The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1919-07-28

his hand. Some thought that Smith
wore a black suit, some a grey suit,
and some a blue suit. He was de-
scribed as carrying pistol, which he
snapped several times, crying, Get
out Of here" One of the students
said that he dropped an umbrella on
the floor. another reported that he
had yelled. Catch that mani"
Even the professors part in the
drama was falsely described. He was
reported as saying. Whats all this?"
"Hullo, what's going on here?" and
only one student even approximately
set down what the professor had ac-
tually said.
Conflicting testimony is common in
the court room. Sometimes a half
dozen witnesses will tell completely
different stories of how a crime hap
pened. Not long ago. a woman was
found murdered in her home. Some
of her jewels were missing, and it
was suspected that the crime had been
committed by a tramp who had ap-
peared in the town on that Gay. -Four
persons were found who declared that
they had observed the tramp leave the
woman's house by the side door about
half-past eight at night. When asked
why they thought 1t was the tramp,
each was surprised and finally said it
was because Of his appearance. Asked
to describe his appearance, the four
witnesses agreed only as to one detail
namely, that the man wore a cap.
One woman swore that she could see
by the street lamp that he was un-
kempt, and that he thrust something
into the pocket of his overcoat. Even
ually, it was a little girl of nine who
gave the detective on the case his first
correct clue. She stated that he had
not worn an overcoat at all, but a
cape. This caused the detective to
eliminate the tramp and start on an
other line of investigation, which
finally ended in the conviction of a
man VINO was not tramp at all.
Another case which shows the fall
libility of the human eye is that of
wealthy manufacturer who was at
tackled by a man who forced his way
into his home in the suburbs some
years ago. and stabbed the manufac-
turer to death. The stranger also at
tempted to shoot him with revolver,
but the manufacturers wife knocked
the weapon out of his hand. BY the
time the police reached the scene, the
man had made good his escape, but
the wife was absolutely certain as to
his identity. He was dressed in dark
clothes, dark cap and muffler, she as
serted, but she knew "by the look in
his eyes" that he was her cousin.
young ex-soldier. Fortunately, the
cousin was able to prove a conclusive
alibi, and the investigation continued
until sometime later another ex-sol-
der bearing resemblance to the
cousin was arrested as the murderer
Again the wife, as well as the family
servants, identified the man as the
manufacturers assailant. altho they
were a shade less certain, but this
defendant was also able to prove his
innocence. Thus, the lives of two in
nocent men were placed in jeopardy
by incorrect observation.
The habit of accurate observation,
it is held, is not difficut to acquire.
Most minds are indifferent to details
because they have not been trained to
retain details. If one would each day
consciously take note of the details
of the appearance of some one asso-
ciate or object and implant those de-
tails in his mind, going back to them
later he would be giving himself calls
themes in observation which would
develop a habit of accurate obserya-
ton. Soon the mind would automat-
cally store away such details.