New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1893-12-12
PRICE THREE CENTS.
MULLER ON THE RACK.
PROGRESS INTHE MEYER CASE
MIR. BROoKE,S SEARCHING CROSS-EXASiHNk
TION OF THE INFoRMER.


he MAKES GREAT BREACHES IN THE PRosECv
| TONS EVIDENCE. WHICH ARE AFTERwARD
PATCHED UP WITH THE AID OF
NUMBER OF suNoR WITNESSES
POINTS MADE on BOTH SIDES.
Rapid progress was made In the Meyer case
Yesterday There were hints during the direcs
examination Of the wiaess Krfel or Muller
that the defendants lawyers were going to take
their time about the cross-examination ana. u
possible to consume several days, making
meanwhile an effort by medical examination 70
secure testimony with which to COMBAT tue
medical proofs that the State possesses OF the
contents Of Baum's stomach after deatn. u
such a purpose as this was entertained by Mr.
Brooke and his assistants, they abandoned IL
possibly upon the discovery that they had
patient Court to deal with, who was entireiy
willing to sit from the rising of the sun to the
going down thereof, ard as long thereafter as
the next man. So while the cross-cxamination
was searching and complete. 1t certainly was
no longer in point of time than Muers impor.
tance in the scheme of the prosecution and the
nature of his testimony in itself warranted
1t ended with many hours OF the day-tnat Is
Judge Barrett's day-remaining for further
work and until late at night the Toms, Dicks
and Harrys who played this little. that little
and t'other little part in the strange weird
drama of Meyer and his crime came along one
after another with their corroboratng stories.
This witness had only so much to say, that one
only so little but taken altogether they give
score of props to Muller's tale and left the part
which the defence can safely undertake to deny
small at any rate.
For, of course. these many witnesses to incl
dental facts can be suspected of no possible mo-
tive for ialsifyng. In point OF numbers they are
too many to allow the thought Of a combination
or conspiracy What each Of them says viii
stand for so much and the fact that one or two
Of them, though perfectly confident In their
Identification of the prisoner and the woman he
called his wife, and Brandt or Baum. the victim.
and Kirfel or Muller. the accomplice and In
former made evident mistakes as TO the par
ticular month that their particular incident oc-
Cured in, affected their testimony to strengthen
rather than to weaken 1t. But the little point
which the prosecution has left uncovered Is Its
danger point 1t Is inconceivable that Meyer can
escape from the necessity Of confessing that he
was engaged in the scheme to swindle the in-
surance companies and that the woman and kir-
fe and Brandt were his partners in the crime;
Al
murder Of Brandt and the moment at which
murder entered his heart and the acts by which
the murderous purpose was accomplished re-
main as yet improved except by the testimony o@
the informer.
TIE TEMPER OF THE JURY.
An incident in the .irect examination q
Muller shows how most people VIII look AT the
evidence of an accompAce who betrays his as
Nf,,ifa ,A told iQ M
how he and Brandt, in carrying out Meyers
scheme to swindle the insurance companies, came
from Chicago to New-York. took the fiat In East
Thirteenth-st and furnished 1t: how Meyer and
his wife joined them there. the latter passing Tor
Brandts Wife and both passing under the name
Of Baum. in which name Brandt had taken the
insurance: how Brandt was made SICK WIN
croton oil and then with antimony, ana now'
failing to obtain a corpse with which 10 complete
the swindle Meyer finally killed Brandt WITH
ant!lnony and arsenic; how some OF the fnsur-
ance was collected and the remainder abandoned
because Of a companys aroused suspicious; Low
they all went back TO Chicago and then began
peripatetic movement through the West In the
effort to escape the detectives who had been put
on their track by the insurance companies. and
how finally the witness identified Meyer to the
officers for br.be OF s59O-after he had told all
this and had told some of it two or three times.
for Mr. Mcintyre could not content himself with
a single narrative of any important point. Muller
was asked the question: "Who brought you II
New-York?"
"Nr Nicol!," he replied.
You mean the Pnkertons, don't you? Yoo
don't mean the District-Attorney, surey!
II mean Mr. Nicol," repeated the witness.
Mr.. Brooke whose features respond easily II
not to his sentiments. at least to his purposes
elevated his eyebrows, and affecting tone Of
mingled surprise, grief and contempt said:
That's a queer thing for the District-Attorney
to do
MR. NICoIL KNOWS HIS BUSINESS.
The District-Attorney understands himseH
about as we'll as most people do. He also under.
stands mcst people nearly as well as they 90
He knew what Mr. Brooke was endeavoring 70
accomplish upon the minds of the jury, and he
knew il was the thing he would have TO look
sharply after throughout the whole OF this case
SO he snapped AT Il swiftly
Think so?" he said. What do you suppose
the District-Attorney is for? He finds evidence
where the evidence is to be found. doesn't heT
And II he cannot obtain 1T from one source. he
must take it from another. And II he can get
It from no one else, he must take 1t from an In
former That's what did
It was a good answer, and it ought to be
one. but there is no use denying that
the Anglo Saxon nature is intolerant of inform
ers and that criminal indictment mainly up
held by the evidence Of one who has shared IN
the crime and its proceeds is not on firm ground.
Mr.. Nicoll. however. Is experienced In the task
of convincing a jury of the truth Of an In
formers story. He knows how thoroughly 1t -
necessary to corroborate 1t and the kind OF cor
which is most telling and he Is ex-
trcmeiy artful In producing 1t in the right place
and at the right time. lie probably realizes
that In the case at the bar this prejudice against
nformcrs has strong hold on some OF the jury
men. 1.-TWO. at least, have indicated either that
or what may be equally hurtful. resentment