The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1864-12-06

not always necessarily conclusive Of the ques-
tions Of act hey profess TO find. There were
items Of testimony in MuLLEB's case which,
it is true, bore very powerfully against the
presumption of his innocence. They seemed
almost as irresistible as direct and positive
proof ofcriminality And yet they were but
links in a chain of circumstances apparently
connecting MULLER with the murder. 1t is,
indeed, an old proverb, that crcumstantial
evidence, when completely made out, Is the
strongest sort of proof And yet a false wit
ness on the side Of the prosecution, or the
want of an honest one on the side Of the de-
fense, to clear up some matter seemingly in
consistent with the theory Of the innocence Of
the prisoner, may lead to wrong verdict,
when the chain of testimony against him
appears to be perfect in every essential par
tcuar.
As respects the present case, the confession
ofMU1LEE is not to be implicitly relied upon.
He protested thai he was not guilty even up
TO the very instant before the drop fell and
though at that awful moment, with his whole
soul agitated, he may have uttered the words
imputed to him" Yes, 1 did i'll the last
words he ever articulatcd-yet it is not inn
possible that he may have pronounced them
either unconscously. or else in agonized inn
patience of the importunate chaplain, who
seems FIRST to have assumed the guilt Of Null
rER, and then to have prosecuted him with
appeals to confess the crime, up to the last
fatal moment.
The clergyman, too, is reported to have
been greatly delighted with his final success
in overcoming the fortitudc of wretched
youth, whom, it may be, he literally badgered
into bearing false witness against himself The
reporter for the London Times, in describing
the scene, says
$50 greatly relieved was the reverend gentle
msn by the confession, that he rushed from the
scaiIold exc aiming, Thank God Thank Cod
and sank down in chair, compile ely exhausted
by bis action. After Tet toyeriug, he repeated IN
j., gil IA, In the presence OF the sher.nS and
uudetsherifis, and the representatives OF the
newspaper press, of whom tuoro were four, what
had Just passed between him and the convict
precisely as It bad been rc.aed above
As the case stands the weight Of probability
is certainly against the hypothesis Of Null
LER's innocence. And yet the human mind
is so prone not to sympathize with crime, but
to lean to the side and cling to the hope Of
innocence, in every case of alleged crime in
which there is a loop to hang doubt on, that
it is not at all surprising that the execution of
MULLER, under the remarkable circum-
stances that attended it, will long
be recalled with painful sense Of misgiying
as to his guilt. There is no likelihood, of
course, that if a mistake was made in the YER
dict, and the wrong man made to suffer for
the murder of Mr.. BRIGGS, the fact will ever
be discovered, though it has happened repeat
edly that men ON their death-beds have con-
fessed to the commission of crimes for which
guiltless persons have beeL punished. Should
it, however, at any time hereafter be disclosed
that MULLER did not commit the murder,
but was only connected with it by a
remarkable concatenation of accidental coin
cidences which fixes the guilt upon him,
while screening the real criminal even from
suspicion, the revelation would come too late
for his benefit, but not too late to teach courts
and juries a most valuable practical lesson.
1t is true that Justice is often defeated by the
overweening compassion and doubts Of her
ministers. Yet it is nevertheless sound and
wholesome rule, that many guilty persons had
better escape than that one innocent person
should suffer- and though jury may even
wise and humane to grant a reprieve where
there is a rational doubt of guilt after con-
viction.