Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1868-01-08
. Ar RRIClD =.
{ o. se5 lie ---1a--f5 & saat
r. .5a ar - a. ssu.F e
The Schnepf Murder Case
Trial of the Case in the Co
lumbia County Circuit,

(Continued from last issue.
PORTAGE Cry, Wis, Dec. II

}
At9 A, NJ, the court convened, Although
violent snow -storm,is raging. the court
room was we'll filed. -sv {.
CLOSING ARGUMENT FOR, THE STATE.
Mr. ishorn made the closing argument
for the state. He said the defence bad failed
TO present any theory, but had flown
about like shuttlecock first insisting on
'1he impossi iblity OF destroying the bodyin
the time claimed; then adopting the theory
hat Meyers had kiE!ed Schnepf and de-
slroyed the body; then again, claiming that
Schnepf was not dead, but on the contrary,
had been seen at Watertown by Mis- Knei-
sci. the butcher woman. The whole effort,
was to create .d0ut. ~ r 4--1
Mr.. Thorn commented severely upon
the attack made by the defence upon Mr.
Giles, the Sheriff 10 Jefferson county, aud
paid glowing tribute to the merits OF that
officer.
He carefully exmined the testimony in
10 its different bearings. He said 1t may
be that this case had something TO do with
the insanity of Meyers; but, if SO, it was
from consciousness of his being suspected
and no. of guilt. He cited two cases 10
which parties had committed suicide whose
innocence was beyond doubt. -
He said that tie best evidence that Mrs
Kue'zsl did not see Schuepfs ghost was
suggested By Judge Orton, that. no pra-
lent ghost on its, way to heaven, would go
through Wa.erown.
The pris ner ale, says his counsel Yes,
after having the bones of his dead father
Ii Id in his face, he did deat heartily. Thlsis
an evidence of guilt. No man without
heart as black as hel's midnight, could
have done 1t. 4.. -......-.st = .-.s
The circums apces that identify the body
are: 1t is ia evidence thai the deceased
was dressed on the day be was last seen IN
soldiers pants, a -woo;en shirt, boots and
hat, and that he wore his pants with sus
penders.
What have We to identify the body Of
the deceased BY? First. we have found
bones, which Drs. Spauding and Cody say
are human bones. Prof. Carr, OF the State
University, concurs with Drs. Spa ldlng aud
Cody upon the fact of theIr being humau
remains. Second, we find with these hu-
man bones, pants buttons, shoe nails, shirt
buttons, and suspender buckles, and every
,hipg else to indicate the dress that covered
the human bones found. .@ZslaE saf E4
| From this We must infer-aod not only
infer. but believe-t atthe person who was
consumed and burned OH that pile with the
human bones found had upon his body, at
| HE time Of burning, pants, shirt, ooots'
and suspenders, ustew hat Charles Schnepi,
the deceased, had ou. the, day he lett his
house for the field work. 49,. - .....
There is a stronger circumstance than
this. It is in proof that Charles Schnept,
he deceased, on the day he was last seen,
had on boots that turued over at the heel.
! If this is so, then one side OF the heel OF
boot would be lower than the other, and
he nails on one side would be shorter than
on the othei. II this be true, the Dals
found should vary in length. An inspec-
lion shows thatthev do vary 50 as to cor
respond with the fact Here, then, is az
Iother Circumstance which strongly ind1-
Gates the identity. There is auotheri CIR
eumstance of strong import, which IS this
1t is in pro f that Charles Schnepf, on. The
Iday of his decease, had 90 soldiers pants
and it is also in proof that soldiers pant
/ .+sre made. uniformly without strap ant
: buckle. behind. No pants buckle Wa
found, and this would indicate that th
person burned had pants wlthom strap an
buckle. Not only does this Indicate II
r out it is in proof that Charles -Schnept,
PANTS had DO buckle on. What, lbep, q
! these facts show ? Do they not sho
; clearly that the person burned upon tt
. pile was person dressed just as Charl
gtSchnepf was.--just as the prisoner at ii
G. bar says be was when he asserts that
y started for Watertown Have we o
hers an identification of every article
IS Charles Schnept's clothes; and dove M
. Itben. by the clothes Identify the body?
What. next have we? Its proof tt
Oi the suspenders worn by Charles Seine
id we're bought at the same time and We
Id like those worn by the prisoner. We II
~ that the buckles found In the ire are.
y, the same mark AS those on the suspend'
49,, worn by the prisoner, Here, then, is
% other fact to add to shoss that have alrea
IS, accumulated. An sh9se facts are bef'
N YOU, and are established By most ab'
daut proof. Are they not sufficient
In you to identity the remains of Chal
"a schnepf by? What more can you ask
GA But W hat further have we? Cha
60 lSchnepf and the prisoner were at "
IS. near the spot where the fragments OF
ut man remains were found. They W
lv. there at o'clock on the day he, was
seen, and he has naver been seen si'
Il The tools which he was at work
pri- 81 tat; - fat-tof tho
b "efo io"nu ~. .
where tue boues were found. Right