The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1893-05-10
4 Point I'm Practice.

Quite a sensation has been created in
New York by some of tie new testimony
which Governor FLOWER permitted to be
taken in the Harris murder case. And
yet there is no reason why any surprise
should be caused by testimony not taken
under legal rules. One OF the strong
cards played by the counsel for HARRIS was
letter sent to the prosecuting attorney
by WILLIAM F. HOWE a well-known Grim
inal attorney, who is now employed in be-
half of HARRIS. At the time HOWE was
not in the case at all, but presumably
from a general interest in criminal mat
tiers, or as favor to the prosecutor, sent
the following letter:
LAW OFFICES OF HOWE HUNMEL,
81 AND 50 CENTER AND
1885, 13S AND 140 LEONARD-STs.
NEW YORK CITY, Jan. IL, 1892.
Francis L. WELLMAN, ESQ:
My DEAR WELLMAN-First let me con-
graduate you on your victory in the arson
case. | send YOU Taylor on POisons"
1t is good work 1t may be useful for
you to read what Baron PARKE says. Baron
PARKE WAS a very eminent judge. as you
are aware, and one of the barons Of the
court of exchequer. Will you pardon me
for suggesting that in your Harris case, in
the course of your speech, you say to the
jury:
accompany me to the grave of this
poor, poisoned girl"
Then turn to the husband the pris-
Oner) and say to him:
"Y on dare not 90 to that spot. You
put your victim there, she whom you
swore to love, cherish and protect and
you would hear through the sod which
covers her remains her cry on cry of
Murderer Murdererp Over that
grave, to which this poor girl was pre-
maturely sent bv the hand of this assas-
sin, write your verdict. lis that of guilty.
From the grave the cry comes forth that
that verdict must be rendered. etc.
You will excuse. | know. this sugges-
ton. You may use il after your own
fashion; and l think. if you look point
eddy in the eyes OF the accused when you
dare him TO accompany you to the grave
of his victim, that he will finch, and that
you will make a strong point with the jury.
l have not yet succeeded in obtaining
SHAFFER's speech on the Stevens trial, but
am not relaxing nv efforts. Directly
that you shall have it because il was
case OF a husband poisoning his vile.
Yours faithfully, WILLIAM F. HOWE.
The prosecuting attorney, Mr.. WELL
MAN, did not follow the advice exactly
but in the closing part of his address to
the jury he said
And here, in closing this trial. ask
you to remember the dead. L ask you TO
90 with me to that lonely churchyard and
stand for a few moments with me by the
grave of this unfortunate girl, and let Us
there. with barred heads say a few words
in praise of her innocent life-she, who
had right to live for years in this garden
of Gods beauty, suddenly taken from it
and hurled into eternity. Let US write
an epitaph at the grave, Murdered! In
nocent."
And then, "looking pointedly into HAIR
RIs' eyes," he added:
Can HARRIS listen without flinching 4?
Can flesh and blood endure such an or
deal? He betrays no sign, no emotion.
Gesl At last One may read signs of
agony hard to repress in the faint witch
ing of those pale cheeks.
1t is difficult to see what this could
have to do with the question of HARRIS
pardon. The fact that the suggestion was
made TO the prosecutor is nothing. 1t
would be no more improper for him to
say something that had been suggested to
him than something that had originated
in his own mind The only question is
whether his remarks were outside the
bounds OF propristy. and as the courts
have passed on that the executive has
nothing to say.
As a matter of fact the plan suggested
by HOWE is an old trick that has been
worked in many court house in the
country. One of the most notable exam
pies was given by SARGEANT S. PRENTIss,
who told Mississippi murderer to go 10
the swamp where he had buried his vic
tim, remove the moss from above the
CHASTITY skull, gaze into those sightless
sockets, and then return here ii he dared, 7"
or words 10 that effect, and it is averred
that the man was so controlled by the
mighty oratory and presence OF the great
orator that he attempted to obey the in
structions. 1t might possibly be that an
innocent man might make some gesture or
show some change OF countenance that
would be interpreted as a sign of guilt, but
the jury is the hest Judge of that The
accused is in evidence in a criminal case.
So are the witnesses and the attorneys.
| Their looks and actions under all the cir
cumstances OF the trial have more or less
weight with jury, and ought to have.
Democrats Not SpoiIsmen.
II anything has been clearly demon