The Washington times., 1920-06-13

l would point out 10 you mat ~ 70
by no means the business OF the
defence TO lay before you the man
ner In which the deed was done.
II sunices for our purpose to con-
vince you OF the impossibility OF
its commission by the hand OF the
accused; and of that impossibiiity
| am confident you must all feel
convinced, even though the strong
est piece OF evidence 10 that effect
still remains for me to expound TO
you.
MY client, as Is established and
admitted. left London for the Con
tlnent by the 2:so p. IN. train by
Foikestone and Boulogne, giving
himself time to negotiate loan
with his bankers before he started.
Il was the necessity for raising
that loan which kept him In this
country over the Sunday. when the
banks were shut. But, on the
theory OF the prosecution. what In
the world was there 20 prevent mis-
arranging his loan on the Saturday
morning and going across on that
day! Surely II he knew OF the
tragedy at all, and deemed II to
make It advisable that he should
leave the country, this is what he
would have done. He would have
left the country at the earliest pos
sible opportunity--thst is, say, by
the afternoon boat on Saturday. in
stead OF Monday. Is not that evi'
dent?
But the reason why he did not.
in fact. go on the Saturday. gentle
men, is exceedingly obvious. 1t Is
because he had not the slightest
idea Of what had happened in the
Summer-house of Scotney House
shrubbery after his leaving 1t on
the Friday night. Had he known
OF that dreadful occurrence un-
questionably he would have been
of on the Saturday. As It was, 1t
was not until the Saturday eve
ming, long after the closing OF the
banks, that he read the account In
the evening papers. Then he was,
we may suppose, in a fever to be
off.
81 am not asserting, gentlemen.
that he acted wisely In 30 doing
very far from it, It was, indeed,
in my opinion. nothing less than a
disastrous step for him to take, be-
cause II was one which must in
evitably raise prejudice against
him in your minds Evidently. gen.
tlemen, my client rather lost his
head. 1t would have been far bet
ter had he stayed at home and met
the charge which is now brought
against him forthwith But he
acted, as he believed, for the best
He had an idea that in going he
took his name out Of the case, as
he took himself out Of the country,
and in some measure saved the
reputation Of the woman he loved
from the compromising association
with him which was otherwise
hound IN fall on IL As a matter OF
fact, he did but injure her fair
fame the more by his ill-advised
though well.intentioned act, and at
the same time brought himself into
a position exceedingly liable to
misconstruction."
Counsel went on to traverse al
most all that his learned brother"
had said about the value OF the
circumstantial evidence on which
the Crown relied, arguing that Il
hardly amounted to evidence really
bearing on the point at issue at all.
He touched on a great many facts
and points, all Of which, in his skill
full handling of them and in my un-
Critical judgment, seemed to prove
the extreme improbability, to say
no more, OF Captain Vibart's being
the murderer, and concluded with
a very solemn adjuration to the
jury. bidding them remember that
it was no less grave thing tnan
a mans life, and Herewith a mans
honor. which depended on their