The northern tribune. [volume] (Bath, Me.) 1847-1855, 1848-03-22

PERPETRATORS time enough to escape, to enjoy
the fruits of their crime. But here the inten.
ton seems to have been to secure immediate
detection-to publish the fact immediately
1t would seem that these blows were inflicted,
| and this body left thus exposed, by some one
VINO wished to turn suspicion upon one who
wat not guilty. Men do not desire TO reveal
their own guilt-to make known their own
crimes.
Not less extraordinary is the accusation that
the prisoner at the bar, enjoying great popu-
larlty, extensive business and ample MEANS
and possessing an unspotted reputation, should
for the paltry motive attributed to him, be
guilty of the highest Grim known to society.
This Is so wholly improb able as to call for the
elearest and most convincing proof before it is
believed. Who comnlitted this crime, we can
hot UNDERTAKE to say-it is shrouded in mys-
'eay ana darkness and so will probably re-
man till That great day when all secrets shall
DC DC MADE knowr-when the earth as well as
lhe sea thai give up her dead-the light of
!, .he moon Shall be as the light of the sun-the
liSht OF the sun shall be as seven days-and
until then it will be known only to Him to
whom. all hearts are open.
Inc government has taken up four days in
examining some sixty witnesses--some upon
the smallest and least important matters-the
the slightest circumstances have been pressed
where they could throw the least light on the
crime. AT last they bring in witness, who,
II to be believed, they might have dispensed
with most of their other evidence. This
amounts to an acknowledgement that this
witness is not to be relied upon.
Mark the difference in the mode of exami-
nation. In the other cases, the evidence was
drawn out by a series of quantities. But
| her ypifp +bo
his testimony in the form of narrative, with
out a question scarcely put to him. 1t would
appear from this, that this testimony could
only be presented in an imposing form in the
way 1t way it was given. Mr.. E. said he
woqld consider the evipence first, indie
pendent of that of Flint If Flint's were
the only testimony, he believed tina, the
jury would scarcely leave their seats-they
would retain verdict without hesitation.
MIR. E. then asked, how stands the case as last
Saturday morning. The death of Mathews none de-
MED. lie supposed that the idea abandoned that
the blows caused death. Although sufficient to
it if inflicted in life, the evidences testify that the D.
peafances indicate that they were inflicted after DEATH
The evidence gives no light as to who inflicted the
blows-if inflicted after death they have no bearing
the caseit is to be inquired only how they aec
tee the deceased but how they are connekted with the
prisoner.
Mr. L. then inquired if the death was caused by by
drccianic acid lie said il was extraordinary that of
the Sknl pnySl0ahS ana the learned professor, cal
ed to testify IN this ease: not of them prfesses
have known previously the effects of this acid the
hnman or animal system. Somcshing was examined
which is said to have been The of the deceas
ed's stomach. But who says with confidence that tets
bowl bottle contained the contents or rhat stomach
Here Is great chasm in tee proof These learned per-
sons derive their knowledge from books, find limit
ed Use of books Physicians are not chemists; chem.
its are not physic! ms. What proof is there of the
identity of substance examined? They remov-
ed about 2 O'Clock Friday afternoon, and placed in an
exposed situation The jury not to Judge If it Is
probable that the contents were not touched-it ia
nough thst they may have been touched. MIR. Will
liams was directed by The physicians and that
this substance was to be thrown away. The village
was full Of excitement. Who say that MIR. w.
was not seen in Jeposing il there There it remain
ed Till morning, and then for The first time it pnt under
lock and key. This is an Acknowledgement that that
was the only safe place. Now there reasons to
show that change had taken place. Pfussic acid
was afterwards found in this substance. 1t is dscov-
cred by the odor and by the tests Where this o.
dor ON Friday: All testify that they discovered
ing of it tien-tlat when the stomach opened,
they foand no such odor. Was there net something
added II mag be argued that it was improbable
who had anv motive for dolngit? 1t might have been
donethe acid bottles absent from the office that
evening" Mr. E. said the counsel had stated there was
blood on the Ratchet
The Ratchet is produced and there is blood,
Mr.. E. supposed upon it. Yet the boy SAYS it
was not the office Ratchet. Flint says there
was no blood on the office Ratchet the next
morning. Neither Flint, Dingley or the off
Ger says this is the office Ratchet. Many per-
sons went in and out of the office; they may
have changed the hatchets. And if they
changed the hatchets to lead suspicion in
particular direction, why may not the same
persons have tempered with the contents of
the stomach, and infused poison after death
When we find that the most sensible quality
OF this poison was not discovered when the
stomach was opened, and when all admit that
the OdOr ShOulI have heep thf. strop1o.+ ,,5
yet after the exposure of this substance this
poison, which would be constantly escaping
was found in it, does it not raise a presump-
ton, probability, that the poison had been
added after DEATH appears that some one
had desire to cause early discovery; and to
remove all doubt of murder. Who can have
had such desire, but one who wished to turn