Pawtucket tribune. (Pawtucket, R.I.) 1890-189?, 1893-12-26
STO[El EVIDENCE.

case where an innocent man came near
forfeiting his life.
The facts were these: Mr.. Courtney, a
rich old bachelor, had vyo nephews-Ed-
ward Horton, his sisters son, and Charles
Courtney, the son Of his brother-who had
Inherited handsome fortune on the death
Of his father.
Mr.. Courtney died suddenly, and IL was
discovered that il was the result of dan
gerous prescription which Edward Horton
had received from the family physician
and had taken To a drug store 10 be filled.
The doctor, who was "A man of reputa-
ton, swore that another prescript ption had
been substituted containing a dangerous
poison. OF course the nephew made the
substitution, and he was put. .sn prison.
To make matters worse, II transpired
that the amicable relations between the
uncle and nephew had been somewhat dis
turbed Of late by reason OF an attachment
of the latter disapproyed by the former,
who had gone so far as to threaten TO
change his will unless his wishes were
respected.
"Who was In company with You from
the time you received the medicine till you
returned to your uncle's housey' / asked
the prisoner. desperately groping after
something to afford ray Of hope.
"No one" he answered, "but my cousin
Charles, whom met near the druggist s
and who accompanied me-"
/ drew from Edward the tact that
Charles saw the medicine put up, walked
with him little way, then went back for
something, Edward awaiting his return,
then walked arm In arm nearly home,
when Charles left.
n all fpI I..I al ~
being dead, IL he also should die childless
Charles would inherit the whole estate.
Tile did It; he did itp the young man
cried In paroxysm OF excitement too ear
nest to be counterfeit.
"He went out TO get the poison when he
left me waiting. He put IL up TO resemble
the druggists parcel. for which he substi-
tuted 1t as we went along Nillain-l
know 1t nowl ] carried the parcel in the
right pocket Of my overcoat, and it was on
that side he walkedp'
was seated in my Office on the day
preceding that fixed for the trial indulg-
Ing In anything but sanguine expectations,
when tap at the door announced a Wis
ftor. 1t was detective whom had EN-
ployed.
"what L. it," inquired after closing
the door.
81 made IN arrest today" he answered,
"and in the prisoners possession found
this overcoat," undoing a package lie had
brought.
"Welli"
"In one OF the pockets I found this"
And he handed me q small parcel, which
Iopened.
Inside were three papers. folded as drug
gists put up their prescriptions.
"The person with whom | found the
coat" the detective continued, confessed
that he stole 1t from billiard saloon, the
owner having laid 1t aside while playing,
and the date he fixes corresponds with
Mr.. Courtney's murder. But what ismore
important, have ascertained that Charles
Courtney Is the owner of the coat"
"Let us go to the druggist 81" exclaim-
ed, springing from my chair and snatch
ing up my hat.
We were soon there.
"Please examine that parcel" said.
putting 1t into the druggists hands.
He did 30, carefully opening the papers
and inspecting their contents. They con-
tained three white powders.
"How do they correspond with those
you made up for Mr.. Courtney" inquir-
ed, land for which Others seem TO have
been so mysteriously substitutedt"
'They do not correspond at all, he an
swered. "They are the same"
"The samei How do you know that"
"By those figures" he replied, pointing
TO the inside of one Of the papers. 81 had
made a calculation that day ON the sheet
of paper, part Of which / used in putting
mp the prescription bought 10y Mr.. Edward
Horton. The remainder have preserved,
not knowing but 1t might become impor-
tant. Here 1t Is, and you see how this
piece and the figures fiji"
They did exactly. The chain Of evidence
was complete.
Ineed hardly tell you how the trial end
ed. Charles Courtney was called by the
prosecution to prove some important point.
The counsel whom / had retained for the
defense asked him but three questions on
cross examination:
"Had he accompanied the prisoner from
the druggist
"Had he lost an overcoat that day'"
"Was that itt'
The questions were very simple, but the
effect on the witness was most remarka-
BILE. He trembled and turned pale. lie
knew his secret was out and that lying
was useless.
lie answered all three questions in the
affirmative and In a voice scarcely audible.
Before the next witness was called he slip
ped from the court and was never heard Of
afterward.
With the testimony Of the detective and
the druggist, not forgetting that Of the
thief who stole the overcoat, we made short
work OF what had promised TO be "A beau
tiful case of circumstantial evidence
New York Journal.
hOOO'S AND ONLY