Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1890-02-28

ne leconey Trial

Early morning after he had gone 10
~ fIola 70 pursue his daily farm
lakoe. aecompanied by . negro SER
Vnnt. who had breakfasted in the
heuse with his employer and the
murdered girl. Uncle and niece had
lone lived together affectionately, and
ehs was his housekeeper. No motive
Ut her murder by him 10 alleged, but 1t
4 suggested that 1t may have been the
result Of . sudden quarrel. No such
quarrel IL testified to by the negro
servant; he heard no noise Of 1t;
his employer came quietly from
The house, took his seat with him In the
wagon and drove to tho field, whence in
two or three hounhe was recalled by
news Of the deed.
The only important evidence impli-
eating him ID that Of this negro,
who testifies that his employer, when in
The wagon, told him to say that he had
seen the niece In the doorway Of the
kitchen as they drove away and the
further testimony Of q workman OF
doubtful repute, who lived In . neigh
boring cabin In the woods, and who
aays that Leconey came to his house
early that morning and told him that he
had . quarrel with his niece and warned
him TO say nothing about 1t. No inti-
macy ID shown to have existed between
thess men, and no reason IL given where
fore % strange confidence should have
bsen reposed In this miserable wood
dWeller.
The negro 10 Of challenged character
for truthfulness and cloud Of wit
y nesses testify that he told them, when
the surrounding country gathered to
the. scene Of the murder, that he had
seem Its victim alive and well as they
In the house, and he gave no in
timation against his employer until
be fell into the hands Of the
prosecuting officers; who have shown
All the way through to the end Of the
trial the most marked disposition to
twist every little circumstance unfairly
against the prisoner and who released
their hold upon another negro against
whom there are serious circumstances Of
suspicion and have done their utmost to
ahow his Innocence. He was man who
had promised to helpL Leconey in the field,
and who had told the negro servant of
Leconey the day before, that he would
be at Leconey's house to breakfast next
morning. He was not there when the
farmer left, but his plate awaited him
on the table. He turned up at neigh.
boring farm, where he was not expec-
ted to work, at an unusually late
hour for farm laborers to report for work.
One fact which completely discredits
the negro witness is that he swore that
Ieconey wore slippers on that morning
and that he saw them on him as he came
out to the pump to wash his hands
where % 1t was clearly shown that
no one walking from the house to the
pumps could DO seen below the knees
from where the negro says he stood be-
side his horses. And fact which posi-
lively shows that the girl was slain after
Leconey had gone out to the field Is that
half drowned chicken was found In
the stove oven, where someone had
placed 1t after the breakfast had been
prepared and the men had gone out
and who could 1t be but the girl in
whose care the chickens were?
All Of the relatives of the murdered
girl and all his neighbors, who gave
him the highest reputation, believe him
innocent and stand warmly by him
and 1t Is further shown that he was
physically weak and unable to cope
with victim who was unusually strong,
and 1t also appears that he was robbed
at the time Of the murder.
How any respectable prosecuting off,
Ger could venture to bold Leconey for
this crime under these circumstances
We fail to understand nor how 30 great
enort could be made by any honorable
man to hang his fellow upon evidence
n that fails even to arouse a reasonable
suspicion. And herein Is the remarka.
bic feature In this crime which will eve,
make 1t celebrated.
There IL possible reason for the fer
veney OF the prosecuting officers, in tn,
fact that the case has attracted wide at
tsntion and has brought those engaged
In 1t into great prominence. Tn,
desire to win even in a bad caus,
prompts many men to injustice
and this fervency of the prose
cution in this very weak case re
wives the remembrance of anothe
murder case in which the senior prose
cutor was engaged some years ago, an,
In which he became very conspicuou
because OF the prominence of the &C
cused and his success in hanging him
1t IL the case Of Hunter, a Philadel
phtan OF standing, who was convicted OF
circumstantial evidence that did no
amount to conclusive proof. 4
murder in Camden. The strong disposi
! sition shown by the prosecution in thi
this case to secure verdict of guilt
against a man who il held by the CON
muuity and by the victims friends to b
incapable Of the crime, aud agains
whom there IL but the films,
evidence Of discredited witnesses, sul
gests that . like energy in th
Hunter case had an unwarranted su,
GEES, and that Hunter may have been til
victim Of savage prosecution, Just 9
Leconey Is sought to be made.
We have watched this case wit
interest and care and regret [
b. obliged to say that we hay
received the most positive in
preston that its prosecution has bee
unjustifiable In its outset and its co,
duct and does not reflect credit upo
IL authors.
Lively Bishops.
II II not many days since FyanueIic,