Ellsworth American., 1877-05-24


the prisoner. Is the wrong shirt produced
His statement i that the shirt produced
had been worn BY him since Monday noon
That week. As Bearing upon this point,
whether the shirt produced was the shirt
worn. you have eve witnesses who swear
th2t the prisoner wore during the week a
different shirt, "A darker shirt than the one
produced. and you have eve witnesses "a
the contrary. That the shirt prodncei was
not the shirt worn; YOU have the testimony
of the youngster, Small. who testified that
lie saw the prisoner and observed his shirt
at Trims during the week
You have the testimony OF Frank SSuu.
ders who saw him while they were lradiu,
butts at Trims; while he was upon the
load of straw at his brothers aud perhaps
at some other places.
You have the testimony If John W. Har-
riman. the elderly gentleman. who swcars
that he thinks il Is not the shirt. that the
shirt which he wore during the week on,
there. was darker shirt
lou have heard the comments OF the
defense upon this testimony; that Ilsrri-
man was not man of good eyc>i .ht: that
Frank Saunders had rot VERY good
chance To see; that the boy could have
silly been mistaken.
Opposed To this i the testimony at tn.
prisoner himself; the testimony ~ his wite.
the testimony u one brother. ~ whose
house he slept upon one night. aud the ties
'imony OF Mrs. Lizzie Hartman.
As tn the credit which shall be given "a
the prisoner. and to his wife and relatives.
uPon this and the other points In the ease.
| shall comment hereafter.
As To- Mrs. iiarriman'S testimony. the
government contends that il i uure liable
4
found IL material To do so for the bru.ht ol
her friend; that She cannot be believed
The government contends that they have
satisfied you. in order 10 break down her
statement here that this Wa, The shirt
that She said upon her first examination
that II was not the shirt. and gave reasons
why IL was not the shirt, saving il was
. darker shirt, and with different plat.
And contradicting her in this respect. YOU
have the testimony of officers Walker, Pat
ersOn. Turner, Weymouth. Dor aud Dew
ereux, and also Mr.. j. K. Jordan.
The counsel for the prisoner saws that, what
ever statement she madc SUNDAY or at the
ir-t examination before the coroner's inquest,
she aiterward. corrected It before the cproncr'>
inquest. And the position taken by the state
l.. that she stated Il when she bad no motive
to state wrongtully, and that she corrected tt
when, out of bias Tor her friend. she bad mo-
tive To do 80.
The government undertakes TO corruborate
the statement, Of the Witnesses that thi, wa.
not the shirt. by calling witnesses who say
they observed the appearance OF the shlTt
upou the prisoner on Saturday morning amer
the murder Friday night. Mr. Emery ie.ri-
dri that he observed 1t 10 b. very clcau
shiri. Iii, son Emery testified IN rei4-
titn 10 II. They testified that their mind,
were called TO thi, point, that they had reason
10 rccoilect, that they 10 reUobcci.
Aul the government asked you thi. Qucs-
ton whether 1t }, likely that on such morn
ing the prisoner wouli have on au entirely
clean suIi sni keep IN his >oilcI shirt WtlA-
er. sheriff DcvereuN, Pdter>ou and View
mouth swear 10 YOU that on saturday night
they examined th- shirt with pari5,ulIritv.
that th"l examined II under the cuff; that
the Gun, were unbrukcn; that they examined
u on the neck You will rcco.cci with what
ppsiiiNrness "r ofhcrwi.e ihcy testified upon
the subject. ami YOU viii judge what weigh;
shAil bc given - their testimony.
The government produces person. who
saw the shirt and cXamiued II. ami the j.
i.nse RIFLES upon the testimony uf other. who
Jaw II. The state then contend. that IL position
IL rorToloraivd b. clTCum>tAucTs. aud that " d h
tie amount Of wearing the shirt NUT have
hsd. aud under the conditions under which Il
must have hid that wearing. A. testified 10
by ihr re-ppn lent him>elf, the shirt which j.,
before YOU cannot have been worn fr um Mon
day before the muri'r was committed TIL
Sunday morning afterwards.
Then, gentlemen, take into confederation
the weeks history Of the shirt. The wrarrr
OF Il had. IL i content 10y the state. hunted
~ the woods paris of several days; they say
with It on. he had slowed some straw upon a
LOAD ;thai he had pelped move q small building
that he had helped load load Of shiuEir-
butts; thai he had m id, a cupboard and
shel,e. al Andrew fiarrim ,n', house: that b,
had done painting no paint i found upon
as "A a. a
II the snow gar can b, believed that he used
some rusty nails. If John W. lartiug-f-i- tl
believe that he worked IN hi, shirt sleeves,
part of the time, II the wulk bench. Il tAt
SNOW gIFi and John W. Hartman arc 10 b,.
believed that he slept ia tn shirt more o.
/ less. that he wore it from Monday TIL early
sunday morning; that he Travelled over the
back route In II Frid-y night, II hi. story i
3 true; that he laid carpet, uI hclpcd Ia. "a
: In II Saturday; that he helped move mortar
bin the same day. # he did so; that b. slept in
! the same shirt the night Of he arrest; that
the SANE shirt ha. heretofore been before TWO
J iuries that Il hl, been exhibited aud handled
/ more or Ices hoTc.
( IL appesrs in evidence the wearer OF il wa
q smoking man. though it does not appear I,
| wthat extent
Now YOU have that shirt for personal inspcc
, tion. and are TO say whether il sppeAr. or no
[ like shirt thus used and worn.
The defense saws Il Is a colorcd shirt and nO
- likely 10 b. soied. And the state SAYS. not
; withstAnding that. the shirt r. exhibited here
and a. It viii br Ia your hand, iYr ,N ANIMATION
/ could not have gone through the history An,
! tests of soilipg. which are sworn to by the vii
| nes-es. II they are 10 be believed.
And the defense SAYS IL would hay" beef
/ much more satisfactory, Is regard, thi>, h al
/ the shirt been taken from the prisoner >Atur-
/ day, and produced here, 80 that you with youl
/ own eyes could distinguish whether the ufii
/ GERS, s,who swOre they exam ned II with the par
| ticularlty with which they say they did, msi'
/ any error or mistake in relation TO II, or not.
! The state admits that TO be a fact, that Ii
would have been wiser to have Mken the shir
earlier, but they say they exhibit 1t to YOU A. j
/ /, nov. Aud in the condition in which yOI
now lind IL they ask you 10 draw the Inference
/ upon the testimony aud the circum, tances
! that II cannot be the shirt which the pri- onci
wore upon the fatal night.
| Gentlemen, you will judge whether IL j. no
matter Of importance, whether or not you ar,
satisfied that the shirt produced was the shir
! 50 worn.
The next alleged circumstance is the finding
/ o. human blood. as contended by the state
upon the garments of the deceased Upon thi
point, II you believe the governments expert,
! 20 the full exten, that they 60. YOU will judg,
! whether you can have any doubt Of the fact 0
| human blood upon the garments, upon tina
testimony. The government a:rees that yol
/ will belie'c II. Ih. defense argues that yol
will not believe ii in view OF the opposing ties
/ ilmony from the experts on the other side
The argument OF the defense is, that it woul,
not be- safe for you 10 rely upon ii. when Their
j. such a difference between learned men.
That question il entirely for you; Ii YOU be
lieIe the testimony of the government experts
and are willing 10 accept 1t TO the fall extent
then YOU Will decide for yourselves what tina
/ testimony e,tdbi.
But the government takes q, it, next prOpO
sition, that il i not necessary for the jury 4
accept the testimony OF the experts bevond tn
point where The experts onlt he two sides agree
thai n YOU are T. accept the testimony of tht
experts for the state only as far as the testimon
Of the experts for the prisoner is substantially
eoincident with IT, and consistent with the 9th
er testimony IN the case-that they have con
clusiyely satisfied you that the garments were
found to be bestained with human blood
The experts for the state, if 1 understan,
them. testify that the blood found by then
must be human blood. or that it correspond
precisely with humsn blood, and Is either tina
or the blood Of an animal whose blood is lk
human blood.
The position assumed By the experts for ia,
defense is, il understand it. that il may o
may not have been human blood, and not tha
it WAS not human blood. The experts tor tn
defense do not testify that the garments hat
not blood upon them. They ma de no examin
alton to see. One OF the experts seemed TO b.
willing 10 accept as to that fact the statemen