The Caucasian. (Shreveport, La.) 1900-192?, 1903-04-23

an ingredient. It had been shown tina
during his residence il America prio
to this time he had been contirne
arsenic eater ard WAS we'll acIEA.H t.7
with its effects Oh lis SYSTEM. III" ".
rious physicians who ;:l;eal.rI =:
MayDrck lad not suspected poi>.'5'
! The first :vcilSatiu.l was l-l"lle - =,
chael Naybr.ck.
The results Of the trial are W.
! known To tic American puDlic-A t,':,
before Il jIldS" OF ;itl>o(!!l1 l4ii,ld, W..
was shortly uttelN:;ll rprircI btc;tt.".
of his intirinity, dying little late.r !:
! private insane ASYLUM, and who Iii;
an aversion toW;;lt Americans a,nuCn+
ing to 4 mania. Ills charge, which u,,
cupitd two OF the eight days cOnSun.*
by the trial, was at Tie time cl&ru ct""
Fed by Sir Charles l.usspll Cater j.o2l
Chief Justice Hus>Hil. tie Is':S)iH.r
counsel, as 'nas5iOHltrly Inviting II,
jury 70 find a ver,lirt of guilty. !:
raging like NiOl"n, counsel for Il:
prosecution against her.
W lIS1l Tx ' u titl ana sentence y q
made known throughout the COUNT,
1t is 10 eXu-2-tt-l;ltiun to say that -.
news was rer"iNod with greater 49,.
isI.lI@nt than that caused by any -:
dict OF Il jury during the century. J:
was not merely the ordinary ~: !:
that WIS :lStOniShed, but the trail. d:
legal intellectS resent at the trial. IL
Guiding the counsel for the crUWr /.
was felt thar il great error Ll.. g.
CURED, that Il Judicial murder Y.
about to be committed. and numeiD.-
petitions :lt-!ill,t the iiltictiun OF
death penalty wore Immediately si@i.s. !
all over the United kin~C.Oln. T,'t-,:.,
petitions We're not wholly lie result u
sympathy for the condemned but n il.
er OF an almost universal feeling Ia; T
the case was not clearly proved am!
that Mrs. Maybrick might. after all, lee
innocent of the crime Of murder.
Before the time set for the executor;
the home secretary, Henry Matthew's
who except the crown, is alone vested
with power to review the trial of c;;,
ital crimes or exercise clemency. conf
muted the sentence to penal servitldr
for life. stating that the evidence did
not wholly exclude q reasonable doub:"
But the efforts In behalf of Mrs
Maybrick did not close with this re-
suit, which was felt to be unsatisfac-
tor. With the Communication of sla
death sentence to life imprisonment.
however. the British authorities rested.
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 q public
into the evidence. Under
the English law condemned prisoner
has no right to reinvestigation of the
evtdence-in other words, has no right
OF appeal-and if unjustly condemned
can only hope for reparation through
a pardon from the crown upon the
of the home secretary
l. Ills jill tllc lOIlG secretaries tFOul MT.
Matthews down to the present refused
to Go, and Queen Victoria declined to
take the initiative in the matter. an
which has been assumed By
King Edward
Under what many people think to be
q mistaken notion Of maintaining the
majesty of the law" the British au-
thorities have kept Mrs. Maybrick III
prison since 1889 regardless of the
number and character of the appeals
for her release. The petitions from
the United States have been particular
y numerous and insistent. hundreds Of
the signers being people Of high Off
cial and social standing presidents.
"a binet officers, supreme court justices
Ind members Of congress, to whom it
would seem the British authorities
would not be adverse to making rea-
'onable concessions
But the promised release Of Mrs.
Nay brick does not come as result OF
hese petitions. nor indeed is it in any
aspect an act Of clemency. Mrs. May
,rick is not to be pardoned. but simply
eleased in accordance with the usuu
British custom The sentence Of life