The Portland daily press., 1895-01-31

in to throw suspicion upon the respon-
dent. That one at the Jail, where he
asked Mr.. Chute to put him in cell
and he would make Graffam admit the
murder. This was put in as If the re-
spondent had not previously seen any
thing about Graffam's charge against
him. But Lewis had seen in the paper
the day before that he had made those
charges. There is nothing unusual in
this respondents proposition to try and
find ont Graffam's guilt in this way.
| Otfic have done such things before
Wa would suppose the officers would
have been pleased to do it. But just like
All else in this case, that has eended to
implicate Graffam,
IL WAS CHOKED OFF.
And about the conversation with
| Tallman Lowell about the cider and
Paris green Lowell declares that he did
not say it. When charged with it he
turned faint. But had this respondent
turned faint when told about it, it
woulu have been great point against
him. But Tallman Lowell isn'G suspect
ed. And there has been another attempt,
/ call it an attempt. because 1T was
i SUCH These doctors have testified here
about the shoes But those shoes were
4 not taken from him till the next Mon
lday. 1t is perfectly evident that that
renders this testimony inadmlssab bic.
But besides that he shingled that roof a
1 sho ort time ago If they were scratched
mere is no onestjon but it occurred on
that roof. They've tried to show here
that the shoes were washed. A man
holds a lantern down and looks at him
that night. Are you going to convict
4 man on such testimony?
r. Also it has been tried to show that
j Lewis didn't go over to the Lowell house
,bwith sufficient haste. But when all
these parties came back from the Lowell
house they didn't run. His appearance
at the Lowell house is another point.
You must have noticed that Lewis is
moderate and slow spok en-. His appear
ance on that evening was exactly as 1t
has been in this CONFERENCE.-The. He
said II want you, and you. and you,
There's no doubt but what that is
what he said. And, further than that,
Coleman, when he got there put him
off. "Gave him a bluff" Tallman and
bner Lowell said something, but he,
GRAFFAM, SAID NOTHING.
Now I suppose the inquiry may arise
as to whether this GRAHAM did see Mrs.
Kim ball and Coburn that night. pve
no doubt he saw them, but it was
through the window. He describes them
lust as they were at the first Of the eve
lining. But that conversation Mrs. KIM
ball enies. The real fact is that it was
| lPCLLED OVER FROM SOME 9TH
i ER NIGHT,
land made to do service for this occasion.
i But they say that digestion had gone
1 on about an hour. That places the time
I of death between 6 and $50, estimating
one hour from the time of eating supper.
Mr.. Seiders then said that they had
prepared what is generally known as the
DEADLY PARALLEL COLUMN,
in which were sat forth the contrast. IN &
facts about Lewis and Graffam. First,
the build of these two men. Lewis Is
slight; GRAHAM is strongly built; the
movement Of these two men; Lewis is
slow, GRAHAM is quick and agile. The
speech, Lewis is slow and moderate and
careful, Graffam testified as if he had
learned it by heart. Opportunity, Lewis
had no opportunity, Graffam ample op-
/ portunity. Motive, Lewis knew that
Cohurn had little money, Graffam did
not nave so good a chance to know it..
Testimony, Lewis's evidence Is unlm-
peached in any material part, that OF
Graffam is impeached in every part.
/ Money, all of Lewis's money is account
ed for to q cent, but Graffam's money
can only be accounted for by adding
that Of Mr. Coburn's to it, Blood on
person, none on Lewis. Graffan's neck
tie was spotted and his handkerchief
soaked in blood. Tracks, none of Lew
ISIS. of Graffam's fresh running tracks
leading from place of murder. Accout-
ing for time, I4ewis's time is accounted
for by the state witnesses, the time OF
/ Graffam is not accounted for at all. He
tells two stories, as TO his being IN the
Coburn kitchen and being in the Low
! ell house all the evening. Both OF
| which stories are absolute falsehoods,
/ and have been shown to be
/ BY THE DEFENCE,
but by the state. Talking, this respond
ent has been ready to talk at all times
in relation to this matter, this is proved
by state witnesses; Graffam is reticen
and his mouth was never opened except
to explain his own acts.
Gentlemen, there is the deadly parallel
between these two parties.
Gentlemen, this is most remarkable
CT Sc in the way in which it has been
tried. The state has put forth all its
enginery, not only to convict this re-
spondent,
BUT TO EXCLUDE GRAFFAM
from it. I have given facts here, and
which are undisputed, which had they
been followed up by an officer, it would
have been impossible to have excluded
Graffam from this murder.
| Now, gentlemen, with all this mass
Of testimony pointing to one Graffam,
has there not been created reasonable
doubt as to the guilt OF this respondent:
I I PLEAD FOR THIS RESPONDENT.
I am convinced that this respondent is
not the guilty person, but that the offic-
ers and every one have turned every
point against him and have refused to
/ follow up the evidence that would i'm
lpIicate another man. | know that you
will do Justice to this respondent. and
.,;+I, +haea worde thanking y0u for yOur