Bloomington (Monroe County, Indiana) World, November 12, 1899, p. 1.
William H. Wagoner Charged with the Murder of His Wife

Submitted by Randi Richardson


 Spencer, Ind., Oct. 11-One of the most remarkable trials ever tried in this
 county was terminated at eight o'clock when the jury returned into open
 court a verdict of guilty against William H. Wagoner, charged with murdering
 his wife on the 10th day of October 1891.
 It was eight years before an indictment was found by a Greene County grand
 jury; and during all these years the defendant resided within a radius of 25
 or 30 miles of Newark, the scene of the tragedy.
 A great mystery surrounded the facts in the case.  One hundred and fifty
 witnesses were subpoenaed, and four days were occupied in the investigation.
 Hon. Charles Hunt of Sullivan, Hon. John A. Riddle of Bloomfield and Hon.
 Homer L. McGinnis of Spencer represented the State while East & East of
 Bloomington and Ed. S. Davis of Gosport represented the defendant.
 It would seem from the evidence that the defendant at the age of 16 years,
 and while in a state of intoxication, without any prior courtship or
 engagement, married Clara Anderson who had all her life been a much
 deformed, ill-shaped and partial paralytic with little intelligence but a
 violent temper and unable to support herself, much less perform the duties
 of a wife.
 It was a tacitly admitted fact that the unfortunate woman was a burdensome
 charge upon her mother who was a widow, and the marriage was brought about;
 and the young man thought it a mere joke at the time, but one Watson, a
 son-in-law, had in fact procured a regular license, paid for them, had a
 justice of the peace to perform the ceremony, and after this mock marriage,
 solemnly legalized, however, the defendant lived with the girl five days
 then abandoned her, but she became much devoted to him and followed him
 about the neighborhood like a child until in May following this same Watson
 took her to the home of the defendant's father, but they refused to keep
 her, and Watson refused to take her home, when she became desperate and
 declared she would drown herself and plunged head foremost into Indian Creek
 but was rescued by the defendant when nearly dead.  The defendant then took
 her back to her mother's, some six or eight miles, and left her, and during
 the summer following, she kept up her visits until he, to get rid of her,
 went to Springfield, Missouri, remained there something over a year, then
 returned to the neighborhood of Newark, and the unfortunate woman again
 renewed her efforts to get her husband to live with her, but without avail.
 This condition remained until 1888 or 1889 when Wagoner's father sold out
 and removed to Gosport some 20 miles away; the defendant going with him and
 making his home there, and on account of the distance, husband and wife did
 not meet again until about May 1890 when Mary Ann Anderson, the mother of
 deceased, induced the defendant to return to Newark and enter into the
 blacksmithing business, she furnishing money to purchase the tools, and he
 was to live with and care for his wife.  This arrangement lasted until
 August 1890 when the defendant again left.  The defendant, in August
 following, went back to Gosport where he remained until one week after the
 death of his wife.  He again returned to the little town of Payne, and on
 the 9th day of November 1891, married Mary A. Clark by whom he had one
 child, a little girl now about six years old.  It was from these
 circumstances, principally, that the state sought to fix a motive for the
 murder.  It was proved that the defendant had, on several occasions, said
 that he was going to have a divorce or have his marriage with Miss Anderson
 declared void and had placed his case in the hands of an attorney for that
 purpose.
 The defense was an alibi.  The defendant was on the witness stand for seven
 hours.  Until the first two days of the trial, it was not known that the
 state had any other evidence, but on the second evening two prisoners who
 were in jail testified to continuous confessions which occurred preceding
 the trial in which it was stated that the defendant had admitted to these
 men that he was present at the death of his wife, that he had paid the said
 Watson $50,00 to do the deed, and that he had gone there from Gosport on
 that night and had met Watson a mile and a half from the house, and that he,
 Watson, had choked the defendant to death, and at midnight had put her in
 the cistern.  The defendant proved an alibi by his sister and
 brother-in-law, but the jury did not believe it.  Since the trial the
 defendant has admitted that he was present at the time of his wife's death
 and that his wife had taken "Rough on Rats," but that she did not expire
 under its effects, and thereupon George Watson with his thumb and finger
 choked her till the breath was gone and then threw her in the cistern feet
 foremost after removing the top.
 He also says that the mother of the dead woman took the lantern from her
 home, as well as the rope and kettle, and that it was she who dropped them
 in after the body had been put in, and she placed the platform of the
 cistern in its place.
 If these statements are true, then it was a most foul murder, and the mother
 and brother-in-law are also guilty.