The Press., 1915-06-02
Ferreting Out
 An Injustice It Was All Done by Young Law yer For an Attractive Widow.
By WILLARD BRAKEMAN

K
 There has been the same develop
 ment in jurisprudence as in everything
 else. From the time of trial by battle
 to trial by jury there has been con-
 tinued progress, and, strange to say,
 there are more reforms being consider
 ed today than ever before. In other
 words, confidence in the justice dis | pensed in our criminal courts is dying out
 | The reason of this is that legal jus | tice is mechanical, and mechanical con-
 trivances do not always work. The many ingenious happenings that have
 been conjured up by detective story
 writers have doubtless helped to make people chary of believing in the infalli-
 bility of courts. l, as a criminal law
 yer, have often, by thought and energy
 alone, turned the results of months
 trial into an absurdity. In the first | place I judge of an accused persons
 innocence from intuition. After that
 I think and work-principally the lat ter.
 I was in a criminal courtroom one day when a young woman was con- victed of having sent dose of chloral | to her husband. I watched her counte-
 nance and made up my mind from it's emotional expression that she was in nocent. You may sheer at judgment | from emotional expression, but it is often the basis of my efforts in my | profession. If you ask me how I can tell innocence from guilt by such a process I am forced to admit that l
 cannot enlighten you.
 The case I have referred to is this.
 Edith Atwater married, through the influence of her mother, Martin Hay | wood, an elderly man, who was | wealthy. It was May and December | match, and December soon froze the sap of May. The couple lived unhap- oily together. Haywood was chronic invalid, and this with age made him peevish. He was very parsimonious and would not have a doctor, constant ly experimenting with remedies which he procured himself.
 The usual way for young wife to get rid of an old husband is by poison,
  The arsenic is always discovered in the deceased's stomach, but this does not seem to deter candidates for widow hood from using it.
 Old Haywood died under very suspi- cious circumstances. These were that he was ill for some time and no doctor was in attendance. No druggist in the town where he lived and died had sold him any medicines. How could man die without doctor or even druggist to help him? The idea was preposter- ous It was the neighbors who noticed these incongruities, and their tongues wagged at one another accordingly. The rumors came to the knowledge of the police, who eXhumed the body; a chemist made an analysis and found arsenic.
 This was sufficient evidence in itself to convict his wife of having poisoned him. But the courts, which are in- stituted to give all accused persons the same chance before the law and use the same machinery for the innocent as for the guilty, insist upon putting both through the legal mill. A person brought up ill refinement and morality is ground out through the same mill as Black Hand murderer who, by signal, informs witness that if he tells the truth his life will pay the forfeit
 Mrs. Haywood was brought to trial, and, as l have said, was in the court room when she was sentenced. She had been convicted by the law ma chine, twelve good and true men being its spokesmen, and was sentenced tC life imprisonment. I knew that she was innocent. How? I have told you that cannot tell you this. Scoffers have since said that I mistook sym pathy for intuition. Let them scof. I will admit that I went away from the courtroom with heavy heart and that the agony of despair in that beautiful face haunted me. It con- tinued to haunt me. When at the end of several months I found I could not get rid of it I determined that 1 must prove the innocence of the subject of it or continue to suffer indefinitely. I determined to begin a work for which 1 would receive no pecuniary compen- sation.
 Having procured copy of the evi- dence in Mrs. Haywood's case, after studying it made up my mind. not withstanding the fact that Haywood had bought no drugs during his illness, that he had taken more arsenic than was good for him. Whether it had pro- duced his death or not did not matter His widow had been convicted of kill ing him by giving him poison on the ground that he had not bought it him. self and she had bought it. This was evidence enough for the court, but it was not enough for me.
 I was tempted to go to the prison where Mrs. Haywood was confined fnd seek for points from her. But that Is not in accordance with my methods. I preferred to work as a scientist, and a scientist should investigate independ- ently of any influence. My theory being that Haywood had taken the drug him. self, it behOoved me to exhaust it be- fore forming another
 Haywood had lived many years in the same town and the same house in W0ken ne Q1eu. nave Sa1Q thar ne had never employed a physician. Never theless, to make sure, I inquired of every doctor in town if he had ever prescribed arsenic as remedy for him. Not one of the profession re- membered having even been called upon to treat him. I then eliminated the druggists in the same way. Not a druggist had ever sold him a particle of medicine. But one of them had sold Mrs. Haywood a considerable amount of arsenic with which to ex- terminate rats. At least this was her reason given for buying it. This drug gist's evidence had been given at the trial and had much to do with the con- viction.
 Now, if Haywood had been used to buying medicines in the town when he wanted them my hope of proving