The Portland daily press., 1895-02-12

great1reoord of that case revealed by the
autopsy, and utterly silent as to any
sign of crime. Here is the place where
CHARACTERS OF GUILT
ought to be written out in bold. strong
letters; here is where the government,
expecting and meaning to find it, sci
its trained agents to work; but with
all that 40 proof of guilt could be dis
covered.
This is one of the bold, bare facts OF
the case. 1t looms I'D like mountain,
and we ought to keep our eyes upon it.
The course of the disease of which this
young woman died is just as free from
suggestion of crime as was that autopsy.
And so long as those circumstances can
be explained on the ground of inno-
cence, this explanation must by rule of
law be accepted. Indeed, the explanation
of innocence is more probable. A ply
stefan we'll known in this city, educated
at Bowdoin College and Boston Uniyer-
sity, son of an old time physician, Dr.
Moses Dodge, whom | remem Der as long
prominent in this city, says that the
young woman died of uraemie, and not of
septic peritonitis. The other physicians
thi nix that the trouble was peritonitis,
induced by septic poisoning; but they
admit that it appeared late in the case
1t may have been 1nuuced by the digltal
examinations made by DR.. Fostr OF DIR.
Nickerson, or by other means.
AS to the uraemia, it may have been
occasioned by chill, by some medicine
taken by the young woman herself, or
by any one of several other causes.
There WAS inaction of the kidneys as
early as Sunday night at O'Clock. The
physicians say that two. three or four
DAYS after the
KIDNEYS CEASE TO ACT
death comes. DR.. Dodge says that this
is what she died OF. In the lower court
the counsel for the government claimed
that DR.. Hughes performed the operation
Sunday night. But here you have her
i'll with a mortal disease on Sunday
night. A re you going to find that she
died from the wound of an instrument
used upon her Sunday nigh? DR.. Dodge
says that she did not die of an abortion
at all. He is trained government VIII
ness, who saw this woman in her lie
time Are you going TO throw aside his
careful observation for the opinion of
DIR. Thompson, who never saw the
woman at all until after her death? DR..
Thorn pson says he thinks that an in
strument was used, although he admits
that all the facts of the autopsy are
silent on that subject. | submit to you
that such an opinion is only a guess? You,
gentlemen of the jury, might as well have
done the guessing, without the trou Bile
of summoning witnesses. Citizens are
not to be theorized into prison. You
cannot convict of crime by organizing
a guessing school with DR.. Thompson
the head guesser and DR.. Weeks poor
and lame second.
| will not have that opinion of DR..
| TIL ompson in here except under my SOL
| emn protest.
| Judge Symonds next pr oceeded to dis
cuss the testimony of the city marshal
and his deputy marshal, warning the
| Jury against such testimony, wnere the
prisoner, in the
MOMENTS OF HIS SURPRISE.
was in the hands of and in a way at the
mercy of highly trained officers, anxious
to succeed as detectives. But even if
that estimony was true, there was
nothing discriminating about it. He
admitted tnat he prescribed compound
cathartic pills for woman who came
to his Office Saturday night. But be
cause he did this, is he to be convicted
of using an instrument to cause the
| death of this woman? DR.. Hughes gave
| her cathartic pills as he says he did, and
the history of the case shows the results
| of cathartics. AS to those alleged ergot
pills, we deny that the respondent had
| ANYTHING to do with them. DR.. Nicker-
son says he took them from her pocket
! by her direction; but that does not
show that she got them from DR.. Hughes.
1t is not necessary to refer at length to
the testimony of the government wit
( nesses that these pills would not pro-
duce abortion, or to the report of the
| analysis, which leaves many uncertain
| ties. These are not the compound ca
thartic pills given by DR.. Hughes. The
| government has not filed the gap need
| ed to connect the pills with DR.. Hughes.
Gentlemen, you cannot leap chasms like
this in testimony.
1t might not have been good taste Tor
DR.. Hughes to keep away from the
off GERS because be did not wish to go to
Jail for a few days. But he is an
OLD RESIDENT OF PORTLAND,
he is fixed to the soil here, he was mar
ried and his children live here. He was
not going to fee. He did not wish to go
to jail until Sunday night; but he had
| neither the intention nor the thought
of leaving town.
| come 60 ne Testimony Oh MarGln d.
Monahan of which there is only one SEN
| tence which tends to incriminate DIR.
Hughes. Monahan represents that he
had an interview with DR.. Hughes on
| Monday during which the latter is rep
resented to have said that Mary Dunn
would he better when something came
away. By this he might have been meant
the effects of the cathartic pills, instead
of the darker meaning given by the gov
ern n emit.
But after all. this is contingent upon
what you think Of this Martin J. Mona
han. Was it not plain to your instincts
tnat he was lying from beginning to
end? No credence is to be placed upon
anything he might say. Is it not GER
tain that he was the father of Mary
Dunn's child? He went about with her
for more than year. She had no other
fellow, he says. He was calling upon
| her at late hours; and when she went to
| Colebrook, it was undou btedly under
stood that they were to be married. And
yet he tells his marvellous story of his
| own innocence in the remarkable pro-
ceedings He is lying from beginning to
end and on the pages where in written