The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1896-05-26

tion Of a cosmetic wash. One Of the
processes in the preparation Of this cos
metlc, as set out in the prescription,
was the soaking OF iiy paper Of the kind
purchased by her, In water. She said
she had bought the fly paper for this
purpose and used 1t only as the pre-
scription directed. She testified that
she had lost the prescription and she
was unable to produce as a witness the
chemist from whom she had procured
the fly papers and other ingredients for
her cosmetic. There was evidence
pointing to motive for the alleged
crime in the evidence Of u waiter who
testified to an improper meeting be-
tween Mrs. Maybrick and one Briefly,
who, according to the theory of the
prosecution, was her lover. in London
hotel. These were all exceedingly sus-
picious circumstances. Every one or
them has been entirely cleared up, since
the trial, but that does not affect the
present consideration of their effect on
the minds of the jurymen. which must
have been great.
Another and very strong influence N
misleading the jury was the extraor-
dinary charge of Mr.. Justice Stephen.
The present lord chief justice OF Eng
land, who heard the charge. thus de-
scribes Justice Stephens conduct: lie
passionately invited the jury to find
verdict Of guilty, taking two days to
sum w. the first day as judge and IN
the second ragged like a violent counsel
for the prosecution against her So
pasionately and brutally, unfair
charge had not been delivered by an
English judge since Jeffreys. Justice
Stephens conduct on this occasion was
so extraordinary departure from all
judicial custom and from his own ac-
customed manner that II was widely
commented upon and regarded as IN
explicable until. when Mr.. Justice Ste
phen went mad shortly after this trial.
it became plain that his extraordinary
charge in the Maybrick case was mere
ly an outbreak of incipient insanity.
This crazy eXhortation to find the pris-
oner guilty of course had great effect
on the Jury.
ONE JURORS CONFESSION.
How this monstrous verdict was
reached is still further explained by the
following statement Of one of the jury
men: We could not hear the evidence
very distinctly and, even II we could
have done SO, II was impossible to car
ry away with US in our memories the
important details. We. therefore made
free use of the newspapers and made
our cullings' 1t Is evident that the
jury had not caught the meaning and
force of the medical and expert testi-
mOny-juries seldom do-and the ire
sponsible judge. in his crazy partisanI
ship, had pointed out to them what he
SO clearly saw himself, to wit: that
it was impossible to find the prisoner
guilty In the face Of the medical evi-
dence' Public opinion was dead against
newspapers had unanimously con-
demned her and were full Of false and
sensational stories about the case and
prejudiced comments upon 1.-THE jurors
were allowed to read the newspapers az
much as they chose. and on the state.
ments of the newspapers they found
their verdict. Thus the verdict Is eX-
planned, and now no one can advance
the argument oh. 1t isn't likely the
jury would have found her guilty unless
there was something against her.
There was nothing against her
Even with the suspicious circumstances
already referred to unexplained, JUS
tice Stephen, In his right mind, must
have seen that the testimony made his
duty to so charge that his remarks to
the jury would have practically
amounted to a direction to go out and
come back with verdict of not guilty.
Mrs. Maybrick was found guilty. SEN
fenced, and has been seven years an
imprisoned convict, sOlely OeCdusc SHe
was tried by a lunatic judge.
Lest the suspicious circumstances
that have been mentioned as affecting
the jury may also also AFFECT the mind
of some reader. it may be well to say
that the presence of the arsenic In
Maybricks apartments has. since the
trial, been accounted for by the dis
covery of the man who sold to May
brick himself every grain of 1t In Feb
ruary, 1888; that the lost cosmetic pre-
scription and the missing chemist who
sold the ingredients mentioned therein.
including the fiy-papers, to Mrs. May
brick, have been found, and that the
waiter who testified to the interview In
the London hotel has confessed that
he lied. Every suspicious circun-
stances has now been swept out of the
case. There is not one shadow Of justi-
tication for the continued imprisonment
of Mrs. Maybrick. even In the minds
of the obstinate officials who refuse to
release her II congress can, by speak
ing out very plainly. do anything to-
ward righting this wrong, whose con-
tinuance IL almost q great disgrace TO
us as to England, let congress do that
thing, even If international courtesy be
very severly strained 1t may be re-
marked that England has shown US no
courtesy at all In this matter