New-York tribune., 1906-06-06
SAYS WITNESSES LIED.
PLEA FOR TUCKER'S LIFE
Gross Perjury and False EUidence at
Murder Trial Charged.

| Boston, June 0-Startllng accusations were
made at the hearing of an appeal to Governor
| Guild to-day to spare the life Of Charles L.
| Tucker. who is condemned die next week for
| the murder of Mabel Page.
| 1t was charged that much of the evidence Of
| the commonwealth by which the accused was
| convicted was specially manufactured and in
vented. and that much of the testimony was de-
| liberate perjury patched up TO strengthen the
peoples case.
1t was also shown that DR.. Francis A. Harris.
| who has since referred TO the case as tho Mas
| sachusetts Dreyfus affair." and who was an
expert witness for the prosecution. admits that
he mistaken: that the knife with which it
| was contended the murder committed could
| not have inflicted the fatal wounds, and that
other physicians had manufactured testimony TO
| ht the theory of the prosecution.
| Besides Governor Guild. Judges Sheldon and
Sherman, who presided at the trial of Tucker.
/ three of the counsel for Tucker. James H
Vahey, Thomas F. Vahey and Philip Mansfield
| and Ex-Attorney General Herbert Parker and
District Attorney Sanderson. of Middlesex Coun-
ty representing the Governor. were present at
the hearing Attorney General Dana Malone
! and the Governors secretary. Charles F. Get
| tery; Mr.. and Mrs. A. F. Tucker, parents of
| the accused youth; Walter Tucker. their son.
| and Mrs. Adam Hale. Mrs. fuckers sister. also
were admitted to the chamber.
| The Governor opened the hearing by stating
that only evidence must be offered.
James H. Vahey. fuckers senior counsel
| summed up as reasons why he asked for elem
| ency: The fact that the evidence was purely
circumstantial evidence: that there rea-
sonable doubt of fuckers guilt; that there was
prejudice against the defendant in the county
| because of the rumors attributing TO him the
responsibility for the death of his wife; that the
| veracity of the evidence of some of the wit
! nesses and of some OF the expert testimony was
| doubtful; that some of the handwriting experts
| were Of notorious character and that there was
! general opinion that a communication would per-
nit the discovery of evidence to substantiate
| the doubt.
/ After witnesses TO throw doubt on the den-
| tity OF the pin which figured in the trial. Dr.
! Francis A. Harris. a medical examiner of Suf-
folk County. and witness for the state at the
trial. admitted writing several letters in relation
10 the trial and the evidence.
/ James H. Vahey then read these letters, in one
! of which. dated May last. DR.. Harris wrote
! that he had written important review OF
/ what he called the Massachusetts Dreyfus af-
fair" demonstrating. he said. "the innocence
of Tucker and showing up the method Of the
| trial"
| Mr.. Vahey then read long affidavit. which
| DR.. Harris sent to District Attorney Sander
| Dwight. another of the medical witnesses at the
| trial, and TO former Attorney General Parker
| Previous to their being read DR.. Harris identi-
! fed them as his own letters.
! DR. Harris holds in his affidavit that the knife
produced az the trial could not have caused the
wounds in the back. In his letter to Mr.. Parker.
! dated January 3, 1905 the day the trial began.
| DR.. Harris wrote that the result Of con-
| ference with DR. Draper (another medical exam
inerJ. he CHarris) of the opinion that the
/ wound described by DR. Mead could not have
been made by the knife found Tucker
| Mr.. Vahey then read a statement made TO him
| by DR.. Harris on May IA last, in which DR.. Har-
ris said:
mind who. after seeing the human skeleton,
especially one corresponding 10 that OF MISS
! Page and not like the shown at the trial,
apparently that of amazon. or. as it looked
/ TO me, like that of male who would not at
once say that the governments theory that such
knife made the c1ts as described in the autop-
sy report, absolutely impossible
! l am prepared 10 that the testimony
/ given on the stand materially at variance
with the statements made before. 1t neces-
sary invent something to explain certain feat
ures, which. If true, would have weakened the
/ peoples case. so il was invented
! Does q man have fair trial when the ex-
perts who are supposed to be honest and careful
invent testimony against MIN. ana particularly
commit perjury 10 win Outf
before the trial he demonstrated with Mr..
( Parker. then Attorney General, in regard TO en-
ploving one of the experts, claiming that the
man was notorious. Mr.. Parker, according to
DR. Harris, said thai he was afraid the other
side would employ him.
Where was the necessity of putting this per-
| turer on the stand TO have him swear against
| the life of the defendant asked the medical
/ examiner In his statement
/ Mr. Vahey said that the statement of Dr. Har-
rIs came 10 him unsought and he continued To
/ read from IT, In paragraph IL accused Or.
! Mead of perjury, and charged that the whole
! testimony in regard TO the azygous vein. which
was severed by the murderers knife had beeh
manufactured 20 ft the case
The Governor asked Mr. Vahey II he realized
the gravity OF the charges for which he was
making himself responsible, and Mr.. Nahey SAID
that he had not made charges. but that tneS
were made by witnesses for the commonwealth
Mr. Vahey then took up the examination OF
DR. Harris Harris admitted that the affidavit
sent 10 District Attorney Sanderson was wrlt-
/ ten at his dictation and that he signed H.
/ Two witnesses testified that some one toio
them of hearing several tramps In Connecticut
tell OF a difficulty with woman In Massacnu-
setts Another witness said he found large
bloodstained glove In a carriage In weston. not
long after the murder.
The entire evening was taken UP by arsu-
ments by former Attorney General Parker ana
James II Vahey the leading counsel for Iucker.
and az the conclusion Governor Guild SAID that
he would take the under advisement TOR a
day
The execution 10 set for the week beginning