The Forest Republican. [volume] (Tionesta, Pa.) 1869-1952, 1886-09-29
IN CRIMES.
TEE WEIGHT OF INDIRECT PROOFS
CONSIDERED.
Far More Convincing in Some Cases
than That Which is Direct-No-
ted Instances Recalled.

than That Which is Direct-No-
ted Instances Recalled.
1t common error, said a lawyer to
reporter for the Herald, to suppose
that crcumstantial evidence is Of an in
ferior quality to direct evidence. THIS
fallacy is much insisted upon in criminal
dofenses. and there are innumerable cases
in the books which apparently sustain
the idea. Yet the idea is wrong, as
very slight consideration Of the nature of
the testimony will show. Indirect proofs
of crime have been far more convincing
in some cases than direct proofs in
others.
Take the case of Professor Webster in
Boston thirty-six years ago, tried for the
murder of DIR. Parkman. Webster was
professor in the medical department OF
Harvard University, and was indebted
to Parkman, who was Shylock and
most persistent and annoying creditor.
Webster was oxtravagant and lived be
yond his means. He could not pay. but
he made an appointment for Parkman to
call at his rooms in the college. The
latter was seen going TO the college, but
was never seen alive afterward. A week
later there was found in the furnace con
nected with the prisoners laboratory in
the college fused with the Stag and Gin
ders great number of human bones,
block Of mineral teeth and small guam
tity Of melted gold. other bones were
discovered in q vault under the prisoners
rooms, and the entire trunk of a human
body was found in tea-chest, imbedded
in a quantity of tea which had belonged
to Webster These different parts, when
put together by anatomists, went 10 make
up the body of a person Of DR.. Parkman's
age, sixty years, and the form of the re-
constructed body had the peculiarities
shown to be possessed by him. No
duplicate bones were found, over and
above what was necessary to compose
one body. The remains were further
shown to have been separated by per-
son possessed of anatomical skill but not
for anatomical purposes. Three dentists
testified to the mineral teeth as being
made for Dr. Parkman, and that the
amount of gold found was about the
quantity used in plate. Webster made
solemn assertion of his innocence, stated
that Parkman had called and that he had
paid him and he had gone away. But
the jury convicted him, and he was SEN
fenced to be hanged. On the eve of his
execution he confessed his crime.
In another case of a murder by a pis-
tol shot it was proved that the wadding
of the pistol found in the wound was a
portion of letter belonging to the per
son accused, of which the other part was
found in his pocket, and that some prop
erty of the murdered person was found
on the prisoner. These circumstances
clearly proved and unexplained are just
as convincing as the direct testimony of
person who saw the murder.
There are instances where accusin g cir
cumstances envelope an innocent man,
and plenty of cases occur where testi-
mony has been fabricated, both direct
and indirect, to convict the innocent.
The administration of justice is not per-
feet, and the occasional condemnation OF
the innocent is an evil that will happen
under all systems. But by the safe
guards thrown about prisoner we have
reduced the chances of such an event to
the minimum. Lord Brougham was once
asked if circumstances could lie. eyes, y
he replied, ''if the witnesses lie"
A young man was accused of crime.
Three witnesses swore positively that
they saw him commit it at particular
place and time. He did not cross-ex
anime them, and he introduced no wit
nesses. He asked the Judge to turn tC
the courts record of the day on which
the alleged crime was committed. The
record showed that on that day the
prisoner was being tried for another
crime concerning which he had proven
an alibi. He was acquitted. That was
case where one circumstance, the fact
of his presence in court, overturned the
direct testimony of three witnesses.
There is grim old story told in thu
ancient law books of murder commit
ted at an inn. Three guests were enter
tanned one wintry night. Two wer,
friends travelling together; the other wa
an elderly gentleman of wealth, accom-
panied by his servant. The two friend
occupied one room, and the other gen
tleman an adjoining room. In the nigh
the two friends were aroused by groan
in the adjoining chamber. Striking
light and fastening to the room they saw
the landlord standing by the bedsid,
with bloody knife in his hand, and OF
the bed lay the elderly gentleman deaC
with wound in his throat The land
lOrd was arrested Tor the murder. Hi
declared his innocence, and said that h,
had heard groans and, fearing robbers
he had armed himself with a knife, anC
had just reached the room when the two
gentlemen entered. His assertions prove,
Of no avail, and he was finally convicted
Of the murder and executed. Prior t.
his execution he asserted his innocence
but said that he had gone to the room TO
the purpose of committing the murde
and robbing his guest, but reached there
Just as some one else had perpetrated tn
crime and escaped. Strange as this con
fessiOn was, it turned out to be true
Years aiterward the servant of the muI
dered man confessed on his deathbed tina
he had murdered his master and robbed
him. The old law reporter sums up tn
case with the formula: "Ihus the limo
cence Of the other man was completed
v Indicated" One of BalZac's storie
furug unon incidonfe Of a cinoilar hind