The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1869-01-02

tle oooL were locked, two burglars could not have
behind them, and left the key inside.
The defence, anticipating this objection TO AIT.
door unOcfsd without making any SSr noise Use
They tell us that they actusliy tried this expert
ment, and although the persons on the step and
gently handled, still the noise was not heard.
On the other hand, Detective Wsrnook and
Messrs. stevens and Atkinson state that the nOso
You must weigh these conflicts of the testimony.
hear the turning Of a key In lock, this DOES not
prove that It cannot be heard by others. But, as
psrently trinipg circumstance, you Will carefally
consider all that has been said upon this subject
II you fnd that the noise of unlocking the door
could not have been heard BY Sarah Campbell,
then you WILL Of course, reject that )rtion Of her
statement that the defendant unlocked The door op,
you will have the right to place the fact that the
door was locked into the scale against Altgelts
DO you believe Altgelt, and that on the night in
question he saw two men leave Mrs. Hill,s front
gary would be strengthened or established. If you
90 not believe him, do you hnd from the eircum-
other fact you can recall, that the premises we're
quy, you muet weigh all the just inferences bear
Ing upon this point, as derived not only from the
bat also from the position OF the body of Mrs. Hill
when found. 1t is not disputed that che was dis
that che must have been pushed or thrown out Of
the back window.
reasonable to suppose that burglar .couid tcase the
moments, precious for the purposes of escape bV car
rying the body into the back room, raising the ptn;
dotu and hToping IL into the yGrd2 1t is argued
that this would not only needlessy prolong his
stay upon the scene of his crime, but wood, BY the
noise necessarily created attract the attention OF
some inmate of the house. 1t is also contended that
the disposition of the body not only disprovos the
conclu sion that the murder must have been com
mitted by some person residing In the house, and
anxious to conceal the crime or to give 1t the ap
1t is for the jury, them to take a careful review
| of the whole case at this point
In support of the allegations Of burglary, con-
slider the open back doors, the evidence of Algelt
and other facts YOU can sGa condition ~
marks, footprints or disturbance; the presence of
neighbours and others outside.
Incidental to this point is the consideration of
Preparation of the crime. The Commonwealth
alleges that the murder was committed with the
| poker, which has been exhibited to you.
sarah Campbell says that 1t looks like the kltch.
en- poker used in that house, and that 1t usual
RPs Sat tta5gn f SH pco L up IN 6a
yard; Mr.. f.. A. Morrell corroborates this and
says he picked It up lying In the blood or Just along
feet from the screen and the poker might have been
three inches further. A portion of 1t laid Ia the
ard brought 1t In and some one said, This the
| thing that did the deed.' This remark, as un.
derstand the evidence, made in the presence of
and whether tho prisoner made any reply;
| Dr. Shapleigh tells US that this poker might have
caused all the wounds he saw except the fractures
He also tells US that q human gray hair was at.
tached to It, and that the hair of the deceased
! gray. DR.. Lewis confirms this statement as to the
presence of the hair, and adds that he also found
stains Of blood. From ali this evidence the Dom
mOnwealth argues that the poker was tho instru-
On the other side, Doctors Gross, Maury, Mitch.
ell, Thomas, and Psine have been called to sup
Gus the wsspon Some Of them ae
of opinion that the wounds could not have been In
that If the poker had boen used for such purpose
1t would have been bent or battered.
You will remember that 1t is not contended by
the Commonwealth that the poker caused the
heavy fractures described to you. 1t is concsded
that they were produced by the fall from the Sec
You may inquire on this point, If the poker were
not the weapon, how came 1t that the gray hair
tached to the iron2 Would they adhere simply
because the head Of the deceaae and her cap were
go, would person ir rhicting the wounds with some
other instrument take the poker from the kitchen
and put 1t near or under the corpsea You are to
Try this case by your common. sense views Of the
testimony.
perts produced by the defendant Is entitled to great
consideration and respect, but the mere opinions
substantial fact reliably established and carefully
| found.
We have thus far considered three OF the links OF
First That this was murder, and not suicide
Second. That 1t was not committed by any person
upla wfully entering the premises.
Third. That the poker was tho weapon employed
| in the perIetration OF the offence.
Let us proceed to take up the other allegations OF
| the Commonwealth, Having exhibited their theory
upon the points already noticed, they now ask you
| the commission of this offence.
| i need hardly remind you here of the Importance
of this inquiry All the other matters are of great
| them
therefore, keep steadily in view all the presump-
tions in his favor, and all the rules governing a
case of circumstantial evidence, to which have
already called your attention.
1t is contended that the blood stains establish the
DEFENDANTS guilt. They may be divided into two
classes The spots upon the defendants clothes,
and the other marks Of blood.
Referring to the last first In order, the witnesses
say that In the sitting room there was q large poo
on the floor, and an arc OF blood spots on the walls
must have been littlo open. They also describe
tracks of blood by drippnss, from the sofa through
the folding doors to the window, smear of blood
upon the lower part OF the SASH and on the outside
of the building blood had also flowed or fallen or
piece Of carpet hich ran along near the sota and
chair near the sofa was spotted with blood. Traces
of blood were also found on the door knobs Some
or all of these are described to you by DR.: Shap
leigh, Jno. p. Montgomery. Esq, and Messrs.
Doster, Leidy, Howard Morrell, and Warnock.
Detective Wsrnock also describes spot on the
inside knob, which, according to his statement,
( appeared to be a drop of blood, the 'centre O.
which had been cleaned out, but the outlines were
peIfect.n This apparent cleaning Of the spot may
have been caused by the hands OF visitors to the
house on the night of the murder. The Same wit.
ness describes specks of blood on the marble tor
table, and on the glass Of the gas. burner Hesayi
try, and smother drop on the upper part Of blan.
| ket on the bed In defendant's room.
Dr. Lewis informs you that the spots on the blan
ket oil CLOTH and door. knobs we're blood. No trace
| nFh hInod mn md hXdFant N