The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1895-02-04
JURY TO DECIDE



OF the borrowing OF this
revolver suspiciouss claim not.
When Keegan brought back the cart
ridges there was no srtificc OF conceal
msnt. He put than back In the box In
tissue paper and did not try to mlngle
them with the rest. Kecgan cleaned the
pistol, but what Of that? He ad-
mitted he cleaned IL. 1t was
an unused pistol and 1t looks as
II the enemy of all pistols, rust, had
seized upon 1t. You are told that the
cartridges were OF . dark color which
Keegan brought back, but they could
easily have been soiied. There is no evil
dence that Keegan brought back
other cartridges than those he borrowed.
Henry Taylor told you that Keegan
trembled, but why do not know. Has 1t
come to this, that nothing but guilt will
cause man to tremble? What one OF
you, gentlemen, would not trenble IL
charged with such an atrocious crime.
But, gentlemen, In that first hour OF
terror, 1t was not then that Lawrence
g. Keegan said to Taylor, "don't
be hard on me.n He did not try TO in
tercede with Taylor, for he never tried II.
II he had been guilty would he not have
tried to "fx" Taylor, as the saying is?
Would he not have asked his friend in his
first hour OF accusation to shield
him? Would he have waited until
after Taylor had given his testimony at
Richmond, and then said: "Don't be
hard on me, Taylor; I've been good
friend to you" Could that mean con-
fession OF guilt? No, gentlemen, frankly.
no. Keegan mado
Nothing of n Confession
during all his confinement. Il. y
snow, woman went to Franklin's
stable about half past o'clock. Who was
this woman? Is there any evidence to
prove II? j know Of but two pieces that
tend to. Annie Whalen says that shawl
was found In the buggy which belonged
to Emily Chambers. Daniel Webster once
said: Il lay no stress on similarity OF
dress; let no man lose his
life through such circumstance
30 say to you. Mrs. Whalen testified
about no peculiarity in the shawl. Think
OF the difficulty gentlemen, OF Identifying
your own hat. You are familiar with il,
perhaps. Yet Annie Whalen says that
because she had worn the shawl once, and
because 1t had a crease and was worn at
the edges, she knows it. Suppose you
were to convict man on this evidence,
could you do it?
snow Walter Johnson, no delivered the
team, says that the woman to whom he
delivered IL to had face not as full as
that which Emily Chambers had, accord
ing to her picture. He says there was q
slight resem blance, and that is all. But
Walter Johnson says something else OF
extreme Importance. He says that the
C..-x.G-.
"He Is the only witness who knows posi-
lively about this buggy. Have you any
right to say that Walter Johnson Is wrong
on this point, in order TO help out the
theory of the government? The sides
don't pull up, they hitch on.
You have see.-fhis buggy and know.
Further, Johnson says that the woman
said: Il will wait for my mother The
prosecution will tell you that this was an
artifice which the defendant used aud
that he told the woman not to tell with
whom she was going. Yet II he wished
to avoid detection why did he
allow the horse to stand on
a crowded street? Nelson Bennett tells
you that little after o clock ne saw the
team on the Hartford pike. Now Mr..
Grant tells you that it took 81 minutes TO
reach this point when he drove the horse.
There Ia 80 minutes TO spare. Where in
the name of reason was this defendant
during this time, this man
with his fell purpose? What
was he doing, i ask. Mrs. White looked'
out and what did she sec. She says she
saw buggy with no curtains on it. II
she did she didn't see the Franklin buggy.
Are you going to suppose that this deien-
dant with his fell purpose unbuttoned
these sides? She says she observed the
man carefully and noticed his dress par
ticularly.
colbert r. Bishop when he saw the man
at a distance OF a hundred fee. mistook
him for somebody else. lie was mistaken.
Yes, human testimony is fallible
and often full Of error. Mrs.
White, think, saw too much. She OBJ
served the clothes OF the woman were
tight. This is very minute. She also says
that the man was on the left side, but
when Bennett saw them the man was on
the right side.
"Now let me speak about the identifi-
cation. There is good and bad identii-
cation. Good Identification is by a per-
son who knows the person whom he iden-
tines. Further, you are helped
II you can hear the voice and
see them walk. But meet
pose that person to be sitting in a carri-
age, how easily then to be mistaken.
Every man has his double, you hear,
and yet mo two faces are just
alike. Many mistakes of identity are
made. Take that citizen In this
State who so much resembles Henry
Ward Beecher, and even this
defendant so resembles another
that Bishop is mistaken. Even the
omniscient eye of Nelson Bennett who
saw so much in half a minute may be
mistaken. He saw no cur
tains on the carrage, and
IL he is right II could not be the Franklin
team. Bennett says the mans moustache
and hair were alike. He forgot at first
10 tell about the brand, which he saw
so distinctly. Do you believe that Nelson
Bennett, IL not told a word about the man
or team, could describe that team week
later with fullness. Do you believe he
would have given the color of the
eyes, aud this mistaken color
OF the hair, IL he had not read Keegan's
description in the newspaper Estimate
his testimony and estimate that OF Mrs.
White / won't discuss her. Gentlemen