Butte semi-weekly miner. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1886-1890, 1889-03-20
AWAITING THE VERDICT.
THE FATE OF BRTsON, IN TEE
HANDS OF THE JURK.

HAEDS OF THE FURY.
Arguments of COUNSEL ON Both Sides in
the Memorable Trial-As Usual, q Di-
vergence of Opinion-The Result Not
Known at the Time The Miner Goes to
Press.
BOULDER, Mont, March 15-[Special to
the Miner. court convened at $50 q.
90. ALI evidence having been submitted,
Mr.. Wallace opened his arguments for the
prosecution. He desired no middle line.
and stands firmly upon securing con-
yietion OF murder in the first degree, and
desires to consider only the three following
points: LIST. An unlawful killing. I'd. A
willful, deliberate and premeditated killing.
Sd. To cor slider that deceased was Annie
Lindstrom, and who was responsible for
her death.
Mr.. Wallace, in a most remarkable and
able manner, made a complete resume OF
the evidence. as introduced by the prosecu-
ton. He called attention to the letters
wri: ten by defendant to Mary O'Dsll, in
which he expressed himself as anxious to
secure
EvENG ON SOMEBODY,
and he (Wallace) claims that it was then
and there the plan was laid by which Annie
| Lindstrom met her death. If defendants
statements were true, that they separated
by mutual consent, there was no occasion
for him to fear trouble or suspicion by the
officers OF the law.
The letter written to Della Lowe and
l never mailed, which was found in defend
ants valise when arrested, deftndant
| claims to have placed there as a decoy to
| mislead the officers as to his whereabouts.
| Evidence had shown that Bryson had
| never left Helena from the time OF his ar
rival until arrested.
FOR THE
Mr.. Ballet then followed with arguments
for the defense. Recalling numerous cases
OF circumstantial evidence, where innocent
men have suffered the extreme penalty OF
the law, he warned the jury to be careful in
their deliberations.
He vas not before them seeking a com |
promise verdict. 1t must be guilty or
acquittal.
The defense, as outlined, is to place the
crime on someone else. Joe Eggars, whose
name has been mentioned frequently dur
ing the trial came in for his share OF suspi- |
cion. How came the bank certificate OF
Hagans into Lindstrom's possession? Was |
q wrong committed against him? Was ii
not possible that Eggars had followed them
to Montana, after making his threats
against them in Minneapolis? A man had |
been seen, living like a hermit, on a blanket
on the mountain. Could not he, Eggars, |
have committed the deed? Could he not |
have seen them go to the depot, and as the
train did not cave for an hour or more, |
met the woman, and |
FINALLY DISPOSED OF HER?
1t is evident that the body was carried to
the hill in a cab. There is no question
of that.
1t did not rest upon the defense to
prove that Eggars or anyone else did
commit the crime. The evidence should
prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that
the defendant, Bryson, is guilty. The
theory was practicable, and the jury
should consider it. Nothing was so exas.
perating to q mar as a woman leaving him
after a marriage license had been issued,
as in the case Of Eggars and Annie Lind
6trom.
The defense disputes that the prosecution
is not at fault, when they wish to establish
beyond q doubt that deceased met her
death on the night of August 81, and at
the prospect hole. The man seen by Mr..
Bluerock, late at night, coming from the
hill, was the man who killed Lindstroma and
slowed her away, whoever he may be.
Was it Bryson2
Mrs. Harting stated when she arrived at
home that night, beard that Bryson was
moving about the room, which was lit up,
and consequently at home. Could not de-
ceased have picked up an entire stranger,
onwhom she a made a mash, and bitter
q night OF ~debauchery in the heat Of pas.
sion could not this stranger struck her the
fatal blowP Women OF her class fire.
queatly do such things.
Dr.. Morris had testified that neither one
OF the wounds were necessarily fatal. Sat.
isfactor steps had not been taken to find
out the true cause OF her death. De.
ceased
GOULD HAVE TAKEN POISON,
died in the house of an innocent man, who
secreted the body to avoid suspicion.
He repeated that his client would rather
suffer death than confinement. Let your
verdict be either murder in the first degree j
or liberty. You jurymen are entitled to j
your opinion, and let nobody swerve you
waver should your opinion be one of
his innocence. Thedefendant is entitled to l
the benefit of any doubt, and not the Ter
ritory of Montana.
Women of deceased's character often
suicide. Cases have been frequent
Montana. He criticised severely the
careless inquest held on the body by the .
coroner, calling it trifing and an Injustice !
fn the nnfonHo nf ond tho r,hlio
Reading a pathetic appeal expressed in a
letter from a daughter OF the deceased,
counsel called it an eloquent appeal, show.
ing to what depths of DEGRADATION she
who bad fallen, and bearing out the theory |
Of the defense.
Nh. Wallace followed with the closing ar. !
in this II
CASE,
'omplimenting the defending counsel for c
the zeal and ability displayed in the I
Ease. Il
Mr.. Wallace, referring to the man Eg. r
Jars, refutes the idea presented BY counsel
or the defence. He had not been seen or |
leard OF since by anyone, and his appear G
lnce In Helena and his committing the r
rhine would be entirely without reason. Y
No evidence showed that any other man I
yer called at her room, or that any init !
macy existed between her and other men,.
tefutes the story Of disease and separa. r
ion; sxplodes the theory Of suicide, as the .
roman beyond q doubt. had walked about .
ne hole alive, as shown by the imprints Of I
he heel. L
IN THE HANDS OF THE JURY. q
BOULDER, March 15.-[Special to the Il
liner. ]-Arguments closed at 6 p. NJ, the il
lry received their instructions, and the 2
ase is nov in their hands. o
NO EPoRr OF THE VERDICT, P
The jury must have remained out until n
fter the telegraph Office at Boulder closed. al
n the dispatch announcing that the easel " y
ad gone to the jury was the latest we had III
'ceived up to q late hour. &c