Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1892-04-08

hyena form beneath IL
OBJECTS TO SCHNEIDER BEING CALLED HYENA.
Judge Wilson here objected to the character
ization by the district attorney of the defend
ant as a Eyena.
District attorney--Do you object to my call
ing him a lamb, judge?
Judge Wilson-You do Just AS you please.
Will take care of my side of the case.
District attorney-Well, then, withdraw the
term.
The two letters written the night Of the
tragedy by the defendant to MY darling Ger
aid" and to MY darling wife" within few
minutes of each other showed the double char.
acter of Howard j. Schneider Or. Jekylr
Schneider and MIR. HYDE Schneider. And
when it was endeavored on the cross
examination of him to discover which he
really was he lodged behind the oft
repeated re answers. II don't know,
such double characters are found in real life:
but In false, base and cowardly Howard
Schneider both are found.
Judge Wilson, object your honor, to such
terms.
The court-The language is not improper.
The district attorney then called the atten-
ton of the jury to the fact that although Judge
Wilson had produced photographs of houses
showing alleged bullet holes. yet he had not
produced single witness to show that they
really were bullet holes.
Judge Wilson-The photographs were ex-
cinded by the court, and you have no right to
comment upon them.
District attorney They we're excluded until
You had further identified them. That you
failed to do, and have right to comment on
your failure to do so.
THE REAL ISSUE.
The testimony of Manning was referred to by
the district attorney, who said that Manning
had not said that he took the pistol
from the dead boys hand. He had
not said 30, and yet no one
would have been more glad to say so than Man
ming. Judge Wilson had laboriously endeavored
to show that the question in this case was, Did
Frank Hamlink fire the first shot? That was
not the question at issue. The question was. Did
NJ. Schneider. 1t was immaterial who fred
the first shot or how many shots were fired
that night. If the defendant went across
the street to provoke quarrel and
he shot at his wife or at Frank
Hamlink, he committed murder, whether Frank
Hamlink fired or not. 1t was important to
know what were the feelings of the defendant
toward his wife that night. For that reason
his honor had, despite Judge Wilson's
strenuous objections, promptly admitted the
Culpeper letter, wherein the defendant spoke
OF his wife as "a living devil" And could any
one say after reading it that the defendant
wished soon to see that loving wife dead
devil?
THE DEFENDANTS PAST LIFE.
The past life of the defendant was then dis
cussed by the district attorney, who said it
showed his character. Only last May
he made the acquaintance Of that poor
girl who now by his hand sleeps
in the grave. Judge Wilson mad said that
secret marriages brought no good to any one.
secret marriage but the defendant? Had
that poor girl asked for it? Certainly
not. 1t was brought about by the defendant,
who, using a pistol, threatened to blow his
brains out If the poor girl did not consent.
The reason was his alone, mothers. If he could
have controlled her person by any other means
he would never have asked for it. The mar
riage over, his object was accomplished.
While that marriage was kept secret he
was free to 60 with other women. 1t
was at Jennie Hamlink's instigation
that the marriage was made public, and hence
his hatred Of her. For that reason he told
her, You have done me one mean trick,
and I'll cut your throat" And lie it
not fair to presume that the pistol
ball which that fatal Sunday night missed its
tended to shut the mouth of that gentle
voiced girP There could be no doubt OF it.
HIS CowARDLY AND CRUEL NATURE.
The incidents occurring the night of October
"a were then referred to by the district attor-
ney who said that the defendants words
that night, ''You know me, Frank: you
know the kind of man 1 am; you
know what I'll do" showed his cowardly cruel
nature. The defendant had said that his wife
had destroyed her marriage certificate. "Oh.
gentlemen of the jury, when man starts
in to lie why not lie so one will
believe him? Do you believe that Annie
Schneider destroyed the evidence of the fact
that she was a lawful wife? Do you believe
that any woman would do such a thing? No.
no. gentlemen.
mo one now knows" continued the district
attorney, whether Frank Hamlink had said he
would shoot the defendant. But if he had il
was but natural for him to do Who would
not threaten to shoot the man who acted as he
did that night
taking home of the defendant by Col. Hamlink,
and to the fact that although they tried to make
a man OF him his LOYALTY to his wife was shor,
lived. When the defendant wrote the letter ad-
dressed My Darling Wife," he thought
that letter would be the only one which would
reach the eyes of the jury. He never dreamed
the damaging letter to Miss Lightfoot would
ever be secured by the government If it had
not would he not have denied it on the stand.
1t was not love which prompted either.
1t was nothing but a base passion which caused
him to impose upon that gentle, innocent girl
She had escaped horrible fate. but poor Annie
Schneider had been sacrificed. The
defendant had assured Miss Lightfoot's
sister that he would not trouble her
sister further. But did he keep that promised
No, else he never would have gone to Culpeper
The defendant had intimated that his wife was
cognizant of his attention to other women
But she was dead now and her lips we're sealed
forever.
AMIE SCHNEIDER LOVED THIS MAN.
annie Schneider loved this man." said Mr.
Cole. 1T may seem strange to you, gentlemen
of the jury, that she could love such being
But the love of woman approaches that OF
the Father above us. 1t almost passeth
| the understanding. She did love him. else
when he threatened to kill himself if she did
not marry him she would have said DO, So
will not marry you No one could tell OF the
| heartache, the anguish, the tears of thai
ness. But even such love as was hers could
not bear such perfidy, and when she wrote t.
him, after he was locked out, her faith in him
was gone. That note did not begin with any
cndearing term. 1t simply said: Please come
and take your things away"
young man NAMED Appleby had figured in
| the case, and it was not too much to believe
that il the grand jury had known before al
much as Is now known of him he would
| have appeared here an accessory Hs
had willingly played the part Of a go-betweeu
| in order to aid the defendant to bring aboA,
the downfall OF an innocent girl He had used
| his own mothers name to hide his own, and
when questioned about it had lied about it. al
he had about other things. More would be
said of Appleby hereafter.
The district attorney then referred to tn,