Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1888-04-19

oue hahu, oE pESsuuplaNS anu CICullstaDti
on the other. The government does II
seek TO establish this charge against the re
pondent by direct and positive testimony b
rather by that which is called presump,i'
and circumstaniial. Direct evidence is tn
which relates and applies directly to II
main issue TO be proved. Circumstant
evidence does not apply directly TO the mai
fact 10 be proved, but applies TO othe
and often numerous facts and circumstance
around the main fact TO be proved, all havin
more or less connection with it, and havin
more or less tendency to establish it. Anon
these actual circumstances or occurrences q
life each event will be found to have its a,
propriate place. All will be found in actus
HE consistent with each other. Truth is al
ways consistent. Real facts are always i
harmony; and when any person attempts t
invent a fictitious story it will always be pos
sible TO prove its falsity if you can compar
all of its parts with all other events whic
have actually occurred at the same time
a comparison can always be fully made it
falsity can always be exposed, Now there i
no act Of the legislature or pri1 ciple of Law
which will enable the court TO inform yo,
what differences you shall draw from thes,
facts that are thus proved, if they are proved
The court can only tell You that it is iucum
bent upon the government 10 establish eacl
one of these facts beyond a reasonable doubt
that they should all be consistent with each
other, consistent with the main fact to b,
proved, and that the differences drawn from
all these facts together should be found il
harmony with your experience, with the com
mon experience of mankind go fa
as you know and with the
ordinary course of human conduct; and these
infereuces should be found so strongly pro-
bable as 10 give you full satisfaction of the
main proposition TO be proved.
Now the government seeks TO establish
the charge against the respondent by an ap-
pllcaton of this class of testimony principal
ly 1t begins its inquiry, however, with the
uncontrovertcd proposit n that on the l4th
of February last Christopher c. Beal came
TO his death from the effect of poison with
strychnine taken into his stomach NAV
be justified i'll saying that there is no con
trovcrsy that the poison taken was contained
i'll Il flask of whiskey in the cellar of his
store. The burden is upon the government
to show you beyond a reasonable doubt that
the poison was mingled with that whiskey
Intentionally by some person for the purpose
of destroying the life of Mr. Beal and To ex-
clude beyond reasonable doubt the hypo-
thesis of accidental poisoning and suicide
The possibility of both accident aud sui
eide has been suggested by the defence. II
is admitted however, that either theory
seems TO be at variance with the circum-
stances attending the death and with the
and dying declaration of the
deceased. The State says either theory is
entirely unsupported by any substantial
fact i'll the case, that there was nothing in
his domestic or financial troubles to raise IA
suspicion of suic ide, aud the manner in
which the whiskey was deposited and drank
completely negative both suicide and acci-
dent
Consider the evidence relating IN al.
legged motives for the crime, the opportunity
and the means for committing IT, and the
conduct of the prisoner before and after the
death of his father. The State saws hi, re-
peated remarks about carrying ON the busl-
ness If his father should step out, show that
he harbored purpose to remove the father
TO obtain immediate control of the business;
and that the irritation caused by his discharge
from his fathers employment on the 2Sth of
January last was the spur which prcked
the side of this intent The defendant
says there was no serious trouble between
father and son, more than frequently occurs
and the defendant knew there was no proper
Iy and no business of value, the estate being
Insolvent. The State says If 1t was murder,
somebody committed 1t; that there is no
sembhnce OF notve Tor any other person.
but there is some appearance of motive for
he state further says that the
circumstances relating to the motive should
be examined III the iIght OF testimony re-
lating to the defendants bad reputation for
integrity ana morality You VIII Judge OF
thls question OF motive.
lhe defendant says others had equal OPP
poftuhity WIN nm To reach the bottles OF
whlskey IN the cellar. lhe State says only
DIXON the clerk. and the brother George
had equai opportunity ;ahd both are exclddei
oy 'he uhuispu'ed iac,s ana circumstances,
beyond reasonable doubt, from all partIclpa-
''on III ''e ''i''e
The defendant says no strychnlne has been
found III the possession OF the defendant.
| he State claims otherwise ard ref RS to the
defendants own story relating TO the bottle
IN Cnshman Browns stable. 1t is claimed
that IN telling that story he was induced by
the fattering hope of showing that the poison
was mixed with the whiskey IN Boson aud
OF dl'ertlng suspicion IRON himself. The
bottle which he admits he had in his hands
and drained OF ITS hquid contents IN that
stable was found by frof. Robinson to CON
tam sediment OF strychnlne. The defend q
ant says the fact that he re lated this incident,
when could not otherwise have been known
is the strongest indication OF his innocence
l he state says the defendant never men
toned the circumstance before, and never
drank any whlskey from The barrel in the
cellar afterward. The theory of the gov
ernment is that larger quantity OF strych-
nine than the whlskey could hold in solution
was first placed III the bottle, and then all
but the sediment turned into the bottle from
which the deceased drank. The chemist
tells you this bottle contained poison enough
to kill forty or fifty men. The defendant
says he had no knowledge of any stry chulne
in the bottle.
The State next asks attention to another
incident which is claimed to be one of con-
trolling significance and importance the
alleged attempt of the defendant to pur-
chase s,ry chime at the drug store of J. +.
McManus in Wateryille. This rests upon
the testimony of l.. ID. Carver and Mr.. Nc
Manus. We have seen those witnesses and
heard their testimony. They took the re-
sponsibility of stating as n fact that the de-
-. >. -. - -. =,