The Portland daily press., 1894-02-02

if not of this; also the statement OF
Prawda that he (Blake) advised
Prawda to run away.
Deputy Sheriff Bucknam was called to
speak briefly about the bullet and am
mnr.ition box. He did not class the buck
shot as bullets.
Mrs. Mary Moxcey, mother of Clarence
Moxcey, was called. She said that on
the night her son lost his gun she went
to his house to invite him home to sup
per. She went into the house, found no
one there, went into the yard and then
down the road, meeting him very soon
and returning with him.
Mrs. Gerow, recalled, denied positively
that, in her conversation with Prawda
on the night he came to their house, she
had been the first to mention the win
dow in connection with the shot.
Here Mr.. True announced that the
State had submitted
All the Evidence
and Judge Bonney announced that the
court would adjourn unil 8 p. M, when
Mr.. Soldiers would argue.
The afternoon session was attended by
the largest crowd of the week. the desire
to hear the closing arguments of Mr..
Soldiers and Attorney General Powers
being general.
MI. Seiders began speaking at 8
o'clock, opening with few general OBJ
servations, and then proceeding at once
to the interesting and forcible body of
his address,
This respondent, he said, is on trial
for murder. 1t is the most serious Of
Tense known to our statutes. 1t means
to him liberty, almost life. Under the
old law the man convicted Of murder
los H.; TTnIa1. bo 10 vU ho INcnS
his liberty. Under the old he died once,
under the new he dies every day. For
no man can realize himself within those
walls never to go forth, without suffering
all the pangs of death.
On the commission of criminal of
Tense, the states officials are at hand
and are by duty bound to look up every
clue, every circumstance, until some
clue is reached which indicates the one
supposed to be the criminal. The whole
wealth and means of the state goes to
pursue the evil doer. This is right, for
it protects you and me and deters the
evil doer. But when the state reaches a
certain stage of suspicion, the conduct
of the state undergoes change. Having
run the suspected person down, the state
brings him into court and then-strange
change-wraps about him the presump-
ton of innocence.
The prisoner as he has stated on the
stand, is a German by birth. He came
here few years ago, without speaking
our language. and went to work to gain
livelihood. By thrift and industry he
had got small farm and home. You
remember the testimony of Mr.. Manley
that he was good man, industrious and
attending to his business. There has
not been presented a word of testimony
to show that he was otherwise than MI.
Manley represents.
At the time of the tragedy he was
Not Pressed for Money.
He had means by him, had paid the in
terest on his mortgage last May, and as
far as we can know, was in easy circum-
stances. What motive then could he
have had to commit this crime?
There was person living in his house
but the fruits of that living were going
into his family. That person had prop
erty, but she was advanced in years, and
in little while by the natural course of
nature and the laws of inheritance as
much would come to him as could have
been gained by this dastardly deed. l
am utterly at loss to find a motive for
this dastardly crime. And the question
of motive is of the utmost importance.
Many case in which the state has felt
that it had its hands on the guilty party
has fallen through because of the failure
to show motive.
This case rests entirely upon circurn-
stantial evidence. Of course there is no
question as to the death of this woman;
but beyond that all is circumstantial evil
dence. l wish at this point to quote the
rules as to circumstantial evidence in the
case of State vs.. Knight.
First, the circumstance from which the
conclusion is to be drawn should be fully
established. Circumstantial evidence is
like chain, of which the facts, like links,
reach from the act to the person who
committed it. In this case the gun lost
by Mr.. Moxcey, the wads found outside
the house, the bullet, ETC., are all links.
But these links must be connected be-
yond the shadow of a doubt to establish
the case. The chain can only be as
strong as it's weakest link. If that link
is bl oxen the chain is broken.
Passing to the fourth rule we find the
maxim that it is necessary that the cir
cumstances to be proved should, to a
moral certainty, exclude every other n.y.
pothesis but the one to be proved.
1t may be claimed here that this per-
son had an exclusive opportunity to COM
nit that offense. We deny that, and we
substantiate that denial very conclusive
ly by simply calling to your minds that
if this respondent could commit that act,
other persons might have done it.
1t has been claimed here that this re-
spondent made
Conflicting Statements.
But no man tells the same story twice
exactly alike if he tells it truthfully. AT
one time one thing will strike him most
forcibly and he will enlarge on that. AT
another time it will be another matter.
You have all read the Gospels more or
less, and it has come to your attention
that these statements do not all agree as
to details, but from this fact the strong
est arguments have been made as to the
truth Of the general story. Hence we
may say that if you hear story told by
man over and over again in exactly the
same way, it affords strong presump-
ton that he is not telling the truth.
MI. Soldiers then recalled to the minds
of the jury the view which they had tax
en- of the Prawda house, and refreshed
their minds by reference to the various
maps which had been presented during
tho av;danca From Prawda'S hack door