Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1901-12-26

violence and yet while seeing that no
innocent man shall suffer, shall see that
no man guilty OF such CRIME alleged
shall go unwhipped OF Justice.
n "If you beiievs the testimony VI
Lawrence M. Whitsman, the witness in
chief, you are. impelled by reason to
the inevitable conclusion that John
Lynn got tho 500 and put ii 10 his own
pocket, and from that 10 infer that he
used the ia'He Eretences alleged. As TO
Lawrence NJ. Whitemau, there is this
difference in this case from the ueual
run Of criminal prosecutions; White
man IS no more the prosecuting witness
thun any other man who terrified. II
there is prosecuting witness, be is
technically Horace q. Rettew. There
~ abso utely thing brought in the
o,se from which you ceu'd argue or
infer that Whiteman has the slightest
interest. He was rather re uctant
wi neas lie docs not claim In SO;
he says it is not his and he is not en-
t tied to it. He went to the stand free
Of prejudice and to toll the truth, and
in my op nion that Is what he did tell
! ou saw the chat actsr OF the witnesses
We brought here to sustain Whteman !;
we had not talked to ope OF them about
this case until he went on the stand.
They said tfeY had not heard his rebu.
tation for truth and veracity questioned
John Lynn Is the dnioLdant in this
case, fighting perhars for his liberty,
anu thera are thrown about him the
same reasons the same influences that
would impel man IL testify in
manner to bring about his own
aoluittal. To such man, in go high
a position, ia case OF conviction, so
much greater ia his fall.
IN such cass as this, it was
necessary fer the defence to have cor
roburative testimony. So they b. ought
here Caleb johnson and Frederick
Vansart who testified they saw money
paid to Whiteman. Lynn tentitie5 hat
he paid the money between the 1Dth
and 18th Of October,
| John Lynn SAYS that WhiiemRn
came TO him and demanded S58. 80; thst
it was not personal debt, but for
work dnpe for tho county. Would John
Lynn as a reasonab man, representing
the county, hare said you can t get
that money aad forthwith had q
| quarrel q loud words. John Lynn is
ordinarily II peaoeable man and IL is
reasonable that he as a county osfioiA!
would have said, Very we'll, Put ~
your bill, the county is r'sporsihle.
No, there was no. disputs in loud
language.
II want to use plain language, and
shall. say that John Lynn lied 10
this case am not using In - language
for any o;her rurp Sc thar think it 10
my duty to use plain words in this
case. Fred Nanrant lied, Caleb John
son lied. say thess witnesses lied for
this reason .ioan Lynn said the bill
was paid tewsen October 10Th and
l2th; Vansant end Johuson said the
same thing; and they can remember
Z; thcae dates of more than yeay ago.
without anything adsGusts by which
! 10 iix The dates, without recalling a
| circums lance TIL 1T ia the mind of q
cat could have fixed the date. We have
proved to you that Caleb johnson could
| pot have been there, for he worked on
those dates for Reed ~ Bro. at the
| workhouss. Ii be wasn't there he lied,
and 4 he wasn't there ransant lied
| for he said he saw HIM there, and IL hs
WASH there, Lynn lied, for Lynn said
he saw johnson there That testimony
of the transaction at Lynn'a house is
not sufficient to produce reasonable
doubt of Whiteman's testimony. II
| you believe Whi,eman's testimony, you
are impolled to bring In verdict Of
guilty. $3.50
Regarding the work at Tweed 3
bridge, there Is no doubt it was done
Two OF the witnesses we're vague as to
| the time they worked there, but they
made mistake hny man may make.
One witness testified that the work was
| done by August 9Th, and 1t has been
shown that Lawrence NJ. Whiteman GOT
1853 from the county for that work,
aud God knows he surely got enough
for it,.
MR.. HAYES srRAKs FOR LYNN.
Walter H. Hayes, for the defence de,
| clared that the whole case of the State
depended upon the testimony of
Rettew said he knew nothing about tho
warrant and never had any Conversation
with Lynn about 1t. Whitsinan says
be did not make out . memorandum
Lynn says he did. Lynn made out the
bill. What became of the money ?
Lynn, Liar No. I, says ne gave it to
Whiteman; VRnsAnt, Liar No. 2, says
Lynn paid the money, and johnson,
Liar No. 3 says he saw Lynn nay the
money. When the Stata has no case,
1T generally calls some witesses on the |
other side liars.
II John Lynn did present false bill,
do you suppose be would have lett such |
evidence behind him to hive been OBJ |
tanned at any timer Is it probable? |
No, be didn't dn any thing of the kind |
With criminal INTENT The State can
not come here and say ''you are 10
infer. You can draw reasonable In.
ferences, but not such differences as
they want you to draw. Mr.. Lynn
denies absolutely that he offered White. |
man S200 Why be would have been |
the biggest fool in the world to have |
offered one otnt to Whteman, with |
this city piled full OF detectives ns 1t |
has been for several months. New |
Castle county got full value FOR every |
cent Of that bills IL has been said that |
this defendant has an interest in this |
case. He has the interest Of himself |
and his family; but / say to you that |
On that stand John Lynn gave his testi |
mony unhesitat ngly and frankly and |
its truth must have been carried to |
you c,nvincingly, @
ARGUMENT OF MIR. BIRD.
Levi @. Bud made the closing argu.
ment in Mr.. Lynn behalf. He was
listened to intenty by a crowd that |
| filled the court room.
No matter what idle chatterinp |
there may have been, no matter what |
the spirit of the press may have been, |
| you are here to deal only with the |
State and John Lynn as you have heard |
the evidence from that stand,ii said |
Mr.. Bird. II know this Jury well |
enough to CAV that in this caea ;,,st |