On Wednesday A. Conkling of Rutland came to this office and gave information which led to the publication of the following the same day:

Sarah Conkling, a bright little girl between 10 and 11 years of age, the adopted daughter of A. Conklin of Rutland, residing about 7 miles from Watertown, went to school to Miss Martha Andrews, in the Eames district. Last evening she did not come home from school so soon as usual, and so Mr. Conkling harnessed his horse and drove to the school house to find her. Miss Andrews told him he saw Sarah go into the woods on her way home across the lots, soon after the school closed at 4 p.m. Mr. Conkling drove back, found she had not reached home, and taking a lantern, went into the woods. About 5 o’clock he found her lying dead, with her skull broken in near the temple, and her face badly bruised. Her nose, chin and hands were frozen. Her mittens were off from her hands, one of them being by her side, and the other a few rods behind. Blood, which she had spit from her mouth, was found in different places for six rods back. It is supposed that she tripped and struck her head against a tree, or stick, or the frozen ground, then recovered sufficiently to go a few rods further, and then, overcome, laid down and died. Mr. Conkling’s house is about 200 rods from the school house, across lots, and Sarah’s lifeless body was found about half way between the two. The circumstances of her sad and mysterious death are being carefully investigated today.

Yesterday Coroner Phillips and Chief of Police Guest went to Rutland to look into the affair, and their investigations resulted in the arrest of Frank Ruttan on suspicion that he was the murderer of the girl. They went to the house of Mr. Conkling, about seven miles from Watertown and two from Tylerville. Several men were there, much excited, but all appeared to think that the girl had been accidentally killed. The following is the substance of Chief Guest’s statement:

He and the coroner went to view the spot where it was said she first fell down. They made a thorough examination at that spot, and found neither frozen hubs, stones nor rocks upon which she could have fallen and produced the wound which caused her death. They then talked with Mr. Conkling, asking him if there had been any person chopping in the woods or any man around there whom he would suspect of committing the deed. Mr. Conklin thereupon mentioned the name of this boy Frank Ruttan, saying the boy had been charged with improper conduct towards (unclear word) girls in that neighborhood before. The boy lived with Henry Humphrey, about a quarter of a mile from the woods in which the body was found. Then all hands started out to search for tracks, and speedily found a boy’s track, tracing it back to where the girl was found and from that place right into the barn-yard of Henry Humphrey. Mr. Guest found the boy and asked him some questions in reference to his boots, enquiring of the boy if those boots he then had on were the same that he wore on Tuesday last. He said they were not; that he had on Tuesday worn his leather boots. Guest asked him if he was in the habit of wearing his leather boots when doing his chores. He replied that after his chores were done, he usually put on his leather boots, but that on Tuesday he had worn the leather boots all the afternoon. Guest asked him then where his leather boots were. He said in the house. Guest went in with him and got the boots, took them to the tracks and they matched exactly. The boy himself said it was an exact fit. Then all the others present fitted the boots to several of the tracks, and in each case there was a perfect fit. While Guest was thus securing the boots, Coroner Phillips, Mr. Conkling and the others were in the house talking with Mr. Humphrey. He told them that he had been in Watertown that day, but that Mr. Reilly Humphrey (his uncle) and the boy were at home. Between three and four the latter two were doing up the chores, getting through by four o’clock, all but the milking. Reilly went into the house at that hour after the milk pails, leaving the boy in the barn. When Reilly came out the boy was not to be seen anywhere. He called the boy two or three times but got no answer. He then went on milking the cows alone. Humphrey thought he had been milking about an hour, when the boy came back. He asked the boy where he had been and the latter answered that he had been in the stable feeding the horses and turkeys. (The stable is in the same yard with the cows, only two or three rods from where Humphrey was milking.) Humphrey then said to the boy, “You took care of the horses before.”

The boy then said he was on the mow. Chief of Police Guest asked the boy yesterday if he heard Humphrey call him that evening. The boy said he did. When asked why he did not answer Humphrey, he made no reply to Guest. Guest told the boy he would have to go with him to Watertown, and the boy made no reply. Guest then asked him what he was doing in the woods that afternoon. He said he was not down in the woods, and that he knew nothing as to how the tracks came there.

After Guest, Phillips and the others followed the tracks from the woods to the barn, they tracked them round the woodpile to where they stood still. They also found the first tracks leading from the house to the woods and they fitted the boots as before.

When Guest and the others were at Humphrey’s house, Mr. Conkling found a blacksmith’s small shoeing hammer, which he put in his pocket, and took back to his own house. When there, those present fitted it into the wound on the side of the girl’s temple, and the mark or wound seemed to fit the face of the hammer exactly. All present fitted it, including the boy, whom Guest insisted should do so. The boy said it fitted perfectly, but he said he could give no explanation as to how it was done. He further said it was probably done by that hammer, but he said he did not do it. He also stated that the hammer was in the barn last Tuesday on the bench. Guest asked him how he knew it was there. He said he went in there that afternoon for an axe to split some wood, and he then saw the hammer. Mr. Humphrey then asked why he did not take the axe in the wood shed. The boy said, because it was down at the water trough used for cutting the ice, for the cattle to drink.

While the parties yesterday were on their way to Mr. Conkling’s from Mr. Humphrey’s the boy said to Henry Humphrey, “What will they do with me supposing they find me guilty of this crime?” Mr. Humphrey said he did not know, and inquired why he asked that question. The boy replied, “Because my boot fits those tracks so well, I am afraid they will convict me.”

While Guest was conveying the boy to the city, he tried to engage him in conversation, but the boy would not talk, further than answering questions in monosyllables.

Marks were found on the dead girl’s body as follows:

Over the right eye is the wound which evidently caused her death. Her right eye is discolored and bloodshot. Her chin is scratched, but not bruised. On the left side of her neck from the back part around to under her chin, there is a cut or discolored place, as though she had been choked with a cord. On the front part of her neck are marks, as though the skin had been scratched by finger nails. The back of her right hand has several scratches, the flesh in places being scratched out.

The child’s clothing when found was very much disarranged. Her underclothing was particularly so. She wore tight drawers, the side button-holes of which were torn out, as though by force.

The place where the body was found was about half a mile from the school house, and probably a quarter of a mile from her home. A few yards from where the body was found, is a tree on which Guest found blood marks, as though she had taken hold of the tree for support.

Mr. Conkling and his wife adopted the child at Massena some years ago. She was bright, and affectionate and large for her age. The school house is nearly three-quarters of a mile from Mr. Conkling’s, across lots. There is a small piece of woods between their house and the school house, nearer the former than the latter, through which runs a path. Mr. Humphrey’s house is a quarter of a mile from Conkling’s, and a person at Humphrey’s could command a view of one passing from the school house towards Conklin’s until the latter reached the woods.

Mr. Conklin now remembers that on Tuesday evening, about the time when the child was due from school, he heard cries in the direction of the woods, and he is now positive that it must have been the little one screaming for help. He thought little of it at the time, the distance rendering the cries faint to his ears.

Frank Ruttan was sixteen years old on the 1st of June last. He was adopted out of the orphan asylum in this city some three years ago. He was placed in the asylum when but five years old, remaining there some eight years. He has twice run away from Mr. Humphrey’s, but each time returned of his own accord. Both his parents have been dead some years.

Coroner Phillips yesterday organized an inquest and adjourned it until Tuesday, Dec. 7th, at 10 a.m. The following are the jurors:* A. W. Hardy, D. J. Eames, Warren Johnson, S. A. Waner (sic), C. A. Fuller, S. S. Andrus. Today a post-mortem examination of the body is being made by surgeons of this city.

Representatives of the TIMES and Dispatch saw Ruttan last evening in his cell at the jail and talked with him. He was in bed, and when spoken to partially raised up and leaned on his elbow. The conversation was nearly as follows:

Question---Did you know the girl who was killed/

Q.-- Had you seen her often?

Q.-- Was there ever any difficulty between you and her (sentence not completed copied)

Q.-- Did you kill her?

Q.-- Does that hammer fit into the broken place in her head?

Q. -- How do you account for that?

Q. -- Does your boot fit the tracks in the snow?

Q, -- Did you make the tracks going to the barn?

Q. -- Who made them?

Q.-- Where were you when Mr. Humphrey missed you in the barn?

Q.-- How long were you absent from the stable where Mr. Humphrey was?

Q. -- Had the horses been fed?

Q.-- Why were you absent so long without saying anything to Mr. Humphrey about it?

Q. -- Then, you don’t know anything about the death of the girl?

Q. -- How old are you?

Q. -- Where were you born?

Q. -- Have you any father or mother living?

Q. -- Were you in the orphan asylum for some years?

Q. -- How long have you lived with Mr. Humphrey?

Q. -- Are you related to the burglar who fell through the ice on the St. Lawrence last winter, and was drowned?

Here the interviewers bade him good night, and as they did so his head dropped on the pillow. The boy’s eyes are black and bright. The expression of his face otherwise is uncertain, and rather stolid. He manifested no nervousness, no anxiety. His answers were prompt, but he said nothing more than was necessary to answer the questions asked him. He is pretty good looking, and has a large, strong frame. We are told that he is an illegitimate son of Emily Ruttan, who formerly lived in Watertown, and probably a nephew of the burglar Ruttan who was drowned in the St. Lawrence.

We will not at present discuss the probabilities of the case. The doctors will probably to-day determine whether or not the girl was killed by accident. If she was not, Ruttan is the apparent murderer, and Chief Guest’s statement indicates that she was not.

P. S. The following particulars are given us by John L. Baker and W. D. V. (name not clear), who went to Mr. Conklin’s this morning and returned soon after noon: Drs. Trowbridge and Stevens of this city, who are conducting the post mortem examination, decided that the girl was killed by strangulation, probably effected by means of the scarf which was around her neck. The skull near the temple was fractured, and also the upper part of the upper jaw. A piece of broken bone was taken out of the latter. The surgeons say that neither of the fractures would cause death. There was a red mark around the neck. There are indications of a struggle for a distance of from four to six rods back of the spot where the body was found. Blood was found in several places, and on one small tree, in the course of the struggle. This course crossed the regular path twice.

The neighborhood people are greatly excited and the place of the tragedy is being viewed by hundreds of people. There is now little doubt in the minds of those acquainted with the circumstances that the murder was committed by Frank Ruttan.

Note: The details of this murder were recalled in an article written by Leonard L. Allen, in the June 21, 1945 issue of the Watertown Daily Times. Frank, was indeed brought to trial and convicted for the death of Sarah Conklin(g). The members of the coroner’s jury were recounted in the updated article. They were residents of the district: Henry T. Hopkins, foreman, and Alfred A. Isham, Talcott Merwin, Abram Bull, Joseph Hadock (sic), Aaron Crain, Simeon Rockwell, William Haddock, George W. Hammond and Charles A. Fuller. The post mortem did not definitely determine that the girl had been criminally attacked.

***********************