Part 4 of 6. In October 1881, new trials began for Henry Romberger and Frank Romberger, who had been previously been convicted of the murder of Daniel Troutman; the new trials were granted because of problems with the instructions the judge gave to the jury in the first trial. In the end, both were again found guilty of murder in the first degree. This series of posts follows the second trials through to their conclusion, including the death sentences imposed by the court. The newspaper articles describing the trials are from the Harrisburg Telegraph.
For all other parts of this series on the second trials, see: Second Trials of Henry Romberger, etc.
For all parts of the series on the first trial, see: First Trial of Henry Romberger & Frank Romberger.
________________________________
From the Harrisburg Telegraph, 20 October 1881:
THE JURY SAYS GUILTY
HENRY ROMBERGER’S FATE SEALED
Frank Romberger’s Trial Proceeding – The same Testimony Offered as That Against Henry – Report of the Proceedings – &c., &c., &c.
At the conclusion of Mr. Hollinger’s address opening the case for the Commonwealth against Frank Romberger, Drs. Reed and Leimbach were called as witnesses and repeated their testimony as to the death of Daniel Troutman. Joel Shadel, John Shibely, Mary Shibely, and Mary Kenter were also recalled and gave their evidence concerning the gray mare and closed carriage leaving Tower City on November 14 and proceeding on its way to Lykens, below which place Frank Romberger got into the carriage and joined Henry, who had been the driver from Tower City. At the conclusion of Mary Shibely’s testimony the court adjourned until to-day.
Henry Found Guilty
During Mary Kenter’s presence on the stand, an unusual noise as if many person walking together on the floor above, caused every eye to be directed towards the door at which juries enter the court room. In a moment after the jury that held the fate of Henry Romberger in their grasp had entered and seated themselves. Henry was called from a comfortable position he had assumed in the prisoner’s dock and ordered to stand up and look upon the jury. He took his stand behind Frank and rested his hand upon the back of the latter’s chair.
The Verdict
Prothonotary Mitchell then said:
“Gentlemen, have you agreed upon a verdict?” he asked.
“We have,” came the reply from all.
“Who shall answer for you?”
“Our foreman.”
The foreman, Mr. John H. Keene, then arose and in reply to the question “What say you; do you find the prisoner at the bar guilty or not guilty? He replied in a firm voice “Guilty.”
“Of what degree?”
“In the first degree.”
Every head then turned towards Henry but he showed no emotion whatever. He preserved the same stolid demeanor that had characterized his bearing since his arrest. When the jury had been polled he sat down beside his counsel, Mr. Bowman, and with a slight tremor in his voice asked: “Is there any hope for a new trial?” “No,” replied Mr. Bowman, “this trial was very fair. We will make a motion for a new trial, but it will not be granted.” Henry, without making answer or comment, returned to the dock, whence he was taken to jail.
The jury had very little difficulty in coming to a conclusion. The first ballot showed nine for first degree and three for second, but a little argument soon convinced the three that they had given the verdict only from a sense of duty. They would willingly have reduced the degree of guilt, but the evidence was so strong and the law so clear that a proper regard for their oaths constrained them to give the verdict of murder in the first degree.
This Morning’s Proceedings.
Court reassembled at 9 o’clock. The Commonwealth continued its evidence against Frank by calling Frances Romberger, Harry Snyder, John Dietrich, Charles Yohe, Charles Wise, Daniel Herman, John E. Boyer, Peter Bubb, Elias Bush, Ferdinand Wagner, John Maser, William Hoffman. Each of these witnesses repeated the evidence they gave on Monday and Tuesday at Henry’s trial. The gist of their evidence was that Henry Romberger and Frank Romberger drove from Lykens into a field about three-quarters of a mile from Troutman’s in a closed carriage drawn by a gray horse. George Troutman, and Daniel Bozer testified, as at the former trial, that Henry Romberger knew Daniel Troutman had money. Elizabeth Troutman also repeated her testimony, detailing the manner of killing and the action of the Rombergers afterwards.
Mary Gise and her husband, George Gise, followed Mrs. Troutman, repeating their testimony of the previous trial, giving the dying declaration of Troutman: “Henry Romberger shot me.”
John H. Martin testified that about ten o’clock on the night of the murder a closed carriage drawn by a white horse, going Tower City, stopped in front of his house and a man got out and went towards Frank Romberger’s home. The witness was closely cross-examined by the defense, the evident purpose being to show he is not of sound mind, but his evidence remained unshaken.
This Afternoon’s Session.
Upon court’s reassembling Lewis Kniley Jr. repeated his testimony as to Frank Romberger showing him a thirty-two caliber pistol on the day before the Troutman murder, and also that Frank behaved very queerly and was in a different mood than usual on the day following the murder.
Peter Altmeier testified that the ball found in Troutman’s body was a thirty two caliber call.
Charles Britton testified that he saw Henry Romberger and Frank Romberger together on the day before the murder; that they went into a back yard and remained together about half an hour.
Ida Graeff then testified that on the Monday or Tuesday morning following the murder, Frank Romberger told her that if he should be arrested she should swear that he was at her house on the Sunday night of the murder, from 6 o’clock until after 10, and that he further told her that if she would do as he wanted he would do anything in the world for her. The witness then declared that Frank was not at her house on the night of the murder.
On cross-examination the witness admitted that she had sworn before a justice that Frank was at her house on the night of the murder. On redirect examination she said that she had not told the truth before the justice, but is telling it now. She had sworn to the truth now because she learned it was wrong for her to tell anything under oath that is not true.
The interesting point of the trial was now at hand. There was a commotion at one of the side doors, and then entered Henry Romberger, the convicted murdered, in charge of two deputy sheriffs.
“Call Henry Romberger,” said Mr. Hollinger.
Henry advanced to the witness stand, took the book and was sworn. The audience in the room leaned forward and was hushed in an instant. Frank Romberger, the man on trial for his life, never moved a muscle. He regarded Henry steadily all through his testimony, and seemed much interest in it. As Henry reviewed the crime and brought out all of its damning facts Frank’s face grew paler, and he leaned forward to catch every word. When Henry finished the court room was again in confusion. He was led back to prison by the deputy sheriffs.
Henry began bis testimony by saying that he had met Frank in Lykens on the Saturday before the murder and talked with him, making arrangements to go to Troutman’s. On Sunday afternoon Henry left Tower City with Shadel’s gray mare. The carriage was closed. He drove a short distance below Lykens, where Frank Romberger got into the carriage with him. The two then went over to Troutman’s passing on the road Harry Snyder and John Dietrich. The witness then said they drove over to near Troutman’s, going into Maser’s field, where they left the horse. They walked to the house and entered by the door, Frank leading the way. In the bedroom Frank demanded money, and on the old man saying he had none, Frank said: “Yes, you have other people’s money.” The old man then got out of bed and went to the window. On coming back he jumped upon the bed, took down a gun and said” “clear out!” Henry and Frank ran out into the yard, followed by Troutman. Frank went to the right and Henry to the left. Troutman followed Henry and fired at him. Henry, dropping to the ground to avoid the shot. Immediately following the gun shot, Frank fired the pistol, killing Troutman. Shortly after the shooting Frank and Henry met at their carriage and started home. On the way Frank said he had shot the old man because he believed his life was in danger. When the two arrived at Lykens on their return, Frank got out of the carriage in front of Martin’s house. Henry then went into Tower City alone. Counsel for the defense did not cross-examine Henry. The Commonwealth then closed.
Mr. Durbin then opened the case for the defense, claiming that to fairly understand the issue involved there must be a clear understanding of the crime. He then explained the different degrees of murder. Continuing, he said that all penal statutes must be correctly construed, and in so doing Frank could not be convicted of murder in the first degree. The only evidence for the defense will be testimony to show that Frank was not and could not have been at Troutman’s on that fatal Sunday.
_____________________________________
From the Harrisburg Telegraph, 20 October 1881:
The jury in the Henry Romberger case took three ballots. In the first ballot it stood 9 for murder in the first degree, 3 for murder in the second degree. The second ballot stood 11 to 1, and the third ballot it was unanimous for murder in the first degree.
_____________________________________
From the Harrisburg Telegraph, 20 October 1881:
A CONFESSION
HENRY ROMBERGER’S PART IN THE TROUTMAN MURDER.
The Condemned Man Talks from His Cell – “I was at Troutman’s House” – “Frank Did the Shooting” – “I Was Very Sorry When the Pistol Creaked” – &c., &c., &c.
A TELEGRAPH reporter had a long interview with Henry Romberger this morning. His counsel, R. L. Muench, had just left him when the reporter reached his cell, and found Henry eating his breakfast. He was in a remarkably placid and pleasing state of mind – not a visible emotion on his countenance, a quiver in his speech or a quail in his eye. In self-composure the man displays iron nerves, as he never on any occasion since his imprisonment, and did not this morning, show any evidence of dismay at his awful position. To the reporter’s greeting, of good morning, Henry responded cheerily, with the usual remark, “glad to see you.”
Reporter – Well, Henry, the fates are against you.
Henry – Better say the juries are against me.
Reporter – Yes, but the jurors are sworn to be guided by the evidence, and base their verdicts on that.
Henry – To be sure. It’s no use now for me to say that I was not on the ground, for I was. Frank and I went to rob old Troutman. That we did; but we never intended to murder him. I did not harbor such a thought at any time when the robbery was planned – it never entered my mind to kill him when we were on the road to the house. I never thought of such a thing when we were in the house. If Frank and I had intended to kill Troutman we could have done it as we stood at his bed looking at him while he slept, but we did not go to kill Troutman, we only went to steal his money. It’s no use keeping this back now, and you may say so. If I had known when we were in the yard that Frank intended to shoot I would have taken that pistol from him, if it had been necessary to knock him down to do so. But I did not know it, and I was anxious to get away from a bad job.
Reporter – You had a very fair trial, Henry.
Henry – Yes. The judge’s charge was fair. My lawyer did me good service. But I made a mistake in not taking two or three men off the jury that were on. If I could have done it I would have taken two men off when the trial was in progress – one in particular, who looked me in the eyes and seemed to say, “I’ll convict you.”
Reporter – But, Henry, it was a jury of honorable men, who believed they did their whole duty under their oath and according to the testimony.
Henry – Yes, yes, I know they are honorable men – still there were two on the jury whom I ought to have objected to.
Reporter – You are to go on the stand, I hear, on Frank’s trial.
Henry – If they want me, I’ll go. The truth will not hurt me. I was at Troutman’s house, you know, and so was Frank, to rob the old man. When the shooting was done I was lying on the ground. Two shots were fired before I got up. This is the truth. Frank knows it, for I told him so at the time.
Reporter – Do you expect a new trial?
Henry – I guess not, but my attorney will stick to me to the last.
Reporter – Well, Henry, I must leave you.
Henry – I am always glad to see you. The TELEGRAPH has treated me fairly since I have been here, and I thank you for it.
_________________________________
News articles from Newspapers.com.
Corrections and additional information should be added as comments to this post.