The Sun. — 1870-08-22 (London, England)

THE MYSTERY YET UNSOLVED.  The coroner's investigation has contributed little to the solution of the mystery which still enshrouds the Nathan murder. But it threw some additional light upon points that have been controverted, upset some stories that have been industriously circulated, and to a certain extent cleared the way for the more exhaustive inquiry which has yet to come. First, as to the two carpenters who were at work in the house on the day preceding the murder. Both seem completely absolved from suspicion. They fully explain their whereabouts, verify their statements clearly, and pass unscathed through a very searching investigation. Their testimony is in other respects interesting. The early statements in regard to the ease with which, during the day time, ingress and egress might be effected, unobserved, are confirmed. There seems, indeed, to have been an inexplicable remissness in this respect on the part of those charged with the safe keeping of the house ; and, entrance once effected, the facilities for concealment were unusually great. Coal-bins downstairs, closets and a tank upstairs, were available without difficulty. These witnesses never saw in any part of the house the iron " dog " with which the murder is supposed to have been effected. The allegation that it had been used some time previous by ship carpenters who were employed to caulk the stable door, is disproved. Yet more prevalent rumours respecting Mr. Washington Nathan are corrected by the testimony of the patrolman, whom the sons, Frederick and Washington, jointly called after the discovery of the murder. They were together upon the doorsteps at the time—both undressed. The socks of one were bloodstained, and his shirt-front was largely smeared with blood. But it was Frederick, not Washington, whose socks and shirt were thus stained. So far as the policeman saw, Washington was without spot or stain. We do not adduce the fact to transfer from one brother- to the other the horrible suspicion which sensationmongers have persistently cultivated, but to correct am almost universal misapprehension upon a point concerning which there has been believed to be no room for doubt. A suggestive fact, now for the first time stated, is that the bloody foot-prints which formed so distinct a track down stairs and across the marble floor of the hall to the front door—all led one way. There were no footsteps tending upstairs, or elsewhere than toward the door. The stories about distinct finger-marks, or other traces of blood, here and there, are now pronounced fiction. The door itself was closed a few seconds before the patrolman was called in. He had just passed the door, and saw that it was shut. One of the sons—the officer cannot say which-seems to have had a different opinion, which however, he did not attempt to maintain against the policeman's positive statement. The same officer passed the house at and again at 4i, on the same morning, and on both occasions, having tried the door, as required by the rules of the force, found it fast. Three hours, it will be observed, elapsed between the two periods at which the officer passed the house. The extent of his beat made more freguent passing-by impossible. The circumstance strikingly exemplifies the inadequacy of the present force to meet the obvious wants of the city. A locality that for three consecutive hours, at the most critical part of the night, is without the visits of a policeman, affords inviting ground for the burglar or assassin. The Coroner has still before him the most essential features of his inquiry. These he must scrutinise and expose with great care, and, withal, fearless impartiality, or his work will be lied to be undone. It is to be regretted that an adjournment of the inquiry has been. rendered necessary, for certainly much very important evidence is even now available. The sooner all the facts of the case are made known the better. Up to this moment the official contributions to the stock of positive knowledge upon the shocking subject have been scanty and inconclusive.—New York Times.