New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1893-01-25
MRS. HARRISS APPEAL.
A PLEA FOR HER CONDEMNED son.

POINTS IN THE CASE WHICH A CORRESPONDENT
THINKS SHOULD NOT BE OVERLOOKED.
TO the Editor OF The Tribune
sir: There two or three points In the letter
OF Mrs. Harris the mother OF Carlyle W. Harris
published In The Tribune OF Yesterday which ought
not TO have been overlooked BY lover Of justice
10 matter how firmly convinced he NAV BE- Of the
guilt Of the young man. OF this there could be
scarcely n doubt in the mind OF any one accustomed
to weighing and sitting evidence who followed the
testimony In the trial. Yet Is It not possible that
some Of the most damaging Of that testimony.
ccntradicted rs It was, may have been misleading
1t viii be remembered that one aspect df
the case most damaging to Harris the testimony
as TO his character lie shown 10 be cold.
heartlese. unprinciped lbertne. who might easily be
guilty OF the crime OF murder.
|, who followed the closely. argued to myself.
al he Is not such "A valn If his life has been.
the whole. upright clean and honorable why do
not his counsel present evidence to counteract the
testimony which counts against him even more than
the circumstances OF his Young wfc's death''
II Is possible. aud In the light Of Mrs. flarriss
statements 1t seems probable. that the reasons for
the absence Of favorable testimony to his character
and habits that, In the plan OF defence adopted
BY his counsel. IT not considered necessary
though It proved the turning point against him. 1t
could hardly have been expected that the prosecution
would work up It's case in such thorough manner,
and the counsel for Harris NAV have been wholly
unprepared to meet the outside testimony. No one
can question the ability with which the defence was
conducted yet 1t is possible that the whole plan OF
defence wrong. and that the strong points when
would have counted in favor Of the accused were
omitted. Certainly Mrs. Iarls's letter reads in
every word like the utterances Of sincere. straight
forward. clear minded woman. and her assertions. II
trne susceptible of proof In regard to the
charge OF other secret marriages, it net proven,
and ought not have had weight, resting as 1t |
did upon the memory Of witnesses AS to careless
statements. perhaps mere boyish bravado, made by
Harris year or more previous to the tial. let |
taken In connection with other damaging teslinohy
this charge probably received more cr'dence 'hah !,
entitled 10. 1t served as one link In chain |
which might have been weaker than 1t seemed |
Harris counsel wa not prepared for the over
whelmlng testimony brought forward rs to his charac
ter: that they relied too much upon ,he aos,r ,,
Of positive proof rs 10 me manner o. the glfi'
death. 1, II not possible that THIS young man Is
innocent. aud has been eatansed In II network N
circumstances
If there Is one chanc" In hundred thousand that
this may be the ease in the name OF mercy Of lnIe,
Of Gods eternal principle! OF hight, lci nm nm, lave
another chance TO prove his innocence. JUsrrTIA
York, January -. 1888.
A RESPONSE TO THE APPEAL OF MRS. HARRIS.
TO the Editor % The Tribune.
Sir: Mrs. Harris. the mother OF Carlyle W. Harris,
who is accused Of murder In her very touching appeal
10 the public which yOn have just published In Your
paper says: ask every lawyer. every DOCTOR every
clergyman every and woman who cares for
Justice 10 be administered 10 demand this new tla
Write your letters Immediately TO the papers that
Recorder smyth may know the opinion OF the public
therefore write to say that young Harris was
scholar I'm my school for about year. when he was
lboni fifteen. lie bright. Wide awake, nor II
ard student but slways doing fairly well. lie was
n hIgh health and always ready for any fun, so that
gave the usual Of trouble that healthy boys
10, but there nothing vicious. nothing under
handed. nothing di,ngrcable about him. have met
lin occasionally since that time, and always found
hin intelligent and interesting.
OF course | read all that could find 10 read about
ais trial. and followed the evidence very closely. The
roofs offered by the cution seemed 10 me 30 sy
md Inconcu,lve that presumed they would all be
wept away by the lawyers for the defence. They.
lowcvcr though said to be good men, proved them
elves wretchcdly inefficient and In fact made hardly
my defence AT all asked to write letter IN
Ms favor which was TO be submitted 10 his counsel
md printed II they thought best. II not printed.
In spite Of the wIetched conduct of the by the
defending lawyers. the prosecuting proofs appeared
- be ~ ilmsy that IL seemed 20 me impossible that /
nv jury could convict any upon such proofs, yet
o my very great surprise they did.
Let us now examine some OF these proofs BY the
light of common sense. \ Young man was brought |
nto court from drug store. who soemnly proceeded
o show the court and jury TINT h- could take II cap
|
uinIne. and then Nil 1t up with morphine. and this
offered part Of the proof that Harris poisoned
lis wife. The proper to this on the part Of |
he defence would have been TO produce in a !
mall pail full OF morphine. sufficient to kill u | |
housnnd men, then have another pail of the same
lie hlled with bT;ln. and get l0uns man 10 empty ,
Ut The bran aud pat the Morphine IN It's place, and ,
hen ak the Jury II they fought hat this proved
lat certain pcron on certain occasion Lad poisoned
certain Thousand MIA. 7
II was proved by physicians Of high character and
Ugh standing that IN certain diseased conditions of
10 body the amount Of morphine In the pills con |
'sscdly taken by Hanis's young wife would have |
luscd death
Agsins this the prosecution attempted to show that
II the organs In the BODY Of this Young woman
cath by a post norton examination made more b
han nifty DAYS after death. Are To believe that
NY man CROPPING about In the mass OF corruption =.
eceSsnrily existing after such lapsc Of time could
ifey testify 10 the sound condition Of at
~ time OF deathl To satisfy myself about that. |
n many years professor In OF best medical
,llcg"s, and asked him whether any such evidence
TIER snch lapse Of time was Of any account Ills a
nswer Certainly not" lie added There is "
proof whatever that Harris committed this crime. | ~
nd moreover, there Is not sufficient proof that this
)ung woman died Of morphine poisoning" ri
Another part OF the prosecutions proof was that III
inandaleua. Therefore he must have murdered hi,
,ung wife. Are deliberately 10 put men to death &C
BON such wrctcledy incOncluslve proof this | :,
JOHN MACMI'LLEN. ~
No 521 West One hundred and sixty -frSts Jan o. D.
SYMPATHY FOR MRS. HARRIS ~