Devils Lake inter-ocean. (Devils Lake, Ramsey Co., Dakota [N.D.]) 1884-1905, 1886-10-02

leverer, heard, as she declares, a sharp cry of
pain. Unfortunately tho girl, instead of
a~scertaining the cause of his cry, fled hastily
to the servants hall. Her account of her
conduct was that @she belle we'd she had heard
q ghost" 1t appeared that popular tradition
declared Great Lorton Hall to be haunted.
and as a consequence the servants were con-
tinually imagining that in certain parts Of
the house they heard various mysterious
sounds. MIR. Mauleverer's room, as it hap
pened, was somewhat remote from the other
sleeping apartments which were occupied
that night. The girl never thought that it
could have been from her master that this
cry of agony proceeded, and so the unfortu-
nate man was left to struggle alone with
death-to which he too soon fell a victim.
The next morning at the usual hour the
valet of the deceased, John Green by name.
went into his masters bedroom. He imme-
diately saw that something dreadful had hap
pened. The bedclothes were in great disor.
der, as though the deceased had been strug-
Cling violently. On looking more closely at
Green saw that Mr.. Mauleverer was
quite dead. He was lying with his face
buried in one of the pillows, and he had ap-
parently died in convulsio ions. In one of his
hands was clutched a bed curtain, which in
his agony he seemed to have torn from its
fastenings. The household was at once
alarmed. The prisoner on learning what
had happened professed extreme grief, and
nearest medical man, DR.. Carrick, of Little
Lordon. DR.. Carrick, who would be called
before them as a witness, undoubtedly fell
into a great mistake. He came to the con-
%rlusion, on seeing the body, that Mr..
Mauleverer had died possibly of sufocation
in a fit Of epilepsy, and he gave a certificate
in accordance with that belief. In excuse
for him it might be said that he had not the
slightest reason to suspect foul play, while
no was aware that deceased was af-
aicted by epilepsy. Fortunately for
the ends Of justice, however, suspicious
were aroused; and on the day after Mr..
Mauleverer's funeral, at which the prisoner
at the bar attended as chief mourner, his
body was exhumed, and or an analysis of
the contents of the stomach it vas
discovered that his death was really
iue to q large dose of %strychnia.
All the evidence that could DO obtained
must have been administered somewhere
about the time when the prisoner last saw
The unfortunate man. How could it lave
~" II AIS"CA ~ Caoo
question was clear. Two persons only had
access to Mr.. Mauleverer about the time
when he unquestionably took the fatal dose.
One Of these was Green, the valet, and the
other was the prisoner at the bar. Now, in
Green's favor certain facts could at once be
alleged. One Of these was that he had never
oeen in the habit of administering drugs to
the deceased, and any attempt he might
make to do so could hardly have failed to
arouse Mr.. Mauleverer's suspicious. The
prisoner, on the other hand, constantly mixed
and gave him his medicine. Next, all their in
4uiries pointed to the conclusion that Green
1ad absolutely nothing to gain by Mr..
Maulevorer's death. The prisoner, on tho
contrary, as he should show them presently,
lad everything to gain by it, provided 1t
-ook place within a certain period of time.
Lastly all inquiries which had been made
ed to the belief that Green had not been in
ihe possession Of any poison at the time
when tho murder was committed. The
prisoner, it would be conolusively proved,
lid possess poison, and poison exactly SINH
ar to that found in the body of Mr.. Maui
everer, a few days before the death of that
gentleman.
Surely in these circumstances it was clear
that, inasmuch as, according to all known
laws, either Green or the prisoner at the bar
had given the fatal dose to the deceased, it
was the latter whom they had the best rca-
son to suspect. But the law mercifully de-
handed in cases of this kind that some mo-
i've should be shown, some reason which
was likely to have led the accused person to
resort to a desperate crime. He was sorry
20 say that there would he no difficulty in
Meeting this requirement of the law on the
present occasion. He would bring forward
evidence to show that q violent quarrel had
aiken place between the deceased and the
prisoner at the bar shortly before the date of
The murder. The quarrel was due to q love
affair between the prisoner and a gentleman
If whom Mr.. Maulsverer did not approve as
1 prctender to the hand of his niece. There
aad been painful scenes between Mr.. Maui
everer and the prisoner, and witnesses, who
were strongly prejudiced in favor Of the
after, would give evidence showing that
there was in reality a very bitter feeling
IN her part with regard to the ill-usage
which she conceived she had received
from her uncle. This was not all,
however. It would DO shown that Mr..
Mauleverer, having executed a will by
which all his vast wealth passed u~nreservedly
10 the prisoner, had within a week or two of
ais death given instructions for the prepare
lion of a second will, under which, in the
event of her marrying the gentleman re-
terred to, she would receive only q compare
lively small legacy, whilst the rest of his
estate would be devoted to charitable pur-
poses. This will had not been signed at the
time Of Mr.. Mauleverer's death, in conse-
luence of.the temporary absence from Eng
land Of his usual legal adviser, by whom it
had been prepared. But the prisoner at the
bar knew of its existence, and knew further
that it would be duly executed as soon as
the attorney returned from abroad. Here,
then, they had what all must feel to be q
strong motive for the commission of this
crime. He did not wish to press hardly
upon the prisoner, whose youth and good
looks were well calculated to PROPOSES most
persons in her favor. But the jury had a
duty to discharge, and he could'no see how,
after hearing the evidence which he was
about to lay before them, and which would
bear out tho statement he had just made to
the fullest extent, they could find any other
was, in very truth, guilty Of having wilfully
murdered Mr.. George Mauleverer on the
night of October "a.
Ihad nerved myself to listen to this terri
be indictment Of my darling without show
ing by any outward sign the effect which it
might have upon me; and up to a certain
point had done SO successfully. But when
the counsel spoke of the quarrels between
Daisy and her uncle regarding myself, I had
found it impossible to retain my composure.
My agitation must lave been made more
visible when l heard of the unsigned will by
which she was to be punished if she married
M. No mention had been made of this doc
ulncnt in the examination before the magls-
| trata. and I was ouita IGNORANT of ito oriet.