The Washington times., 1919-12-17
LOGIC vs.. CUNNING
At TRIAL Of wan
American ingenuity Clashes
With Oriental wit as Chinese
Faces Staying Charge.
(continusd from Pags Eievsa.) }

(continusd from Page EisvsA)
Kalorama road. on the night Of the
killing. why did he answer the door
bell when DR.. Kang II called early
In the evening? There was no light In
the upper floors Of the house. Why
shouldn't he have sat quiet in the
basement Of the building and let the
caller suppose there was NO one at
home and 70 awAyy VIII ydid he an
swer the door and show himself In
the house II he was. already contem
plating one or more murders?
The question naturally arises: Was
he expecting WI? Had WI given
Aim mis- key with the understandins
that he would let wu in when that
Individual returned. II 20, II proves
his contention that Wu was in the
plot. II not, V raises the question
that will not down-that other per-
sons for other reasons were concerned
to see DR.. Wong slain that night Who
was It Wan was expecting In the early
part Of that evening At the mission
house-was 1t an accomplice-was II
the supercriminal not yet suspected
and probably never to be appre-
hended?
This Il Q case about which one
knows lot when one knows nothing
The more one studies IT, the more
complications 1t presents. II Wu was
now repudiated confession asserts he
was, why wasn't he with Wan? Why
did he Join Howard Je6ers and the
other Chinese at the Oriental cafe Z
Certainly not for the purposes Of a
future alibi because that little dinner
of four broke up at about o'clock,
and at that moment DR.. Wong and Mr..
Hsie were known to be dining with
the Chinese envoy to the peace confer
encc at the Nankin cafe.
II Vans confession 10 false In the
details which fncriminate Wan. why
cannot It be false in the reason II
gives for the triple tragedy? 1t leaves
the situation In the status Of leading
all three men for Q worthless piece Of
paper, or that others besides Wan
were involved.
Could Wan have Killed all three?
Yes, a. circumstances developed
where each one Of the fated trio came
home alone, Wu hrst. Hsie second.
and DR.. Wong third, he could have
shot them down like nine pins-ons
by one.
Whereabouts Kn0wa.
BY what stretch of the Imagination
could Wan have hoped that the men
would come in separately? DIR. Wong
and Mr. Hsie were known to be at
tending the same dinner. The proba-
bility was that they would return
arm in arm. Only q coincidence pre-
vented 1t. The dinner party Of thir-
teen broke up into little groups. DR..
Wong and Mr.. Hsie were separated.
Otherwise at least one might be ahvs
today Had they entered the house
together no one man could have
downed them both. One, at least
would have been able to get to the
telephone in the front hall and sum-
mon help. Doesn't circumstances
alone indicate that whoever was lying
in wait in that household that night
had some one with him, enough to
take care OF two men at once? The
contention might easily be that that
other person was WI, and that to-
gether Wan and WI intended to finish
the doctor and his secretary but for
one circumstance. 1t was this:
Although Wan went to the door
when DR.. Kang Ii called early that
evening, another person who rang the
bell at Q o'clock could get no re-
sponse. This caller was Inspector
Bradley, from precinct 10. He was
calling in response to complaint
from DR.. Wong that petty thievins
had been going on in the mission. AL
though he rang and rang, he got no
response. Why didn't Wan or WI.
who had had time to reach home at
that hour, respond to the call? Could
1t be that WI was already lying cold
In death-that Wu was the first and
not the third and last victim, as the
police contend7 II that supposition is
true, the question again logically
arises, could Wan haye had the temer-
ity to stay there alone and wait for
the coming of the other two men or