The weekly democratic statesman. [volume] (Austin, Tex.) 1871-1883, 1882-12-28
THE STURLA TRIAL.
How the SisterhOOd of the Accused
Subscribed to Aid Her Defense.
TSnaoiaI 70 Cou,ior To,,,roI

CHICAGO, Dec. 17.-Theresa Sturla's
trial ended pretty. satisfactorily to all
concerned. The defense had begun to
hope for an acquittal, though it did
not hope for any success when the
trial was entered upon. But the Ital-
ian woman conducted herself so cleV-
erly on the witness stand that even
the expectations of her own counsel
were exceeded. The years imprisOn-
ment in the penitentiary, the jury's
sentence, will be reduced a month by
the allowance for good behavior.
Altogether the result is as
satisfactory as disagreement.
If the jury had not reached
a verdict arrangements had
been made for an application for her
release on bail. Miss Carrie Watson,
the Chicago 'landlady" who has cham
pioned the defendants cause from the
time of the tragedy, was to offer her
self in the sum of $4,000 if required.
The verdict will be acquiesced in. 1t
would take six months to get a mo-
ton for new trial prepared and
argued. Perhaps it would take year.
1t would cost a good deal of money
besides, and there has been no money
in this case for anybody. There has
been vague impression abroad since
the trial was first talked of that a
great deal of money was subscribed
for the defense. 1t was said that
prominent business men had con-
tributed funds, and that fab
ulouS sum was also contributed by
the members of the demi-monde. The
stories were all gross eXaggeratiOnS of
the truth. Three thousand dollars is
what the defense of the woman cost,
not cent more, and the lawyer took
not penny. When Sturla was taken
from the Palmer House to the station
on the morning of the shooting, upon
some lady's suggestion she sent for
A. s. Trude, the most successful GRIM
inal lawyer in the city. She told him
frankly that she had no money, but
was Sorely in need of advice. The
lawyer told her that he would take
charge of the case for charity'S sake,
and he did. Madam Watson busted her
self in the defendants behalf and con-
tributed $1,000 of her own money,
and from other lanGladieS the women
of the town collected about $500 more.
The defendant had the sympathy OF
all the women of her class. The rich
contributed of their plenty and the
poor gave their mites until there was
about $500 to supplement the $1,000 of
Madam Watson. Gentlemen" said Il
person who knows, gave less than $50
of the $1,000. They were not appealed
to. The defense of Madeline Sturla
was assumed by her sisters in shame,
and men were not asked, because the
frail creatures were proud to assume
the whole burden"
All of the $1,000 was used up in de-
fraying the costs of the trial. Scarcely
a witness was summoned to testify
who did not demand, before he came,
his blOod-money-not barely his wit
ness fee but a heavy toll. The witnesses
were, as rule, common people,
habitues of low places, depraved men
and boys. They were brought, some
of them, from out of town, their living
was paid for, they were reimbursed for
lost time, and their travelling expenses
were paid out of the $1,000. The
stenographer's bill was several hun
| dred dollars. When the trial was fin
ished all the money was gone, and
there was some yet to pay. Trude's
fee, if he had charged one, would have
been from $1,000 to 5000. From this
exhibit some idea of the cost of an
elaborate defense to charge of muir
| der can be formed. Heaven help the
poor defendants who have not the
| wherewithal to support witnesses, EN-
ploy stenographers and hire lawyers.
The Sturla defense was greatly ham,
pered by the reluctance of respectable
witnesses to appear to testify. n most
| important witness left town a week
before the trial began and never turn
ed up again until to-day. He was a
married man and an associate of the
murdered man, Styles, in his lifetime,
and a frequenter of Madame Watson's
establishment. Although he knew
much that would have been of service
to the woman on trial for her life,
he dare not appear. He was afraid of
the disclosures that might be forced
by acroSs-eXamination. This was not
the only instance of the kind. The
defense in a murder trial. especially if
it be attracting great deal of atten-
ton, receive many facts and sugges-
| tons from outsiders not known of
when the case goes to trial, and in the
Sturla case, instead of these questions
coming unasked, people cogniZant of
the facts hid themselves, or else were
in terror lest they should be sum-
moned to appear and testify.
At a conference held at the Jail to-
day between the prisoner, her counsel
and certain of her friends, it was de-
cided not to press the motion for a
new trial, which pro forma was made
at the time the verdict was rendered.
NJ. F. Bogney. editor of the New Or