The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1894-02-03

Therefore, the jury must take into care
full consideration this bias of Mrs. Prawd
IN weighing her testimony.
Passing to the theory that the shootin
was an accident, Mr.. Powers brought t
the attention of the jury that In tina
one place alone, through the narrow sill
of glass looking into the room where tn
n old lady stood, the eye of man coul,
victim down. An accidentally fire.
bullet might have gone anywher
through that house or barn. That wa
the only path that could be taken by on,
fired by design
With regard to the possibility that
man could have stood within aEou
thirty feet of the house, Mr.. Powers
the defence's expert, who had mad,
measurements and who differed from
| Mr.. Pierce, the other expert But better
even than the testimony of Mr.. Jordan
was the fact that the bullet did &C
| through the widow. A fact of this sort
/ was worth something.
linen there was the statement of Mrs.
| Prawda that the gun was fired "just
outside the house." nearer than she had
ever heard a shot before. Moreover,
| there was the statement which crept out
| OF the prisoner at the bar, that the report
was just outside the house.
Who can believe that this was an acct
dental shot fired from a distance? No
such thought came into the minds of
those people on the spot when
This Deed of Blood
was committed. When I examined the
prisoner yesterday, he denied that he
had said the report was close to the
house. When he was shown the report
er's notes of his testimony he said he did
not know whether it was outside or in
side With these witnesses believing
that the shot was either in the house or
close by it, what becomes of that distant
shot, and glancing bullet?
1 think we can assume beyond a posi-
blllty of doubt that that man stood
close outside that house: and this being
assumed, l ask you who could be th +
man who stood out there that night wi b
that deadly weapon in his hand? Out Ct
the Kitchen window streamed a light.
From the window above came another.
1t could have been no accident that a
man stood there, with that loaded gun
in his hand, In the light of that window,
near that dog which he would arouse
in the immediate vicinity of this prison
er, who would have you believe that he
was without the house at that time.
No, it could not have been accident
that levelled the fatal shot at that aged
woman. 1t was murder,
1t Was Assassin alton
Having established that it was murder
we are far on the way to finding out who
the murderer was. "ThisN man had no
exclusive opportunity. If he could have
done it any other man could" say the
counsel for the defense. Let us see WI
the facts are in this matter. Here 800
this man accustomed to the use - e.
arms for fifteen years, a gradue 20 81 the
borne in the strength a was So
idea that it CO, "a OIL one
been no accident, that he te 1ia nave nave
on this night that Tom c llu one Sa oeI
was the old trick of cry SareS ulo ~; o ~
And that very night he t 4ga 9o pp M Sniea
that he never thought L eotu i Johh mey 81
IL that tn shot was asn n Of, that moment.
who fred it mist cant for him, the man
ont of the house have seen him come
it was meant fol 60 go TO tne sneu; II
been seen throu ANNIE she muse nave
he assassin = Of them in so full view
If glass in aimed at that narrow strip
which was the upper window behind
I'D LADY, outlined the figure of the
hat niobs could have done that deed, on
vhere IF t, in the light of the windows,
ida him 1e owner of the house was out
,ssass;n1 self to detect and follow the
ms, ? Gentlemen, do you believe
lis exr IN when he tells you that after
,imint .erience in the German army, after
when guns for fifteen years, he believed
lar he heard that shot that a stove OF
non MP had exploded? Out of his own
i'm tn, August M. Prawda condemns
T. self.
ar asked him if he had ever heard a
MP explode, and he said lots of them. y
Z questioned him farther, and he finally
lid three" Now gentlemen, l appeal
o YOU as matter of common knowledge,
if a lamp does not explode in your neigh
borhood about as often as man is
struck by lightning. And yet, this man
of thirty-one years has heard three
explode.
Now the defence have dwelt with much
force upon the readiness with which he
; has told his story. 1t is true that he was
i ready with the story which he wanted
| others to believe. Now there is certain
| amount of warp and wool to
| All Falsehood.
To this the warp is varied. When
questioned the prisoner as to the sound
there was brought out an entirely new
piece of evidence. He heard a SHREK
when he heard the shot, he says. He hae
never said that before. Recall for {
moment his conversation at Gerow's
He told Mrs Gerow that Mrs. Meyer was
shot right through the window In thu
face. Mrs. Gerow and her daughter
| agreed to this But Prawda on the stand
saws that Mrs. Gerow asked him first i
it came through the window. How re
mar kable must have been the intuition
of that woman, who did not know
whether the shooting was up stairs Oh
down stairsl Yet if we are to believe
Prawda he had no knowledge, when hi
| went to Gerow's as to how the shooting
took place. There was only one way fol
| him to know how she was shot, ant
that was by knowing who did the deed.
Another more significant fact. Why
when they knew that Mrs. Meyer was il
trouble, did this prisoner take light tt
go to her? He knew that she had ligh
in her room. If he was innocent, VIII.
did he so halt, hesitate and draw back
and wait for a light? 1t was because h.