The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1905-04-25


rowness or vindictiveness against this
young man, the defendant I wish you
would lay 1t aside. The state Of Minne-
sofa Is far too great. its conscience far
too large to do SO small thing as to
proceed against one of it's citizens in a
spirit of malice. II it could be said that
this was the last murder that would ever
be comnittedein Minnesota, and that here
after there should be no more Of these
crimes committed, the state might well
say to this defendant: go hence free
man." Why? Because the purpose of this
prosecution is not to inf1ict any punish
ment upon him. 1t is rather to proclaim
that law is sacred and must be obeyed,
and that the evil minds must withhold
their hands from deeds Of lust.
Where Suspicion Pointed.
General Childs then recited the facts
as to the murder. He described DR..
Gebhardt as an exemplary, Industrious
held in high esteem. He told of the To-
cation and division Of DR.. Gebhardt IS Of
fees; Of the noises on the night of Nov.
l, which indicated to pedestrians that
there was trouble in those offices; of
the finding of the body, the hammer,
the handkerchief and the pencil. He
said that New Ulm had been stirred as
stirred under similar circumstances, and
that, when the mystery seemed deepest,
the heaven above" had pointed out
the hammer, the handkerchief and the
pencil as clues leading to the discovery
Of the murderer, and to enable jury
to render verdict to strengthen the
law and to protect human life every
Where.' He continued:
HWithin twenty -four hours after that
murder somebody took the handkerchief
and washed the corner of it. That first
on, the letters C. r. When water
had washed out the stain of blood, there
came into view the letter * CIR
X the speaker spelled slowly. "Some-
body whispered George B. Koch. - {
Ownership of the Hammer.
Their was described the investigation
following that circumstance. General
Childs asked: 'Whose hammers In
answer he first told of the testimony at
the first trial of Dingler, the teamster,
that he had seen hammer very similar
to the one found near the dead man, in
the Koch barn in the autumn of 1908.
This testimony he said, would be re-
peated. -. * >. ~ -
Then he told of the two other wit
neses who had been found since the first
| trial-the boy who had lived in the
Koch home during the winters for five OF
worked III DR.. Koch's office-who, he
said, would establish beyond all doubt
as the state believed, that the hammer
belonged to the Kochs.
The speaker then told of the pencil
and how at Hoidale & Somson g law Of
ice early the evening of the murder Mr.
vogeL the lumberman, had given to DR.
Koch such pencil as had been found
half buried in blood by the dead man Is
side. He declared that it would be
proved that the pencil could not have
dropped into the blood from the pocket
OF any one of the men who entered the
room after the crime had been DONE.
1 @ DR.. Koch's Injured Hand.
i General Childs said it was the opin.
ion of the state that the man who muir.
dered Dr.: Gebhardt had injured his
hands while going thru the screen in
leaving the office thru the rear window
Of the Office. .. #,Er
He said the state would produce
among others, a witness, physician
| OF high standing, who was of this opin-
ion, and that, while DR.. Koch was lying
on the sofa in his office twos days after
the murder, this physician had said to
DR.. Koch, General Childs said, drew
his hands from his pockets and extend.
DOCTOR He then withdrew them and
replaced them in his pockets. The
physician, the speaker said, had seen
>, three superficial lines, two or three
inches long and about one-sixteenth OF
an inch apart. 81 .s
:, "If you will look at a screen,' said
General Childs, "you will ascertain
; that the wires are about that fal
apart III
Then the speaker told Of DR.. Koch Is
going into the drugstore and getting
the finger cots and said that the clerk
there would tell the circumstances OF
that event. He said that the murderer
must. have received injuries to hi.
knuckles by striking them against the
, brick wall in grabbing the wire which
he must have depended upon in some
degree in getting down out Of the real
window--such injuries as had been seer
in the hands Of Dr.. Koch before the
3 scribed as in the first trial, and at
3 tackled the explanation of DR.. Koch
: declaring that they could not have beer
i. made in the way he described, and tina,
Q they were, as a matter Of fact, mad,
/ purposely to conceal the other injuries
4 to the hand.
I, The Clothes and Overcoat.
u General Childs said that it was t,
Q be presumed that the clothes Of tn
;. man who slew DIR. Gebhardt were be
l spattered with blood. He said that i
= would be proved that on the evenin,
!, of the murder DR.. Koch wore what i
: known as a pepper-and-salt suit and
9 cravanette overcoat, "with slash
: pockets-pockets having vertical open
i ings.' Witnesses, he said, would shov
that on the morning following tn
crime, and for several days thereafter
DR.. Koch wore 'Enot the pepper-and
}. salt coat, but brown coat. -
t Then as to the overcoat, it would b
r proved. he said, by persons who en-
:, tered the office of DR.. Koch that tn
}, coat then worn by him was "not
f coat with straight, horizontal pockets.
that DR.. Koch's overcoat had "disaI
s peared' three weeks after the crime
|, and that the defendants explanatio
: was that it was stolen. General Child
! said that the defendant, when aske
g why he had not let it be known tina
e his overcoat had been stolen, said b
Is had told Mr.. Somsen, his brother-i1
n law, about it, and that Mr.. Somsen ha
n advised him not to say anything.
& The next feature Of the coming TEL
y timony which General Childs describe
= he said he would prove the defendar
# took home, past the Dahn home, and til
testimony of Mrs. Dahn as to the bloc
m on the gatepost.
:; AS to the Motive.
le General Childs said little as to IL
A. motive He prefaced his dissertation /