The Helena independent., 1889-03-16

Mr. Ballet commenced speaking at 2S0
o'clock. He said he felt the grayeness Of
the occasion In addressing q jury who had
the life of man in their hands whom he
knew TO be innocent. Knowing as he did,
having cleaned his knowledge from law
books, how many innocent men had suf-
fered for crimes they never committed, be-
ing the victims OF circumstantial evidence.
be realized his responsibility and the re-
sponsibility Of the jurors. He then read
the Indictment Commenting upon the IN
dictment Mr.. Ballet said there were six
counts ON which II was possible 10 convict
the defendant, but he was not there seek
Ing for q compromise verdlct-nothlng but
the acquittal OF the defendant would sat
isfy them. IL was the law that the prls-
oner should be given the doubt II one ex-
listed, and as he. thought that had been
proved, q verdict Of acquiital was expected.
No one should be convicted on circum-
stantial evidence II there was an imperfect
link In the chain OF evidence, and the chain
was not perfect The defendant should
not be convicted because he had lived with
a woman and had had words with her.
These words were not OF q malignant char
acter and incidents where persons are lly.
ing together who have had and still have
quaTrels are numerous. The otfense Is al
legged to have been committed In Lewis and
Clarke county, but the only evidence that
had been introduced 10 show that the crime
was committed In Lewis and Clarke county
was the position OF certain prospect hole
and no witness had testified TO the county.
Mr.. Ballet In reviewing the testimony
argued from the defendants standpoint OF
innocence, claiming that when Bryson left
Annie LundstTom he left her because she
had given TO him foul and flthy disease,
which II Bryson had been married to her
would have procured for him a divorce.
The testimony OF Mrs. Levy shows that the
little spats Brys0n and Annie Lundstrom
had did not rise 10 the dignity Of a quarrel
The theory OF the prosecution that Bryson
came TO Montana for the purpose VI max
Ing away with the deceased was not con
slstent with facts testified 10 by witnesses
for the prosecution, that Bryson tried 10
leave the woman while on Eighth avenue,
but she would not permit him TO do so.
The motive OF gain had not been shown. Al
advanced by the prosecution, for Il was In
evidence that the defendant had frequently
sought work, the reason for 80 doing being
that he was out OF money.
When defendant and deceased left The
house on Eighth avenue they walked down
/ broadway. Defendant went into a drug
store 10 buy some medicine and naturally
Bryson's disease came up and he told th,
woman that be was going 20 leave her. III
walked with her 70 the Montana CentrA
depot and that was the last he saw OF her
That they were seen on lower Main stree
that day, Aug n, is In evidence. Refer
ring 10 defendants lingering around th,
city after his alleged offense, Mr.. Ballie
said such an action was never heard OF be-
fore; n criminal always attem pted ~ ge
away a. far as possible from the scene oI
his crime. The defendant, confident tina
the deceased was In Butte, was open an,
| anove hoard In hls acflons fIik.ra tva
no evidence establishing a single allie
CATION In that Indictment tn,
Jury was not there 10 convict upon su.
plclon. no matter what cloud may enyelo
the defendant, but TO convict upon irrefui
able evidence, and that had not been prc
duced. The discrepancies In the defend
ants statements about Annie LundstrOm'