The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1896-03-15
MR.. o WORK.
The Newport Shoe Mans Part In Iden-
tifyfng Pearl Bryan's Body.
the IndianapoIis journal.

Special to the Indianapolis Journal.
CINCINNATI. March 14-"Sheriff Plum
mer has been censured too severely in this
Pearl Bryan business said L. ID. Poock, in
his Newport shoe store to-day. Ii was Poock
who traced the victims shoes TO a Ports
mouth factory. and then to Greencastle. and
who, according 10 detective j.. c. Grammar.
cid the only detective work that has ap-
peared thus far in the case. Plummer was
interested in the shoes from the beginning.
and on Saturday. the day the body was
found. he had shoe dealers here to look at
them He DID not ask me. because he was
better acquainted with other dealers. What
they said. together with the telegram re-
ceived from Greoncastle in response to in
quiries. threw him off the track"
"Plummer and the detectives seem 10 have
formed a theory that the spoe was sold in
Cincinnati. and that the victim was from
this immediate vicinity. Ought not 4 man
to have gone 10 Greencastle at once?" Mr..
Poock was asked.
Yes, I think so. l would have started at
once. But, you see. they thought that al
though the shoe had a Greencastle dealers
name on ii. it might have been sold else
where. the dealer having got it as a job lot
from the factory. There is a store here in
"AA~L mas ISL NV jill BLUES
stamped Greencastle."
But the shoes sold at Job lots this way to
other dealers than the ones whose names
are stamped are very few, are they not?
They won't average > per cent. will they?"
We'll. l suppose not" said Poock. reluct-
antly. There were many shoes sold that
way formerly. but the custom is not SO
common of late years"
The presumption was. then, nine to one,
when the shoe was first examined, that ii
was sold In Greencastle, Ind. ?'
suppose 1t was" answered Mr.. Poock.
but there were chances that it was a shoe
made here in Cincinnati. In the shoe fac
torres wnen a girl spells a shoe she is COM
PEELED TO keep the pair. There was nothing
10 prove that the shoe had not baen taken
In this way by some Cincinnati or Newport
factory girl. and that she was the victim.
Even after l went 70 Portsmouth il was
possible that the snoe was worn by a Ports
mouta factory girl. and that she was miss
DO you think that there was more than
one chance in a hundred that this was so,
despite the theory the police worked on for
three days that the woman came from Gin
than L per cent. of the shoes manufacturer?
NO, l do not know that they do"
assc1 rOofA sald mat ne dld not care to
or not In prosecuting the investigation. When
Re took up the clew of the shoes on Monday
tirely out of the detectives minds. He said
that ne would cast no reflection on the de-
t~ectives, for they had treated him well.
you REGARD your work in determining
that the shoes were positively sold in Green
castle as the taing which finally led to the
Identification Of Pearl Bryan?'
Yes. / think that undoubtedly led to the
Identification. l left here on the fier al
noon, crossed the river at Portsmouth, went
a mile and a half to the shoe factory, and
In forty minutes after l reached the factory
1 had a message on the wires saying that
Louis & Hayes. of Greencastle. had bought
a dozen pairs of shoes, that none had been
spoiled. that there was only one No. 3 shoe
In the lot. and tnat the Fort Thomas victim
must have purchased it. l sent two tele-
grams, and Plummer and the detectives
started on the strength Of the first"
IF IL had not been for this proof you
brought TO light do you think the girl would
ever have been identiied2'
No l do not think that she would. ]
think she would have been buried before il
would have been found out" Poock re-
peated that Sheriff Plummer has been GEN.
sured where. ne does not deserve censure.