The Morning herald., 1875-09-11
CHARLIE ROSS.
The Trial Of WesterveIt.

oNER's. APPEARANCE THE COMMON
WEALTH CoNcLUDEs-THE PRISONERS 3
WIFE AS wITNEss-scENEs- AND IN
cIDENTs, sc. .,' ,..u .Oa..
With each SUE ceeding day the interest in
this trial increases, and on yesterday the
crowd that assembled in the court room to
hear the proceedings was greater than on
any preceding day. The evidence which has
been elected within the past day or so has
evidently created some alarm iu the prison.
er, and his face wears an expression of
painful anxiety. His wife and children
who have been with him every day since the
trial begun, were present, and seemed to
be under subdued influence. At the open
ing of court yesterday morning, Mr.. Hagert
announced to the court that the Common
wealth rested, which was received by the
spectators with some surprise, as they had
not expected the conclusion so soon. And
when Mr.. Eord arose to address the jury for
the defence, breathless silence ensued.
He claimed f or his client not mercy but jus
tice, and urged the jury to decided the case
entirely on It's merits and the evidence pro-
duced. The speaker appeared as the un-
paid counsel ofsa poor and innocent man,
who, for five months, has been eagerly wait
ing for this trial that his innocence might
be established. This man had not the pow
erful aid of wealth and friends to enable
him to ransack New York and bring witness
ses from afar. If that were possible it
would be easy to prove where he was and
what he was dong at all the dates that had
been cited in the evidence against him. 1t
had been the purpose of counsel to indro-
duce no testimony at all, but their client de-
manded, as an act of justice, that he and
his wife should be allowed to give their
statements under the solemn Obligation of
the oath, and tLat other testimony tending
to establish his innocence should be intro
duced. The testimony would be necessarily
brief, but it would have the weight of truth.
During the address of Mr.. Ford, Mrs.
Westervelt and her little daughter, wept
freely, and the prisoner himself seemed con-
siderably affected.
Mrs. Mary OLeary was the first witness
called for the defense, and testified that she
lived on Monroe street in Philadelphia. She
knew Wcstervclt and his sister, Mrs.
Mosher (or Henderson). Her evidence re-
lated to the dates at which they were in hel
house and neighborhood. Westervelt har.
boarded next door to her, but left in thd
spring, and she saw no more of him unite
the following August, the Saturday before
Mrs. Henderson left for New York.
TIE next witness was Miss Kate Morgan.
She went to live with Mrs. Henderson
(Mosher) three or four days before her con-
finement, the 10th of July, and remained
with her until see went to New York, on
the 10Th of August, and she never saw Wes-
tervelt until the Saturday before Mrs.
Mosher went to New York. That was the
last she saw of him until she saw him in
the courtroom. She saw no one with her
when she went to the depot except the
children. An anonymous feature in the do
mestic life of Mosher was developed in the
course of this witness testimony.
It is almost certainty that Mosher, the
father of "thc children" mentioned by wit
ness, was the stealer of Charlie Ross, the
man who, with unexampled cruelty, disre-
garded utterly the sentiment of parental
love where others were concerned, and by
his acts gave the world right to suppose
that he did.not know what love and tender
ness meant; yet his own children had pet
names in the household, and his boy Charlie
was known altogether at home by the name
of "Lovey." On cross-examination this
witness testified to seeing Henderson and
Clark (Mosher and Douglass) at the house
with Mrs. Mosher the day before her con-
fnement.
Mrs. McElroy was called and gave evil
dence in cOrrobOratiOn of that given by the
two preceding witnesses. Her testimony,
like theirs, related to Westervelt's presence
in Philadelphia in July.
The prisoners wife was the next witness
called, and as she took the stand the ex
preston of anxiety on her face was greatly
and she waited with no small
1egree of emotion for the questioning to
commence. There was lull in the proce II
ngs for few moments, a consultation
among counsel on both sides, and then Mr..
Hagert arose and expressed an objection to
The examination Of the witness. She was
The wife Of the prisoner, and in the case of
man charged with misdemeanor the wife
If the man is disqualified as witness. The
Act of Assembly permitting defendant to
estify in his own behalf make him witness
If him only at his own request, npd unless
le has requested to be examined, his wife's
disability is not removed. Therefore he de-
red to know whether the defendant was to
'e called as witness If 90, he made mol
objection to the testimony of the wife being
AIKEN. Otherwise he did object.
The witness was then sworn, and testified
Is follows: ! reside at No. 70 Montgomery
treet, New York; I was married to int
'risoner in New York in Wallet Street
dethodist Church, on the Goth of Septem-
er, 1868; have had three children; two are
ow living and are now in court; prior to
anuary, 1874, ]. resided at No. II Willett
treet, New York city; my husband was a
olice officer then'in The Tenth precinct: was
ppointed August 5, 1872; came here once
n visit to see Mr.. Mosher about Septem-
er 8, 1878, and Mrs. Mosher's husband was
utting up a preparation to kill moths, and
ther insects, and he used to sell 1t in Balti- |
lore and around the neighborhood, Mosher
nd my husband were not companions; they {
ere not together much while we were in the i,
o,1c CO II, 1OOrna Of raat. Whau thay In {