The midland journal. (Rising Sun, Md.) 1885-1947, 1900-05-11
The e6ouf Of aBfute
Ry RODRIGUES OTT0LENGUI.
AutIt0rof '.Adt artist In Crime" ID Conflict of
Eutdence,'' "1he Crime of the
Century," Etc.
copyright, 1900, by Rodrigues otto,ensui.l
Concluded from last week.


Concluded from last week
I was very proud Of that argument.
1 thought that my lawyer had done re-
markably well with a poor case, and l
was more pleased because 1 saw that
the jury were moved. felt satisfied
that after the doubt thus created in
their minds they would never convict
me of a capital offense.
The prosecuting attorney did not
make long speech, but it was a
strong one.
81 must congratulate the prisoner"
he began, upon the ingenuity of my
legal friend, his defendant. What the
other side lack in the way of evidence
they make up in sophistry. Mark that
1 do not say logic, for, just as it has
been explained to you to be convincing
circumstantial evidence must fit all the
facts, so also is it with an argument.
Failing at single point, it ceases to be
logic and becomes sophistry, yet a dan
gerous argument and most convincing
till the flaw is discovered. AS the de-
fense admit all our facts, which indeed
they are compelled to do since they are
facts, l need not go over the ground in
full. have only to explain away this
sophistical argument of my ingenious
adversary and show you plainly that
his explanation is extremely fallacious,
purely theoretical. And, much as I
should hesitate to deprive the prisoner
of a single chance for his life, at the
same time / am compelled to ask you
to follow me out of the realm of the
ory and sentiment back into the more
stable ground of truth and justice.
"It is common practice for those who
have weak case to assume what their
opponents will say and then build up
an answer. This is assumption indeed,
and in this instance words are put into
my mouth which certainly would not
utter. You were told that 1 would ask
you to believe that these two men quar-
relied at or near midnight in a room in
the hotel and that then they went out,
in the face of a rising storm, on 2
pleasure trip in boat. No, gentlemen,
/ would not so impose upon your intel
ligence as to ask you to accept any
such preposterous proposition. What
1 do ask you to believe is easy to be-
lieve, however, for, as God is hearing
what say, consider it to be the sol
emn truth. 1t has been testified, and
the testimony has neither been refuted
nor denied by the defense, that the
prisoner prosecuted the lady who was
engaged to the deceased with atten-
tions which she spurneQ. 1t has been
shown that she accepted the deceased
and that the prisoner Immediately
heaped vituperation upon him in the
very presence of the woman whom that
day he had pretended to love. True,
the pretense for the quarrel was the
dog, lame dog and very lame pre-
tense. Later we find that the prisoner
pursues the deceased to his very room
In the hotel in the nighttime. They
quarrel, and shortly afterward they
both go out. Now, why did they 60
out? Evidently they went to settle
finally the difficulty which existed be-
tween them. Harassed and annoyed
by this man who had been his rival
and who did not hesitate to precipitate
a quarrel in the presence of the woman
to whom he was engaged, the deceased
accepted a proposition to go to Deer is
land and fight it out Thither they
went. There one man died. Now, why
did he diep Evidently before reaching
the land Mr.. Norton. who YVES sitting
In the stern, since he had the longer
oars, and thus had his back to his ad,
versary, was treacherously thrown
overheard. The oars, slipping from his
hands, foated off and were not easily
recovered. Therefore they were left.
1t was villainous murder, plain and
simple, and am assured you will
agree with me-
My lawyer arose and asked the court
to direct the jury to dismiss from their
thoughts the theory of intentional
drowning suggested by the prosecution,
as not q bit of evidence had been adj
duced upon which it could be based;
secondly. that, as the prosecution ex-
planned the presence of the two men In
the boat by claiming that they had
gone out to fight, the jury should give
the prisoner the benefit of the doubt,
and if the killing occurred during the
fight they should bring no greater yer-
dict than manslaughter. Both of these
requests were denied by the judge, but
they had their influence upon the jury,
! am sure. Their verdict you already
know.
Now, will endeavor to give as clear
a history as possible of this mysterious
affair as it is known to me. Early in
the summer 1 came to this place with
my dog Psyche for season nf hunting
and fishing. 1 must tell you at once
about Psyche, for she was the keynote
of all that has occurred. About three
years ago 1 met with bereavement in
the death of my only relative, my
brother, which left me absolutely alone
In the world. After time this loneli-
ness preyed upon me to such an extent
that to escape from it I secured a COM
panion by buying q setter puppy, ]
have always loved dogs, but had never
owned one before. l did not immedi-
ately choose name for my dog. but
was satisfied to call her Puppy, to
which she responded readily. AS she
grew her affection for me and her intel
ligence increased to such an extent that
| soon discovered that had treasure.
would come home at night, at times
tired out and depressed in spirits, and
enter room which would have added
to my gloom but for the presence of
this faithful friend whom no moodiness
could ALLEVIATE. Ever on the watch foI
my coming, her CHEEKY bark would bid