The Cincinnati daily star. [volume] ([Cincinnati, Ohio]) 1875-1880, 1879-06-21

chief points in the embarrassment of the
police were these-that there appeared no
motive for the crime, and that the blow
had been struck by weapon which posi-
lively belonged to the deceased, and was
in his possession up to the very hour of his
death.
Evidently the assassin bad not come
armed, or he would have used the weapon
he had brought with him. On the other
hand, how came ho possessed of tho knife
by which the terrible deed was ciiected2
.lere was no tracs of this. Tie weapon
with wAich the deed was accomplished
was there, but it offered not the least clue
TO the as3assin's identity, simply because
it had never belonged to him: All the
proof Of his act was the wound itself
which prohibited the thought Of suicide,
and the discovery of the criIpsoued kuiie
itself, found un,,er chair.
Not trace cou.d the police find, albeit
they tried hard tp make such discovery
as wouldappear Of little value to an ordin-
ary man, but Of immense Importance to
such man as Paul Webber. In the mys-
terry Ct Taggart's Inn there was not the
| fain.est sign of any solid evidence against
the murderer and the police were cast
back utterly and wholly upon surmise in
other words, tho police could do nothing
but guess
And here is some analysis of the way in
which the police guessed.
10 whose interest was it to kill Graham
forbesf Had his affianced auy wish for
his deathH The faintest common sense
was sufficient to discover that she could
have no interest in his death.
! SO far from susIectiug Margaret It's Do
lice engaged in the case experienced, apart
from their sense of duty, IL desire to track
down the assassin, if OILY to avenge her
o victim far more TO b. pitied than Graham,
for his suffering lasted but q few moments,
hers must exist for years.
Was the assassin common thief-a
burglar by profession There Was no
proof aforcible entry having been made
into the apartments, and the money in the
open drawers of the eScritoire had not been
touched, nor was any article of value miss.
ing from the rooms.
But there was ono piece Of evidence
which did away with the theory that tho
Assassination was the act of q robber. The
victim would not have known the namoof
the assassin; and it was evident, on the
contrary, that hewas acquainted with his
aSSailant; that, had life been spared to
him but mere moment longer his name
would have been found in the handwrit-
ing of the murdered.
Was the assassin resident of the innV
perhaps of tho very house iyself, in which
the murder had been donef For, it will
be remembered. the inn-porter distinctly
denied that anybody had rung at his
lodge after the gate was shut, and asked
for Mr.. Forbes. Thus shaped ite4lf the
great question-was the miscIeant O. resi-
dent of the innR
Finally, was the murderer tho indiv6.
ual referred to by the porter as having
visited the deceased during the evening
previous to the day on which he was killedf
tho gentleman of whom something was
already known to the police, in consa-
quence of the Stock Exchange difference
between him and Graham Forbes.
Only about Austin S:yory did ANYTHING
like tangible suspicious cluster. Against
this aentleman's character tho police had
no actual black mark, but in that vast net
work Of society We call London, there are
many men who without having actually
stood charged before Il nlaEiStrate, are
nevertheless watched by the detective
force CT the metropolis.
4 Hs was cne Cf those men of fashion who
came nobody knows whence, wholives no.
body is quite aware how: who do no work,
and yet live like gentlemen; who anpar-
emily possess no income, and yet are never
without money.
Siyory kept verv good society as far as
his masculine friends were concerned, and
no one could say that he had been a de-
fauiter Oh the turf. at his club, or in any
way shown himself man whom it was
necessary to ''cut"
Up to the time when Forbes created
scandals against Sivory by his behavior in
Capel Court, not a word had been said
against that individual as an honorable
man. However, it was known to the po-
lice, that at the time of Forbes death, ST.
worry owed the dead man large sum OF
money upo1 acceptances and inasmuch as
these acceptances were not to be found, it
was evident that they had either been
given up by Forbes Himself, or stolen. But
no sign Of theft or search after aay OBJECT
had been found in the apartments occupied
by Graham Forbes.
1T was necessary, therefore, that the po-
lice should make all proper inquiries based
Epon the suppositiou t}Saa Sivory did kill
'raham Forbes.
sNov, in the ordinary way Of police work,
where man is suspected, a magistrates
warrant ia issued, the police arrest the ac-
cused, take him to the police-station, and
enter upon the chaIge-sheet the charge
made against HIM. Now, it is the law of
England that when once charge is made
against man upon the charge-shcet, the
case must be settled before magistrate,
and in open court-in other words,a charge
onec entered, the enquiry into that charge
must DO heard publicly; and therefore, re-
ports appear in the papers, and the accused
is, to o certain extent, publicly dsgraced,
even though the charge be not proved
against him. : For it is very evident that
though magistrate may say man leaves
the court without the faintest blot on his
character, the man is not any the less Te-
ceived with certain sort of awkwardness
by his friends. Therefore, it can readily
be understood that the police are particu-
larry cautious before charging man Of
apparently spotless. or almost spOtless,