Oxford Democrat. [volume] (Paris, Me.) 1833-1933, 1882-09-26
Jacob felt as if the very ground was

they had, although with some difficulty,
secured the very witness who saw "the
miscreant" Indicating Jacob fire his own
buildings. Happening to turn his head
J just then, Jacob saw the large. man sit.
ting within six feet Of him and watching
him closely. This completed his confus-
, ion. The subsequent proceedings upon
the trial were not very clearly apprehend'
ed by Jacob.
The Court took a recess for dinner
As Jacob went to his room the large
man stood in the door of the room No.
239 again. Hard at it, hey:" he said,
as Jacob passed.
"Yes, but they can't prove it," said
Jacob, with determined accent.
"Sir," said the large man, severely,
"they can prove anything if they have
the evidence" and the large man went
into his room and again banged the door.
In the afternoon the evidence on the
part of the defence was given. The first
witnesses called upon that side did not
seem very important to the case. They
were, however, some Of Jacobs neigh
bors, and the evidence was very painful
to him on that account. One testified
that there could not have been as much
hay in the barn when it was burned as
Jacob insisted that there was. Another
thought that Jacob had exaggerated the
size Of the barn where the hay was stored
and he thought, for that reason, there
could not have been as much as was rep
resented. Still another had walked over
Jacobs farm, when the hay and grain
were growing, and was confident that
there was only middlin' CROP" and
by no means as much as the plaintiff
claimed.
The opposing counsel explained, with
a glance at the jury, that this evidence
was presented not only as bearing upon
the question Of the amount of the loss,
but as showing more clearly the nature
of the attempt ION the part of this
wretched man" TO defraud his neigh
bors.
There was a significant pause. The
opposing counsel held whispered con-
sultation with his assistant attorney and
with some men whom Jacob recognized
as members of the board he then rose,
and said, impressively, :" We call Gotlieb
Jansen
A short, elderly man, rather thin than
full-faced, but evidently German, was
sent forward from the back seats. Jacob
recognized him; he was a hired man,
who worked about the neighborhood of
the Cove. Jansen gave his testimony
through an officer of the Court, who acted
as interpreter. His statement was, that
standing "over beyond" hollow, a
quarter of mile away, in the field back
of Jacobs large barn, he had seen Jacob
come behind the barn, deliberately strike
match, and set the straw and hay and
barn on FIRE.
The cross-examination of this witness
by Jacobs counsel was the interesting
feature of the trial.
"Ask him if he could see how Jacob
was dressed" said the counsel.
"He says yes, he could" responded
the interpreter, after putting the question
to the witness.
ASK him what color his clothes
were.'
He says he wore Drown or a KIND OF
red, iron-cloth overalls."
ASK him whether Jacob had on boots
or shoes"
"Dey vos poots-dey vos poots," said
the witness, making cross-lots answer
in broken Euglish to save time.
"You understand my question = said
the counsel.
"Yaas, yaas, unterstan," said Got
lieb.
"Ask him in German" said the Court
to the interpreter.
The interpreter complied, and responded
=" he says they were boots"
ASK him what time of day it was"
said the counsel.
"He says it was just getting dark.
ASK him what Jacob had around his
neck, when he saw him strike the match
and set the fire."
He says it was a black handker-
chief
ASK if he could see plain"
"He says yes"
"Ask him whether he had on stock
ings," said the counsel.
This question caused slight ripple Of
merriment. Old Gotlieb glanced around,
saw the fun, and laughing and shaking
his head, said, "Naw, nav, could not tell
de shtockings."
There was brief direct examina-
ton, in which Gotlieb stated that he did
not mean that he actually saw the match,
but only saw Jacob stoop over and strike
as if it was match, and then saw it
kindle, and saw it grow to large fire.
He also explained that the overalls were
blue instead of red.
1t was apparent that Gotlieb's left eye
had been injured or lost. His examina-
ton was concluded by single question,
asked by Jacobs lawyer, which drew out
from Gotlieb the answer, NAV, nav,
can only seen from Won eye"
As the concluding evidence in the case
Jacob was now recalled formally to deny
as the rules of evidence require, the state
ments made by the witnesses against him.
As he came upon the witness-stand. it
was apparent that great change had
come over him. Was there such a pal
lor upon his face. or was it the strange