Evening star., 1865-10-19

SQa1er, one Oh t0e N1hDSsecs. pTONcu NC Wes IN
the neighborhood, and that Of the two who at
| tempted to prove alibi, Boswell, was so
| drunk that he could not fix the time, and that
| The other, Thomas Donohue, now in Jail, could
| not be belle we'd, he testifying that Lusoy was
| At home in his yard about six o'clock, but be-
\ fore dark, on Thanksgiving day, when the
| sun went down that day AZ 81 minutes past
four.
He proceeded to show how the blood could
be accounted for on his hands and cost, and
reIerred 70 his statements concerning IL, con-
tending that his statements went TO prove him
me guilty man. Ii he knew that he had been
| butchering he would also know where he haA
been, and could have proved il. Another sus-
pictous circumstance was his failure to let the
| party in. II he had committed no offense he
| would have come down, seeking an in yestiga-
| ton. The mud must be considered, and IL il was
| proven that the mud on the child's shoe and
| tnat on tne prisoners coat were the same, then
Mr.. Phillips spoke of his appearance in the
cause, and said he supposed the motives of
| Messrs. Wise and Allen would be impugned
but whatever might be said Of them they had
done good service before, and il the prisoner
l was the guilty man and was consigned to pun
| ishmant they would be entitled TO the thanks of
| the cornrnunity There was also the confes-
sion Of the accused, ffied TO by Rodgers, who
| he defended Watson says the accused said
They don't know who did IT and never viii" !"
| and he contended that that was enough con-
fession for him.
Mr.. Phillips closed at l1.45, and was fol-
lowed by Mr.. Fendall, for the accused. The
n
voting offence, and as had been said by one, q
| mind could not realize that il had been COM
| mitted by human being As the offence was
| OF magnitude, they should require the
greater proof. Does the accused appear like q
| guilty mani He is a citizen, a husband and q
| father. Mr.. Wood, known TO the jury, had his
suspicious aroused, arrests him, takes him to
the Old Capitol, keeps him ten days, then ne is
| taken before Judge Fisher and after eleven
days in Jail is discharged
After tins the Corporation offers q reward,
L but the bill is not signed. and these gpntlpman
ascertaining that il was a law, by the Mayor
not having returned the bill to the Council, set
themselves to work to earn this reward. Then
| they go to Albany, look up these convicts,
| bring them here. II this man is found guilty il
| will be owing to them, and if innocent they
| would have the pleasing satisfaction of know
ing the blood of the accused rests on them
Mr.. Fendall proceeded to review the evil
dence, contending, first, that the evidence a. TO
| cient, the only witness being the coIored
woman, w no may have been mistaken, and the
little girl Donaldson, in his opinion not a COM
petent witness. They also attempted TO prove
that the accused attempted to perpetrate the
| same felony afterwards committed on the per-
son OF the little girl Ingle, but failed, and the
| was in broad daylight and then, again, the
witness did not agree TO the dress of the per-
son described: The man Donaldson's testi-
he saw the prisoner in his yard about
| sundown that day. The law says they
| must give the prisoner the benefit Of all
L
| blood on the coat, shirt and pants; and Mr..
| Wood had never had the latter in possession,
| and but two Of the witnesses ever saw the
| pants. The shirt and coat had been subjected
| TO an analysis, but the pants were not. Mrs
| Lusby had explained how the pants came At
| Lusby's house.
| being brought here from Albany 10 testify
| against a man being tried for his life, and
said ii showed what straits the Government
had been driven to. He then analyzed their
eOntpndiuV that ma ma Iii N
statement like they testified to would be a fool
Could they be believed!
The chemist says the stains on his shirt WAS
blood The prisoner says IL came from his
wife. The prosecution meet this by saying the
block on his wifes garments was fresh, but 1t
was not proved that il was all fresh.
Mr.. Fendall closed by urging the jury TO give
the verdict OF acquittal, as his client was
titled TO.
Mr.. Bradley, for the prisoner, followed. re-
ferring first TO the appeals made by the counsel
to the feelings of the jury, which he con-
demned. The ohense was one less than hu-
mana little innocent lamb butchered to graft
| fy the fiendish lust. They had nothing to do
with the atrocity Ct the act, but with the proof,
and the proof alone. They had been selected
| from 200 men TO decide the case, upon the evil
| dence alone, and he made no appeal for the
prisoner no mercy for him, but for them to ap-
| ply the evidence to the case If he is guilty let
| him be bound hand and foot and taken TO the
| gibbet, where his bones may whiten after the
| the birds have taken the flesh.
The grand question in the case was the iden-
| tty OF the party committing the act. What do
we have in the case-two convicts, one jail
| bird. one detective, Mr.. Wood, the emissary of
the Government, with his satellites, a colored
| I"dy who went southwest when going west,
and others, and not of them saw the ac-
cused on that day. On the other side there
was not q witness who did not know the pris-
oner, nearly all of them having seen him that
day; and the speaker (reading their names)
asked them to weigh them well.
Among other reasons the crime was attrib-
uted 10 the prisoner was because he was seen
II the neigh bOrlOCd and hp IN
lyZe the testimony of the witnesses as to his
being near the place. Mrs. Savoy testifes to
seeing the prisoner, and then says she never
saw him again. Watkins and Taylor, for the
defense, testify they saw a man sit on the white
stone at the corner, but could not identify the
prisoner with that person.
The prosecution offered TO prove that the
prisoner attempted 10 commit the same offence
on little Emma lngle, but had failed in this
Their object being to prove that the prisoner
had horrible propensity for little children.
The testimony OF the little girl Ingle was in
consistent. George Shafer saw HIM with
fiat glazed cap, and so does Boswell, Perkins,
crime was committed.
The next phase Of the case is blood and for
eight long months they have been getting up
this case and are seeking to prove the prisoner
at the bar the guilty one. They undertook to
show that the blood marks was the blood of
Octavia Rousseau. Had they done so! Mr.
Bradley spoke of the arrest by Mr. Wood and
his emissaries, and stated that the prisoner
knew them at the time, and proceeded TO COM
making the arrest Mr.. Wood testified TO the
conversation with the prisoner IN which
the accused attributed the blood on his
Clothes to butchering or from his nose having
been bleeding The prisoner at the time was
under the influence Of fear, and he asked what
value shoald be put on this testimony, given
only by VIM. F. Wood, who stated he did not
"slt in pew two feet by eight every SUNDAY
and look at a man in the pulpit, and go about
the rest OF the week as he pleases,' and was
not supported by others.
He next referred to RODGERS and WatOo,
who were brought from the Penitentiary The
law was that competency can be established
by pardon after the party has served out his
term in State prison, but then his statements
should not be taken unless substantiated by
other witnesses. Why these witnesses, AIex-
ander included did not give the same testimo.
ny, and it could not agree.
The government should establish without q
reasonable doubt that the stains were blood
stains, and the blood was that OF Octavie Rous-
seaui but they could not prove that it was
human blood, and he referred to the report of
Dr. Erni in support.
Mr.. Bradley spoke Of a number Of soldiers
hQtxa bnr,t thA lAx~D ~,