Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1895-04-18
THE CASE OF MRS. MAVERICK.
Public Opinion on 1.-The New Evidence" &c
(Reprinted from the ''Irish Times" SEPT.
II, 1S94.)

| II, 1S94.)
To the Editor of the Irish Times:
Sir-In leading article in one of thu
London daily morning papers of recent
date on the case of Mrs. Maybrick it i:
stated that the home secretary is quite
prepared to grant Il commission of inquiry
provided those who demand it furnish
| him with adequate reasons. Let then
bring forth the proofs which arc said tt
exist, and which can establish Mrs. May
bricks innocence, and Mr.. Asquith will
be only too glad to examine them and act
upon them"
| This is good news provided it be carried
out There is, however, another view
| to be regarded in this case-viz., that
Mrs. Maybrick has never been proved
guilty in open court of an attempt to ad-
minister arsenic with intent to murder
| In Sir James Stephens digest of the
law of evidence he distinctly tells III
THAT the burden of proof as to any par
| ticular fact lies on that person who wishes
the court to believe in it's existence"
1t therefor is unquestionably the duty of
those who believe in the guilt of the pris-
oner to bring forth the proofs which are
said to exist of her guilt, but they never
have been published. A prisoner is pre-
| sumed to be innocent until proved guilty,
and the question for serious considera-
tion now is whether large reward should
be offered to obtain the proofs required.
for in the absence of such proofs the pub.
lie generally will never rest in what they
consider would be "a silent quiescence
! of injustice" Indeed her majesty's gov
eminent. whether Liberal or Conservative,
could not possibly admire those who, by
their silent quiescence," placed them
selves almost outside the pale of reason.
For what is the use of reason If we do not
apply it TO such a case as this? which is
admitted on all sides to be unprecedented
since the days of the Star Chamber. Nc
doubt all right-minded people are ANNA
ted with a love of justice and with a desire
to arrive at the truth about Mrs May
brick, why therefore should those who
believe in her guilt hesitate for one mo
ment to produce their proofs of guilt.
The highest duty will always be found to
be coincident with truth. Why, then,
should those who believe the prisoner to
be guilty appear to object to a sober analy-
sis OF her case in open court? In anoth-
or daily paper, of even larger circulation
than that form which have already
quoted, there is an excellent leading ar
ticle on this case. The writer, after point
ing out the fact that in the opinion OF
very high legal authorities, There exists
in Mrs. Maybrick' S case ample material
which would entitlc her to hearing be-
fore court of appeal in criminal pro-
cedure if there were such a court" goes on
to say" But the most mighty considera
ton is the new evidence that has been col
lected and published in pamphlet >
We have carefully read it, and are CON
strained to say that on its face this new
evidence bears the stamp of genuineness,
of trustworthiness, and of conclusiveness
in regard to the matters of which it treats.
And they are fundamental matters deal
ing with and accounting for the presence
of arsenic in the house of the deceased.
and in his stomach, accounting for these
things IL way that, if the evidence be not
overthrown, completely exonerates the I'M
happy wife and widow. The witnesses
are not as is so often the case under similar
circumstances. irresponsible persons. =
Without entering here into recapitu-
lation of the documents, it is sufficient
to say that case appears to be made out
such as cannot be ignored by the present
home secretary, MIR. Asquith, without
violating the plainest dictates of justice
and humanity. 1t is false to say that moth
ing can be done He has, under the Queen,
the pardoning power He can if he will.
examine the witnesses. sift the evidence
and render verdict in the light of all the
truth. If it is not done the sin and the
shame will be disgrace to the fair name
OF England These are not my words
do not know who wrote them, but do
know that the opinion they convey is the
very opinion of great legal authorities