The Kenosha telegraph. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1860-1888, 1876-06-15

easily be remembered by many readers.
It may be said that the trial was one Of
the most interesting in British judicial
annals. Madeleine Smith had engaged
herself to young Frenchman named
L'Angelier. 1t was clearly proved that
she was tired of him, and was anxious
to disentangle herself from the connec-
ton. But L'Angelier chung to her and
refused to be rebufed. There is no
doubt that on several occasions, just pre-
vious to his visits, she had purchased
poison, or that, always after these visits,
he was seized with severe illness. On
the 18th of March, Madeleine returned
to her house In Glasgow, after a brief
visit to some friends. The next day she
purchased some arsenic, to kill rats
with, as she said. The arsenic bought,
the next thing she did was to write to
L'Angelier, inviting him to tea on the
evening of the 18th. He happened to
be out of town, and did not, therefore,
| get the note until it was too late to &C
cept the invitation. She wrote again on
the 21st, urging him to come the next
evening, and saying: "I waited for you,
but you came not. I shall wait again
tomorrow night, same time and arrange
ment." This Dote L'Angeler received.
So far the proof was clear. It was also
in evidence that he started from his
lodgings in excellent health on Sunday
evening, and that he sauntered in the dl-
rection of Madeleine's house this was
at 9 o'clock. Twenty minutes later he
called on friend who lived but short
distance from her residence. Here the
evidence utterly failed, and left blank
for four hours and half. At 2 in the
morning, L'Angelier was found at his
own door, writhing and speeches. and
in few hours he was dead. The autop-
sy betrayed large quantity of arsenie in
his body. But between twenty minutes
pas 8 and 2, no human being could de-
pose to having laid eyes on him. Made
leine herself denied that she saw him at
all that night nor was the slightest
proof forthcoming that she did. She
was put on Trial for the murder LAnge-
lier and, altogether, her desire to get
rid of him-that is, a motive her pur-
chase of arsenic-that is, possession of
an instrument similar to that which was
found to have been fatal and her notes
of invitation that is fact from which a
strong probability of a meeting between
them that nigh was established-were
fully proved, the absence of all proof OF
actual opportunity to commit the deed
availed to save the prisoner 'slife. She said,
in effect &C. was at my house, and can
prove it he was not there, for defy
you to prove it. Therefore, have an
alibi." The Scotch verdict of "not
proven" set her free, but did not clear
her of the stain of deep suspicion.
The story of the Danish pastor, Soren
Qvist, is one of the most touchingly
tragic in judicial records and once more
exemplifes Paul Fevals complaint that
Justice is sometimes too quick to seize
upon appearances, and neglect the sup
position of fabricated evidence. Soren
was clergyman of middle age, settled
over a small primitive parish in Jutland.
Pure and irreproachable in character,
genial, generous and devout, he was
cursed with q fiery, ungovernable tenn
per yet he was universally revered !;
and varied his pastoral cares, as is not
infrequent in Scandinavian countries, by
cult;vating q modest farm. He had
daughter, gentle and comely. A farmer
in q neighboring village, one Morten
Bruins, well off, but Of bad reputation,
|
was rejected both by her and by the
pastor. Soon after, a brother of his,
Niels Bruins, entered the pastors service
as Farmland. Niels was lazy, impru-
dent and quarrelsome, and frequent alter
cations occurred between him and his
master One day Soren found the man
idling in the garden. A quarrel ensued,
when the pastor, his hot temper getting
the better of him, struck Niels several
times with spade, saying, "Ill beat
thee, dog, until thou lest dead at my
feet" The man then jumped up and
ran off into the woods, and was not seen
again. The rejected sutton, Morton,
after his brother had thus mysterioUsly
disappeared, boldly charged the pastor
with the crime, and offered to produce
convincing proofs of the fact. Soren
was, therefore, arraigned, when the fol-
lowing evidence was arrayed against him:
A man testified that on the night after the
quarrel he saw the parson, In his green
dressing-gown and white night-cap, dig
ging hard in the garden. It was also
proved that, search having been made
in the garden, a body had been un-
earthed, undoubtedly that of Niels, with
clothes and earrings upon it. A servant
girl testified not only to having heard
Soren repeatedly threaten to kill Niels,
but to having seen the parson go out
into the garden on the fatal night in his
green dressing gown and night-cap. Still
stronger evidence was produced to the
effect that the parson had been seen in
his green dressing gown and night-cap,
carrying heavy sack from the wood near
by into the garden. The chain of evi
dence was apparently complete against
Soren and the poor parson now sealed
his own fate by declaring that he be-
lieved he had killed Niels though uncon-
sciously. He stated that he was wont to
talk in his sleep. He had found texts,
xur.i+tnn sermons and visited his church