Bismarck weekly tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1884-1943, 1895-12-20

came: if she had desired to hide it,
would she have waited until he came,
which was after Young and Reed came?
The state might say it had been forgot
ten, but if the defendant and his wife
had been guilty of completely in this
crime, would they have forgotten 50 vital
a point? The state, he said, wouldhave
the jury believe that every act of.com-
mission of commission by the Wadsworths
was an admission or evidence of guilt.
AS to the demeanor of the boy koehm
whom Mrs. Wadsworth had testified did
not appear nervous or unnatural on the
morning of the homicide, Mr.. Boucher
said the whole demeanor of the boy
Roehm showed him to be no
unskillful actor; this had been proven
when, only a few feet from the dead
body of Severson, he told persons, in
response to an inquiry as to what he was
doing, that he was stealing Eds hay.
This, Mr.. Boucher said, proved the boys
GOODNESS and lack of fear, and was, he
held, the only heartless remark made
about the ranch at that time.
The state, in opening, he said, had
essayed to prove the: body of Severson
had been placed at Wadsworth's direc-
ton, in a place hardly fit to shelter a
dead animal-the summer sleeping
room. They had not proven this, he
held. The evidence showed, he said,
that Wadsworth's only insistence was
that the body be not allowed to remain
out over night, and that it was Mikkel-
son who said it should be placed in the
summer sleeping room, which was the
place where the man himself had staid,
up to a short time before.
The testimony Of Dietz was also taken
up. Dietz admitted being unfriendly to
Wadsworth, said Mr.. Boucher, and he
would leave it to the jury to say whether
he was trying to tell the truth, when he
was testifying, or to harm Wadsworth.
He said Dietz's testimony as to a remark
made by Mrs. Wadsworth, and as to
other facts in relation to the first in
quest, had not been corroberated by any
other of the persons present. He would
leave the jury to say how he was testify
ing.
Mr.. Boucher finished his address at
IL O'Clock, and Mr.. Hammond then
begun to speak to the jury.
Mr.. Hammond, in an impressive man
ner began his address and took the jury
to the morning of the 21st of December,
at the Wadsworth ranch. Fred Roehm
had in the main told the truth as to the
way the murder was committed. The
defense admitted the killing-they ad-
mitted the dying gasps of the dying
man-admitted that he fell instantly to
the ground-would admit all the facts,
except the statements which tend to
connect Marcus Wadworth with the
crime. These statements the defense
combats because they are not true.
This man is brought here as a prisoner
pleading for his life because he is
accused by a crime by one who confesses
to perjury. one who confesses to burg
larry : by one confesses to murder.
Would they believe that this boy, who
stood unmoved when the body of his
victim was being cut up by the surgeon
the boy on that occasion could make
a trivial remark about the blood to the
sheriff-the boy who could witness that
autopsy without shedding a tear
needed the assistance Of a paralytic to
touch him at the fatal moment? 1t is
unnecessary-it is absurd. There are
two things in the boys story that
tend to connect the defendant with the
commission of the crime-first, that he
stood behind the boy when he fired, and
second, that he assisted to carry the
body out. AS to the first, it was wholly
unnecessary for Wadsworth to be there.
The boy was wholly capable of doing
that alone. AS to the second, Mr.. Ham
mond contended that the boy could get
the body into the corral himself as we'll
as with the assistance of Wadsworth.
In this ease every statement made by
the defendant had been twisted and tor
tured. If he spoke, his words have
been twisted into declarations of guilt,
If he was silent, this silence was also
taken as an evidence of guilt.
The speaker commended that there was
n single fact that was a key to the
whole situation. Take one statement
made by Mrs. Wadsworth Eaton, Deitz,
Mikkleson and Mrs. Wadsworth all tes-
tify that when the coroner and jurors
entered the house and said that Ed wal
shot, Mrs. Wadsworth said something.
What did she say? One witness said
hat she asked, sis that SOL" The YER
sion of another was that she said, sYou
don't say!" A third claimed that she
remarked, "Why, Mr.. Eaton!" Mrs.
Wadsworth herself says that she asked:
4 r. = y = TTY1 - -. -r = -3fs H- III.