Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1870-12-07

the wrapper off and escapes from him. She
PUSHES into the next room and hasps the door.
He then turns and follows his other victim
DO you suppose her hands were still at that
time! Nos the blood must have been letting
from them, there can be no doubt about that,
and his hands sprlnging to and fro-the blood
Of his wife whom he loved so tenderly! He
pursues Mr.. Latin at his back door, inst
opening it-and then he drives the knife into
his neck inficting the fatal wound, following
him into his own shop, and there is seen by
one witness with uplifted hand. And the evil
dence in this case so far rs we have been able
to present, shows this to be the case.
Is there one thing inconsistent with that
story? Not one scntilla of evidence. 1t is
consistent with everything; it is the truth
about that fatal deed But not wheth-
you take that statement, or whether you
believe this man upon the stand as he tells
you his story. Now, before l speak of that,
let me tell you that he has placed himself be-
You'd fear of contradiction before he went up
on that stand. All the other witnesses of
that fatal deed are barred by his knife and by
the law of The land for his protection. He
had clear field TO himself, but he dare not be
trusted with that, and so a convenient frenzy
obscures his recollection. man can say
II don't know" Il don't recollect," Il
don't remember" and you cannot touch
him he is only to stick to that story and
how can you show any Inconsistency in his
narrative! 1t is impossible, and so he does
not remember. But you will recollect
that although he told you he didn't remember;
yet he remembers something. He remembers
that that man laid his hat upon the table. lie
was under the bed and you remember how
that valance came to the floor? He was I'M
der the bed and yet he knew that that man
put his hat upon the table.
Mr.. Libby.-I protest against that He ex-
pressly stated that he did not see him put his
hat upon the table.
Mr. Reed.-He said that he thought by his
motions,-l think those were his words, that
he did. Under that bed and under those cir
cumstances he couldn't see motions on the pat
OF the man about laying his hat upon the
table. Tie motions he would make would be
simply motion of the upper part of his body
Farther then the only light that he had, and
they have appealed TO your almanacs to
show that it was a dark nght-a night without
moon-the only light that he had must have
come through the sitting door, and no
other way. But we pass that by.
And now why did he have that hat on the
table! Because while it might be supposed
that a jury could have man in bed with his
wife, ia perfect condition-his DOTS and
clothes all on, yet TO have him with his hat
on would be to ncopgruous altogether. And
after he tells you that when he sprang out
from the bed the man made a rush for his hat,
and that they struggled together in that man
ner. But he tells you in his direct exami-
nation that he remembers nothing about it.
He tells you several times during this testi-
mony that he does not recolect what occurred
and yet you remember went on with him and
he got interested in his New York fe
with his wife, and | came back upon him WITH
out giving him chance for preparation, and
he says in answer TO repeated questions, that
the blow in Lafiin's neck was struck by that
bed Now if he didn't recollect, why did he
happen to say thats
Now let Us take his story. Let us take the
only defence, which by his own ingenuity he
could present after hearing all the testimony
which should clear him. He started from
Augusta his suspicious being aroused by his
wife, and now let me say here after man
has turned his wife out of door-told her he
would no longer live with her-what right has
he to 90 near her. You may talk about his
''tenderly loving her, but when man tells
his wife to 20, and tears her raiment in pieces
what business has he with her further. lie
starts down, his suspicious aroused he
says, by the interview which he had wi b
her at the cars What that interview vas
he alone tells you. He alone gives II Q
grounds and reasons, for his suspicion
lie goes down there armed; now what toi !!
You are asked to believe that he went down
there entirely tor the purpose OF seeing il he
had proper grounds for suspicion, intending,
/ suppose they would have you infer, after
he had satisfied himself, to come quietly
home. He did not know that jealousy is the
rage of man" He forgot that he was excita-
bic, and that his jealousy might lead him to
commit some act of violence. No, he did not
forget it. He went over there for purpose,
and prepared for that purpose. According 10
his own story he sat there waiting for II result.
Did he come down to protect his home,
marital relationship save his wife from de-
structon? No! He went there to see her in
disgrace, to wait until the disgrace was pre-
sented Would a husband who loved his wife
tendery, and thought that she was to be led
astray would he have waited? No; he
would have pushed from her the fearful
act--he would have rescued her, not wanted
to see it consumated here. He tells you that
as he went along there he took Oft his clothes.
| understood that he stood at the door and
took off his clothes, but on cross-eXamination
he stated that he took them off at the barn.
lie says that when his wife put the shutters
to, he knew she would turn the bolt. As she
was turning the bolt-an instantaneous action
almost-and yet according to one of his state
ments he had time to take off his shoes and
his coat, and walked up to that door and
crept in and under the bed. Mark you it was
a low one, he says so himself for his own pur-
pose He could not rush in there he had to go
IN with some sort of care as not to disturb
his wife, and then post himself under the bed
What for! For the purpose OF finding man,
an adulterer, with his wife. That must be his
own statement. Now l tell you as a rule of
law--and make no doubt that it cannot be
controv erted-that where provocaton is an
excuse, that where provocation is a justifca-
ton, it man comes deliberately forth and
seeks it, he is out of the pale of the law. If
a man comes deliberately armed where his
nose is to be pulled, and he knows it, the
provocaton is no justification whatever.
Think of a man putting himself in such
position, for an innocent purpose, it has been
said to you here. DO you suppose that man
didn't know his own disposition? Doyou sup
pose that these repeated acts were induced, as
he says, by jealousy? DO you suppose he didn't
know what would be the result il he found any
! one there2 OF course he did According to
his own story he is guilty of lawful murder,
and no frenzy can save him.
mass now gentlemen, to the consideration