Reporter and farmer. [volume] (Webster, Day County, Dakota [S.D.]) 188?-1946, 1897-02-11

reluctantly consented to cancel Miss
Cifford's engagement.
The evidence given before the JUICE
Construction. including the dispositions
of Somerviile himself. made 1t clear
that she had shot her abductOr In self
defense. She ,Montm0rency and JOSH
ali Skinner were simply bound over to
appear against Somerville, il called
upon; and "a similar conrser was pur-
sued with respect to Daft Billy, when
the latter had recovered sufficiently to
understand what was required of him.
But, in view Of the far graver charge
formulated against SOmervi!le in the
extradition warrant, the French au-
thorities deemed it useless To proceed
against him. And thus, two months
after the tragic scene at Versailles, he
vas formally given over into the custo-
dy of Josiah Skinner and another Off
cial sen from Scotland Yard.
AT Bow street the prisoner (whO,
while protesting his innocence, re-
served his defense) was committed for
trial, without the formality of q re-
mand. Even at its initial stage two
facts told against him with great force.
He was identified, both by the manag-
er and the accountant of the London
& Westminster Bark, as the man who
had p~ersonated Ernest Norton. And
the missing mans drafts. together
with Zana's jewels, had been found by
the French police in his possession.
The trial, which followed in due
course, will long be remembered as n
of the most sensational in Old Bailey
records. We do not propose giving Il
verbatim report, because such a course
would involve n ENTHUSIASTICALLY rep
clifton of much that the reader knows
already. Let it suffice to indicate the
principal links in the chain of circum-
stantieal evidence set forth by the
Crown.
Ernest Norton arrived at the George
Hotel, Southampton, upon the 9th of
April, and his departure for London
with the avowed objects of procuring
a special marriage license and of de-
posting Zana's jewels in n bank, were
proved by the evidence OF Zana herself
and OF Mrs. Baxter.
Josiah Skinner had experienced no
difficulty whatever In identifying the
prisoner with the DIR. Richard Somer-
vile formerly practicing at Twicken-
ham; and, OF course, II of his first
cares had been to hunt up the dis
missed servants. The housemaid now
deposed to the arrival, upon the night
of April 9th, of a gentleman in every
way answering TO the description of
Ernest Norton. He had not occupied
any bedroom that night, nor had any
member of the household seen him de-
part.
Next, it was proved by the bank Off
Gals that the prisoner Ito whose identi-
ty the manager and cashier swore pos
itively) had successfully personated
Mr.. Ernest @. Norton, and had cashed
a draft for two thousand five hundred
pounds bearing that gentleman's sigma
tnre. Reference was made to the sud
den breakup of the establishment at
Tsyickenham; and the prisoners move
ments were traced to Paris, where, it
was shewn, ne had led a life of pl>aS-
ure and eXtrayagance-upon the pro-
ceeds, presumably, of Ernest Norton's
securieties and cash.
His Surreptitious visit to England
had escaped notice; but expectation
orse to its highest when Zana entered
the ~witneSS-boX and detailed all that
had passed between the prisoner and
herself-her account of the scene at
Versailles being corroborated by Josiah
Skinner, Daft Billy and Montmorency.
Link by link the counsel for the
Crown formed his chain from the
abundant mass of evidence that had
been given. The evidence was, he adj
mitted. whilly circumstantial, but he
reminded the jury that circumstantiai
evidence, IL consistent, was often the
most deceiving.
1T Is safe to predict" he went on,
that that counsel for the defense will
make the most of the fact that no proof
exists of Ernest Norton's death, and
that you cannot honestly convict the
prisoner of numbering a man who may
possibly be still alive. But what Is the
presumption, the inevitable presump-
ton? Here we have a young man, in
the best Of health and spirits, about to