The Portland daily press., 1901-02-16

exA1L44 10 N1E HuAA -AA1AA WI Wv "
rishts When the oiiiosr went twenty
two miles and sought an old worthless
cart, Edwin n. knight never once made
the most natural sueessticn for an limo.
cent mana "whst on earth do you want
it forP' II was inconvceivable that
during the ride OF the defendant with his
partner, mention was never once made Of
the horrible murder that occurred In
their very nelgborhood only the day be-
| fore.
The defendant had every opportunity 20
carry away the rail, secrets IA, and put 10
to so drsadfui g purpose. keferring 70
the statement OF Charles Msader on the
stand that he had been educated" 20 the
ouestion OF the murder MIR. Ssiders said
this testimony revealed mush for the only
man who educated him IL educated he
had been, was his uncle. Edwin Ii
Knight. the defendant.
Recess was taken until two o'clock.
10 the question Of the value OF an AK
pert's chemical analysis OF q stain to de-
termine whether 1t was human blood.
MIR. Seiders devoted considerable time.
He maintained that the opinion OF Pro-
lessor Angel that the stains on the knife
ami trousers were OF the utmost value In
completing the chain OF discriminating
events which the state had charged
against the defendant. There was no
doubt in the speakers m ind but that the
spots on the knife and on the pocket were
OF human lood. MIR. Seiders pointed out
to the jurors the patches placed on the
trousers the defendant wore on the day OF
the murder, and referred to the diverg-
encs of the testimony OF Mrs Knight at
ths ooroner's jury and that given In this
! court as TO when the repairing was done.
Why did nos Edwin Ii. knight as
| the coroner's Jury state that he did not
! have with him the knife which probably
assisted in completing this terrible crime,
on his visit to the pasture, and thus clear
himselfs MIR. Locke whom the defense
sought to charge with this crime, told the
truth, Mr. seiders continued, and suspic-
ion rolled from him. 1t WAS poRsible that
the testimony of all three witnesses as to
the knife was correct and yet there were
many opportunities for Edwin ii. knight
to get the Instrument after IL had been
washed and return 1t without detection.
Tracing on the chart, MIR. Seiders fol-
lowed the route taken by the defendant
through his pasture on May LIST, re-
counted the repairs the latter testified he
had made and allowed S3 or "a minutes
as ample time for its accomplishment.
BY actual measurement knight travelled
one and one-fftn miles and Mr. Seiders
allowed that he walked at about tne rate
of three miles an hour. for all OF which
about an hodr was the time the speaker
thought reasonable limit for thA de-
fendant to complete the work and return
home. The attorney general figures from
the testimony OF other witnesses and then
approximatsd the slime they passed the
! defendants house and deducted from that
1t was 0 IL whsn Edwin knight was first
seen to return from the pasture. MIR.
Seiders arguing from his figuring found
an Inconsistency In this testimony of wit
neas Wright that he saw Fannie Sprague
going to the spring at about $50.
1t was not the desire of the state TO
cover mp one single thing, Mr.. Ssiders
said in the character of the Sprague
woman. Whatever her character, It W as
no Justification to this prisoner for rob-
bing her of that priceless life. "As long
as l live," continued Mr.. Seiders, 81
shall always believe that this crime was
committed for the sake OF the self-preser-
vation of this man. Man Is the natural
protector of woman. And at no time is
protection more expected, more looked
for, more so ught by woman than when
she is In this condition in which Fannie
Sprague was In at the time OF her
DEATH
What was the object OF knights visit to
Locke II it was not to induos him to etAy
In the +. j. knight place SO that Fannie
Sprague might have home. Referring
to the evidence OF little Freddie Sprague,
Mr. Seiders said that the testimony OF
the child while his attention was fixed,
was far more truthful than that given by
some witnesses in this trial.
There was not to Mr.. Seiders' mind a
single piece OF evidence to connect s. s.
Locke with this crime, the man whom
the defence holds guilty, Of the crime.
The attempt had failed. "There is no
evidence known that points TO any other
man or in any other direction than this
respondent" 1t was impossible for 80
many things to point In one ERECTION
and there be absence OF guilt.
MIR. Seidsrs defined the meaning OF the
term Reasonable doubt The extreme
range in the causes which may give rise
to motive, make 1t impossinls TO deter
mine positively II the motive was COM
mensurate to the orime.
Court here suspended until 8. 30 o'clock
Saturd ay.
WESTBROOk.