Wood County reporter. [volume] (Grand Rapids [i.e. Wisconsin Rapids], Wis.) 1857-1923, 1899-08-10
rs THE WOMAN REALLY A MUIR
DERESS?
FACTS OF TIMELY INTEREST
The So-Called Crime Conviction That
Followed and the Persistent At
tempts Since TO Secure Freedom for
the inquired Creature-Testimon
Adduced at the Trial.

cold little woman stood at the bar OF
-le old criminal court in Liverpool
receiving her sentence Of death for
murder by poison. And of all the
throng that filed the court in that SUI
preme moment, their eyes fixed upon
her as, her hands resting lightly OK
the dock rail, she faced the judge in
the black cap, she alone was in COM
plete command of herself Not a
muscle in the colorless dead wall of
her face moved The blond hair.
neatly combed, and frilled with severe
accuracy, never stirred. The light
eyebrows never twitched as the words
Of the sentence booming her to death
by the rope fell upon her ear. An
additional compression of the thin
lips with their uncomfortable tight
ness at the corners, a colder CLINT than
usual in the hardest eyes ever seen in
man or woman, and that was all. And
as the voice of the judge ceased she
turned and, with something of the
smooth, soft, 1.-the grace of a panther,
fitted down the steps Of the dock to
the cells below.
The woman was Florence Elizabeth
Maybrick, who from that time has been
more or less an object of a certain
morbid, sympathetic interest to a
large part of the public in England
and America. The alleged victim was
her husband, James Maybrick.
The agitation that followed the con-
viction of Mrs. Maybrick, the review
of the case by the then home secre-
tary, Henry Matthews, the commuta-
ton OF the sentence of death to penal
servitude for life, and the subsequent
repeated attempts to secure her re-
lease, are we'll within the memory of
the reading public. With all possible
respect to the enterprise of the New
York newspapers which furnished
cabled reports of the proceedings at
the trial, it may be said that the vast
majority of the general American
public is ignorant of the vital points
in the Maybrick case, or of the charac
ter of the evidence which led to her
conviction by the Liverpool jury.
AS to the justice of the verdict or of
the punishment decreed by the home
secretary, there are many varied
opinions. The DIRECTORS are con-
solidated into three parties. The
first party, composed of the hysteri
cal shreikers, led by Gail Hamilton,
argue that Mrs. Maybrick should not
have been convicted, because she was
an American, and that her detention
in an English prison is an interna-
tional outrage and a fiaunt in the face
of the American nation. This propo-
sition is simply an insult to the COM
mon sense of the plain people of this
country, and may be dismissed with
the comment that it's only effect so
far has been to aggravate the stiff
neckedness of British officialism, and
place almost insuperable obstacles in
the way of Mrs. Maybrick's release
The second party, led by the Baron
ess de Rogue, Mrs. Maybrick's mother,
and Alexander McDougall, an Eng
lish barrister, declare that Mrs. May
brick was absolutely innocent of the
crime for which she has suffered, and
is the martyred heroine of wicked
conspiracy against her life and lib
erty on the part of the Maybrick fam
lily. But the majority of those who
were associated with the trial, or who
closely followed the evidence in the
case, reach this conclusion:
1. That James Maybrick did not die
from the administration of arsenic,
but that the gastro-enteritis from
which he suffered was induced by
natural causes.
2. That the evidence nevertheless
clearly proved beyond the possibility
of doubt the purchase and systematic
administration Of arsenic by the
prisoner to the deceased with intent
to kill.
8. That there was ample testimony
to show that Maybrick himself had for
years, preceding and subsequent to his
marriage been an arsenic-eater; that
Mrs Maybrick was aware of this fact,
and relied upon it to protect her in
the event of accusation.
4. That Maybrick, by long usage,
had become saturated with the poison,
and was arsenic-proOf.
). That in deciding that Mrs. May
brick had been guilty of attempted
murder, the home secretary arrived at
the only true solution OF the mystery.
6. That if Mrs. Maybrick was not
guilty of the actual murder of her hus-
band she was legally entitled to &C
quittal
7. That, inasmuch as she was never
tried for attempted murder, and as
that charge formed no part of the in
dictment on which she was arraigned
she should not be punished for at
tempted murder, and is, in fact, il
legally detained.
In view of the powerful effort for
her release now made by Ambassa-
dor Choate and by Lord Russell, OF
KiIlowen, who defended her at heI
trial, it may be as well to submit, fol-
trial, it may be we'll to submit a brief
summary Of the evidence submitted by
prosecution and defense At her trial.
The beginning of the chain is found
at Battlecrease House, one of the
series of villa residences built in and
around Garston, a suburb of Liver
pool, beloved Of the merchant, the
| flash stock-broker, the professional
man and the wealthy shop-keeper. Il
was the March Of 1889. The May
bricks had been on an Atlantic liner
bound from New York to Liverpool
/ They had been eight years married
Those eight years told the story of &
| haggard WEAKNESS and peevish discon.