San Antonio daily light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1886-1907, 1886-05-28
CONTRIBUTION BOX.


rNOTE.-Short letter. from our readers are
solicited for this column on any subject The
name of the writer must accompany the ar
tiCIc. a big waste basket is reserved Tor All
rejected communications
Review ofthe Celebrated, Maxwell Case
The trial of-Maxwell, or Brooks, in
st. Louis, for the murder of Preller, at
the Southern hotel, is in many Of its cir
cumstances exceedingly sensational;
still there have been many trials more
deserving of enrolment in the list OF
causes celebres. The Southern is 'the
largest and most fashionable hotel in the
city of st. Louis, and it seems almost
impossible that the body OF man that
had been murdered in one OF the rooms
of the hotel and packed into large
trunk in the room could remain there
for As hours, or longer, without being
detected by the smell of the decaying
flesh, than which nothing is more pene-
trating or offensive. The tracing up and
capture of Maxwell, an almost entire
stranger in st. Louis, in his flight from
St. Louis to San Francisco and from there
to Auckland, would stagger belief were
it related in a sensational novel OF the
French type, yet it is sober reality.
The circumstances and the conduct OF
Maxwell, after he had committed the
murder, create in the unparalleled mind
doubt as to his sanity that is hard to
drive out of the mind. He fingered
about As hours in st. Louis without any
substantial reasOn'fOr this hazardous de-
lay, when a sane man would have en-
ployed the time thus wasted and dawdled
away in making his escape from the
scene of his crime, and in so covering up
his tracks as to battle pursuit. Then he
must take along with him, slowed away
in his baggage, articles OF jewelry and
clothing that had belonged to the dead
man, which, in case they were found in
his possession, would constitute strong
link in the chain of circumstances that
pointed to him as the murderer OF Prel-
Ter. He might have dropped these tell
tale articles into the ocean some night
during the voyage from San Francisco
without being observed, or he might
have destroyed them or pitched them
into some alley before leaving st. Louis.
Prudence and common sense dictated
prOmptest destruction of these circum-
stantial evidences of his guilt, yet he re-
tains possession of them as If he had been
in IA conspiracy against himself and was
bent on furnishing the evidence to
convict himself Again be exhibited his
roll of bank bills with an air of idiOtic
OstentatiOn, and asked the clerk of the
wine room If he thought $500 would
save a man from the legal consequences
of murder committed by him. He
even asked the barber, whose services
he called in, II trimming his hair and
shaving OIL his whiskers had wrought
such n change in his personal appearance
as would prevent his being identified by
a detective. Such question could not
fail to arouse vague suspicious in the
minds of his hearers, at the moment,
and when the body in the trunk should
be discovered, as it was bound to be, to
direct this suspicion to him and form
meshes in the net work of circumstan-
tial evidence that would be thrown
around him. like a garment. Nor does
he seem to have acted any more dis
creetly after he reached San Francisco,
where he stopped at the leading hotel,
instead of at some obscure boarding
house in some obscure street, where he
might seclude himself from the public
gaze, and increase the difficulty Of
his being detected. Common sense
and prudence would have pointed
out to him the immense importance OfsO
covering up his tracks after his flight
from st. Louis as to put it out of the
power of the detectives who were likely
to be trailing him up to discover the
fact that he had ever come to San Fran
cisco. While in San Francisco, so far
from seCudng himself as much as pos
Sible, which he might have done under
the plea of iRdispOstiOn, he seems to
have made himself quite a conspicuous
figure in a discreditable sort of way.
He told an inmate of the brOthel, which
he visited, that he had shortly before
killed a man and that he did not mean
to be arrested.
From first to last, his acts and conduct
were not those Of perfectly sound
minded man. and we think they point to
the fact that he was insane to some eX-
tent. Whether this unsound mental
condition was of such a character as to
efface from his mind the boundary be-
tween right and wrong, is another ques-
ton, and which it is the province of the
Jury now trying him to determine, but
we are very decided in our conviction
that he was insane TO some extent at the
time of the killing.
The statement made by Maxwell on
the witness stand that he Killed Preller
accidentally while performing an opera
ton on him, is disprOved by the facts
and circumstances. When men kill
fellow-man accidentally they attempt
homicide but at once inform some one of
the fact and how it come about; and had
Maxwell really killed Preller uninten-
tiOnally he would not have taken so
much pains to conceal it, as he is shown
to have done. Nor does a person who
unintentionally kills a man follow it up
by rObbing him of his money, clothes
and jewelry. That Maxwell was almost
destitute of money is strong circum-
stance against him, inasmuch as it shows
motive for the murder. That after
killing Preller he robbed him of 5000 in
money, his watch and clothes, goes to
show his plea of unintentional killing is
false. The robbery and the plea are not
to be recOnciled, and yet they must be
recOnciled before his plea can avail him.
The testimony of the druggist as to
the purchase of the ohlor0form by Max
well talies with what the detective
swOre that Maxwell told him in Jail.
The plea of unintentional homicide is
shown by Maxwell's own acts to be
false. ANTHONY W. DILLARD.
Our Colored Citizens.
Much is said of the want of energy
and thrift on the part of cOlored people