The Hillsdale standard. [volume] (Hillsdale, Mich.) 1851-1909, 1859-11-22

government had to bring in, but 1t was OF
a pretty decisive cha-acte and the opin
ion of those present evidently ran counter
to the prisoner. The only evidence pro >
duced by the defence, was the employer of
young Bates. He testified to his conf
denco in him, and that during the two
years he had employed him, he had had
no fault whatever to find with him.
"What salary did you give him?'
"Six hundred dollars year"
ale he extravagant in his habi,s?"
"Far from it. Without being pGrsimo,
nious, he had always been economical, and
has, to my knowledge, somo hundreds of
dollars deposited in the Bank"
"You never suspected him Of gamb
ling?'
"No."
This was about all the evidence that
could be brought forward by the defence.
Though Of ursc it had its weight, it was
very unsatisfactory, compared with tho
strong circumstantial evidence against him.
Evidently the counsel for young Bates felt
this, for he looked depressed.
"Gcntlomen Of the jury" he said, in
rising, for the first speech dovolved upon
him, "conf lent as | am of nv clients in
noccnce, it IS to me source Of deep re
gret that L cannot substaniate it bv the
most incontrovcrtible evidence. Such,
however. is the nature Of the cose, that
have been able only to bring proofs of the
excellent character he has hitherto sustain
ed, Yet why should / say only? l. not
a character a probity, and that attested
by his cmployer-thc man who ought to
know If anybody could--is not such a re
putation, l say, worth anything? If not,
there are not many Of us safe against con
spiracy-l admit that even such charac-
ter ought not to weigh against some evi.
dencc. But what, gcntl'mcr, is the na
turc Of tho evidence brought against NY
client? 1t is simply circumstantial, and
as all who know anything of the law, will
admit there is no species of evidence moro
likely to mslead or which has led to so
many unjust vcrdicts us this. The prison
er's handkerchief was found beneath the
Bank window through which the entrance
was made, and that on the morning after
the robbery. How came it thereg Did
anybody see the prisoner put it there 3
That is not claimed. Docs it afford con-
elusive evidence that he did put it there
Not at all. Suppose, gentlemen, and it
is very supposablc case, that the real
robber wished to screen himself from sus
picion, and throw it upon some one else,
what more easy than TO obtain posSosio ion
Of the prisoners handkerchief, and take
care to drop it in just tic place where it
was found?
"Gcntl,mcn, this is very important
point. Let me call your especial atten.
ton TO H.
At this point thrr, was 4 commo,ion in
the room. a yonrg lady seemed near
ainting, and was carried ont. Ii was the
daughter Of the President, between whom
and Bates, as has been said, there had
been mutual affection. Her father, it
was observed, turned pale and seemed i'll
at rest, no doubt from concern for his
daughter. The advocate procoeded--
"You will perhaps ask why we dH not
attempt to prove an alhi. Simply be-
cause the prisoner took long walk with.
ont company, on the evening Of the rob
berry, aul returning a. late hour, enter
cd his boarding house by means ofa night
key, after the rest of the inmates were
asleep.
ain conclusion I have only to suggest
this consideration, il my client sto' tn,
money alleged from the Bank, what has
he done with it? Is it not rather singular
that 1t has not yet been lound!"
Here ended the argument for the de-
fence. The District Attorney rose and
spoke substantially as follows:-
"Gentlcmon of the jury Let me be
Gin by briefly rccapitulatins the evidence
which have to offer. In the first place
it was shown that on the morning succeed
ing the robbery, handkerchief, marked
with the prisoners name, was discovcrel
under the Ba k window. 1t is recognized
as tho prisoners by the washorwoman
whom he employs. This point believe,
is conceded by my learned brother on the
other side. What, [ ask, can be more
conclusive than this? To tie sure, no one
saw him drop i;-bat Is that necdful -
He was not in the habit Of lending his
handkerchief that I am aware. But it
might have been stolen. We'll | admit
it. Bot no evidence has been brought for.
warl to prove that il Cos stolen In the
ahsnrca of that we must believe rs | DO.
that it was the prisoner nd he only that
dropped it.
"My brother has endeavored to under
value, and present in a suspicious light the
weight Of the evidence, simply because it
is crcumStantial. That is dangerous
doctrine. Once admit it, and half Of our
criminals will 60 unconvicted.
"Anothcr point. lie brings forward
the prisoners 60 d character. Well, ger
tlemen, what Of il! There are hundred,
of men whose character is good, simply
because they have not been detected in
any crime as yet. But is that conclusive
Not at all. | will not mention, because
instances will occur to all of you leases Of
men who have been proved guilty of stu
pendous cri ncs, and that beyond doubt
whose character previously was excellent
"My brother asks, in the last place, i
the prisoner really distracted the money
what has he done with it? Why has i
not been found? That, if he will pardor
ma, strikes me rs exceedingly weak
There are a hundred ways in which b,
might dispose Of it. During this mystic
rious absence of his, what hnders hin
from having it concealed somewhere O.