The new dominion. [volume] (Morgantown, W. Va.) 1876-1904, 1886-01-16
PEARRE-KIRKLAND CASE.
Ex-Gov. Whyts Argues that the
Lady Made no Cutlery.
The Counsel also Declares that the Accused
Had Been Encouraged by Mrs. Kirk
lands Manner to Call at Her
Room-State's Counsel
Declares this In
consistent.

ANNAPOLIS, Nd, Jan. 1.-The case
of James G. Pearre, son of ex-Judge
Pearre, of Cumberland, charged with
having attempted an assault upon
Mrs. Kirkland, at her residence in
Baltimore, was argued in the Court
of appeals to day. The only point
at issue was the admission of tests
made to prove that Mrs. Kirkland's
screams were not heard on account
of the thick walls, ex-Gov. Whyte,
counsel for the accused, saying that
the Court was bound to give the
prisoner the benefit of every princi-
pie of law. There was, he said, no
cutlery by Mrs. Kirkland, and all the
circumstances go to disprove the
waman's testimony. This alleged
act occurs in the dead hour of the
night, and the accused has no de-
Tense. All the circumstances neces-
sary to make this case of attempt
ed assault are wanting. The State
ought to have shown the nature of
the house, and the accused had a
right to rely upon that to prove that
in this dead hour of the night the
slightest sound could be heard on
Cathedral street.
The testimony of young Pearre
was read, showing that he had held
conversations with Mrs. Kirkland of
a bantering and free character, had
tested about the doors between her
room and his when she called him a
"bad boy" &c, and in reply to the
question about the door being fas-
tened she replied, there is the win
dow" and when he said, do you
think would risk my neck on that
corniceY' she had answered as she
passed to her room, nothing risked,
nothing gained" Pearre's testimo-
ny as to the two notes through which
he was falsely led to believe she had
invited him to come to her room af-
ter the opera were also commented
upon. Pearre said that he went to
her with the full impression that
she had agreed to admit him, and
when he crept along the eighteen
inch cornice on that cold night on
the l4th of March he found Mrs
kirkland's window open. The delay
in making the accusation against
Pearre was also dwelt upon Not
until the story had gotten into the
newspapers did Mrs. Kirkland make
any statement, and not until Thurs
day after the Saturday night of the
alleged assault did she go before the
Grand Jury to complain of hel
treatment.
Mr.. Cans, Deputy States Attor
ney for Baltimore city, followed fol
the State. The counsel, he SAID, hat
argued the case in way the Stat,
could not understand. To a bare
fact of law he had brought in every
argument that ought to have beer
addressed to tribunal where mo
ton for new trial could be made
He had in the exceptions under thei
protest, dragged in all that ought tt
udNc Dccu Glt OuI tul lclt Out Ill
that ought to have been in. The argu
ments should be addressed to tn,
Court, on the principle that judges
are not only judges of the law bu
are men. He thought the practic
unfair and reprehensible; unfair be
cause the State came here to argue
question of experiment on sound ant
not ON the merits of the case.
Col. Marshall made the closing al
gument for the accused. He said
1.-THE proposition to which l asl
your attention is, first, can an exper
express himself on anything but
hypothetical case made out from tn
facts of the case; second, if so hoy
then must an expert qualify himscl
to explain that the sounds could no
be heard? If such evidence coul,
be admitted it should have beel
made in fairness and in the interes
of justice and not from motives Q
vengeance"
The Court took the case unde
consideration and will probably han
the opinion down IN week or two