Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1892-04-09
JUDGE BRADlEY'S CHARGE.
A Clear Exposition of the Evil
dence and the Law.
SCENES IN THE COT RI.
The Room Crowded with Spectators and the
Charge Listened To with Intense Interest
The Prisoner ExhibIts Some Emotion as
the Jury Filed Out.
TnSiax,a RrnceeAinga.

Schneider. The announcement IN HE SrAE
that the trial would be concluded today had
the effect of crowding the court even more
than il was yesterday. Every seat was taken
by $50, and when District Attorney Cole
resumed his argument every foot OF standing
room was filed On the steps leading to the
Judges bench members of the bar stood packed
as closely as IL Was possible 10 do so. Never be-
fore was the room 30 crowded. Aboutthe only
unoccupied space In the room was that directly
in front Of the Jury. and even that WAS eur
tailed to such an extent that the district attor-
ney had barely room enough to move about
THE APPEARANCE OF THE ACCUSED.
The terrible ordeal through which the de-
PENDANT had passed during the district attor-
news scathing denunciation of him had a most
noticeable effect upon him He looked terribly
cArewCrn. and for the first time during the
trial he seemed to have lost his careless and in
different manner. He at last appeared to fully
realize his position, and frequently showed by
the nervous twitching Of his mouth and hands
that he was far from the indifferent being he
had been
MARY HARRIS TESTIMONY.
The district attorney resumed his address by
calling the attention of the jury to the tssti-
mony of Mary Harris, the colored woman who
had testified that she the defendant throw
down his revolver. She had. by her simple
straightforward manner. impressed every one
an educated woman Of wealth. but she
honest woman and was much entitled to be
believed as the noblest lady In the country.
AN ABSURD PRETESsIoS-
The district attorney then referred TO what
he termed was the absurd pretension of the
defendant that the pistol which fired the bull
lets into his wife's body had been held five feet
away. The powder marks on the coat made
him out liar, in that as other testimony had
made him out a liar in everything else material
to his defense. Judge Wilson had claimed
that according to Rose Rosary's testimony six
shots were fred. but the attempt was so in
sincere that it hardly needed a denial Dr.
Thompson had told that he had searched the
night of the shooting for the fifth bullet That
for the fifth bullet if there was a
fusillade of shots-if ten shots were
fred? He searched for the fifth bullet because
he had been told by every one there that night
that but five shots were fired. If more had
been fred. why had not Frank Schneider, why
had not Manning said to him that there were
more than five shots fired? Simply because the
defendant had not then had time TO hatch his
lies. That was the only reason
THE PISTOL THAT DID THE DEED.
Judge Wilson had said the government had
denied that there were two pistols 1t had
done nothing of the kind. The government
had said from the first as it said now. that there
district attorney, holding up the Merwin a
Hubert pistol found by Frank Hamlink's BODY.
lis the weapon which the defendant used in
his terrible work 1t may have been
Frank Hamlinks pistol, but whether it was or
not is no matter. IL 1t was the defendant
stole il to take his wife's life and the life of the
man to whom il belonged. IL is fair to pre-
sumo to say this, for the defendant had ample
opportunity to take it IL has been told YOU
gentlemen Of the jury that after the defen liant
taf tha nltrk rkar
never seen again.
Frank Hamlink did not have a revolver
when he left the house with mis- sisters for
church that night. He did not even know
that he would meet the defendant that night
When Frank HamlInk was found his over
coat was buttoned tightly about him. That
showed that he did not have time to open his
overcost Men carry their pistols in
their hip pockets, not in their over
coat pockets. unless they carry it, like the de-
PENDANT in their overcoat pockets to do instant
murder. IL the pistol was Frank Hamlink's il
was stolen from him by the defendant to Kill
him with il, and then after the murder was
done to claim that Frank HamIink nsd used
that weapon on the defendant.
But, gentlemen Of the Jury said the district
attorney, the scheme was not a new one II
was centuries old. The great poet Shakespeare
tells of II in his immortal play of Macbeth"
where Macbeth stole the dagger of Duncan's
guaras to murder the king. Ii was a scheme
cowardly, as murderous as this defendant be-
fore you III there were no other testimony in
this case il would be enough to convict the de-
PENDANT IL the defense wish to have YOU be-
heve that the pistol was Frank Hamlink' am
perfectly content to have them do So"
MASSISs's CONFLICTING STORIES.
The district attorney then referred to the at
tempt made on the stand by Manning to have
the jury believe that he took the pistol ont of
Frank Hamliukfa hand wba -,
not Manning was not able to tell two stories
ak about finding the pistol Every one he
spoke TO about it heard a differ
eEt version Of It. Had he not
right To De indignant over sGch testimony
lie surely had. He was indignant here. and he
was indignant when Manning attempted to
create the same false impression in the district
attorneys Office. Who would not be indiV
nant over such thing? pistol was IN
doubtedly found near the BODY but he vopld
never take Mannings word for u, and that
was the reason why he had not put him on the
stand. He could and would not believe him,
and he had no hesitation in saving so. The
defense had endesvored tccreste the impress
s1on that Manning found the pistol in Frank
Hamlinks hand. not near it. not bv it, but in
ms hand, gentlemen And in doing that they
knew they we're doing something that was not
true"
Now. who put up that scheme but the de-
fendanr Did he not say TO his brother Frank.
Go back and YOU will ind a pistol in FranL
Hamlink's hand" Manning was there and i'm
mediately began to peddle out the storv
about town that he fonnd the pistol
IN Frank Hamlink's hand That w.s
where the story came from and that
IL how il originated Manning wa- not the sr.t
man to reach the body Col Hamlink was the
nrst one to reach II. Col Overtou came nm
just as he reached II, and he svears that Manning
was not there. He also swears that he saw no
revolver. Col Hamlink says the same. and
young Sanford said the same. Manning did
not have the pistol then, else these men would
have seen II Manning said he pick led the BODY
up, but both Col Hamlink and Col Oyerton
swear that he did not Manning also said that
he handed the pistol to Officer Morgan lust
where he found it Ofhcer Morgan said Man
ung handed him the pistol after the body had
been carried into the house
TINE Defendants MOTHER AND SISTER
The district attorney then referred to the
testimony Of the defendants mother and sister
Maud He had nothing harsh to say of them.
He could understand how they felt-their wish
to help this defendant He could sneak
hArshly only of the man Who to save
his own worthless life, insisted upon his
mother and sister going upon the stand
and swear to something they knew was
not 90. He could understand how that mother
and sister could sndeavor TO persuade them
selves that they saw the pistol there in
Frank Hamiink's hand; but the pistol Was not
there. They knew il was not there. rs every one
else knows IL ives not there. aud with that he