The Roanoke times. [volume] (Roanoke, Va.) 1890-1895, 1892-03-08

ABINGDON, March IL Special MIR.
Buchanan began this morning at $50
He opened his argument by reference
to the law Of the land-that every man
is presumed innocent until he is proven
guilty. He then spoke of the side is
sues that have been brought into this
case.
vt is an outrage to try man upon a
single charge for three separate offenses.
The two vital questions in this case
are: Did Mrs. Baker die from poison?
Was the poison administered by DR..
Baker, her husband. If the prisoner is
to be found guilty on circumsta nj ial
evidence every circumstance must be
fully proved, and you must implicitly
believe it az each and all of the OF her
circumstances.
The whole chain is no stronger than
its weakest link. Let us louk at tho
material circumstances in this case;
and first let us take up tho chemical
analysis. 1 will not say anything
about the legality of tho exclamation
except to say that when that body was
eXhumed in order to obtain evidence
against the prisoner, the prisoner ought
to have been there with his counsel and
physicians to see that everything was
legally and properly done.
"But to pass on, DR.. Taylor took the
organs to Richmond and made his
analysis. He found in the liver arsenic,
zinc and q peculiar aromatic odor.
Now the zinc certainly came from the
embalming 1uid so did the aromatic
odor. Arsenic is moro diffusable than
zinc How can you say that the arsenic
did not come from the same source? It
has been proved by experiment that
arsenic placed in the body after death
will, within fourteen days, dilfuse
itself through every part of the body"
MIR. buchanan passed on to the testi-
mony of Mrs. Gilmer, and gave various
reasons whEashe should not believed.
The strongest point he made in this
line of argument was the fact that she
| swears away every statement damaging
to herself--even swcars away tho most
sacred oaths that she took in the letters
| and thus after revising them swears
the remaining passages are true.
but Mr.. Bailey says the letters will
not lie?' Either these lie tiers lie or the
witness lied when she came on the
stand. Then she swears that she never
intended to deceive DR.. Baker, but
when pressed admits that she did"
She lied to her sister, and invoked
the spirit of her dead child to witness
the truth of what she said. She stated
on the witness stand that she did not go
to Paramount with the intention of com.
hitting adultery. She has been false
to her husband, false TO her children,
false to her church and even false to
her paramount. Her letter to DR.. Baker
since the former trial shows that she is
still false-false either to her husband
or TO the prisoner.
But they say that DR.. Bakers an
swer is an admission of his guilt. Are
his protestations of innocence in that
letter an admission Of his guilt? He
told her that She was not compelled to
testify. He meant, of course. that she
could not be made to testify as to che
fact of adultery-for this would have
been to criminate herself. She saws
herself that she is not worthy Of belief
and yet you are asked to believe her.
MIR. Wysor said she was attempting
subterfuges on the standard yet you
are asked to believe her."
MIR. buchanan closed his speech with
an allusion to st. Paul standing before
the Roman judge and demanding with
the ind gnation Of innocence q trial &C
cording to law. He spoke two hours
and twenty minutes, and covered every
detail of the case.
CONFERENCE.-The Attorney L. B. Hut
ton closed the pleading. He began n
few minutes before eleven. He said he
dld not propose to quote poetry or at.
tempt wit; that he came, representing
the people of Washington county and
the State of Virginia to charge tho pris-
oner with poisoning his wife; that it
makes no difference whether DR.. Baker
seduced Margaret Gilmer, or whether
Margaret Gilmer seduced DIR Baker, the
question to be considered is: Did Dr.
Baker poison his wife He took up first
the circumstances that tend to raise a
presumption of his guilt
What is this case? | want to argue
it fairly.
The question for you to consider is:
Did DR.. Baker kill his wife by poison?
You are not called upon to hang him;
you are called upon to say whether or
not he is guilty of the charge. II he is
! guilty he deserves to die. Let us see
whether he has been proved guilty be.
yond a reasonable doubt.
Il will first discuss the questio Did
Mrs. Gilmer tell the truth? What
motive could she have had for testifying
falsely? You saw her motives; you saw
that she did not want to testify. She
said that her whole life was a lie; but
what reason could she have for coming
here and swearing the prisoners life
away? She told the truth. Lot us SEQ
how her story is corroborated."
Tho testimony in corroboratian Of
Mrs. Gilmer was then examined
II say that the adultery and the at
tempted poisoning Of Wyndham Gilmer
show the intent Of the prisoner; they in
tensify the remark: All barriers shall
be burned away fine had the poison.