The Caucasian. (Shreveport, La.) 1900-192?, 1903-04-19

an ingredient. 1t had been shown that
during his residence in America prior
to this time he had been confirmed
arsenic eater ard WAS we'll acquainted
with it's effects on his system. The va
riOus physicians WHO attended Mr..
Maybrick had not suspected poison
The first accusation was made by Mi
chael Maybrick.
The results Of the trial are we'll
known to the American public-a trial
before Il Judge OF unSOunu mind, WIZ
was shortly afterwlrd retired becauS<
of his intirmity, dying little later 10
private insane asylum, and who hAG
an aversion toward Americans amount
ing to Il mania. HIS charge which 0r-
cupied two of the eight days consumed
by tho trial, was ut the time characters
hed by Sir Charles Russell Cater Lord
Chief Justice RusselD. the prisoners
counsel. as "passiOnately inviting iii"
jury to find Il verdict of guilty, IT
raging like violent counsel for Tie
prosecution against her.
When the verdict and sentence were
made known throughout the country,
it is no eXaggerutiOn to say that til"
news was received with greater aston
fshment than that caused by any V"r-
diet of jury during the century. 1t
was not merely the ordinary public
that was astOnished, but the trained
legal intellects present at the trial, in
Guiding the counsel for the crown. 1t
was felt that d great error had Oc-
Cured. that judicial murder was
about to be committed. and numerous
petitions against the intiiction of til"
death penalty were Immediately signed
all over the United Kingdom. These
petitions were not wholly the result of
sympathy for the condemned, but rath-
er of an almost universal feeling that
the case was not clearly proved and
that Mrs. Maybrick might. after all, be
innocent of the crime of murder.
Before the time set for the execution
the home secretary, Henry Matthews.
who, except the crown. is alone vested
with power to review the trial of cap
ital crimes or exercise clemency, com
muted the sentence to penal servitude
for life, stating that the evidence did
not wholly exclude a reasonable doubt"
But the efforts in behalf of Mrs.
Maybrick did not close with this re
suit, which was felt to be unsatisfac
tory. With the Communication of the
death sentence to life imprisonment.
hox 1n Rrifi Sh tnI
and the steady stream of petitions and
appeals from all over this country and
America from that time to this have
failed to move them to further acts of
clemency. On several occasions Mrs.
Maybrick personally petitioned the
late Queen Victoria. asking for one of
two things-either pardon or a public
investigation into the evidence. Under
the English law condemned prisoner
has no right to a reinvestigation Of the
evidence-in other words, has no right
of appeal-and if unjustly condemned
can only hope for reparation through
pardon from the crown upon the
recommendation of the home secretary.
This all the home secretaries from Mr..
Matthews down to the present refused
to do, and Queen Victoria declined &c
take the initiative in the matter, an
attitude which has been assumed by
King Edward.
Under what many people think to be
mistaken notion of maintaining the
majesty of the law the British au
thorities have kept Mrs. Maybrick in
prison since 1880 regardless of the
number and character of the appeals
for her release. The petitions from
the United States have been particular
~ numerous and insistent, hundreds of
the signers being people Of high Off
cial and social neutrality-suspicious.
cabinet officers. supreme court justices
and members of congress, to whom 1t
would seem the British authorities
. would not be adverse to making real
eonable concessions.
But the promised release of Mrs
Maybrick does not come as a result of
these petitions. ner indeed is it in any
respect an act of clemency. Mrs. May
brick is not to be pardoned. but simply
released in accordance with the usual
British custom. The sentence of life