The San Francisco call., 1897-03-04

| also knew Blanche Lamont. Between and
| 4.30 OF this afternoon she saw Duran It and a
| young lady pass though the gate into the
| churchyard and on toward the side door.
| His compa MON she could not identity posi-
| lively but from her appearance thought at
the time that 1t was Blanche Lamont, or an
other young lady of similar size and height
| This young lady testified that she was not
with defendant at any time upon that day
and no claim is made that she was.
George Kings Testimony.
| George King was member of the church
| and its organlst He knew defendant and the
| two were very friendly. Al 5 o'clock on this
| door, letting himself in with his key. He no.
| ttced strong smell of gas and went forthwith
| to the library to see If it was escaping there.
| He failed to find the leak. Thence, closing the
| library door, he proceeded directly to the
! Sunday-school room and sitting at the piano
| began to play. He PLAYED for two or three
| minutes, when defendant came through the
folding doors to the rear and stood looking
at him. 81 asked him what was the matter.
| because of his pale condition. He had his coat
| off and his hat off, His hair was somewhat
disheveled. He came through and then told
me that he had been fixing the gas above
! the auditorium and had been overcome by 1t
TO such degree that ne eould hardly descend
| the ladder. He seemed Iii. He handed me a
| 50-eent piece and asked me TO go and
| get some broino-seltZer." Witness procured the
| seltzer and upon his return found the defend
4
| the platform in the Sund y-scnooll room. He
| thinks, however, that defendant was lying
down. Defendant took dose OF the selizer
which seemed to nauseate him somewhat
| The two sat and talked together for q few
minutes, then went upstairs to the choir lott
aud carried down a small organ. Defendant
appeared weak and had tc stop two or three
times to rest. Then they went to the library
door, which Durrant unlocked. and entering
put on his hat and coat, which were lying on
box in the corner. Witness had not seen the
hat or coat when he went into the library the
first time that afternoon. They then LETT the
church and walking some distance together
separated and went to their respective homes.
1t was then about o'clock.
Upon the morning of April 13, ten days after
the disappearance OF Blanche Lamont and one
day before the discovery of her body, her
aunt, Mrs. Noble, received through the mail
package which contained ali OF the rings worn
BY her when she left her home. The rings
were inclosed in a copy of the Examiner, and
upon the paper were write the names OF
George King and Professor Schernstein. King
was a common friend of Durrant and Blanche
Lamont. Professor Schernstein was her music
teacher Neither OF the two wrote the name.
The paper and wrapper were exhibited 10 the
jury, together with admitted exemplars Of
defendants writing.
Sale of the Ring.
Upon a morning between the 4th and 10th
of April Adolph Oppenheimer, pawn-broker
was offered for sale q gold ring containing q
diamond chip. The ring was identified as one
worn by Blanche Lamont at the time of her
disappearance, and subsequently returned 10
her aunt through the mail The person offer
ing the ring for sale was the defendant.
William Phillips testified that some time in
the frs. part OF April he saw defendant stand
ing in front of 0ppenheimer's place between
10 and IL o'clock in the morning.
DR.. G. F. Graham was student and class
mate OF Durrant's at the Cooper Medical Col
| lege. From $50 10 AIS P NJ. of April 3 DR..
| Cheney of that college delivered a lecture to
! his class upon the sterilization of milk. Dr.
| Graham attended that lecture and took notes
of il. The defendant, in support of his alibi,
| claimed to have attended the lecture, and like
wise TO have taken original Eotes, which were
admitted in evidence DR.. Graham testified
| that after Durrant's arrest aud before the
| trial. he visited i'm with q friend. Durrant
| requested his companion 10 withdraw that he
| might talk TO DR.. Graham alone When he
| had done so defendant informed DR.. Graham
| that he had no notes OF the lecture, and re-
| quested the doctor to lend him his, saying
| that II he could get them he couid establish an
| alib. Defendant told him that he could take
| the notes to Durrant's house, get his book and
| put them in il, and the book could be brought
| to him in jail, or that the witness could COM
| NIT his notes TO memory, come to the jail and
| repeat them to him.
Summary of the Evidence.
This STANDARDIZATION of the evidence is not
| designed TO BE- exhaustive. Much that is
| cumulative upon the part OF the people is
| omitted. No analysis is made of the allbi of
the defense, or OF The claim of the pr osecution
| that when not completely demolished, 1t
| stands upon the unsupported word of the de-
| fendant Enough has been set forth TO show
that the verdict and Judgment finds support
| from legal and sufficient evidence, and when
| that point is reached the inquiry of this court
comes 10 an end, saving in those exceptional
| cases. OF which this is not one where The evil
| dence against the defendant is SO slight as to
| make clear the Inference that the verdict must
| have been rendered under the influence of
| passion or prejudice. people VS.. Vance. 81
Cal. 400; People VS.. Manning, 4S Cal. 335 !
| BY this evidence the defendant and Blanche
| Lamont she with her strap OF books entered
| the Emmanuel Church at about half-past
| O'Clock in the afternoon of April 3. At 5
| O'Clock defendant is seen there, and explains
! his distressed condition as caused by the in
halation of gas. AT o'clock he leaves the
| church. Blanche Lamont is never again seen
| alive. Two weeks after her nude and decom-
! posing body is found in the church. She had
| been stfangled and her corpse dragged 10 the
| belfry. The clothes which she wore on leav-
! ing home are seereted about the floors and
| rafters Her books found, still tightly
| strapped. These facts, with the others set
| forth, are sufficient to Justify the hypothesis
| other reasonable hypothesis than that OF mis-
| guilt. Such evidence Is clear4y sufficient to
| warrant and uphold the determination that
the girl was strangled to death at-the hands
| of the defeudant upon the afternoon of April 8.
| The evidence OF defendants previous good
| character, so fully established, was circum-
| stance making strongly in his favor. We are
asked TO say that the jury disreg arded it in
| They we're fully and fairly instructed upon
/ the matter, and il must be presumed that the
1 instructions were regarded.
Motive for the Crime
| Appellant further urges that the evidence
| fails 10 disclose any motive for the crime
| that proof OF motive is essential to support q
| conviction, and that. there fore, the judgme Mt
/ must be reversed. If by this is meant that
| proof OF a PARTICULAR motive must be as clear