The Norfolk Virginian. [volume] (Norfolk, Va.) 186?-189?, 1895-11-19
Mr.. Shoemaker. Of Holmes Counsel. Held
by Judge Thayer for Perjury In The Case.
A NEW TRIAL FOR HOLMES ARGUED.
Daring Which the Fact Was DevcI-
oped that blanche IIanniSan IInd
Rcen Paid TO Swear Falsely TO an
Affidavit by Shoen,alx er-! The Law.
yer stood pnllid and Ncrveless.

Philadelphfa, Pa, Nov. 1S-The ar
gument for a new trial in the case of
The convicted murderer Holmes was
heard this morning in the Criminal
Court, before Judge Arnold, who tried
the case, Judge Wilson and Judge Thay-
er, the presiding judge of the court
Like all the phases of this singular
case, this ordinarily routine procedure
finished a sensation. Holmes was
brought from prison to court. The
weeks of confinement since his conric-
ton have added to the emaciation that
was so marked when he was in court
before, and q hectic flush has taken the
place OF his former pallor He has
also lost the easy look of confidence
that he wore during his trial and al
though he was composed, his anxiety
was plainly visible. The sensation was
furnished by Mr. Shoemaker one of
sented all affidavit from Il witness plr-
porting to be named Blanche Hanni-
gan. In the affidavit the witness swore
mat she kept II cigar store on Callow-
mn street, near tNe house whore Piet-
eel was killed and that she knew the
dead man and that he told her that he
intended to commit suicide. District
attorney Graham asked that the Wit
ness be called TO the stand and Mr..
Shoemaker yeplied that he did not
know where she was. Then Air Grol
nam called u private detective named
fWetaler. TO the stand. The detective
Testified that Shoemaker weeks ago ina
s VII, Ten out the affidavit and given him
T5o 10 pay some one TO swear to it. Then
cetectiNe Geyer was called and he los
tiiled that Swetglcr had shown hin,
me affidavit before it was signed. ,rnen
woman was called TO the stand. who
.uiu she was the blanche Hunnigan"
VINO signed the affidavit.
Shc swore that she knew no,h;nr
upout stateincnts in the affidavit. Her
n',lhe instead of being Hannignn wns
Shea. and she is the matron In Tho
rourth police district 1t was at the
Went with Swctzler to Shoemaker and
lnPersonated blanche Hnnnipon ;.
Shoemaker gave her $50 and took bnr
before notary public and She s,vore
10 The statement.
This astonishing trc,;,,,o,,, a.,
seemed to clearly point to q norinrn5
allluaTit, evidently surprised the Court
ana when Shoemaker attempted to
Tlake mi some confused statement Judge
n na.sr Sussested to him that his
greatest safety lay in silence.
Mr.. Rotan, Holmes other ATTORNEY
stated 10 the Court that he knew no
tnlnS OF the aflidnvir. and then he ia
san lhe argument for n new trial The
mann points of the reasons for asking
ior n new trial were given in these dis
patches last week when the applica ton
Tor a new trial was filed The princi-
pai allegations for asking for ths, trial
are are mat ne district attorney influenced
the jury in Introducing cvl lrncn show
ing that the children were killed by
tonnes; that tile dcfenre was not
ready To proceed, and that the court
erred on n nomber of points In the
trial t'I
Mr.. Rotan argued for an houl and
fifty minutes, and then District Attor-
ney Graham replied. III his argument
MIR. Rotan had dwclt upon the odmiss
ABILITY OF the evidence OF Miss Yohe on
tne ground that the Commonwealth
had moi clearly shown she was not The
PRISONERS wife, ana that therefore she
was not competent witness Mr.
Graham reproduced the prisoners let
ters to the Willimettc Ills. wife. ac-
knowiedsing the ceremony Of maria gc
anu MI. Graham sprung Il surprise on
Holmes that perceptiby took him
aback.
Mr.. Graham put In evidence a record
from the Chicago courts of an appli.
cation for divorce filed by Holmes
asking for q separation from his real
Wife, who lives In Gimerton. n. H.
lie also produced an affidavit from this
wife that while making the now ia
nous journey with Mrs Pictzel and Miss
1ohe Holmes came to see her and re-
sumed his relations as Il husband with
her.
Mr. Graham reviewed the contentious
get up by the defense and step by step
demolished them, and in Il manner that
WIS dDSOlulclS conclusive shed Il flood
OF convincing light upon Holmes guilt
During the trial MIR. Graham was fire.
quently restrained by points Of law in
referring TO the prisoner, but I'm his
review of the evidence to-day he was
restrained by no such conditions. and
he fairly withered Holmes with his
.scorching arraisnmcnt OF his various
crimes. The weak point in AIR. Gra-
hams case during the tria! was
how PietZel was actually killed. His
Inference was that Pictzcl was chloro,
formed TO death by Holmes. but he
never brought this out clearly. Judge
Wilson seemed struck by this and
asked Mr. Graham how Pictzel was
killed. Mr.. Graham said that 1t was
the contention OF the Commonwealth
that Holmes chloroformed him to death.
but the District Attorney did not make
1t clear how they believed that dead man
was murdered. Mr.. Rotan seized on
this point and addressing the Court
In his closing argument. dwelt upon the
improbability OF n man of Holmes ply
sique overcoming PictZel and killing him
with chlOroform. He also contended
that though the Commonwealth had
produced evidence to show that PietZcl
bought pint of whskcy the night be-
fore. there was no evidence to show that
he was drunk on the day he died. and
thereby enabled Holmes to administer
chloroform 10 him In that condition.
In concluding his argument Mr..
Rotan asked the court to take particu-