The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1893-05-20
SCREW LOOSE SOMEWHERE
Relatives of Hrs. Charles Wadley Pur.
suing q Quiet Investigation.
Trying 10 Determine How Such Plain Case
OF Murder Was Allowed to Go Through
on Lighter Charge.

nt the unusual proceedings In court by
which her husband was sent to the peni-
Tertiary for three years on plea of crImi-
nal operation. They believe that Wadley
Is either an innocent man or else he MUIR
dered his wife in cold blood. The ex-
traordinary action of the grand Jury, which
Is usually guided by the prosecuting attor-
nsy. IN view of the mass of testimony be-
fore Coroner Beck has caused the relatives
to open their eyes in surprise. Wadley Is
presumably on his was to the penitentiary,
as he was sentenced by Judge Cox @ few
days ago.
COMES SION WAS EVIDENTLY FALSE.
There was not the least evidence to show
that Wadley killed his wife by an opera
ton. the evidence. In fact. all showing that
no such operation was performed. yet
Prosecuting Attorney Hoffman accepted
the alleged confession made by Wadley of
causing his wifes death in this manner. 1t
Is resarded as passing strange that man
would plead guilty TO a crime of this kind
when the evidence was overw helming in
its proof that he did not commit il, and an
inference at once suggests itself to thoss
interested. Ii Coroner Beck had been
called before the grand Jury. as they claim
should have been done. he would. no doubt,
have given his opinion that Mrs. Wadley
died from the effect of strangulation at her
husbands hands. DIR. Beck informed Dr..
Divins. q brother of Mrs. WadIey, of such
Intention. Yet another singular feature OF
this proceeding was the neglect of the
prosecutor to coll Coroner Beck before the
grand jury. The coroner had big bundle
OF testimony that would have thrown
different light on the case.
1t Wadley did not cause his wifes death
in the manner described IN his confession
and IN his plea of guilty, then, the relatives
say, u great injustice has been done in
sending him to prison for an offense that
reputable physicians say was not CON-
united. His anxiety to accept the penalty
for the crime he confessed. in light of the
testimony. indicates that he was apprehen-
sive OF more cOndlgn punishment for q
graver crime. IL will be Temem bered that
Mrs Wadley died shortly alter she and her
husband had been dining together. The
man and wife had retired to q room after
leaving the dinner table. and a while
iater Wadley rushed out aud an
nounced that his wife wss dying.
The circumstances were so suspicious
n
careful examination proved that no such
criminal operation "a Wadley afterward
confessed TO had been performed. The
opinions of the physicians wore alike, In
that che died of anemia of the Iarynx. The
coroner followed the case up so closely that
w adley finally made the alleged confess
sion, admitting he brought about her death
In the manner 10 which reference has been
made. The coroner had been informed
that quarrels bel cen Wadley and his wife
INIT Van az N
be the acgressor III these affairs.
Dr. Hester stated last night that he was
very much surprised a. the procedure in
the Criminal Court. He was positive that
Wadley was Innocent of the crime with
which be was charged in the court record
after sentence. DIR. Hester conducted the
autopsy, and was also before the grand
jury. where he gave evidence in line with
the developments at tho autopsy.
STATEMENT OF DIR. DIvENs.
DR.. C.. w. Owens. brother-in-law of
Wadley, is greatly surprised and also in
dIgBant at the manner In which the case
was handled by Prosecutor Hoffman. tie
insists that there was not the slightest evil
dence to show that Mrs. Wadley was killed
in the way which Wadley claims in his
confession. DR.. Owens also makes state
ment which indicates very peculiar pro-
ceeding in the grand jury room. TO say the
least.
"Dr. Beck told me.D said he shat he had
all his evidence In the caee locked ND In
his safe, aud that the grand jury did not
call for it at all. He also told me that his
verdict would be that Mrs Wadley's death
was caused by anemia OF the laryDx.
and, il further called upon, would add
that this was probably caused. rs
lie believed from the evidence. by her hus-
banu strangling her. The coroner also told
me a day or two ago that be was ready and
willing to further investigate the matter.
This action of the grand jury and the after
prosecution of Wadley on the malpractice
indictment seems very strange. There Is q
slip In ii somewhere. 1 understand that
the grand Jury only heard the evidence of
DIR. Hesler. and that he testified that death
was caused by aneInia of the iarnyx, vol
unIeering no theory as to the circum-
stances. however. lt Is absurd To say that
she was killed by criminal operation. as
the autopsy showed not the slightest evil
dence of this claim. / reached her house
within q half hour after she died and re-
manned there until the autopsy was held.
At the autopsy were Drs. Hester. Young.
Rudy. Coroner Beck. Mr. Buchanan and
myself. A most searching examination
was made. with the SUSPICION OF malprac-
tice in view. and il was conclusive
that q criminal operation had not
been performed. 1t seemed perfectly
clear to me and TO the other physicians.
believe, that death was caused BY straDgu-
then he has not had justice. for in this NAL
practice case he is undoubtedly innocent.
DIR. Beck also told me that he had his ver-
diet in the safe, and that the grand jury
did not call for it. l was summoned before
the grand Jury, hut before | could get down
TO the courthouse the body had adjourned.
so l was unable TO give my testimony. /
und erstand that the case can be reopened
with view of returning an indictment for
murder in the first degree and shall try
to find out why the grand jury ignored the
evidence obtained by the coroner.
WHAT HoLTZMAN HAS TO SAY.
Prosecutor Hoffman was seen and ask ed
about the disposition of the case. and made
some rather peculiar answers to the ques-
tions asked him. A Journal reporter called
upon him at his office, and asked him why
IL was that the grand jury returned an in
dictment for a criminal operation, instead
of the graver 0iiense OF murder.
lit Was simply question of the lndict-
ment that MAS returned. or none at oil, re-
piled Mr.. Hoffman.
''Vhat do yOn mean by thatf
Il mean that there was no evidence upon
which TO base IN indictment for muir
DOR
WAS there any upon which TO base an
indictmens for the crime for which he was
indictedp
mo, there was not"
Did not the ply sicians testify that there
wes no evidence that n criminal operation
had been performcdV
They did; but Wadley confessed to bav-
ing performed one'
ala n nor nassibIe or eyen pr0bahla that