The Rutland daily globe. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1873-1877, 1874-10-05

taken for the other by those who are init
mate with them. Cases of mistaken iden-
tity were read of much interest.
But few persons can Judge of identity of
handwriting. There Is an infinite variety
OF 1t, and there is SO many who write Just
alike that there is great chance for mistake.
Mr.. Nicholson pointed out the contrast be-
tween the writing submitted In this case.
That there was resemblance does not
prove anything. Mr.. Rowell did not in
cludc in his testimony the handwriting of
John p. Phair. This testimony docs not
amount to anything and needs no discus.
sion. The patent note case has been re-
ferred to, and hope some such case has
come under your notice. SOM men write
different hands at different times, and there
are men in this bar who write so nearly
alike it is very noticeable.
There is one test made to you last night
worth everything That is if this man was
the guilty one he never would have given
them the benefit of that signature. That is
a test they cannot meet or explain. That
man If he was guilty was insane when he
wrote that name. There is evidence enough
to raise a reasonable doubt in your minds
as to the guilt of the prisoner. They claim
he Is not fool. As you look at the sigma
lures you will find decided difference
Let me read some instances of liability of
error in identifying handwriting. Several
instances were read by the counsel.
1t is proved that the prisoner was at the
Berwick House at quarter past four on
Friday morning; shown that he was at
breakfast at the depot soon after and went
off on the train. 1t is proved that it is over a
mile from Mrs. Freezes house to the Ber-
wick House, and consequently if this man
was there he must have come from there
| by half-past three, three full hours before
the fire broke out. 1t may not be possible
that it had smoldered there all that time;
but you are not trying this case in the pos
| sbilites. Remember the combustible part
of bed was first found on fire. We are
not driven only to raise reasonable doubt
in your minds as to the guilt of this man.
That is a section of the town where men
| who do work up here live, and they get up
early. If there had been any evidence be-
| fore it would have been discovered. The
| bed is found on fre.-the most inflammable
material in the house. Is there not a
| reasonable doubt that this man set that on
| fire three hours before All the facts must
| be consistent IN order to find verdict of
| guilty. Another thing is that he was in
Providence when they say he was in
Boston. There is evidence to show he was
in Providence. He left here with de-
| sign to go there. He went to Providence
| depot and undoubtedly went to Providence
If so he was not at the Adams House, was
not the man L. F. Smith and did not pawn
those goods. If he got all that money on
those goods what has become of it -? They
have sworn on the part of the state that
they have exhausted every effort to find
any money anywhere. They have to re-
sort to the absurd theory that he threw
away the money. This is too absurd for
argument. lie would not throw it away
until some suspicion was attached to him.
Why should he commit the crime !? The
only motive they say was to get the money
and they now say he threw it away. When
shown the Boston Journal would he not
have taken that opportunity and not have
come back here They undertake to prove
that be had wallet on him. There is a
total failure to prove any such thing. The
boy don't pretend to say he had wallet.
1t is utterly impossible TO find that he had
wallet and threw it away. All these
things show he could not have been the
man. E. f. Smith had money and pawn
tickets, this man had neither. My colleague
alluded to the fact that no blood was
found. The theory of the states attorney
is not worthy of consideration. That he
should be in state of nudity to commit
such crime in house where he is ant to
be surprised at any time of day or night.
DIR. Allen says it is possible that the crime
might have been committed and no blood
have been found upon the person commit
ing the deed. Then there is no weapon
found upon him or about the premises, not
only that but there is not a trinket belong.
ing to her found upon him. If he loaded
himself down with her spoils something
must have been found up IN him.
We explain this razor business the more
fully. We show you by Mr.. Williams tes-
timony that she had razor of her own.
Not an unusual thing to find a razor case
in her trunk, and we find barber shaved
him all the time of his being there. He
undertakes to sneer down his testimony and
set him off against Dora Wilson you will
remember that she told you that the place
was reputable place. You knew that she
lied and that it was disreputable house,
and she was there because it was such a
place. The fact of all these instruments is
no evidence of guilt on the part of the pris-
oner. 1t amounts to nothing whether those
instruments were found in one position or
another in the rooms, and either way 1t in
no way points to the prisoner. This knife
is a dissecting Knife and the prisoner is not
likely TO have had ii. The States Attorney
says it is evident that the prisoner made
false aud contradictory statements, but
have they proved any such theory? They
must make the proof positive beyond
reasonable doubt; they have failed to con-
tradict his statements as a whole, or to
show that he lied when he said he got the
shirt at Vergennes. The testimony is pro-
bable that he was there and it was ex-
changed by another clerk who was not
brought here. But how does it appear
that the shirt has disappeared That fact
is enough to show suspicion about it. FIX
changes are frequent in such cases and
dealers get goods marked by others than