Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1888-09-18

SUPERIOR CouRr,
/ Sept. Term, 1883.
STATE vs.. CHARLES L. BEAL.
Charles L. Beal, the defendent in tn,
above entitled action, being duly sworn says
on oath, that since the trial and verdict agains
him therein of guilty of murder in the tirs
degree" found at the April term of sale
court now last passed, new material and i'm
portant evidence have been discovered whieh
he believes and is advised would in case of y
new trial, be likely 10 change said verdict in
his favor. That said new evidence is of a
character distinct from any evidence pro
duced at his said trial in April, and such al
he could not have anticipated and was not
informed of until after said verdict again,
him.
That Leonard d. Carver of Waterville, in
said county was a witness in behalf of the
State, on said trial and gave the testimony
.ch your atfiant begs leave to produce
in connection herewith which was in sub
stance, that your petitioner visited the drug
store of J. +. McManus in said Waterville
in the first part of February last, and before
the decease of Christopher c. Beal, of
whose murder your petitioner IS accused, and
inquired for and tried to purchase strychnine
which was refused him, the details of which
incident is related by said Carver, going
very strongly TO make it appear to the jury
| that your petitioner was at said drug store at
tempting to procure strychnine with the
intent and purpose of killing the said Chris
topher c. Beal.
That the said j. +. McManus also testified
to the same effect and in such manner as to
lead the jury to believe that your petitioner
was at the drug store of said McManus 10 pur-
atnt,, tah ,,rla
said Christopher c. Beal. The testimony of
which two witnesses for the State Your
Honor remarked in the charge to the jury,
and your petitioner fully believes was of the
greatest significance" as it was left by said
witnesses and well calculated to condemn
him as guilty of murder in the first degree
and ''of controlling importance" in said trial,
and he begs to be allowed to produce the
testimony of said McManus in connection
herewith.
And now before stating the newly discovered
evidence your petitioner wishes here again,as
always heretofore, to deny absolutely that
he was the person who was at the said drug
store as testified by the said Carver and Me-
Manus, and that il is, as he believes, a case
of mistaken identity on the part of said wit
nesses, yet the jury doubtless believed that
it was your petitioner and that he was seeking
strychnine with mur,ierous intent toward the
said Christopher c. Beal.
The new evidence which has been dis
closed and which can be adduced in case
your petitionser hall be granted new trial is
as follows:
Said }. F. McManus will testify that the
person who came to his drug store in Water
vile as he testified at the original trial, and
whom he believed and testified TO be the
- hal firr ~,
him. said McManus, in low tone when in
his drug store on that occasion in which he
Informed said Mcyanus that he wanted
something to make the old man
awful sick that the old man--or his father
the witness cannot state positively which
was drinking hard, and he desired to sicken
him; that he expressed no intention other
than this, and was entirely frank in regard to
the purpose for which he desired strychnine,
and that he, said McManus, communicated
said conversation to said Leonard ID. Carver
rs soon as the person who called for the
strychnine had gone out of the store.
Therefore, inasmuch as said new evidence
would very strongly tend to convince the
jury that said person, whoever it was, had no
murderOus intention and consequently, al
though the jury might still believe it was
your petoner who called for strychnine at
the drug store as testified, they must believe
that he was not attempting to procure it for
the purpose of numbering his father, but to
make him sick only. Ard if they should
still believe that the petitioner for such pur-
pose only put strychnine in the whisky which
his father drank and was thereby fatally
poisoned, it would not be murder in the first
degree but a crime of less enormty. He
humbly prays your honor to grant him new
trial G.. l.. BEAL.
KENNEBEo S.:
September Is, 1888.
Subscribed and sworn to
Before me,
II. NJ. HEATH, Justice of the Peace
Attorney General Baker appeared to oppose
the motion.
J. +. McManus, the Watervile druggist
who testified at the trial that Beal called al
his drug store in February and inquired fol
strychnine, was called and testified that al
the time the man whom NE called the pris-
oner was at his store, he held conversation
in low tone with him in which he said that
| the "od man. or his father, was drinking
badly and had been playing tricks on US boy
and he wanted to get something to make him
sick. That this was the purpose as disclosed
by the low conversation and that he, Me
mapus, after the man had gone out, told L.
ID. Carver, who was present in the store
what the man said to him in the low conver.
sation.
L. ID. Carver testified in corroboration oil
the statement of McManus, and said tha
from what McManus told him of the prvat,
conversation he was impressed with the belief
that the boy wanted the poison only for tht
purpose of making some one sick and not fol
any murderous purpose.
The Attorney General contended that tbs
evidence proposed was Of slight importance
and could not affect the result in case new
trial should be allowed. The circumstanc,
of the call at the drug store was but one liuG
in testimony and that the case was sufficient
ly strong without it. The calling for stryci.
nine at the store was the main fact and It.,
important one; the object disclosed by tE'
| at ha time uae of M