The Portland daily press., 1880-05-03

bonds belonging to Pennell. $500 in money al
so belonging TO Pennell and over $500 in cash
and bonds belonging to his ward-leaped out
of the window and escaped; that the cold wind
coming in at the open window blew out the
gas and partially revived Pennell, who crawl
ed to the door in state of semi-conscousness,
got the doors open and fell on the threshold
where he was found few minutes after. He
commented on the marks on the shutters be-
low the window as testified to by Stillings and
Cook, and the testimony of Thoits, who saw
two men in the corridor about o'clock, as cor
roborating this theory. He said the uniinpor-
tant contradiction of Mayo should have no
weight because he might not have heard right,
ana Iiiat CONTRADICTION OF this sort were never
entitled to much consideration: and he claim
ed that John T. Oxnard was utterly unrelia-
BILE and simply lied. He called attention To
the matter of II. l. Robinson, anc said it was
proved that Robinsons name was not written
by Mr. Pennell; that Robinson had never re-
celved MS lee but once and scorned the idea
that Penneli would procure man to commit
forgery for the sum of $1.62, when he was
sure TO pc detected by man who was in the
same building. He said it made no difference
VINO wrote the name as long as Pennell did
not. He depicted the scene when Penne1 was
taken to his home and asked if the jury of
anybody else would believe that he took this
way to cover up discrepancies which had they
been known amounted to less than $3.50.
He called attention to the fact, proved with
out dispute and beyond cavil, that Pennell ar
ranged for his wife and children and Mr..
Knight to come to the office at o'clock and
help him carry home his books and papers and
clean up for his successor, and that the inclem-
ency of the weather alone prevented them a
fact not known to Pennell-and asked if the
jury believed that he would arrange for his
neignbor, his wife and his children to come as
witnesses of the crime which would render
him infamous in the eyes of his fellow men
forever He argued that an unblemished char
acter in and out of office for fifty years ought
to weigh something i'll his favor and if he was
to be convicted on mere suspicion, no man was
safe against whom crime was imputed by NAL
ice or circumstances such as might happen to
any one He closed by invoking the careful
scutiny of the jury and said: Into your hands
L commit this cause and the interests of nv
client, for good or evil. Upon your verdict
depends all that he has of property, of char
acter, and standing among his fellow men;
all is of the future to him and to his family.
This is the real issue which has attracted Sc
much attention and excited such eager public
interest Men desire to know whether he is
guilty or innocent of this awful crime imputed
to him, and whether he is to go from this court
with the ruin which such crime ought to in
volve, or whether he shall return to his home
without spot or blemish upon his hitherto un-
sullied character as an honest man and hon.
ored citizen. If your verdict shall be against
him, it would have been better for him had
the robbers bludgeon left him lifeless beside
the safe which was plundered, for then the
community would have echoed his praises
when dead for the same acts which men would
condemn in him when he is living. 1t is not
and will not be, seriously contended that he
WAS negligent. 1t cannot be negligent for a
man to sit beside his safe, as in this case, with
the door shut and bolted. The whole question
then comes back to the guilt or innocence of
the man himself. Upon you rests the respon-
sibility of rightly deciding the issue. Public
policy does not require your verdict to con-
denim an innocent man that an example NAV
be made to deter others from the commission
of actual crime. And whilst YOU are not to
divest yourselves of that divine humanity
which enoble and gilds our common nature,
we do not ask verdict of your sympathy or of
your pity, all that we ask is that pure and
shining justice which is the right of every
man to enjoy, and which is the same in its
beneficent offices, under all circumstances
and throughout the ages.
MIR. LIBBRY's ARGUMENT.
Ex-County Attorney Charles F. Libby COM
menced the closing argument for the plaintiffs
at ten minutes past eleven as follows:
May 1t Please Your Honor and Gentlemen OF
the Jury-While the eloquent words of the
counsel for the defendants are still ringing in
your ears and your feelings are still stirred by
his earnest appeals to your sympathies in be-
half of his client and his family, can hardly
expect that you will turn with much interest
to consider the other side of the case, which is
lacking in dramatic features and appeals to
your sober Judgment and your sense of respon.
sibility as jurors rather than to the promptings
of impulse or emotion.
This case fell to my charge while held the
Office of county attorney for the county of
Cumberland, and my connection with it today
grows out of the fact that took part in the
former trial, and have been familiar with its
history and development. That l have no
personal ends to subserve in the prosecution of
this suit and have no feelings of personal hos
tility towards the defendant, 1 think | need
hardly assure you. am we'll aware that there
are other persons who might have conducted
this important and difficult case with greater
ability, but as the duty has fallen to me have
accepted the responsibility with the desire to
present fairly the case and aid you in reaching
a conclusion in which truth and Justice shall
be indicated.
To my mind the case is one of unusual i'm
portance, presenting questions of law which
are new in this state, and questions of fact
which as determined by your verdict, will
tend to encourage or check certain dangerous
tendencies in our community.
Your verdict will determine whether the ac-
countability OF public servants shall be MAIN
tained or whether official delinquencies shall
be lightly passed over.
One of the startling features of modern So
ciety is the rapidly increasing number Of def
alcations on the part of public officers. These
defalcations have often been committed by
men who have stood high in the estimation of
the community and who have yielded to the
temptation to which the possession of trust funds
exposes them. One of the marked features
of these cases is that when detection is inevita-
bic and public disgrace stares them in the
face they have often sought concealment by
such a defence as is set up in this case.
Both public and private debtors have repeat
eddy put forward the pieaof robbery to cover
up their financial difficulties, so that suspicion
at once rests upon such defence and the first
inquiry OF the public is, whether the accounts
of the individual disclose any irregularities.
This feeling prompted the examination of
Mr.. Pennell's books shortly after the announce
ment of the robbery and led to the detection
OF the numerous errors and Irregularities in
his accounts which have been laid before you.
Before examining those accounts it will be
we'll to consider the probability of the story of
the robbery as told by Mr.. Pennell who is the
only witness to the fact.
Mr.. Libby here called attention. the singu-
lar circumstance that the trrobberyshould have
taken uplace on the very last night of Pennell's
term of office, that the deed supposed to have
should have taken place in room with UNI
locked doors, with persons in neighboring Off
ceS, and at time when the Superior Court
was in session, and that the robbers should
have lett packages OF bonds in the safe, and
have left Mr.. Pennsll in position where he
was able to get to the door of the corridor and
Immediately make known his condition. How
Mr.. Pennell reached the door is a mystery, the
robbery being known within 10 OF IL minutes
of the occurrence. Robbers would not expect
to find $4,000 in cash in an insecure safe in
the treasurer's office. Business men are not
in the habit of keeping that amount of money
by them while having bank account at the
same time.
There are some features of the case which
suggest preparation for the robbery-the one
arthousand dollar packages of money The
rangement for his family and friend (Nlr.
Knight to come to the office that evening.
Mr.. Jabes Woodman's testimony does not
confirm Mr. Pencils testimony as to some
connected with the notices of
foreclosures about which Mr.. Pennell went to
the Advertiser office few minutes before the
alleged robbery took place. His explanation
of the reason for returning to the office that
night is uot satisfactory.
The testimony as to his injuries is contra
dictory. No two witnesses agree. Reuben
first exclamation is stMy God his
head is stove in" but the testimony only shows
a slight swelling. All the injuries he showed
might easily have been inflicted without serious
risk or harm. 1t is sometimes easier to raise
bruises than to raise funds.
Mrs. Mcclellan sees finger marks on the
throat, through his beard, but she also sees
blood on the floor which proves to be tobacco
juice. He was not in a position to receive the
ba dacorihoc HE oo,oo1o.x:...