The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1893-12-27
ANNIE WAGNER'S FATE
1t Will Probably Be Determined
by the Jury This Evening.
Mr.. Span Completes His Argument for
the Defense-Purchase of Poison
and Motive.

trial. They all expected a masterfuI
plea for the life OF the GIRL nor were they
disappointed. In substance Mr.. Spaan said:
Il was talking about the scheme Of this
girl. claimed by the prosecution. to mar
~ Charles Koesters. They have laid great
stress on the fact that she had addressed
some valentines TO herself and that when
the postman delivered them she remarked
that she did not care for that fellow
They say that this was a scheme to excite
Koesters's jealousy. She says she bought
the valentines for little Mamie. If she had
not testified the whole story would have
fallen to the ground of its own weight. Her
entire conduct in that family stamps the
story as lie. They say that the poisoning
of little Mamie a part OF her scheme
TO aid her in marrying Koesters. That Is
the most fiendish thing that has crept into
this case. The idea of poisoning a nine-year-
old child, who only added to Koesterss
necessity for a wife. for the purpose of in
creaSing her chances of becoming Mrs.
Koesters! The death of Mamie Koesters,
as the court will tell. has nothing TO do
with this case, only so far it goes TO
show motive for the commission Of the
crime with which this defendant is charged.
Who was little Mamie Koesters? Why had
her childish affection found an echoing
chord in the breast of Annie Wagner?
Love. One word explains 1t all. The very
touch of Annie's hand, the sound of her
voice was enough to cause this little girl
to yield a childish obedience TO anything
Annie might say, even to the contamination
OF this fiendish scheme, had it been well
founded. The story of the conversation of
little Mamie and Annie when Mamie went
to her In the loving confidence always dis
played between them, and told Annie about
the play at the church, in which there was
wicked stepmother, and asked Annie If
all stepmothers were wicked, and Annie
said, Most all are plainly shows that the
thought of marrying Charles Koesters had
never entered her mind. And Mr.. Duncan
then said. with all the eloquence at his COM
mana: She then poisoned little Mamie
CLAIMS A CONSPIRACY.
annie told you that Mamie said that she
was glad that grandpa was gone because
now he could not scold anyone. But old
MrS. Ohleyer, on the other hand, said it
was Annie herself who had said this. You
will remember that Mrs. Ohleyer is the
witness who. while she knew that it was
she who gave Koesters that shirt on Christ
mas day, did not mention ii because she
knew it would help Annie's case to do so.
/ While the Koestrs, the Ohleyers
and this Borst were hatch
ing up this fiimsy scheme against
her they were hypocritical enough
to treat her as equal and a friend.
Great Jehovah, in what way could the old
man Koesters have stood In the way of
Annie Wagner's marriage with Charles
Koesters? Why was little Mamie i'm the
way? They point to her death as an evil
dence. Why. Almighty God. in his benef-
| cent kindness calls away the king from
| his throne and the little child from its
| mothers breast. The proposition stated to
you by Mr.. Duncan and Mr.. Brown is that
| you cannot find the defendant guilty while
| there yet remains I'm your mind a reason
| able doubt Of her guilt This is not the
proposition of a lawyer. II is the funda-
mental groundwork of all criminal juris-
| prudence. 1t is the bulwark of American
| freedom and liberty. Now, If these people
| were poisoned whom do they depend upon
| to prove the fact? Is it a mar whose very
/ name calls to your minds thoughts of
| justice. OF scientific care or integrity? No,
| it is a man who. while at the very begin
ming of his Investigations in this case,
| said. L believe she is guilty. That man
is DR.. Eisenbeiss, an analytical chemist
| who has no laboratory. no instruments, in
II
which he did this work, for which he now
wants $500 of the peoples money. DR.. Rey-
er and DR.. Storch have added their writ
ing to this case and. like the footprints of
| time, their writing now stands out against
them" Mr.. Span then read the death
certificate of DR.. Reyer, in which he at
| tributed the death of little Mamie to toxine
/ poisoning and then took up the evidence
/ given by Drs. Reyer and Storch. showing
| several times where they contradicted
| themselves and each other. Continuing he
] said:
| "Dr. Hurry told you that 1t was possible
| for the arsenic placed the face after
death to have found its way into the stom-
| ach. Thus we have the evidence of DR..
Hurry, who testified that he had not been
paid anything for his testimony. nor would
| he accept anything in the future. placed
in the balance against the evidence Of DR..
| Eisenbeiss the hired, interested numbskull.
| who has had his bill for $500 laid away in
| the pigeon holes OF the commissioners Of
| fee Mr.. Hoffman, do you think he will
ever get II you don't convict this poor
( girl?"
Mr.. Holtzman-Every cent of it.
| You think SO, my friend, but say to
you that the commissioners of this county
| are not going to pay this man Eisenbeiss
| for his worthless services.
| THE State has tried very hard to make
| a point out OF the statement that the de-
| PENDANT objected to the holding of post
| norton examination of Mamie Koesters,
| but when the Witnesses are examined it
| appears that il was Charles Koesters who
| made the objections. You will remember
| that KoesterS himself testified before the
| coroner that he did not suspect anything
! wrong until Mrs. Ohleyer suggested il TO
| him. and that he objected to the post-mor-
| TEN because they did. Dr. Beck said on the
| stand that ii was because of this objection
| that he ordered the post-mortem TO be
| held"
Mr.. Span then stated that he was done
| with all but one point bearing on the case.
| and that was the most important one. He
| then went over the evidence of the case in
| regard 10 the alleged purchase of poison by
| Annie Wagner. He reviewed the evidence
| bearing on that point, quoting from the
| statements made by her sister and brother
| in-law in support of his argument
THE PURCHASE OF POISON.
''They say that her story in regard to
how she obtained the poison cannot be true
on account OF the discrepancy in the
amount of poison found in the box and the
| quantity which should have been in ii ac-
cording to the testimony of Mr.. Splann.
Now, here is the box found in that closet.
and here is box / bought last Friday.
Compare them Do you see any difference
in them? Do you think you would know
which box had been handled around from
hand TO hand since last May and which
one was bought last Friday?' CThe boxes
were passed around To the jury.) Mr.. Spaan
then read from Taylor on evidence TO show
that the detectives, In hunting around the
scene of q crime, always ranSack the entire