Ellsworth American., 1877-05-24

J said to the officers. or about that time.
J without having seen lighted houses and
human beings upon some one or other of
! the streets through which he passed to
/ reach his home. And the counsel for the
defense says, il, Is ordinary and probable
that it should be 50, aud that it wa, 50,
The position taken by both side, on
this point have been so clearly and fairly
aud exhaustivelv argued. aud the value of
] the point is so fairly impressed upou Your
minds by the arguments. | d. not feel
that it i required vi ule TO further anal, ze
the testimony In relation To It, or give
YOU any further words about il. The
state deems it vital matter against the
accused. The defense regards IL as not
! made out and without importance.
The next incident. in point of time. vas
, what the prisoner said IN the officers
bearing in mind all the time that his state
nent to the officers il not TO he taken un-
I less yon believe he made such statement;
the next incident was what he said to the
officers in relation TO Webst-r's saloon.
1 and the appearance OF IL. as he "as CO.
ing home; the officers say he told them II
was lighted, and he saw the hight in Il
particular way.
The defense SAYS he i corrobOrated In
this statement of seeing the lights. because
the lights were there to be seen. Aud
( the defense say hc ~ also corToborated by
his having correctly stated the time when
the Web>ters actually. npon that night,
came home; that he could not Know
when. unless he had himself been at home.
I and had passed the saloon 50 as To know
and see.
As 10 this the government. in response.
says, that the lights were not a. stated;
that he gave a description OF the lights A.
D ha tb.tu q, h.as hat an
Inference of his; that he had known the
habits of the Webster's in that respect;
and that IN the particular instance there
/ WAS an exception as to the mode of light
ing the saloon. and that he thereby made
mistake. The Web>ter's testify that. on
that night. Instead Ola light in the front
/ saloon. shining over the window Into the
rear. there was light upon the table IN
the back sSloon, near the window throw
ius a. Mrs. Webster describes. a stream
oi light out from the window upon the
surrounding grounds.
On cross examination the witnesses said
that there were lights IN the front A. well
a. in the rear. aud that there was glass he
tween the two sections of the saloon. and
I theargument OF the defense l. that The ght
IN the rear was unimportani. and amount
ed TO. nothing compared with the general
lighting OF the establishment. Aud the
state says that there was difference. i
market difference. anl THAI the prisoner
did not state what he knew. but when he
supposed
Then the state relic. upon the Circum-
stance OF what they aliege TO be unuatur-
=. conduct on the part of the prisoner.
taking hls own statements to be- true. al
ter hts return to the house they .av
there l. strangcuess an iinprobabiiiiy. iu
the tact that after being tour or live day
from home. aud anxious to get hum',
f irtYrliu. go the night Ia reach hnm-. hr
/ SHOULD have = 'uc into hi> house and - q
down upon a lounge instead 81 go'r- to
hi> g'iic. or hi> wife coming to him. whrih-
cr he lay taere a longer or shorter period
The state relies upnn, a. they contend. the
uunaturaluess OF the tact that u the sister
heard him when lie came in. or the wife
did, that they should not have gone down.
or he should not have called upon them
or gone up immediately upon his arriv-
ing home
And they reiy upon the improoabillty
that. under the circumstances. the prison
er would hate stopped below 10 I'LL a
lamp.
The position taken by the government j.
that the prisoner was driven into thu
colloquy which took place between him
and the officers. He stated that he returned
home aud lay down upon the lounge. and
lighted lamp and lett Il burning vhie
thus reclining; and one OF the officers. II
you believe their testimony. said then the
Webster's mus, have seen YOUR li.'ht VIXEN
they came in that he was compelled In
order 10 avoid that predicament of things,
to make the statement that his light
went ont and that ne was without a
light when they came in. and Afterwards
filed his lamp aud vent 10 bed The
state takes the position that this acooun;
OF himself i a pt-ten-e aud fabrication too
Improbable TO De believed
Aud the defense takes the position that,
reasonably considered aud interpreted. 1t
l. not unnatural or exaggerated, aud is
fair, probable aud Ia be believed
Tn. next circumstance relied upon by
the government il, ~ they claim. the TACT
that il he mad got home al bali past or
thereabOuts, aEd gone above al about ten
u zee hl> wife, ana his sister got up out OF
bed. the Web-ler's NOT being asleep in the
adjoining house. they would have heard
some of the movements, and they testify
they heard nothing.
: In. defense say. IL i only occasionally
that these movement. are heard betweel
, the trnements aud that IL does not follow
that noises were not made because not
heard by the ebsters.
The next circumstance relied upon by
the stare. /, the condition in which the low er
part of the house was found the next morn
ing according To the admissions OF the re-
spondent. IL appears. il YOU believe the
testimony that the back window was open !:
that the back door was unlocked; the
Websters stating, if YOU believe them, that
when they went into the house they lock
ed it. There Is no evidence that anything
was missing. There VA. a ladder found
near the rear of the house, and there were
other ladders abont there. belonging 10 the
working parties about the Emery Block.
Taking this state OF things in the rear OF
the house. the government puts TO YOU this
proposition: Who entered hat house IN
the night time; Was il entered afJer the
Websters went through aud went Ia bed
Who entered ity The position taken 10y
the government is that you must be
brought to the belief that the prisoner came
home late at night. and came ihto the house
without making any unnecessary or Alarm
ing noises. by getting through The wrDdO "
and then opening the door, aud in the hur-
~. or Tor some other reason. left them un-
fastened as they were.
The defense takes the position that The &C
things about the window aud door. were
dlsclo o.ed by the prisoner himself. and that
he need not have told the story II They
were done by ms own hand. Aud that
: statement or position of defense j. met ny
the state in this Way. They say he mad,
the statement, first, because he supposed
. Webster had gone out that morning befOr,
t the prisoner did, and had seen what exis
ted there, aud that he had TO modify his
story in accordance with the probable anc
pruvable facts.
The next circumstance which the stats
relies on. is the conduct of the prisoner the
next morning. Comment Is made upon hi.
. inquiry put TO Emerton, 'are they al
dead?' The state contends that his con
duct in that particular was unnatural ant
inconsistent with that of an innocent msn
be being friend and acquaintance OF tn,
!; persons killed and among the last person.
who had seen Mrs. Thayer the night be
fore.
The defense contends, on the other hand
that his conduct was not at all strange
/ that all men do not act alike; that he did
, say to Dorr that he came in that night. and
, told him the time be got back. And then
on the other hand the state relies upon the