Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1894-05-12

The defence say that she had occasion to
go to an outbuilding in the morning, leav-
ing the house alone, and that there is pos
sioility that some person might have gone
into the house during the time.
You will remember the testimony,
that in regard to persons seeing
Trask drive out OF the wood
road and of Mrs. GetcLell that when
she came from the outbuilding she saw
Trask on the step to the piazza, and that
she spoke to him and he got upon his sled
and drove along; also the t stimony of
Trask that he went along without gettilg
off his sled. Did Mrs. Getchell have the
exclusive opportunity or not: If exclusive,
you see the great Importance of it; if Mt t
exclusive, the equally great importance of
it to the defence. Recall the incidents of
that forenoon, because it is the time VIII n
the fatal dose was prepared, and decide that
question as to exclusive opportunity or not.
The defence says the testimony upon thi,
vital point comes from the prisoner her
self, and that if she had been guilty of Or, :
pairing this poisonous dose she would hay
done it and left the house so the exclusive
opportunity claimed could not have existed
Give that such weight as it is entitled to.
AS bearing upon this question, il is our
duty to consider the question Of motive and
the conduct of the prisoner. 1t is not
legally necessary in any case to prove mo-
tive. 1t may not always be possible to I'M
derstand or discover one. There. may be
cases where jury would not convict with
out evidence of a motive, when with salts
factory and sufficient evidence of one, the
evidence as to the rest of the case being
the same, they would convict. In other
words, it is for you, gentlemen, to say
whether or not it is necessary, because if
the testimony is so conclusively salts
factory as to the commission of the crime
as to leave no doubt in the minds of the
jury as to the commits sion of the crime by
the accused, then it would be entirely I'M
necessary to occupy any time in trying
to ascertain motive. But, as | say, it might
in any given case be necessary, and jury
might not feel authorized to convict unles
there was sufficient and satisfactory proof
of motive.
The judge then reviewed at some length
the testimony re lating to the relations of the
prisoner with Trask, as bearing upon the
question of motive, and gave some instruc-
ton upon it. He mex reviewed the testi-
mODy tUuChlbS iiC tUuuutt VI TIE DTlSUUtT
during the afternoon and evening of her
husbands sickness and subsequently. The
counsel for the defence had relied upon the
conduct of the accused on that Saturday
afternoon, to a great extent and claimed
that she did all that any wife could do, and
appeared to be heartbroken and grief
stricken. The government also relied upon
her conduct and alleged statements or mis-
statements as to the cause of death. The
government claims that one dose from
the bottle was taken before dinner and an
other before the Doctor arrived, and that
subsequently, after the doctor had gone, a
third dose was given, and the giving of this
third portion is much controverted. The
two Robinsons and Abbie Keen testify that
at the breakfast table, on Monday morning,
she stated to them that she gave it the third
time. Ambrose GetcheIl testities that he
was present when the third dose was given,
and thinks Catherine Nash was also there.
Mrs. Nash has been upon the stand for the
defence and said that she didn't see this
done during the time she was there. The
defence deny that the third dose was given.
AS to the alleged statements of the prisoner
subsequent to her husbands death, it i.
claimed that within a short time after hel
husbands death she stated to various pei
sons that he died of private disease con.
tracted during his absence in the West, and
upon that subject Mrs. Arletta Getchel
testifies that while here in Augusta on the
Monday subsequent to the death, the pris
oner told this story as to the alleged cause
of death, and the same thing is testified tC
by Ambrose Getchell, and the same thine
in substance by Abbie Keen, aud the gov,
eminent claims this was told to allay suspi
cion, because it had been proved by the
physicians who made the autopsy that nc
such disease existed. The prisoner denie.
this and says there had been times wher
there had been some slight difficulty of the
kind, and she might have spoken of it tc
Mrs. Arletta Getchell. and the theory OF
the defence is that this story, either limo
Gently or wickedly, has been devised by the
Getchells and Abbie Keen, and has been
told here either for the purpose of wrong
fully bringing about the conviction of this
woman or else because by reason of theil
Continued on 9th page.