Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1895-04-18

distinct penalty attached to 1t, Mrs.
Maybrick ought to have been heard In her
defence 1t is the duty OF those who be-
lievc that Mrs. Maybrick rs guilty Of any
crime to prove that she is so. They can
not prove that the prisoner used sufficient
means ''to effectuate the intent" The
Times, In an article has admitted that
the want of court Of criminal appeal
in the case oflMrs. Maybrick Is nothing
less than "a caamity," and that human
being has been condemned to penal ser
vitude for life on nothing more, after all,
than suspicion. Your correspondent say
ssIt is remarkable that no evidence bear
ing on Mrs. Maybrick's guilt has come to
light in five years; and that fact alone
should be something in her favor"
But If that fact be considered as remark
able" surely there is tho far more i'm
portant fact that mass of evidence bear
ing on Mrs. Maybrick's innocence has
come to light, and 1t Is this fact which
has so greatly revived and augmented the
agitation which is now going on in ref
erence to this sad case.
/ am, Sir, yours, &C.,
Heathcote Hardinge
Ravenscourt Park, W., Feb. 2, 1895
The Maybrick Case.
(The Morning Advertiser Jan. 80. 1895 }
To the Editor of the Morning Advertiser:
Sir,-If any of your readers imagine
that Mrs. Maybrick Tor any other prison.
err must be guilty on account of the re-
fusal of the home office to grant release
| think very recent case will undeceive
them. Last summer a man named Potter
was convicted of felonious assault on q
woman named Smith, and sentenced to
five years penal servitude. The convic-
ton was of course, procured by the evil
dence of Smith. She was afterwards
prosecuted for perjury. One would have
thought that when the magistrate COM
mitted her for trial there was a reasonable
doubt of Potter's guilt, and that he
should be liberated-at all events on
ticket of leave. No such thing. The home
secretary requires demonstration of inno-
cence before releasing prisoner. But at
the winter assizcs. Smith was tried and
convicted. What further proof could be
wanted? Yet Potter was not released I'M
til the 23d of January What was the
reason of the delay? Had the home sec
rotary some doubts as to whether the
conviction of Smith was right, and was
doubt as to which was the real criminal,
to make both of them serve out their SEN
fences? Clearly, if Smith had teen &C
quitted-even if the jury had disagreed
Potter would not have been liberated at
all; yet the acquittal might mean no
more than that, though there was
strong probability that she had perjured
herself, the case against her was not suf-
f1,A, 30 Id. I, n
is plain that the home office struggles to
the very last against admitting that there
has been a miscarriage of justice and has
no hesitation in keeping an innocent man
or woman in prison for months II that is
necessary in order to exclude all possible
doubt of his or her innocence. And per-
haps Potter would have had to spend
another month or six weeks of his SEN
tence (concurrently with Smiths If the
meeting of Parliament had not been so
close at hand. 1t would not have been
safe to have Potter still in prison on the
9Th of February. How long will the Eng
lish people tolerate such system as this9
Would any other civilized country do so?
1t can sink no lower than it has done
under Mr.. Asquith.
am, Sir, yours, &C., D.
B. l..
To the Editor of the Morning Advertiser:
Sir,-I cannot still understand Mr.
Seymour's argument. Does he contend
that if Mr.. Blakes evidence be true Mr..
Maybrick must have died of arsenic? 1
think it would be much more likely that
he died of arsenic if it were proved that
the arsenic in the house was introduced
by someone else and that the arsenic in
his body was administered by someone
else, and if it appeared that he introduced
the former into the house, and administered
the latter to himself, it would certainly take
more arsenic to kill an habitual arsenic
eater than an ordinary man. Proof of
habitual arsenic eating, therefor goes to
strengthen the opinion of the doctors who
held that he did not die Of arsenic.
AS to Mr.. Seymodr's contention that
the fact that Mr.. Maybrick procured ar
senic from Mr.. Blake for the express pur-
pose of self administration within a short
time before his death affords no ground
for thinking that the small quantity Of ar
senc found in his body was self-adnin-
istered. do not think any of your read
ers will agree with him.-I am, sir,
yours, &c,
Jan. 26, 1895 A Liverpool Lady.
PRESS COMMENTS.