The Monmouth inquirer. [volume] (Freehold, N.J.) 1865-1933, 1923-02-22
PART II.
CHAPTER I.


| THE BLACK TORTOISE IN COT RI
The court to-day was filed to over
flowing, and large number were una
bic to gain adnittance.
The tisar france Of Old Fricks dia-
mond-we nope our respected fellow
citizen will excuse our using the ia
miliar name by which he is SO well
known-has been eagerly discussed and
| commented upon by the newspapers for
the last few weeks.
The case did not promise to become
particularly difficult or complicated
one, although it was known that the ac-
| cused had retracted her confession; but
the stolen article was Of such an I'M
usual kind, and Of such great value, and
{ tie persons who were to appear in the
case were so well known, that it was
only to be expected that the proceedings
would attract as many people as the
court would hold One could hardly
imagine anything more sadly interesting
than the pale and pretty girl who stood
charged before the court with the theft
i Of the now famous diamond. By her
side sat her counsel, a young advocats
! who is already known in legal circles a.
most able and successful counsel for
the defence
Among the witnesses was the we'll
known figure of old Prick, and by his
side his niece, Miss Frick
Not far off stood Mr.. Monk acting
, chief Of the detective department. al
ready well-known and popular figure
in our town, as much appreciated for his
acuteness and boldness as for his tactful
conduct when in the execution of his
duty as a police official.
The dark, distinguished-lo man
beside Miss Prick was the Englishman,
Mr.. Howell, who, as everybody knows,
has been compelled by strange coin
cidence to appear as witness in the
case, and who, it is said, will give the
most remarkable evidence ever heard in
our courts of justice The Englishman
did not appear particularly edited with
his task From what | hear, it seems
he has tried to escape giving evidence.
1t is anything but a pleasant duty to give
evidence against young woman when
one feels that it will mean conviction for
her.
The presiding judge of the court took
his seat, the case for the prosecution
was stated and the usual questions
asked of the accused as to her name,
age, etc.
She did not look up, but answered n
a fairly audible VOICE Then she AS
asked whether she was guilty or sot
guilty.
All waited anxiously for the answer.
Her voice was this time so low that
the judge had to lean toward her and
request her TO speak more loudly.
The silence was so intense that the
answer, although scarcely more than
whisper, was heard all over the court
Not guilty"
Had the public expected anything
else? Perhaps-perhaps not.
The public prosecutor then began his
charge
The crime with which the accused was
| charged was not of a particularly COM
| plicated nature with regard to the ques-
ton as to how, or by whom, the theft
| had been committed. But it was dif-
ferent matter with regard to the mo-
| tives and the circumstances under which
/ it had taken place, and he was willing
| to admit that in this respect little or
| no light had been thrown upon the
| matter. An uncommon article. an OBJ
| ject of great value in other words, the
| black diamond, which now lay en-
the judges table, was stolen on May 10
from Mr.. Prick, who was now present
in court as a witness. The police were
at once informed of the theft, and they
succeeded not only in recovering the
stolen object, but also in providing such
information that the public prosecutor
was able to prove fully before the court,
both how the theft had been perpetrated,
by whom, and how the thief had dis
posed of the stolen object.
He would call witnesses to prove at
what time the theft had been committed,
that the accused at that time had been
at least half an hour in the house, that
she during that time had the opportunity
of going into the room where the dia-
mond was kept, and at time when the
cupboard was not locked. He could
prove by a means which seldom fell
to the lot of the authorities, that the
accused, in the time during which the
theft had taken place, had been into
the room and even opened the case
where the diamond was kept. He could
next prove that the accused at an earlier
hour of the same day had had an OPP
portuuity of hearing an assurance from
a rich man that he would pay large
sum of money to become possessed Of
the diamond She thus knew before
hand that she could sell the stolen arti-
Gle without any difficulty.
Finally, he could prove that the dia-
mond was actually sold by the accused
OR. the same day to the man just men
toned
Thus far the chain of evidence was as
complete as any could be, and in order
to substantiate the guilt of the accused