The Portland daily press., 1874-01-31

JANUARY CRIMINAL TERM, 1874 sYMoNDs j., PRE-
SIDING.
FR1pAY.-State VS.. Catherine Waller alias Carrie
M. Waite.
Cha,les E. Somerby, book-keeper at the Canal
Bank, was called as an expert in handwriting. and
asked to compare three lots of letters-one package
received by John Waller from his wife in Portland;
four others written in red ink and addressed to Wall
er since suspicion fastened upon Mrs. Waite, and
bearing different signature; and two acknowledge
ed to be Mrs. Waites. Mr.. Somerby testified that
in his opinion the letters all written by the
hand but the writing disguised in the four
written in red ink.
Mrs. Jennie Spear, testified that she met the
spondent in Portland in 1869; she then went by the
name of Kate Wallace, and called on Miss Blakeley
with some young women whose acquaintance she
had made board of the Carlotta; said her father
was descendant of Sir William Wallace; James
Spear, now witnesses husband was afterward pay
ing attention to Kate Wallace after he broke the en-
gagement n1S7O she disappeared ;saw her next at At
lantic Lodge, and her husband said she then called
herself Carrie M. Kent; Kate Walace's hair was
dark brown; Mrs. waite's seems to be black; wit
then approached the prisoner and repeated this
statement about the variation in the color of the
hair, but said she had doubt respondent was
Kate Wallace.
Mr.. Austin Edgerly, of Cape Elizabeth, was in
spector of customs in Portland in 1862 and engaged
this respondent, under the name of Kate Wallace, as
servant, board of the Carlotta, her arrival in
Portland; she was poorly dressed; remained in his
family until December, and used to call there until
the next May; has not seen her SINCE but is satisfied
of identity, though her hair is darker than for
merry when she hrst camewlthess SAID ,ner mar was
ABOUT tne ceior Oh TINS little grfs-pohting 10 carrie
Waller.
WI oonh T. o"0n Vi Iortiahu was "a lieu next,
u saiu ne iau oeei hii uiessei ioi II years, anu
""' - won INC .'"N"iao'ui0 VI WIGS ""U 'io
piu ~ go. - - .. nan
~ oo. 1A.''s' ,.on eaoos.eu INC pi''onei
" Ae- nav '''N "'io" 'ne "''ne'' " eoo noi
mani
noi oouh'ei o'''0'eu' oi INC sio"h, INA. Ho ue-
Aeno0 Ia. 'e' o'e" 'oc ~ "" 'Ao p-'" o-"' VIZ wv
VI 'ne p'ioo"'i Na'i u'ie :" NV" '.0 uo'o
gwen Wy INC so'oi nhon. "'."eo'oS' anu ~ "Do.o W
time to introduce rebuttng testimony wnen that plea
was onered
The court sustained the objection,and the evidence
at this st ige OF the case, was ruled out.
The Rev. Mr.. Wright of the st. Lawrence street
(CongregationaD church, testified that he married
she defendant, Catherine M. Kent to Edward +.
waite, April "a, 1875 in the forenoon.
Inc county Attorney SAID here the testimony Tor
'ne prosecution closed The counsel for the defence
asAou u INC letters had been introduced as part OF
'ne 'ne soenographer, referring to his re-
poi'' sa,u my nau no'' Inc county Attorney then
,o'o1 " - s;n pu. H. Inc counsel Tor defence
INCL 'ou o.. "al Aen' I'LL IL p m
1ne so'oihnieno 'ee.'o"S amounts to this: The
witnesses 10, .1.A"a,.., .lp oy no spec
la MAJ 40 ~. ~ HESITATION as
no "o.a, one' 81 70 90 Ie, 40 Oa.n-
elme acheiiAle' ai'er ma,uo '"e =, Ionn "aiier
anu oeners as hate "aiiaoe' O".ii0 ~ i>on'' anu
hhaiiy tne Wle OF EDWARD L. "hte' Aho ihd mage