The San Francisco call., 1898-12-19
WIDOW, MOTHER, SISTER, Tbree of tbe Mourners for Cborles Hilderbrond.

posterous verdict that allowed his slayer to go scott free. They did not demand the life of their brothers S slayer, but they did ask for justice, and they regard the an- swer to their prayers as a mockery-a sarcastic echo which seems to deride the supposition that there is any such thing as justice in the metropolis of the Pacihc Coast.
 If the story of Miss Lilly Hilderbrand is to be believed, and her veracity has never been questioned, there are many peculiar things in connection with the trial of Rosser that need explaining. Her con- clusions may be biased, it is true, but the facts from which they are drawn reflect no credit on those whose sworn duty 1t is to see that strict justice is done to all. Miss Hilderbrand thought. she had right to demand that the slayer of her brother should be punished. She so informed As sistant District Attorney Hinkle, who had charge of the case, when sne went to him to ask that he subpoena certain witnesses whose testimony might have penetrated the understanding of even jury of the mental caliber possessed by the twelve men sitting in Judgment on the evidence. She was given to understand that her suggestions were regarded as interference ney Barnes deputy did not propose to ask for a continuance to enable him to secure new witnesses, for fear the trial might go over until the new year, and he wanted the "honor'' of trying 1t himself before he went out of office.
 He would not allow our attorney to
 
 to do with the case" said Miss Hilder- brand last evening. 'I wanted him to summon witnesses to prove that Rosser had been released from the guardhouse on the morning of the shooting, after a. month s confinement there for offenses against military discipline; also to prove that he had tried to shoot a private in the Tennessee regiment before the ree-f ment came to California, and that he was of a quarrelsome disposition. MT. HinkIe sald he could not do that, as he was not allowed to introduce testimony as to the prisoner character on special occasions as that would be no proof of his natural disposition The fact, in my opinion. is that Hinkle was acting under instructions ron ron District Attorney Barnes, whose Rosser told MT. Hinkle that it was a case or rather and son standing together ana am more than ever convinced that was right in my surmise
 But even with the evidence that was introduced l cannot see how the .ury could return such a verdict. It was shown that Rosser shot my brother deliberately. him chance to defend himself. There was no evidence to show that he was drugsed; he was simply drunk and had been walking up and down in the market some time before he killed my brother
 He had murder in his heart that day |" interrupted old Mrs. Hilderbrand sadly, and if he had not killed my poor boy he would have killed somebody else''
 Yesterday was the third anniversary of Henry Hilderbrands wedding and a sad anniversary 1t was for the young widow. scarcely more than a girl in years. The 6-year-old mite, Marie, whom the young couple had adopted, has been taken into the family of the elder Hilderbrand and the widow is also with them at present Her husband had made no provision for her in the way of insurance. as he was hoarding his earnings with the expecta- ton of going into business next year on a small scale. It has been reported that subscribed for the widow, but the report was unfounded, as was the report that the family of the murdered man had con- sented not to prosecute the case against Rosser in consideration of the payment Of