know my husband cut the forefinger 
of his right hand with that knife, while he was at work on our 
well ; I have used the small blade of that knife to cut ham 
and steak ; it was the only jack-knife my husband had ; the 
large blade was notched and dull, the small one sharp ; I cut 
steak with it because our only carving knife was dull ; I find 
it more convenient to peel apples and pears with a jack-knife ; 
since he has had that knife, I think a third of the time it has 
been in the house for family use ; going to the woods that 27 
Tuesday, he had on his brown striped shirt, and brown checked 
pants and straw hat (shown and identified by witness) ; I first 
knew Mr. Hayden was suspected the morning of the funeral 
(Thursday) ; he told me in our room ; he was lying on the 
bed, crying ; said I : 
“ HERBERT, WHAT’s THE MATTER ? ” 
He told me then of what he was accused. (The clothes 
shown and identified as worn by the accused the day of the 
murder, were the same examined by Dr. Sanford.) 
Cross-examined by Mr. Harrison—Mary was a good girl 
only quick-tempered, and took excellent care of my children ; 
I have a clock in my house which I often look at ; I let my 
boy play with my husband’s knife because it amused the boy, 
who always liked to have papa’s knife ; it was 3 o’clock that 
Wednesday afternoon that my boy was playing with the knife 
in connection with a pumpkin and some sticks ; I first knew 
my husband went to Middletown the morning of the murder, 
by reading it in a newspaper ; I had said I would like to have 
him see Dr. Bailey some time, about my condition ; Mary 
seemed sad when she first came to see me that Monday ; on 
Tuesday she asked me if she looked poor and pale, and I said 
she did ; she said she had a good mind to swear, at which I 
expressed surprise ; speaking of a Mrs. Davis’ (a neigh- 
bor) recent death and post mortem examination, Mary said if 
she should die, she didn’t want to be cut open. (Poor Mary ! 
since her death, her body has been exhumed four different 
times, and little else beside her extremities now remain where 
first deposited.) Then she said : “ Oh, dear, I’ve a good mind 
to kill myself; ” she said she had been offered more wages to 
come back to her Guilford place without her baby, but she 
said they had lied to her there, and she would not return ; 
Mr. Studley had said he was going away, but he did not, and 
I thought that was the reason Mary left her place—she was 
afraid of the men after her trouble, and did not like to have 
them around ; I always thought her a modest, well-behaved 
girl ; I never until that morning thought she was insane—un- 
til I heard that talk ; the day I saw the carriage at the spring, 
my husband told me he saw Mary, and stopped to get a drink ; 
Mary, last Winter, stayed at her own house, when my hus- 
band was at home, that is Friday nights and Saturday morn- 
ings ; the rest of the week Mary stayed nights with me ; since 
last March, when my husband has been at home, he has gone 
most of the time for our cow in the evening, and done most of 
the out-door work ; last March, in the middle of the week, my 28 
husband came home (from South Madison) to an oyster sup- 
per ; I got Mary to come down and tend the children while he 
and I went to the supper in the church parsonage ; it was in 
the evening we went, about 6:30 o’clock ; I stayed until about 
1 o’clock in the morning ; my husband was with me, except 
the time I asked him to go over and put the children to bed: 
he was gone about ten minutes ; Mary was of a filial nature, 
and not fond of dress; she told me she thought she ought 
to help her father at home all she could on account 
of her boy being there ; the only reason I know why my hus- 
band left the Rockland (North Madison) church, was because 
they said they could not pay him the salary he had been get- 
ting—I think it was #350 ; if anything has been wrong about 
my husband at Carver, Middletown, or Rockland, I do not 
know of it ; I have led a perfectly happy life with my husband 
since marriage, so far as he was concerned. (This was said 
earnestly, and with much feeling.) 
To Mr. Jones—I never distrusted his fidelity ; I did not 
tell him at that oyster supper to hurry back when he left to 
put the children to bed at my request; the water in that 
spring was cool and good, and I often sent the children up for 
some with a little pail. 
As Mrs. Hayden left the stand a number of ladies crowded 
around to greet her, and help her down from the small plat- 
form. One lady saluted her with a loud kiss. During Mrs. 
Hayden’s testimony she kept her eyes fixed on her husband 
most of the time, and he looked at her continuously. 
The forenoon of the eighth day of the trial opened with 
Mrs. Talcott Davis, a neighbor of the Haydens, on the stand. 
She testified that she was intimate with them, having nursed 
Mrs. Hayden in sickness. They were very affectionate. One 
Sunday morning, about three months before, witness saw 
Hayden’s boy come into the house with a cut finger, saying 
he had cut himself with papa’s knife. She had also seen the 
boy’s fingers done up in rags a number of times. Witness was 
sent for, the day after the murder, being told that Mrs. Hay- 
den was in very poor health. That afternoon she heard Hay- 
den inquire for his jack-knife, of his wife, and saw him get it 
off the shelf. Witness assisted in preserving some pears she 
judged had been pared that day. That Wednesday morning 
the Hayden family washing was brought to her house, but no 
blood was on Mr. Hayden’s clothing. The witness often saw 
the Hayden boy play with his own little knife, but never with 
his father’s, though the day he came running in with his fin- 
ger cut, he said his papa’s knife did it. Witness complained 
of their carving knife being so dull, and Mrs. Hayden told her 
she often used his jack-knife. 29 
MR. HAYDEN, COOL AND COLLECTED, TELLING HIS STORY IN 
COURT, AND DENYING ALL KNOWLEDGE OF THE MURDER. 
The afternoon of the eighth day Mr. Hayden was on the 
stand. A stir went round as his name was called, for there 
was the greatest anxiety to see how he would conduct himself 
and hear what he would say. He took the oath looking full 
at the Justice, and holding up his hand without a tremor. He 
was dressed in black, his coat being a frock, but not high-but- 
toned, and instead of the usual white tie he wore a black one, 
pushed underneath his turn-down collar. He spoke very dis- 
tinctly, but not too loud, and although taking time, occasion- 
ally, to think, did not seem to hesitate in his answers. He 
testified : My first name is Herbert, and I am 28 years of age ; 
I heard my wife when she testified, and she told a correct 
story of our early history ; I knew Mary Stannard since April, 
1876; I have no knowledge, direct or indirect, of the cause of 
that girl’s death. 
Mr. Jones—I desire to ask you whether there have been any 
criminal relations between you and that girl ? 
Witness—Never, sir (firmly). 
Mr. Hayden continued—I have had only the one jack-knife 
since last January ; it has been in the house a good share of 
the time, my wife and I using it to cut ham, dress chickens, 
cut steak, etc.; my little son has repeatedly cut himself with 
that knife ; my wife, Mr. and Mrs. Luzerne Stevens, Mary 
Stannard, and, I think, Gilbert Stone, have seen cuts on my 
boy’s hand from that knife ; I have repeatedly cut my own fin- 
gers with it, and have a cut on my finger now (showing cut on 
forefinger of right hand) that the knife made about two weeks 
before my wife’s confinement, while I was alone at work on a 
well curb; the cut was made with the small blade, which was 
the sharpest ; Tuesday noon I left the knife home, and did 
not have it again until Wednesday afternoon ; there were four 
of us present when I asked for it then, and my wife went to 
the shelf and got it; I do not recollect what I wanted it for ; 
Wednesday, between 3 and 4p. m., I got my first knowledge 
that I was suspected of the murder, from Valentine Miller, of 
Middlefield, who told me what Dr. Matthewson, of Durham, 
had said that same morning ; I was never out walking in the 
fields with Mary Stannard ; she rode with me, the first time 
with my wife and children to get cherries ; the next time, at 
my wife’s request, I went to Mary’s house and carried her 
down to my house; the next time was six or seven weeks ago 
I carried her, at my wife’s request, to Middletown, to do some 
shopping ; Saturday before the murder I was at my house pre- 30 
paring for Sunday services ; I left for South Madison Sunday 
at about g o’clock, to preach ; I left for home about i p. m., 
Monday ; bought oysters, pears, etc., to bring home ; arrived 
home between 3 and 3:30 p. m. ; I did not know then that 
Mary Stannard had got home ; I saw her after I got home 
and did my chores ; I sat smoking and reading in my dining 
room, in the presence of my wife and children ; Mary came 
in and wanted to borrow a rake ; I went out to the barn and 
got it ; I had no conversation with her except about the rake, 
and in my wife’s presence ; I went to Middletown Tuesday 
morning ; I wanted feed for my horse ; I started between 6 
and 7 o’clock ; I also wanted to see Lafayette Burton in regard 
to carpenter’s tools he had promised me ; I also wanted sugar, 
molasses and fuller’s earth for my wife ; I am overrun with 
rats both in house and barn ; I talked often with my wife of 
getting rid of them ; I talked of getting arsenic and mixing it 
with meal ; rat’s-bane was also mentioned, but I had no faith 
in it ; my wife feared to have poison in the house ; in Middle- 
town I bought at Tyler’s drug store a box of fuller’s earth, 
AN OUNCE OF ARSENIC, 
and nothing else ; then I came down to Durham and bought 
there oats, sugar and molasses ; also got the mail ; started for 
home, and when I got to Stannard’s I saw my little girl, who 
wanted a ride home ; I drove up, and she and niy little boy 
got into the wagon ; I there saw at the gate of Stannard’s 
house, Benjamin Stevens, Mr. Stannard and Mary ; I asked 
Mr. Stannard for a drink of water, went into the kitchen to 
get it, threw it away as it was too warm, and then returned to 
my wagon : I may have said to Mary, “ Good morning,” but 
nothing else ; I think I heard Mary say she wanted some cool 
water, and she took her pail and went out to get it ; I said 
nothing to her about going to the spring ; before I left I talked 
to Benjamin Stevens about some lumber, from three to five 
minutes ; while driving down near the spring I met Mary 
coming back ; I asked her for a drink, got it, thanked her, got 
into my wagon, said nothing else, and got home about i i 
o’clock ; I told my wife of getting a drink from Mary ; the 
arsenic 1 carried into the barn, the other articles into the 
house ; my wife did not want any poison in the house on ac- 
count of the children, so I took it into the barn ; I have not 
used a particle of that arsenic yet, and for all I know it is there 
now ; after taking care of my horse 1 returned to the house, 
and began opening the oysters for dinner ; wife cooked the 
oysters while I took care of baby, then she took the baby 31 
while the children and I sat down to eat; then I took the baby 
and she made toast for herself and ate it ; I used my jack- 
knife to open the oysters, and afterwards gave it to her to peel 
the pears ; got through dinner about 1:30 ; then I cleared the 
table, emptied the slops, made three beds, looked over the 
statement of my wife’s administrator’s account, signed it, 
smoked and read ; it was a very hot day, and while smoking I 
lay on the floor playing with the children ; then I told my wife 
I must go into the swamp and pitch some wood ; it was 2 or 
2:30 o’clock when I started, my children accompanying me to 
the fork of the road ; then I went down to Burr’s barn, turned 
and threw my wife a kiss, let down the bars and proceeded to 
where the wood was ; I calculated to throw up, so as a team could 
get to them, four horse loads of wood ; the route I took that 
morning was the same I always took ; I was in the woods one 
and one-half to two hours, and was engaged the whole time 
throwing up wood ; I had on a straw hat extremely dirty, a 
thick shirt, pair of pants, thick stockings, and a pair of Irish 
brogan shoes ; the shirt and pants have been shown here in 
court ; I quit working at 4 o’clock and came home, because I 
had thrown out all the wood I started to ; coming back I took 
another route for I wanted to look at my corn patch ; this 
brought me out in my potato patch ; I saw my little girl by 
the window and called to her to bring me a basket so I could 
pick up some potatoes ; I finally had to go for it myself; I 
picked a peck or so of potatoes, and took them in about 
a quarter past four ; I then picked up chips, cut kindling wood, 
changed my sweaty shirt and sat at the back door and smoked ; 
then I came in the house, and lay on the floor and talked to 
wife ; then I made a fire, went into the barn and fed my horse ; 
then I went into my study and wrote a postal card, to a Mr, 
Dudley, and had almost finished directing it when I heard 
Burton Mills come running in crying that Mary Stannard had 
cut her throat or some one else had cut it ; I then went up to 
where the body was, as already told by others, and the only 
opinion I there heard expressed was suicide ; Andrew Haz- 
lett, Nehemiah Burr, and myself, went down to where they 
had been burning charcoal, got a wide plank and three sticks, 
and on the plank placed the body, and helped carry it to Mr. 
Stannard’s ; I said a coroner ought to be called and an inves- 
tigation made ; I then went down to my house, where my wife 
said she could not stay alone ; I remained with her until a Jus- 
tice of the Peace came along, and he said that all who saw the 
body must be present at the inquest ; so I rode up with him ; 
this was about 10 p. m. ; I then started out with Charles 
Scranton to help summon the jury, but had to go home to my 32 
wife ; when I testified before the jury, I said I hoped they 
would make my examination final, as I had to go to South 
Madison for help for my wife ; the next (Wednesday) morning, 
I hauled two loads of that wood I threw out Tuesday, and 
Odell Stevens, Edgar Stevens, and Edward Stannard saw me 
haul them ; Silas T. Ives called upon me Thursday afternoon, 
after the funeral ; I was sitting in front of my house and he 
cam£ into the yard and began talking to me ; we both agreed 
it was a very sad affair, and a full investigation ought to be 
made, and the guilty party brought to punishment ; I don’t 
recollect that he told me, as he has testified, to be circumspect, 
nor to be careful ; I told him I would not run away, for I had 
no occasion to ; I don’t remember that he said anything about 
securing counsel, nor did I ; the relations between myself and 
wife have always been most pleasant ; any rumors of trouble 
between wife and self about a woman are untrue. 
THE MINISTER’S CROSS-EXAMINATION. 
All my wife said in her examination was correct, except 
that when we lived at Carver, Mass.,we rode over to Plymouth 
to get married ; don’t remember having any particular talk 
with my wife over Mary’s seduction when she lived in North- 
ford ; I preached when Mary went forward for prayers one 
time, and I think I might have talked it over with wife ; I 
never heard anything bad of Mary except her first trouble ; 
she was not of wanton mind ; she was in good health except 
occasional headaches ; I don’t remember that my wife ever 
spoke to me of Mary’s physical condition, nor of any female 
weakness she had ; I don’t think I ever thought Mary insane ; 
her father told me his wife had been insane at one time ; I 
don’t know of Mary ever being intimate with any man or men ; 
or of her having a beau or beaux when at my house ; 
I heard she had a beau some six or seven weeks ago ; I have 
no knowledge of anything pointing to the cause of her death ; I 
never studied medicine ; I studied physiology—Carpenter’s 
work—mostly animal physiology ; I thought when I saw the 
body that night, though I noticed the way her hands were 
folded, that it was suicide, mainly because the others said so ; 
the only strange thing that occurred to me that night was, 
that there was no weapon to be found ; my wife told me of 
Mary being down-hearted, but I made no special inquiry of 
her (wife) about it; I think I last sharpened the small blade 
of my jack-knife two months ago, before I cut my finger, on a 
whetstone ; I always gave my son my knife when he asked for 
it; the story that Valentine Miller told me, that made me first think I was suspected, was that Mary Stannard’s body had 
been found in the road opposite my house, and that Dr. Mat- 
thewson said I had got myself into a scrape and wouldn’t 
preach again for some time ; the only pasture I had for my 
cow was the one where the spring was ; the chief object of 
my Middletown visit that Tuesday, was to get carpenter’s tools ; 
I m-t Dr. Bailey there and he asked me about my family and 
about my wife’s condition ; he asked me if her condition was 
the same as when she was confined four years ago ; I asked 
him if he had many cases like my wife’s. 
Mr. Hayden kept pretty cool the whole time he was on the 
stand, except a little nervousness he showed under cross-exam- 
ination. His story, like his wife’s, created a very favorable 
impression. While he was giving his testimony, Beniamin 
Stevens sat perched upon a bench back in the rear of the hall, 
resting his chin on the palms of his hands, and listening with 
great intentness, though his face was as expressionless as ever. 
It was on this day that photographs of the various places 
mentioned in connection with the murder were introduced. 
33 
THE MINISTER DISCHARGED. 
The forenoon of the ninth and last day of the hearing was 
devoted to hearing unimportant testimony, though Mr. Burton 
’ corroborated Hayden’s story about his calling for carpenters’ 
tools at Middletown the forenoon of the murder, and counsel 
for the prosecution made a strong fight for more time—for an 
adjournment that more evidence might be sought for, he claim- 
ing that with time he could get it. But Justice Wilcox ruled, 
just before the noon hour, that the case must go on, and that 
time enough had already been allowed counsel for the State. 
When the afternoon session began, Mr. Harrison was absent, 
and Mr. Hayes, when asked about his senior associate, looked 
solemn but said nothing. Finally Justice Wilcox asked after 
Mr. Harrison. Mr. Hayes arose and said that Mr. Harrison 
• felt pained at the action of the Court in refusing an adjourn- 
ment, which prevented counsel from looking into several mat- 
ters which had just come to his knowledge, and which were 
thought very important in the case, and accordingly had with- 
drawn from the case, the speaker only returning as an act of 
courtesy to the court, to the counsel on the other side, and to 
deny a rumor that Mr. Harrison had gone to Rockland to ab- 
sent himself purposely, and thus force an adjournment. Of 
course this news created a great sensation, and for a time there 
was much excitement. 
When quiet was restored, Mr. Jones arose and said that he 
was not responsible for the conduct of any one in this case, 34 
but himself. He thought Mr. Harrison had lost his temper. 
His going away was an insult to the Court. “ The proceed- 
ing now is tantamount to an acquittal. I have never, from 
the beginning of this case, doubted the innocence of Mr. Hay- 
den ; never, never, never ! There isn’t a particle of evidence 
in this case that I can’t crush to atoms ! ” 
Warming up with his subject, Mr. Jones asked, even if that 
po >r girl wrote that letter, and enclosed a letter to H. H. Hay- 
dei, is it to be inferred that that should mean guilt ? What 
is the duty of a minister except to help the unfortunate, assist 
the poor, and care for the weak. The man that saw evidences 
of crime in the actions of this man cannot have read that bet- 
ter Rook—:annot have read that better Book. Now it is left 
to the year eighteen hundred and seventy eight, left to the 
little town of Madison in Connecticut, to promulgate the doc- 
trine that to help the unfortunate is an evidence of crime! 
And it is left for the counsel for the other side to claim to be 
the patentee for that doctrine. Look upon that prisoner! 
Looks like a murderer, does he ? Not an impartial man or 
woman in this court room, but knows and feels that this man is 
innocent. The speaker concluded by hoping that there would 
be no further delay while the State looked for further evi- 
dence. 
Mr. Hayes thought a continuance ought to be granted, and 
asked what possible harm it could do the accused to have a 
short delay. If none was granted, the counsel for the State 
would assuredly withdraw. 
Mr. Jones—Well, if counsel has withdrawn, there’s no use 
asking for any binding over. 
Mr. Haves—We don’t withdraw if his Honor sees fit to 
grant us a continuance. 
Justice Wilcox said he had heard all along, intimations of what 
was coming. He had adjourned the case from time to time 
for the convenience of the State, and while it was conceded 
the accused had not languished in jail, yet he had been de- 
prived of his liberty and put to great expense. The State had 
had full time ; had gone over all the ground ; had summoned 
all needed witnesses. And now the defense comes on with all 
its testimony, and the case is virtually through except the re- 
buttal evidence the State may bring on. The speaker knew 
not what might come, but it seemed to him there could be no 
further evidence. If he thought there was, he should cheer- 
fully adjourn the case. 
Mr. Jones asked for a summing up and a verdict. 
Justice Wilcox, after looking over his notes, began a resume 
of the case, He spoke of points which at first looked black 35 
against the prisoner, but which had been explained away till 
they were of little value to the State as evidence. The blood 
on Hayden’s knife, he at first thought was damaging evidence 
against the accused, but it had been explained away to the sat- 
isfaction of the Court. The Justice, while on this point, quo- 
ted the fact that he himself had at that moment a knife in his 
pocket which must have been full of blood resembling human, 
for he had recently killed a dog with it, and a dog’s blood re- 
sembles that of a human being. 
He continued that he couldn’t doubt a single word that Mrs. 
Hayden had said—he didn’t think she would tell a falsehood 
to save her husband from the gallows. She identified the 
clothes her husband wore, and there was no blood on them ; 
whereas it was evident that the murderer could not have 
avoided some deposit of Mary’s blood. “ There is no ques- 
tion in my mind but that this was murder ; it was not suicide. 
Some person foully, wickedly murdered that poor girl ; and 
God alone knows who—and the man himself. And now, be- 
fore I close,” said the Justice, arising and speaking with great 
solemnity, “ I cannot forbear to say that I have given the State 
the fullest chance for investigation, and the defense the same, 
for the reason that no one hereafter may say that injustice has 
been done to the State or to the person charged with the 
crime ; and further let me assure the gentlemen and others 
that they don’t know me if they suppose, or have supposed, 
for one moment, that I would discharge the prisoner if there 
could be found any evidence to warrant his commitment to a 
higher tribunal. If he were the nearest and dearest friend I 
had on earth, and had committed such an awful crime as that 
of murder, he would receive no mercy at my hands. In con- 
clusion, let me say—from the testimony given—that if I were 
as sure of Heaven and? eternal felicity as I am that this man is 
guiltless of the crime of killing of Mary E. Stannard, I should 
rest content. Mr. Sheriff, please discharge the prisoner.” 
The court room immediately rang with cheers, friends 
crowded forward to congratulate the prisoner, and for a time 
great confusion prevailed. A number of ministers present, 
from surrounding towns, also shook hands with Mr. Hayden, 
who looked pleased, bnt showed no particular emotion. While 
this was going on Mr. Jones hurried to Captain William C. 
Minor’s house, where Mrs. Hayden was staying, and first broke 
the glad news to her. She was coming down stairs and Mr. 
Jones called out that the trial was ended. She asked fearfully, 
AFTER THE VERDICT. 36 
“ What is it ? ” Mr. Jones replied : “Your husband has been 
h > nor ably discharged,” repeating in brief Mr. Wilcox’s closing 
sentence. Mrs. Hayden’s face grew a shade paler than usual, 
bat she said nothing, only continued her way down the stairs. 
Arriving at the bottom, she faltered out, “ I can’t—can’t say 
anything,” and immediately began to weep violently. Soon 
she recovered, and her reception of her husband was very af- 
fecting. Until late in the evening, throngs of people crowded 
thr house, congratulating the minister and his wife on the 
happy termination of the trial. 
PUBLIC OPINION. 
It seemed to be generally understood that Mr. Harrison 
withdrew by the advice of the State’s Attorney. The press 
commented variously on the result. The Hartford Courant 
said that just before the verdict the belief in the minister’s in- 
nocence had been daily growing stronger in the community 
where all the parties were known, and that the testimony of 
the minister and his wife went far to explain away the circum- 
stances that threw suspicion on him and led to his arrest. The 
New Haven papers commented but little, but the ouside pa- 
pers were not slow to condemn the Justice’s action. The 
Springfield Republican said : “ The local Justice before whom 
the examination has been held, has rather prejudiced Hayden’s 
case by ruling steadily in his favor, and has now capped the 
climax by discharging him entirely. This is a mistake, for 
there was certainly evidence enough against Hayden to justify 
and demand a more thorough trial, which may indeed yet be 
held, but there is no reason to suppose a jury will yet convict 
him.” 
In conversation with a New Haven Union reporter, the 
morning after the discharge of Hayden, Judge Harrison ex- 
plained why he withdrew from the case. In the beginning, 
and before the examination had progressed three days, coun- 
sel for the State were informed by a prominent and truthful 
resident of Madison, that Justice Wilcox had said there was 
no evidence against Mr. Hayden, and he should discharge 
him ; and counsel for the State were advised to abandon any 
further proceedings against the minister. They 
consulted with the town authorities, and finally concluded to 
go on with the case, and at least hear what Hayden had to 
say if he chose to go on the stand. Mr. Harrison also quoted 
to the reporter the case of the Rev. E. K. Avery of Rhode 
Island (previously noticed), where two magistrates, brother 
Free Masons of the accused, discharged the prisoner, though 37 
there was a strong case against him. This led to a great deal 
of anti-Masonic excitement, with the result that Mr. Avery 
was again arrested, tried before a magistrate not a Mason, and 
bound over for trial. In the Madison case, Justice Wilcox and 
Mr. Hayden were members of the same Masonic lodge, and 
Mr. Harrison (himself a prominent Mason) thought there was 
a great deal of similarity between Avery’s and Hayden’s cases. 
Mr. Harrison also quoted the fact that it was remarked that, 
although Justice Wilcox had no means of knowing the case 
would condclude when it did, yet he had his decision written 
out, with the reasons for it. P'urther, Mr. Harrison was told 
that the Justice had written in his closing sentence, where he 
said he wished he was as sure of Heaven as he was of Mr. 
Hayden’s innocence, words referring to his being equally cer- 
tain that he (Hayden) had no illicit intercourse with the girl. 
That part he scratched out, and Mr. Harrison wondered—“ did 
he doubt it ? ” 
In reply, Justice Wilcox denied that he had said he should 
discharge Mr. Hayden, as alleged by Mr. Harrison. Until the 
noon of the last day Mr. Wilcox had written none of his re- 
view of the case except a few unimportant preliminaries, and 
at noon he wrote the closing sentence. The latter he thought 
best to have ready, and if there were any new developments 
that would change his opinion he could throw it away. He 
had the impression the case would close that day, and wanted 
to be ready and not cause further delay. Mr. Wilcox added 
that he thought when the State finished its side there was 
something of a case against Mr. Hayden, but after hearing 
the defense he changed his mind. Mrs. Hayden told Mr. 
Wilcox, after the trial, that “ if Herbert killed Mary Stan- 
nard he ought to be hung ; but I am satisfied he did not.” 
MR. HAYDEN AND HIS FRIENDS. 
September 29, Mr. Hayden preached his first sermon after 
his trial on a charge of murder. Bouquets graced the altar 
furniture, and a dozen towns were represented in the audience 
that crowded the rather small Madison church. Justice Wil- 
cox sat on the platform near Hayden. When the minister en- 
tered he walked composedly to the pulpit and entered into 
conversation with the Rev. Mr. Latham, a retired Madison 
clergyman. He was dressed in a black broadcloth suit, and a 
small white neck-tie encircled his throat. Although he must 
have been conscious that all eyes were scanning him curiously, 
his wonderful composure remained undiminished. Mr. Hay- 
den read the 27th Psalm, “ The Lord is my life and salvation, 38 
whom shall I fear?” and also read from the 5th chapter of 
St. Matthew, “ And seeing the multitude, He went up unto a 
mountain.” The minister did not talk about his late trial, 
having been advised to allow time to intervene betore alluding 
to it. The only reference made to it was by the Rev. Mr. La- 
tham in his prayer. He thanked God for the support and 
guidance that He had extended to the pastor in the teriible 
and trying ordeal, the equal of which seldom comes to any one. 
He prayed that it might make Hayden still wiser and better, 
and that God’s blessing would rest upon his wife and little 
children. The allusion to the family of Mr. Hayden awoke 
evident sympathy for Mrs. Hayden, who was in the audience. 
Hayden preached gracefully and easily, and his manner re- 
mained the same throughout the service. 
Mr. Hayden’s congregation made the next move in con- 
nection with this remarkable case. September 30, “ we, the 
persons, officers and members of the M. E. church and con- 
gregation of Madison, Conn.,” passed resolutions of unquali- 
fied and continued respect for Brother Hayden as a man and 
minister ; that his late arrest was made on the most criminally 
frivolous grounds, and was therefore a great outrage upon him 
and society at large ; that they rejoiced he was a free man, 
honorably acquitted, despite “ the wicked designs of evil men, 
and the ungentlemanly, unwarrantable, unscrupulous and in- 
human course pursued by the prosecuting attorney for the 
Commonwealth ; ” promising him moral and financial support; 
calling upon the world and especially the Bishops and others 
in authority in the Methodist Episcopal church, to take notice 
of this declaration of firm belief in Brother Hayden’s inno- 
cence ; expressing pain and sad grievance at the course pur- 
sued by the secular newspapers in commenting upon the affair ; 
but more especially at the Christian Advocate of New York, 
the leading organ of the Methodist church, for turning a cold 
shoulder upon Brother Hayden during his trial; and finally 
thanking by name many of those who had stood by the min- 
ister, and overhauling those who believed in the minister’s 
guilt. 
The promulgation of these resolutions stirred up much 
feeling, and a few days afterwards the New Haven Palladium 
gave a detailed summary of the evidence upon which the State 
relied to convict Mr. Hayden, but which was excluded by the 
court, which had the effect of creating somewhat of a public 
feeling that the State had not had fair treatment, and that the 
facts were sufficient to justify the bringing of Mr. Hayden be- 
fore an unbiased jury. In this resume it was claimed that the 
testimony of Susan Hawley, Mrs. Jane Studley and Edgar 39 
Studley, ought to have been admitted, and if it were, Mr. 
Hayden’s conviction was certain ; that there was evidence to 
show that the throwing out of the wood in the swamp, w'hich 
Hayden swore took him an hour and a half to two hours, 
could have been done in ten minutes or less, and that it could 
be proved he could have gone from where his wife last saw 
him, unobserved by mortal eye, to the place where the dead 
girl’s body was found, in twelve minutes, and that thus he had 
a full hour and a half for an interview and a murder; that 
Hayden’s subsequent conduct might count for much or little ; 
and that just such a knife as Hayden had, and on which human 
blood was found, did the murder. Further, Mary Stannard 
told the same story to three different persons, and she always 
had a good reputation for truth among the neighbors, so it 
must have been true. She had what would be taken for signs 
of pregnancy, and certainly she thought she was in that con- 
dition. She did not ask Studley to go to Hayden as she did, 
for the purpose of blackmail, because Hayden was so poor he 
had to borrow money of Susan Hawley. 
HAYDEN REARRESTED. ENOUGH ARSENIC IN MARY’S STOMACH 
TO KILL TWENTY PERSONS. 
While this feeling already mentioned as growing against 
Mr. Hayden was at its height, the country was startled on the 
morning of the ninth of October by reading that the preced- 
ing night the minister had been rearrested on a bench war- 
rant issued by Judges Hitchcock and Culver of the Superior 
Court, and that he had been brought to the County Jail at 
New Haven. The main fact that led to his second arrest was 
the finding by Prof. M C. White, who, it will be remembered 
took the stomach of Mary Stannard for analysis, of over fifty 
grains of arsenic in it, or enough under ordinary circumstan- 
ces to kill twenty people. Prof. S. W. Johnson, who holds 
the chair of chemistry in the Sheffield Scientific School, New 
Haven, assisted Dr. White in the analysis. The poison, 
strange to say, was not absorbed but lay in a mass. Mr. 
Hayden was as composed as usual when arrested, but the 
parting from his wife was very touching. He was at once 
brought before the Superior Court and at the request of 
State’s Attorney O. H. Platt, a mittimus was issued commit- 
ting the prisoner to jail, pending the coming in of the Grand 
Jury. The prisoner refused, as before, to say anything about 
the case, but his counsel, L. M. Hubbard, told the reporters 
that the defense, the same day Hayden had told where he left 
the arsenic in the barn, had sent up to Rockland and secured 
it, and it would transpire that the original package had not 40 
been broken, and that the man who took it from the barn was 
a man of undoubted integrity and honesty. It was under- 
stood, and the State’s Attorney admitted it, that the State had 
other evidence against Hayden, but it was mainly corrobora- 
tive and of no special importance. 
October 14, the Grand Jury met. Hayden was brought 
down from the Jail, and in the court room, though every eye 
was fixed upon him, he never showed that he was aware of the 
great scrutiny, but sat cool and easy, as if he were an unin- 
terested spectator. At 10:45 a. m. the Jury retired and nearly 
all the witnesses who appeared for the State in the hearing at 
Madison appeared before them. It was expected it would at 
least take two days to hear all the State’s evidence, but after 
hearing the principal witnesses the Jury were satisfied, and 
that same evening Foreman E. A. Cornell endorsed a true bill, 
and the minister was at once remanded to jail there to await 
his trial. For a time his counsel talked of making a motion 
for bail, though the State’s Attorney insisted the case was not 
a bailable one. But no motion was made. Soon afterwards 
the State authorities sent and obtained from Talcott Davis, 
who took it from the barn at the request of counsel for the 
defense, the arsenic bought by Hayden in Middletown. It 
was given to Prof. Johnson, and he, according to Hayden’s 
counsel, weighed it and found it to contain 475 9-10 grains or 
within about five grains of the full ounce Hayden purchased 
at Middletown. The last complaint on which the minister 
was arrested contained two counts ; one for killing Mary E. 
Stannard by cutting her throat, and one for killing her by ad- 
ministering arsenic. Mr. Jones, when told of the finding of 
the arsenic, said : “ They had a big thing, they thought, when 
they found the blood on the knife, but that’s all exploded ; and 
now they’ve got the arsenic, and when we come to it, we’ll 
knock the bottom out of that.” 
Since his last arrest Mr. Hayden has languished in prison 
—and not exactly languished either, for he has had many 
friends call upon him and they have allowed him to want for 
nothing. He has done no work, passing the time mainly with 
books. Now and again there have been rumors about another 
bloody knife being found, of finding metallic buttons in ashes 
found in Hayden’s stove, of a man being seen to cross the 
lonely road in the neighborhood of the spring, and lastly an 
apparently well-authenticated story that Mrs. Edgar Stevens, 
while washing Benjamin Stevens’ trousers the Friday after the 
murder, saw so much blood on them that she fainted. This 
sent the reporters out to see Mrs. Stevens at Madison, and 
while she admitted that she had a fainting spell, caused by 
exhaustion while washing Mr. Stevens’ clothes the day in 41 
question, she flatly denied seeing any blood on them or say- 
ing that she did. The other rumors will amount, probably, to 
about as much ; and it is safe to say that beyond some corrob- 
orative evidence of more or less importance, the State, in the 
coming trial, will have nothing to offer but what will be found 
in these pages. Hayden was to have come before the Janu- 
ary term of the Superior Court, but owing to State’s Attorney 
Platt being elected United States Senator, and therefore not 
having time to go on with the case, it was postponed till the 
April term of the Court. Just before Christmas last, a pas- 
tor of a Methodist church in the New Haven District issued 
an appeal for aid for Mrs. Hayden and her children, who were 
in distress, what little personal property they had having been 
sold to pay lawyers and meet the expenses of the former trial. 
She was homeless and had to seek shelter with friends, the 
little Madison church being too poor to care for her. About 
$235. were raised in various churches and from private indi- 
viduals and forwarded to Presiding Elder W. T. Hill. . 
HAYDEN IN JAIL. 
A newspaper reporter thus describes a visit to the minister 
in jail last Jauuary : Mr. Hayden sat to day on a chair at the 
foot of his bed in the little cell in the County Jail, and his wife 
sat sewing on another chair set in the narrow space between 
bed and wall. There was hardly room enough to turn around 
in the remaining space, yet both*of them politely arose from 
their chairs when the reporter stood in the cell doorway, and 
invited him to a seat inside. Mr. Hayden looks as well and 
healthy as ever, and smiled just as pleasantly as during those 
September days, when |is every action was noted and pub- 
lished far and near. He was neatly dressed and his curly 
locks showed as careful attention as ever. Mrs. Hayden 
looked pale but not worn and managed to call up a half smile 
to welcome the visitor. As usual Mr. Hayden would converse 
upon any subject but the crime which is laid to his door. His 
wife managed to see him twice a week, he said. She was stop- 
ping at Madison—“ not keeping house,” she interposed—no, 
boarding around among friends. (The smile faded a little when 
he told of her dependence on others.) But, and he brightened 
up again, she was shortly coming to New Haven, where she 
was to stop with kind friends while his trial was in progress. 
Mr. Hayden said he had many visitors and from many quar- 
ters he was told to ask for anything he might want. He 
wished for nothing he was thankful to say. He was very 
thankful for the contributions for his family. In Madison a 42 
lecture had recently been given for her benefit, and his people 
were generously paying him his salary all along. His parting, 
“ Don’t say anything bad about me,” was accompanied by a 
laugh as if he had no care nor fear of future trouble. Sheriff 
Byxbee told the reporter that Mr. Hayden had as many as 
twenty-five visitors a day, many of them strangers drawn by 
curiosity. Finally, the prisoner had insisted that all visitors’ 
names must be sent before he would see them. There were 
many requests for his photograph, but he would not grant 
them, as it had come to his knowledge that the New York 
illustrated papers had offered as high as ten dollars for a pic- 
ture of him, from which to make a cut to print from. 
IN CONCLUSION. 
The sorrowful story of shame and crime which has been 
faithfully detailed in the foregoing pages, is somewhat relieved 
of its sombre and repulsive character, by the development of 
one or two movements promoted by practical sympathy. It 
is not an unsubstantial satisfaction to reflect that there is, in 
the human heart, a sense of tenderness for suffering which 
responds promptly and kindly to suggestions for ameliorating 
the sad effect of fallen humanity’s misdeeds. It is understood 
that generous proposals have been made for providing a home 
by adoption, for poor Mary’s unhappy orphan boy, whose for- 
lorn condition aroused an active solicitude among many good 
people. Moreover, in towns contiguous to that in which the 
tragedy was enacted, some effort has been made to procure a 
suitable memorial stone for the grave of her whose lips are 
sealed in death. There is a sorrowful pleasure in mentioning 
numerous small contributions in behalf of little Willie Stan- 
nard, made by visitors from various places to the scene of the 
murder, and that the idea of raising a fund toward the support 
of the child has found general approval. 
Thanks to Connecticut’s love of law and respect for consti- 
tutional rights, a fair trial by a jury of his peers is the privi- 
lege of every accused person. May the Right, which is only 
another name for Justice, prevail, and may the innocent be 
delivered from even the suspicion of evil, and the guilty de- 
tected and made subject to a proper penalty ! It is devoutly 
hoped that the impressive lesson taught by the dreadful oc- 
currence herein given, may not soon be forgotten, but that 
the sacred declaration—the wages of sin, is death—may be 
recognized of all men. We should not, however, overlook the 
fact that laws, though made by legislators wrinkled and grey 
perhaps in experience, are, after all, but earthly devices, and 
the whole truth of any matter is only revealed to the eye of 
One whose ways are not as our ways ! THE CLAIRVOYANT'S STRANGE STORY. THE CLAIRVOYANT’S STRANGE STORY. 
There remains yet to be told the story of Grand Juror 
Charles Socrates Stannard’s visit to a clairvoyant to secure 
assistance in unraveling the great mystery. It is printed here 
to show a strange phase of this strange case, and must be 
taken by the reader for what it is worth. The fact of the visit 
and its result, created great excitement at the time. Dr. Hunt 
of Fair Haven, a medical clairvoyant was the person visited 
by Mr. Stannard. When the newspapers got hold of the af- 
fair, Dr. Hunt was visited by the reporters. He said Mr. 
Stannard had called, saying he was prosecuting officer at Mad- 
ison, and desiring the Doctor to “sit” for him. The clairvoy- 
ant did so, but insisted that he, being in a trance, could not 
remember what had transpired. All he knew was that after 
the sitting Mr. Stannard was satisfied and seemed to be in a 
hurry to get away. 
Next Mr. Stannard was interviewed. At first he was very 
reticent. Finally he admitted that the Saturday after the 
Tuesday of the murder, he made a twenty-five mile journey 
to Fair Haven to see Dr. Hunt. The two-dollar fee Mr. 
Stannard paid out of his own pocket, and then came the doc- 
tor’s trance. While in it, he minutely described the scene of 
the murder, the victim and the murderer and what led to the 
commission of the crime. He told of a man who answered 
Mr. Hayden’s description exactly, on his way home from Mid- 
dletown that fatal Tuesday, stopping at the spring in the 
morning, and talking to a young woman whose appearance 
was exactly that of Mary Stannard. An appointment was 
made to meet in the afternoon. His journey from his house 
to the swamp lot and then around to the rock near where 
Mary was in waiting, was detailed by the clairvoyant, until 
the girl and her alleged murderer were seated side by side on 
the little rude seat of stones n<Sar where her body was after- 
wards found. He told her of his visit to Middletown after 
medicine to relieve her in her supposed pregnant condition, 
and after some talk she asked him for fifty dollars with which 
she might go away to some city and be relieved of her child 
and thus escape the disgrace that would attend such an event 46 
if she remained at home. (Mr. Stannard said he got the im- 
pression from the clairvoyant that Mr. Hayden had been giv- 
ing Mary ergot, but it had not produced the desired result) 
The clairvoyant continued that the minister claimed he had 
not the money, nor could he get it. He was poorly paid, and 
needed all his small earnings for his family. Mary then re- 
plied that she would tell Mr. Hayden’s wile the whole story. 
This aroused the minister, angry words followed and in his 
passion he raised a large and jagged stone and hurled it at 
the girl. It struck her on top of the head with considerable 
force. With a wild shriek Mary turned to fly, but after run- 
ning a short distance (forty feet) whirled dizzily, and fell 
senseless to the ground, striking heavily on her face. 
Then the clairvoyant in his trance saw Hayden look horri- 
fied for a moment at the result of his mad anger, and gaze as 
if dumbfounded at the poor girl lying prone upon her face. 
Suddenly a gleam of hate shot across his face, and approach- 
ing her, he turned her over and looked at her, then he quickly 
put his hand in his pocket, drew out his clasp-knife, and after 
pulling back his shirt sleeves to the shoulder (he had no coat 
on) he turned her head carefully to one side, and without a 
moment’s hesitation, plunged the knife blade into her neck. 
Her hands he folded across her stomach with one of his 
hands, so that no blood could get on them in her dying strug- 
gles. Then he started to return home leaving her as she 
died. On the way he passed by the spring and he stopped 
and washed his hands and arm, and the knife. Then he hur- 
ried home, the clairvoyant following him in his trance and 
telling of the woods he went through. This story Mr. Stan- 
nard believed implicitly, and consequently he was and is firmly 
convinced Mr. Hayden murdered the girl. He quotes, too, in 
support of his statement that the clairvoyant told the truth, 
that the day after this visit to the doctor, Attorney James I. 
Hayes came from New Haven to look up evidence for the 
State. On his way to the scene of the murder with Mr. Stan- 
nard, the latter told him what the clairvoyant had said, and on 
arriving at where Mary’s body was found, behold ! the rude seat 
of stones was noticed near by, and close at hand was picked up 
the very jagged and bloody stone Dr. Hunt had described in his 
trance, “ all going to show,” said Mr. Stannard, “ that the rest 
of what the clairvoyant saw must be true ; for no one had 
thought of or found that stone before.” While thus talking 
with Mr. Stannard, he let fall that the Tuesday following the 
first visit to the clairvoyant, he had made him another one. 
But what he had learned he would not tell; it was too im- 
portant to come out at that stage of the trial. At length, on 47 
being asked if anything was said concerning a rumor at that 
time afloat that Mr. Hayden had burned the clothes he wore 
that fatal day when he went down to the swamp, Mr. Stannard 
looked wise and finally admitted that his later information 
touched upon that point. After much urging he wrote on a 
slip of paper the words: “saturrated with carasene— 
burnt,” adding, “ Mind you, I hav’nt told you ; but it makes 
me bile, knowing what I do, to sit in that court (pointing to 
where the trial was in progress), day after day, and hear that 
false evidence given.” Marv Stannard’s Murder 
Tii 'mmmm aobbob. 
THE ONLY FULL AND AUTHENTIC ACCOUNT 
OF/THE 
ARREST AND TRIAD 
OF THE 
BIT. HERBERT II. HAYDEN. 
A TERRIBLE HISTORY. 
WAS POOR MARY STABBED OR POISONED? 
A STRANGE CLAIRVOYANT STORY. 
PRICE! IS CEWQPS. 
Entered according to Act of Congress, iu the ye ir 1879, by Allen & Walker, in the Office of the 
Librarian of Congress, at Washington. PORTRAIT OF THE WIFE OF HICKS. 
THE BOAT IN WHICH HICKS ESCAPED FROM THE OYSTER SLOOP. PORTRAIT OF ALBERT W. HICKS, THE PIRATE.