The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1895-10-26
APPEAL FOR DTRRANT
Attorney Dickinson Trying to
Bolster a Weak Case.
He ATTACKS NO WITNESSES.
Bnt Lays Great Stress Upon the COL
lege's Diseredited Roll Call.
he CLOSES Over the Discrepancies In
Durrant's Own Testimony and Con-
auct. and Insists That the Prosecu-
ton Has Not Proved He Was ABB
sent From the Lecture.

san FRANCISCO, Oct. 25-Attorney Dickin-
son son maze the opening argument for the
deIehse IN the trial Of Theodore Durrant
To-Day Although the air in the court room
was stlfiing. be spoke from morning until
night, ana then announced that he would
NOT conclude his address until the court
sAoold meet next Tuesday Dickinson's
speech was in the nature of a surprise.
from the fact that he did not attack the
integrity or the prosetation's witnesses
OF denounce The methods Of the police. as
attorney Deuprey minated in his opening
address to the jury would be done. Never
thetess, II Is generally conceded that he
made the most Of what is considered a
weak case. lie based his whole defense
on the reliability Of the roll call. which
shows that Durrant attended DR. Cheney's
lecture on the afternoon of April 3, aud
challehged the prosecution to prove that
the roll was Incorrect. Mrs. Leak and
Mrs. Crosset, the two elderly witnesses
VINO testified that they saw Durrant and
MISS Lamont near the church. were treat
ca geatiy. Dickinson said that while he be-
neVed the witnesses told what they be-
neFed 10 be the truth. he was convinced
that their minds had been worked upon by
reading so much about the case. In sup
port Of this theory he cited the fact that
neither witness told what she said she
knew about the case until three or four
months after the crime took place. The
testimony Of Mrs. Nogel and the three
schoolgirls who swore they saw Durrant
and Miss Lamont board a Powell street
car IN front of the normal school was dis
posed of in the same manner Youth end
old age, he said. were the two periods in
life when people we're the most positive in
their statements and the most likely to be
mistaken.
Touching upon the contention OF the
prosecution that Durrant's motive for the
rfr
impelled Jack the Ripper TO commit the
Whitechapel murders in London. Mr. Dick
inson challenged the prosecution to show
anything in the testimony submitted which
tended 10 show that Durrant was not a
moral man. With regard to the story told
by Durrant on the stand, to the effect that
a stranger tapped him on the shoulder and
gave him a clue 10 the whereabouts of
Miss Lamont. Mr.. Dickinson said the
great number Of anonymous letters re-
ce3ved from cranks by the attorneys for
the defense made IL probable that some
one might have given Durrant such a clue.
In beginning lis argument Mr.. Dickin-
son wasted no words in getting to the
point of his subject. He spoke IN a calm,
convincing manner. without attempt at
oratorical effect, and dwelt on the facts
as he saw them. Let us begin with the
morning of the Sd Of April. he said. THE
defendant, then young man In the prime
OF his manhood. bore an honorable and up
right name, which still stands unsulied.
My learned young friend Of the prosecu-
ton made some remarks in his opening
address 10 You in which he made some
references 10 the usefulness the passion
and the sensualness OF the defendant, and
] would cali your attention 20 the fact
that not an iota Of evidence has been pro-
duced 10 support his remarks I speak ad-
visedlv. / believe that there Is TO testi-
ard hoe - l. Inn
should be borne In mind. that there Is
usually R motive where there is a crime.
And now AZ the outset / submit that there
is nothing 10 show a motive for the COM
initial Of this crime; nothing in this mass
Of testimony for which a motive can be
deduced for the commission OF this crime.
We have him. then, on the morning OF
April 5. young. studious and with a good
character The young lady who lost her
life I believe was OF good character There
was no intimacy between these TWO par
ties. They met but seldom. She was not
OF a retiring disposition She acted nat
uralIv went into society OF among her
friends four nights in each week regularly
Therefore she was not dependent upon the
defendant. / have heard 80 intimatod that
she was dependent upon the defendant as
an escort I submit that such is not the
case. She WAS a regular attendant at the
church and the Christian Enieavor meet
ing club and other functions she did not
come In contact with him. on tails morn
ing the young man was on his way -
school. He there accidentally met blanche
Lamont. There is nothing 20 show that it
was other than an accidental meeting.
No testimony has beer adduCed 70 prove
that they had arranged % meet the
They boarded the car together. ! believe
tne Riri 10 have been pure and NIrtuous.
She was well acquainted with the defend
ant She had known him for four or I'VE
months. Had he been an improper COM
DaniOn for her she would have known it.
Her aunt and the young ladies' OF the
church would have known IL. and their
mothers and fathers would certainly have
known H. | Judge from the remarks made
yesterday that the prosecution attaches
a great amount II importance lo the fact
that they discovered that the young girl
and this defendant boarded a Mission
street car together. That they learned
from che defendant himself DID not Mr..
pur~lnt tel Mrs Noble that ne rode 20
school with Blsuches Di3 he not tell Il
never anuearcd before in this case. HIS
testimony vas unnecessary. as tine de-
fendant told of having ridden 20 school
With Blanche Lamont on the morning ~
Apr.l 3 NJ Sholmont would fGsinuste
rhat there VAS something improper about
ieIrraNi CNFfH3NE on filF Nak ltstk- Ilt'lfl-
ing II such had been The case. tA:s Young
lady was warned. ana she wouli not have
rqet him ia the afternoon Innocence
among girls Is easily frightened. II takes
care 81 itself and - this young lady had
been I'm suited cr h3d been improperly con-
ve-s "a vftA hv thfs defendant IN ne morn
ing sAe would noe have seen him m the
afternoon Her Innocence womb Asve ,o,f
her No no 7 VIII not Co. ] an atrail,'
au7 she weuis rot have bceu there-
Vow bow natural the cord0et ~ she
defendant wss on April He met AIRS.
Nehla Al tAe church sold ho~ ~ having
ridden ~ school v}-N Blanche Lamont.
-nE informed hev oF having spoken vfth
tha rs-l about q Nook-'T7e <rK ~eTTroz'--
Witch he promised 20 bring - She a1r-.
The information vas corVevsi 20 Mrs.
noble AEsln or the rext Fr.1ay. tre De-
s,rssr- called a. the house. he .ack the
BOOK 500 Te- ra'1s were taken uo- 20
-nH p ~- - F{arrhe's ftsan3earanea - w
s- serrrs ~ ~'e thaf wot'3 - rr-r rn-
t.gafv r-swnrr 20 procedure f1~ eaft~
uter Wauf1 hs seek 20 81 irt0 ere very
-, Pc. - s~e scene - his crimes r
tes--s hardly probable
.ts 20 D- E1arsen's lecture. - does rct
-.--.srs 20 have attended =. fEe 50 stated
an -hs stand Ana vet the persecution
-re,as r~oat stress uuon ERE fect thaf +he
1rg..,fevt was not present a. Hauser's lee
tts~a THE defendant saws he cafzzed with
s;iere~ TAe gentleman was ow fhe stand.
and 8ses uss aenv -. That Is evidently
-rrle W. crrne d0pn row. fhe0 90 D~.
t-t,e-0v's le-turc take 81 thaf the fesfi-
ucrv - clear thst IRE defendant was AZ
,aAs lecture n the afternoon. and ] base