The Wichita daily eagle., 1896-01-25

4
years. Their reputation is good.
Martin McNulty said he had known
! the defendant and her fathers family
ever since 1864 and their reputation is
good.
| Miss Kate McNuity: I have known
Mrs. Leonard ever since knew any
| body. 1 knew her first in Indiana Did
not see her very often of late.
DR.. A. II. Wendall, 1904 South Market:
Il am physician and graduate of Gin
cinnad Medical school Have been
physician to Mrs. Leonard ten years ago
l have seen her frequently since that
time; she come to me for treatment.
She came a shoTrt time before this thing
! happened. l have given special auten-
ton to temperaments The county at
| torney objected to DR.. Wendall telling
whittier Mrs. Leonard was capable of
committing such a deed as murder.
Mr.. Comfy picked up the hatchet and
asked DR.. Wendall if it would be pos
sible for woman of Mrs. Leonard 5
strength TO strike a blow that would
fracture H. II. Leonard's skull and he
said it would be impossible. DR.. Wen
dell said he could look at blood with the
naked eye on a hard substance such as
steel and tell whether it was human
blood. County Attorney Davis OBJ
jected ithat he could not tell such a
thing as that but Judge Dale overruled
the objection, and said, the witness had
shown himself competent, because he
said he could tell The blood on the
haltchet, was, however, so dim that he
was unable to say that 1T was.
w. II. Tull and Thomas Tull and 9TH
ers testified to the good character of
Mrs. Leonard as did a number after
which the defense rested without put
ting the defendant on the witness stand
and Judge Dale at 11:30 a. m. adjourn
ed court until p. m, in order TO pre-
pare Instructions TO the jury.
The defense proved only two things
and they are that Mrs. Leonard was a
''peaceable" woman SO far as the wit
nesses knew and that according to DR.
Wendall she could not hit a blow with
the hatchet that would fracture Leon
ards skull.
This was certainly a very frail ar
NOR for to defend ones life with against
the circumstantial evidence submitted
by the state and yet they confidently
expected an acquittal, or at worst a
hung jury.
They did not introduce a single word
of evidence to show, or tend to show,
that Mrs. Leonard was not consorting
with her former husband, the man
whom they proved she was much afraid
of. They made no effort to contradict
he evidence of the state that she was
seen riding with him a few hours be,
fore the murder of her husband, in the
remote suburbs of the city They
proved nothing to show that she was
not present at the murder, that IT was
not done at her house and that she did
not abet or counsel in it. To be brief
they did not pretend to prove anything
that would exonorate her from the
strong chain of circumstantial and cor
roborative positive evidence woven
about her by the county attorney. This
failure was not the fault of the talent
of the attorneys who are both bright
and able lawyers. The natural conclu-
sion then is that there was really no
defense available.
At 11:30 O'Clock the court adjourned
until O'Clock in the afternoon.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
When the court convened in the after
noon the crowd was immense.
When Judge Dale took his seat and
commenced to read his instructions to
the jury the great crowd was so still
that a snow flake could have been
heard falling.
The document was a very clear and
able one, and so plain with the propo-
sitions of the law governing the case
that the dullest man could comprehend.
Taking them as a whole they incline
very strongly towards the defense. Yet,
they contained q few paragra phs that
the prosecution could take great COM
fort from.
Judge Dale ventured no opinion as TO
the guilt or innocence of Mrs. Williams
but simply stated the law and showed
that the burden of proof was on the
state.
John Davis opened, then ]. F. Comfy
followed, then S. B. Amidon and Mr..
Davis closed at exactly O'clock.
The speeches were not brilliant but an
impartial judge viii say that Mr.
Davis address was the ablest, especial
ly his opening remarks. His statement
were all candid and sincere and they
had a marked effect on the jury.
Mr.. Comfy, on every occasion, is a
fine orator, but he disappointed his
friends this time. He made a fair
speech, Of course, but it lacked the con-
vincing element. The fact is he had
no grounds to make an able speech
on. He could not appeal to the SYM
pa thy of the jury for the defendant was
not in the right condition TO sustain
sim in it. She was crying, of course.
but her tears did not gush forth like
they would from an innocent woman
or from a woman that had exalted or
fine feelings The fact is Mrs. Leon
ards tears did her no good. II any
thing could arouse sympathy it was
the presence Of her old ather who sat
near her, but Mr.. Comfy failed 10 give
him as prominent a place as he might
have done TO the advantage of his
client. The fact seemed to be that Mr..
Comfy realized he had a hard case and
one that he could not play very well on.
Mr. Amidon in his address showed
hard work, too. He was in good trim
for an oratorical display, and started
in 10 make 1t, but fate seemed TO be
against him to say nothing OF the sym
p2thy Of the spectators and jury. He
did not have a single point, apparently.
in his favor and he could not make his
client shed tears with any better sue
cess than Mr.. Comfy. They mildly at
tackled a part OF the evidence and policy
shown by the county attorney. but even
that was uphill business The hearts
and tongues Of both Mr.. Comfy and Mr..
Amidon were willing enough and able
enough, but the truth is they were woe
fully short Of ammunition.
Mr.. Amidon is usually very dramatic
in his speeches before a jury but on this /
occasion he gave only one dramatic
scene and that was when he waved the
red dress and apron OF the defendant
before the jury and asked them where
the blood was that the county attorney
said stained them
This gave Mr.. Davis a chance 10 be
dramatic in his closing speech. He
produced black calico dress. waved
il before the jury and threw il al his
feet saying: Gentlemen. this is the
dress l sad was stained with blood |
and * was the dress worn by the de-
fendsnt when she murdered her hus-
band, Henry II. Leonard"
Mr.. Davis made very impressive