St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1895-03-07

lis knOWle0ge that this man wanted
TO make another statement, or was
willing to make another statement, diff
ferent from the one that he had made,
when he made a clean breast of 1t.
And he Eustis) uses this remarkable
language: Now, you would like to
make full statement of things as they
exist, would you, Mr.. Blixt'' Then the
answer is: well, 1 don't know what
you want me to do
Blixt, the murderer, caught by the
public officers in lie, hellish, fendish
approached by the public officers and
asked If he did not want to make a
full statement. Now, you would like
to make full statement of things as
they exist, would you, Mr.. Blixt?"
Answer-Well, I don't know what you
want me to do now. He was ready to
do anything that they wanted him to
do. Bless his penitent soul. God has
spoken through BiiXt, but it has gone
through him like a cannon ball, like
thunder bolt; Gods voice has shivered
like glass; exposed his plots, his mind
his constructions, his deep, dark abiI-
ity. Well said Cardinal Eustis,
you know the statement you made
want to correct the statement you made
on Sunday and put it as it is. Now tell
us just exactly how things occurred on
Monday night. (The rest of it he had
Just tell us what time you came in (;
state what time you came in after it
was DONE
Now, what inventions did this wonder
full witness make? He must now. to
obtain the blessed pardon which he ex-
pected to have as soon as his case is
over and his victim has gone to the
gallows-his coveted escape from the
gallows under the mercy of the court
on account of his confessed repentance
and penitence-I say, he must now, in
order to obtain it, invent an excuse for
killing that girl. He killed her and he
killed her for her money; he and his
accomplices killed Kate Cling for her
money, and l will prove it by his own
lips-from his own lips. Now, in re-
gard to his first statement, found on
page IL. Recollect, gentlemen, that this
first statement was made after the
public press had teemed with the doc
trine and the logic and the platitude
that because Harry Hayward had a
life insurance policy upon Kate Cling S
life, he must necessarily have been in
terested in the murder. These papers,
according to the testimony of Blixt,
were seen by him, and read by him, up
to the time that he was arrested and
taken into custody; so that this cum
ming man was in possession of the pub
lie ideas in relation to the suspicion
hanging around Harry Hayward. And
he tells you that he was to have one
fifth of the insurance money at that
time, and in his telling about that he
makes slip-Claus A. Blixt makes a
slip-a remarkable thing for Claus A.
Blixt to do; but he did it here.
What about the money she had on
her person?" Money on her person.!
Eustis asked him that-What about
the money she had on her person?
Eustis had found out that this woman
had had $1,000 a few days before, in
Barge's saloon; Eustis had found out
from Harry and from the exhibition of
the notes, and everything, that $1,000
had been paid to her; Eustis had
found out by inspection of the vault
that the money was gone, and he
asked this man Blixt What about the
money she had on her person." An
swer: THAT was a fake She never
had any money, 1 don't think. Of
course, l don't know" Whose fake
was that? Who had told Claus A
Blixt that she had money on her per-
son? Claus A. .Blixt hadn't stated that
he was to have the money on her per-
son. or that she had any money on her
person, or that she would be found
with any money on her person by
Harry, either in his first statement or
his second statement, or in the testi-
mony. How did he understand that
the question of having money on her
person or not was a fake? Why, there
is but one explanation for il. When
she was killed. when she was robbed.
she had no money on her person, and
the motive of the killing and and the
motive of the robbery was all fake
she didn't have the money on her.
Now" said the suspicious Eustis.
she had some money, and showed it,
when you were sent after. and she
signed the note there" His answer
is: Yes, but that was a long time be-
fore this time Eyes, it was a week
ago, about" Yes and then Mr..
Eustis drops it right there. Now, you
answer to yourselves, gentlemen how
1T was that Claus A. Blixt made that
expression, in the first statement. that
the money which she had on her per-
son was a fake. she didn't have any
money on her person; don't think she
ever had any money, 1 don't think: of
course, | didn't know" He didn't
know until she was murdered. and it
turns out to be fake. Now. we come
to the second statement. He must
now tell that he murdered the woman.
So he puts in his testimony for the first
time that Harry brought whisky bot
tie to him, about o'clock in the after
noon. That was a purely coined piece
OF business. 1t is evidently coined now.
1t had been ascertained that Harry
had been with Waterman. and that
they had been drinking together: and
a Doctor. who came on from Anoka,
stated in the public press that he was
with Harry, and he bought a bottle of
whisky at Lally's saloon.
All that Harry had said and done
within the last few days was in the
public papers; and this man Blixt.
Selling upon these things in the public
press, coined it into the statement that
the whisky that "he had bought he
brought to me and Infatuated into nv
brain, so that 1 could kill that woman. :"
Why, gentlemen of the jury, does his
wife swear to any whisky? No. Does
Anderson swear to any whisky. No
Does any one else swear to any whisky +?
Does he not swear that he went and
got bottle in the house for Harry.
and emptied the contents into a bot
tie that had screw top to it? Yes, he
swears to that now. Where would he
have naturally got that bottle except
from his wife? Looking around for an
old, empty bottle, wouldn't his wife's
attention have been called to it?
Wouldn't she have known about it?
And he says that he didn't drink it all
up; that he left some of that whisky in
the bottle. Wouldn't his wife have
found the unexplained portion of the
whisky in that bottle and have been
able to come forward a-zl corroborate
him? Most certainly she would. This
whole talk about whisky was a coined
invented; the motive for
its invention was to explain how 1t was