Waterbury evening Democrat., 1903-06-17

] said they were at the car With bare faces, and could 1t be that they were l so foolish as to conceal their faces al Hurlburt's shop and take off the masks as soon as they reached the light? The :, stories told by Wolcott, Merna and 1 MorrisSette are inconsistent and i'm ] probable. MT Hamilton characterized l.WOlcott as little worse than An nanias. According to his own story he took solemn oath at the switch to never reveal what took place there. He paid no heed to his oath. He had nc regard for truth. He would swear on l all the bibles ever made and Koran to boot, but would not respect his word. No man would degrade himself as | Wolcott has. No man can say that l Wolcott has a vestige of character. 1 You cannot get purity in house of prostitution; you cannot get grapes from thorns, nor roses from thistles. A stream is no purer than it's source. l Take Woloott from beginning to end and you have the embodiment of a creature in comparison to whom An nanias was a truthful man, Benedict Arnold a patriot. Yet he is the man on whom the state depends to send these young men to prison for ten 1 l of the young men. Which will you choose? But I must pass from him. hope to never again come across a beast like him. I wish I could shut | him from my mind. for he is a moral l 1eper, a man of the worst character I | ever met with in all my life."
 Morrisette and Burpee.
 MT Hamilton recalled to the jury Morrissette's apparent inability to un- derstand while under cross-examina- tion, but in his direct examination by the state he mad no trouble in under standing. ''In his direct examination he says he was an hour and half in Colonel Burpee's office. Think oe 1t! An hour and a half in the office of the counsel for the company! He said they did not say word about this case. I don't know; perhaps it was home rule for Ireland they talked about. And again, he said he never told his story about the case until he got on the stand. Now that can't be so, for how would the state know what questions to ask him? But at the close of his that in all his conversations with
  of his assailants; then that he never identified them until he went on the stand, and under redirect examination by the state he testified that he saw Winnegar and Vandemark once be- fore" Mr Hamilton pointed out the improbability of identification of any human face at one glance and the countless cases of mistaken identity To no one did Morrissette say that he recognized the accused, not even to his fellows, not even to Detective Dodds or the nurses at the hospital"
 Taking up Merna's evidence he said Merna testified there were but ten men at the switch while Wolcott swore there were seventeen. The only means by which he identified Winnegar was by a dark moustache, his face which needed a shave and a silver watch charm It was shown, said MT Ham, ilton, that Winnegar had no watch chain and that he had shaved that day.
 Ennis testified that the Vandemarks were not at the switch at all They were with him and Warren down on the road. This testimony is contra dicted by Wolcott. MT Hamilton then dwelt on the aIibi in general This part of the case he compared to the be- trayal of Macbeth by the witches Wolcott on seeing the endless line of Duncan's descendants exclaimed: "Will this line stretch out till the crack of doom?' So with the testi- mony of the alibi, 1t made the state cry out for 1t seemed never ending. Testified to as 1t was by thirty-f1ve or fnr " ,Iab take to say that all these were mis- taken or was Wolcott MT Williams, with all his skill and experience, was unable to break their testimony. They were solid as the rock of Gibraltar; solid in the consciousness of the truth. Wolcott on the other. hand has played false to the state, false to the railroad company, false to the accused, false to everybody. I don't know how MT Williams will treat Wolcott whether he will turn him out or putty him up, varnish and gloss him over and present him to you. This man who ought to be in state prison, who told you that he was riding all over the state on trains at somebody else's, expense. He it is who should have the shackIes on his hands as debaucher of the truth. If MT Williams leaves Wolcott out of the case you must discharge Ross, Brearton and Mcclure, for he is the only one who brings them into it. There is not a scintilla of evidence against them only what he says. Con- cluding MT Hamilton warned the fury against MT Williams's rhetoric, that 1t was the evidence they must stick to In that he will have no fear for the verdict. The question Is: Have the accused committed the crime charged?' He warned the jury against the idea that unless some one is punished the trolley cars cannot run or that crime will be rampant Wolcott is the kind of man he said who will work for a reward every time and because the accused are strikers he put this crime on them. He asked if any of them would be so fool ish as to plan crime in a public place like Wolcott's pool room and so hurt their own cause In, the strike. Had any of them decided to do this crime they would have gone about it in a different way.