The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1900-11-22

Mr.. Parry or will you believe the defend
ant 1t is no argument to assume that the
defendant perjures himself"
Again referring 10 Mr.. Parry, the attor-
ney said: Let me see IL We cannot meas
ure up this golden calf we are supposed TO
worship. Isn't ii strange that such good
citizen should be approached by this ig-
norant, drunken Irishman and not say any
thing about IL until brought out by per-
sistent newspaper. IL the Parry story is
true, why was not Higgins denounced i'm
mediately by Mr.. Parry. l would rather be
a drayman than be man who can be
twice approached In that way and not re-
sent it,. Attorney Span spoke at length
upon politics entering into the matter and
and nine Republicans. politics should have
no weight in deciding the question of guilt
of the defendant. In conclusion he pleaded
for mercy for the defendant In behalf OF
his wife, children and aged father.
ATTORNEY ELAMS ARGUMENT.
Attorney Elam began the closing argu-
ment for the State at 1880 last evening. His
argument was forceful one and he dwelt
upon the facts in the case which showed
Higgins to be guilty of the charge against
him. In opening. Attorney Elan said: I'VE
are nearing the end of trying investiga-
ton and we are also nearing the end of
tedious days proceedings. 1t is true that
before the recess Of court we listened TO
what is termed eloquence. You have all
doubtless discovered that there is common
stock in trade that is more or less drawn
upon by those who are accustomed to ad-
dress political assemblies and talk before
Juries. have never had the patience under
any circumstances to devote myself in ar
gument before jury to a discussion of
the shape and color Of a mans clothes or
the color of his hair 1t was not exactly
fair for Mr.. Span to denounce Mr.. Pugh.
1t was unfair for him to charge that the
Cd -. inr
cused because Mr.. Parry, the principal
witness, was a man of wealth. There
should be no acquttal because this man
Higgins worked as a drayman for nineteen
years and because he is poor.
The defense is pursuing a cause to set
up a new saint whom they admit is pro-
fame and worthless in many respects. In
regard to the argument of the defense in
not having more witnesses to prove the
charge of attempted bribery / might say
that bribery is usually done only in the
presence of two persons and these stories
of the two principals have to be consid-
cred. We have the stories of Higgins and
of Mr.. Parry. You must consider the mo-
tives of each man and then decide who to
Mr.. Elan then told the story of the ordi-
nance on which Higgins attempted to Sc
cure bride and said there was no objec-
ton to the switch being laid until Higgins
raised it, and when he could not extort
money from Mr.. Parry he threatened to
have the ordinance killed in the Council.
Mr.. Elan refuted the statements that had
been made against the character of the
witnesses for the State. He said there was
nothing in the testimony to subject Mr..
Parry to the abuse given him by Mr.. Spaan
before the jury.
Judge Afford read his instructions to the
jury, which were based upon the law in
the case. The jury retired, with instruc-
tons that, in case no agreement had been
reached by 10 o'clock, the jurymen would
be allowed to retire to bed and begin de-
alterations this morning. At 10 o'clock no
verdict was reached and none will be ex-
pected until this morning.