The San Francisco Call. Newspaper, November 1, 1895, Page 8

! | | { i H { | 3 LD bt . — B i Mo PTGy i os hhasa. 8 THYE SAN FRANCISCO CALL, FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 1, 1895. SILENT TEARS OF THE PRISONER'S MOTHER, Mr. Barnes' Effective Elo- quence Produces a Dra- matic Scene. MRS.DURRANT SUCCUMBS Why the Defendant Came Down and Stood Before George King. THE BELFRY DOOR CLOSED. A Steady Flow of Oratory That Held the Great Audience for Four Hours. sciously won—pay the highest tribute that can be paid to eloguence. If sometimes Mr. Barnes faulty on Wednesday he was perfect yes- terday. He began in the valley of easy, graceful argument. At times he rose to rare heights of eloquence, but the ascent was always unstudied and spontaneous, and while he soared there the words flowed with a wonderful fluency. And the de- scent was always natural and pleasing, leaving no sharp contrasts to show the pitfalls common to most extemporane- ous efforts. Indeed there were no pitfalls vesterday, or, if there were, no one saw them or heard them and, therefore, they were not. Carefully and conscientiously he dis- sected the evidence, and when his natural, healthy feeling led him into hot and fervid denunciations of ‘‘the monster beside whom Holmes, the sordid murderer of a dozen lives,is a gentleman,” his words were still chaste and his rhetoric still marked with good taste and the absence of the commonplace. In the afternoon he devoted some atten- | DURRANT TRIAL IN A MINUTE-MR, | BARNES CONTINT: e in the long drawn-out trial | eodore Durrant for the murder of | nt in the belfry of Emmanuel | & genuine exhibition of | le group of ladies that sur- | THE For the figure of that female 1 woman, dressed de olemnly, almost entirely 1t, the prisoner’s mother— inder the powerful de- | torney Barnes for | crime. | seen to bend her head over on the | who satnear her | ggled—or seemed | p them back. Then was the snw the tes to stru, she wej aken, during . Durrant composed herself for the ly - | THE TEARS OF A MOTHER. | Mr. Barnes’ Scathlng of the Mur- derer Opens the Well Springs | of a Broken Heart. | The unexpected came yesterday. The | mother of the prisoner wept. She leaned ber head on ber boy’s shoulder. No one | saw the salt drops that ran from her | weary eyes, but the slight frame shook and trembled—a mother’s heart wasbreak- | ing, bleeding. No sound came, no other sign; only that drooping head, that con- ive struggle which could not be hi d How often or how seldom have the well springs of that mother’s heart burst the fonts that held the agony back from its natural ease; how often have her eyes been dimmed and her breathings been sobs since her son first answered | “‘not guilty” to that hideous crime of the ! beliry, does not appear on the record—is ! not known to those who have seen her only in court. There she has played the role of the Sparian mother, in effect if not in manner. When the chains of evidence began to tighten and coil themselves about the prisoner; when the fate’s uner- ring finger has pointed from the witness- stand, saying “‘there is the man!” when the eloquent District Attorney has painted with the language of a master the awful blackness of the crunel murder, and has scathed with all the power of a righteous indignation the monstrous depravity of the assassin whose fiendish fingers shut out the life breath of Blanche Lamont— | when all of these things happened, and others were in tears, it has been this little | brown-eyed woman, dressed daintily in black, with a bit of bright color in her modish headgear,who haslent her strength to the prisoner; who has whispered soothing, trusting words in his ear; who | has smiled almost gavly and preserved an | outward demeanor that has even lost her | the sympathy, sometimes, of those least | inclined to harden the heart against the | mother because of the unnatural crimes of { her son. And so it came as a revelation yester- day—those silent tears from the mother's heart. Were there a smaller heart than | there is in that generous and kindly frame | & of Mr. Barnes those drops from the brown | eyes'of this small but nervy woman would be as priceless gems to his seli-conceit, for | it was his own glowing, scathing. burning words and metaphors that wrung them | from the secret recesses of a heart steeled | against the world. To do him justice Mr. Barnes was unconscious of the scene till it | was over. He stood with his back to the | prisoner, enwrapt with his own feelings | wrought to the heights by his own breath- ing picture of the helpless girl and the monster in the belfry. Then he came to the point where the monster robbed the dead, tore her poor, cheap baubles from her white fingers. “The defendant helped toconvict himself by robbing the dead,” he said. “Why heshould have taken the rings i of the murdered girl God alone knows! But | he took them, and as he dragged them off | that girl's stiffening fingers he must have | feltin his dank and flabby hair the first | cold breath of the harvest that was to | come. As he had sowed so he should | reap. He had sowed misery, blood, sor- row and tears. He shall reap detection and exposure. He shall—"" It was here the crisis came. The little woman bent forward to her mild-faced, | unmoved boy, bent as though about to whisper another ray of hope and strength to the accused, to ‘‘the monster”—if the jury’s verdict shall so denominate. Quite an ordinary proceeding this was. Bcarcely any one noticed it at first, for Mr. | Barnes held his audience in a trance from first to last yesterday. But the head did not rise again and it lay closer and heavier than ever before in the courtroom. Long it nestled there—time being relative— until a juror saw the crisis, saw the great heavings of the mother’s frame, saw the | hand that Durrant reached around her | slight figure and the helpful, passive taps | of the boy’s palm on the woman’s shoul- | der, saw the flutter in the little crowd of | women near the broken mother—saw and wisely suggested to the court that it was a fitting point in the speech for a brief recess. Quickly the scene was over—quickly at least to the hungry audience, now alive to the realism of the day’s drama, reeking in | the spectacle that a Christian scheme of living has conjured up to add torture of the innocent to the karma of crime and pile human woe upon inhuman sin. Oh, yes; the mother of this abnormal son (abnormal whether guilty ar guiltless), ! who turned and lightly smiled 2 moment later, the mother of Theodore Durrant, whose face is as impenetrable as the ages— this nervy, Spartan little mother—even she has human feelings. Now a word for the orator whose mas- ter touches provoked this little scene, these few silent mother’s tears, which do in reality—whether designedly or uncon- | defense—the alibi { The former, he said yesterday in closing, | intersection | men, it is impossible. tion to Organist King, classifying him as ‘‘a man who knew too little for a man who knew so much.” Then he showed what has not been shown before in the trial— | why Durrant came down from the beliry and stood in the folding-doors in front of King instead of goingout the front way unawares to King. 1t was, said Mr. Barnes, because’ Durrant had shut off | egress at the belfry-door when he broke the knob to shut off ingress. He had closed the door upon himself and there was but the route he traveled left him. And therein Mr. Barnes offered the first rical theory that has been given for what has always seemed a most peculiar and unnatural proceeding upon the part of Durrant. By 4 o’clock in the afternoon Mr. Barnes | had reached the end of the State’s main case. Then court adjourned. In the morning the District Attorney will devote his attention to the evidence offered for the nd the good character. was the plea set up by the first murderer, Cain, who answered: “Am I my brother’s keeper?”’ e MR. BARNES PROCEEDS. A Lucid, Analytical, Powerful Argu- ment—Organist George R. King Handled Without Gloves. ‘When court opened in the morning D trict Attorney Barnes resumed his argu- ment, Ma: of t it please the court and you, gentlemen jury he beginning of ‘the second argument in this case 1 feel as h 1 ought properly, naturally and simply 0 apalogize to you for detaining you so long with this argument. Itis, 1 know, burden 1o you. s physical and a mental effort on my part, which 1 wouid be glad to avoid; butTieel that it is my duty to theState 10 place these matters before you, and that it is your duty to listen with what patience you to what I have to say. At the conclusion of yesterday morning’s session I had drawn Your atlention to the fact_that after Miss Ed- wards had seen Blanche Lamont and Durrant on the dummy of the Powe tcar at the of Market, kddy and Poweul streets, they then disappeared from human sight, £0 far as we know, until shortly aiter half-past 3, when they were seen by Mrs. Cros- sett in the Valencia-stieet car. Mrs. Crossett is corroborated by physicai facts. 1t was a fortunate and a happy thing for justice that Mrs. McKee gave a lanch to the members of her family. ~Mrs. Crossett asserts this, and there can be no question as to the date, for it is proven by facts. General Dickin- son laid some stress upon the fact that Mrs. Crossett said she left Sacramento and Walnut streets a little after half past3in the eiter- noon, at which time Durrant and Blanche Lamont, if they were together, had already been on the Powell-street car for minutes. Recollect the testimo Crosseit. Sk M at about tw day of my th y minutes past3in the after- | noon. Mrs. Perry says about a quarter past 3. Mrs. Crossett says that they reached the junc- tion of Market and Valexcia streets at half past 3 o'clock. Question—Is it not & fact that it took you three-quarters of an hour to go from Laurel 2nd Sacramento streets down to Market and Haight? Mrs. Crossett was asked. Answer—I did not have a waich. s0. Q.—Didn't it take you fifteen minutes from I suppose | Mrs. McKee’s house t6 the car? don’t know, and I should judge it would be = little after half past 3 when I got to the junction of Market and Haight. rs. Crossett, a nice, gentle old Her eyes were bright, her brain was nor- mal.” You saw her on the stand. Mrs. Crossett ot on the Valencis-street car, She saw Blanche Lamont and Durrent on the car. There she watched him for eleven or twelve blocks. They can say what tney like. What motive could Mrs, Crossett have 1o come here at her time of life? We are not learned in medicine, nor surgery, but it is very easy for Aany one who saw that ola woman to see that her race is almest run. Upon_her gentle head already there is & glimpse of the sunshine of immortality. Do yon think that this lady at Ler time of life would come here and deliber- ately attempt to swear away the life of an lu- nocent man; to say that this deiendant was there when he wasnot? Is it credible that Mrs. Crossett could have known this aefend.- t for four years, watched him twelve blocks on the car, would try to catch his eye, notice him disembark at Twenty-first street, and that atier all this she should be mistaken? Gentle- But supposing that she How is she corroborated? The trick that Mrs. Crossett saw in time to spoil. She saw them on the car for twelve blocks. . Vogel saw them at Clay and Powell streets. iss Pleasant and Miss Lanigan at California and Powell streets. Miss Eawards to the end of the turntable ivhere the Baldwin Hotel is. Gentlemen, it is an absolute physical impossi- bility. You know it, as I knowit. 1 desire to read you an extract from the cross-examina- tion of Mrs. Crossett to which I desire to call your attention. It was the final thing upon which the State relied. During this cross-ex- amination a trick was laid for Mrs. Crosse(t. t was the same one that was prepared for Mrs. Vogel, the same kind of a trap that was set for Oppenheim when another ring was shown him precisely similar to that wort by the un- fortunate § l._The very same thing was pre- pared for Mrs. Crossett, and. that old lady, 71 years of age, armed only with the truth, not only avoided the trap, but carried it off bodily. Iwill read to you. Listen to this: 1 Q.Y—}low was Mr. Durrant dressed on that 2y’ A.—I do not know. Q.—Did you notite & long black cvercoat with velvet color ? .—1 do not know. Q—Did you notice the stiff Derby hat that he wore ? A.—He did not wear a stiff hat. Cross-ezamination which calls for the forger and counterfeiter. You remember that poor, paltry subterfuge. What kind of a hat did he wear, a8 testified to by Miss Pleasant, Miss Lanigan and Miss Ed- wards? Why, it is the people’s exhibit here. [Showing a soft felt hat.] “This kind of cross- examination, which call to its aid the counter- feiter and the forger, is what I condemn and despise. Ileave its value to the judgment of men other than myself. Mr. Barnes here read to the jury an article which commented on the duplicates of Blanche Lamont’s schoolbook strap and gold ring. The conclusion of the article Here wes lady. was. | read: What sort of practice is this? Are we to understand that attorneys are at liberty to call to their aid forgers and counterfeiters for the purpose of cont g witnesses? Mr. Barnes continued: When they got off that car at Twenty-first and Valencia sireets this defendant had not yet induced the unfortunate girl 10 go into the church with him. They walked down Twenty- first street, and finally this girl agreed with the defendant and they turzed down Bartlett street. Martin Quinlan's testimony s amply corroborated. This brings us to the subject of Martin Quin- lan. This ‘unfortunate man has had poured out upon him the vials of the wrath of the de- fense. Why? minate the evidence of Quinlan and the case still stands Jeith the foundstion as irm as the everlasting hills. DISTRICT ATTORNEY W. S. [Sketched by a “ Call™ artist.] BARNES. Butif you believe, as I do, that Quinlan saw what bie said he did how do we know that he vit? We know it plainly for this reason: rossett corroborates Quinlan at one end, 3 ak at the other. In justice to this man Who has been assailed here it is but fair to say that long before the State knew a word about Mrs. Crossett or Mrs. Leak it knew about Quin- | lan.” He was the first man to come forward. There has been an aitack made on his charac- ter. It is asserted that ne is a Police Court lawyer; that he has a motive in the case; and thai therefore he is not telling the truth. It | was said he did not have a friend or acquaint- | ance who would say his character was good. | Gentiemen, in the trial of this case my pillar | of cloud by day and my pillar of fire by night has been the guilt of this defendant. We are not trying Quinlan’s character in Santa Rosa ten years ago. We are trying the innocence or guilt of this defendant, Theodore Durrant. Mrs. Leak was at the window, watching for her daughter. When he got to the corner of Twenty-second 1d Bartlett streets he saw tnis couple. He did not know the young lady, but Durrant by sight. They passed within two or three feet of him. He was in a position to Tecognize him. He had lived in that neigh- | borhood for ten years. We call your attention to the testimony, in the words in which it was given by Quinlan, as the basis for our inquiry 1uto the testimony given by Mrs. Leak. Now, | upon this particular day Mrs. Leak stood at | her window at about a quarter past4. She was looking for her daughter, and as she stood there looking down the street she saw this couple coming up. Mrs. Leak takes them up where Mr. Quinlan says he iost sight of them. They were walking together, engaged in con- versation, the young lady on the outside near- est the street, says Mrs. Leak, just as Mr. Quin- lan said, and they remained in her view as they crossed the broad s\\'cer in front of the church, till they came to the gate through which they passed. She knew Theodore Dur- rant, did Mrs. Leak. She had been & member of tie church for fifteen years. Mrs. Leak knew Durrant well and had seen him often. She had lived opposite the church for two years or more. She had been a constant at- tendant at that church every Sunday for two years, while Theodore Durrant was the usher in the north aisle, every evening, and to the Sundey-school, where he was a kind of assist- ant to the superintendent; to the Young Peo- Ele's Society, at which it is also fair to presume e was attending. as up to April or May he had been secretary. Two years of solid attendance at this church, two vears of seeing this Dur- rant, why should she not know him? How could she make a mistake in regard to the identity of thisman? She could mot see the girl because she was on the outside of tho strcet, walking along with this young man, conversing with him. Irest my case upon this testimony, es 1 do npon that of tbe other wit- ses for the identification. Can you con- e that all th vitnesees could” be mis- taken? Is it a possible hypothesis? Itis in- credible that seven witnesses, all without mo- tive, are all banded together into a conspiracy to convict an innocent man of the murder of Blanche Lamont in the lonely beliry of Em- manuel Church. Mrs. Leak saw them pass beyond he reach of human eyes. These people walked up to the gate of the caurch. Durrant opered the gate, walked in, and the girl stepped in behind him and the gate closed. Blanche Lamont, between quarter-past 4 and twenty minutes past 4 on the afternoon of April 3, 1895, passed through that south gate in company with this defendant; then disappesred from human eyes. Eleven days later her body was found rotting in the belfry of that church. Her hat was found in_the beliry. In the beliry were these poor relics of mortality hidden. The knobs of the beliry door and the books were found in that church. Gentlemen, Blanche Lamont never came out of that church alive. She went into the church walking with this monster. From his pocket the defendant drew his key. He bent down and unlocked the door. He stepped inside and withdrew his key and locked the door behind her, and they were alone—alone, this weak and_sickly child, the girl whose slender form filled the dress that Tests upon that body (pointing to the wire model). “Heaven is high and the Czar 1s the power.” They were alone, and she uneble physically to cope with this monster alone, and as the Russian proverb says, “Heaven is high end the Czar is the power.” Alone, till the time this defendant appeared to the startled eyes of George King in the Sundey-school room, dis- heveled and white &s the body he nad left in the belfry. District Attorney Barnes quoted frow an opinion of Chief Justice Shaw of Massa- chusetts in the Webster-Parkman murder case, showing thedifference between direct and circumstantial evidence and what in the light of the law constitutes a reasona- ble doubt. Mr. Barnes also made passin. reference to Holmes, who is now on trial in Philadelphia on the charge of having murdered people to secure their insurance mgneg. “‘Compared to this defendant,’” said the District Attorney, “Holmes isa gentlaman.” This monster lured this girl alone into the churc) Compared to him, Dr. Webster, who killed his creditor, was an illustration of a kind, fen(ll and gentle nature. For this monster ured this gentle girl ulone into the church, Walking side by side they passed there and went tothe library. What was the reason he brought that girl ‘into the church? He says helproml§cd her & book. Geoige King, if you believe histestimony, says he found the libfary door open. Who opened it? Theodore Dur- rant, on that eumfnl Wednesday afternoon. But the libr Kw“ not suited for his purposes. It was better than the belfry, but still it would not do, because when he got in there he realized that this was the first Toom from the church-vestibule. It had a window on Bart- lett sireet, and he was liable, nay, almost sure, 10 be'discovered. No,ousecond thoughts, yhe belfry. Gentlemen, can’t you imagine the lc::rgucz of this creature—I cannot elfi 8 g.mlk Durrant's nimble fingers put on the new lock. Gentlemen, I have struggled and I continne to struggle during this argument against the personal feelings tha} are sure to spring up in 2 man when the proofs of another man’s guilt are absolutely clear, but sometimes 1 have to e knew | stop, because 1 appreciate it is no part of my duty' to impress my own feelings upon you, that I am merely the illustrator of this evi- dence. WhenIclose my eyes I can see that man and that girl, I can seé him telling her to come up into the beliry, of the beautiful view that can be had from’ there. Ican see these two walking out side by side from that library- | room, up the stairs, up into the gallery of | the churen to the beliry-door. We don’t know | that this beliry-door was ever locked before, but after the 3d of April it was locked. Who had the to that church? George King, the presid | | | | | janitor and Theodore Durrant. Durrant was | the mechanic, the man who worsed with | nimble fingers. Who was the man who changed | the lock on the library door? Tueodore Dur- rant. Durrant furnished the keys for the new lock. Who was the man who furnished the keys to that new lock? Theodore Durrant. He had in his possession, 1 assert, from the known facts in the case, from the inferences which 1 draw, the key or keys thet would lock or un- | lock that beliry door. Iassert it as certain and | as sure that on Wednesday, the 3a of April, | between 4:15 and 5 o'clock, in the beliry of | the Emmannel Church, beliind the door, was this murder committed. That this girl was | drugged outside, that she was murdered in | somebody’s back yard and then dragged up |into the belfry, as Mr. Deuprey argued on Friday, seems to’ me to be the merest nonsense and not calling for reply. At this point the noon recess occurred. When court convened in the afternoon District Attorpey Barnes continued : Durrant had destroyed his egress from the belfry. Through the church we have brought this defendant and into the belfry. No words of mine can impress upon you that scene any more graphically than it 1s_probably fixed in your minds. What should he do? He must preserve himself. The instinct of self-presorva- tion arose in him. Now nobody pasted into the beliry except the janitor, and he only oo casionally, and'so he got the hatchet from the janitor’s room. He broke off the knobs. The knobs having been broken off, the force that was used to break them was so considerable that the plate of the door itself was sprung n{nen, and no key would afterward ofyen it The fiecessities of the occasion compelied this defendant when he hed destroyed ingress, to also destroy egress, In whet position did he Jfind himseli?_ He could not remain in that beliry. Your inspection of that belfry would develop two facts. Why Durrant showed himself to George King. There are two means of egress, eliminating the door—the second or false platform of the belfry, through the beams, thence through an opening broken in the ceiling; the other is through a small door. He could not get through the door of the beliry, hence he must poss into these other rooms. This brought him into the midceiling space where the sun- burners are. From that space there were but two modes of descent—one by the ladder which ran from the gallery; but he could not go out of that, because when he took tha £iri up tnto the bellry that ladder lay in the gallery. You do not suppose, and I do not suppose, that a man was going to let the girl lie there while he fixed the ladder up, the ladder being {n the gallery? There was but one means of de- scent—to pass over and through that mid- ceiling space into the attic and down the back stairs (o the entry of the hall that runs behind the pestor's study, down the back stairs, which would land him just where King says he saw him at the glass' doors of the Sunday-school Tooms. King knew too little for @ man who knew so Much. It was the only way to get out of the mid- ceiling space, and when that man appeared to the eyes of King in that doorway he had come down out of that midceiling space, down the stairs to where King sat, and it Isjust as sure as though we saw him there, as it is the only Touté he could have followed. And now my history brings me to George R. King. Of this young man I'regret to speak as it is my duty to speak. He was produced asa witness for the State. You sew him testify, George R. King impressed me as a man who knew t00 little for & man who knew s0 much. He was areluctant Witness, €0 much so that I had to_drag out of him what testimony we did get. What kind of A witness is this young man? Intimate with the defendant; a” visitor at the defendant’s house; the deiendant a visitor at his. All along through this trial a visitor to the defend- ant, yet unable when called upon to remember the subject of his conversation with him. King will regret the part he took in this case. He looked at me with a face of brass, saying, “My mind is a blank.” What kind of a witness is i who goes &nd sits down and hobnobs with the attorneys for the defendant? In thatIlay no charge of ill-doing at the doors of Mr. Dick- inson and Mr. Deuprey. These are honorable gentlemen, and 1 admire them; 1 am not criti- cizing them. He is in this position that it be- comes necessary for the representative of the | State to refer to him. Whatever Mr. King may know I cannot teli; but I believe that in time to come this young man who has his life be- fore lrim will regret the part he took in_this case, for I do not believe that George R. Kiug has done his full duty. But we must not dis- regard his testimony. Tt is very important, and considering the individual who gives this testimony, considering the relation that he maintained with this defendant, the testimony that George King gaye, unwiliing as it was and reluctant, is very important testimony. Only King and Durrant had keys to the library. King says that when he came into the vesti- bule of the church he smelt gas. Now, gentle- men, do you suppose he did smell gas? The testimony of the plumber is that he was in the church the day betore, and all the burners lperlecl condition. But if he did go into the library, what condition did he find it in? He says Lie found it with the door open. Now this was subsequent to the time when he ana Durrant had put a lock on the door to keep the books safe. Only two persons had keys to the door, George King had one, Theo- dore Durrant had the other. en George King entered the churech that afternoon and found the library-room door open he knew in the first place ‘that he had not opened it. Either Durrant had been there and unlocked the door with his key and gone inside for some purpose or somebody had opened that door for some improper purpose. 1i King fancied he Wwas alone in the church, don’t you think that it of the Ladies’ Aid Society, the | he would haye looked for some trace of Theo- dore Durrant? - Durrant’s testtmony does not agree with King's. But he went in there and tried that gas- burner with a match. He says he did not see the defendant’s hat end coat on his firat visit to the library. He then sat down to the piano to play in en atmosphere that was charged with gas so that it made him sick. He had been playing two or three minutes when sud- denly at the door appeared this defendant, without his coat and hat, pale, with distorted feature: ongested eyes and disheveled hair, and, according to his testimony, he says the defendant stood there in the door and looked at him for a minute. Take the story that the defendant tells himseli. Believe, if you can, thatat the time he heard the notes of the piano he was leaning over the gasburner and fixing the tips of the sunburner. Suppose he did what he said he did. Let us follow what he did next. George King says that he played not more than two or three minutes before Durrant appeared. Durrant told no one about fizing the sunburners. Durrant says that he heard George King while he was at the sunburners. He arrange the electric_spark apparatus. He replaced the teflectors, dusted them off, walked the space over the top of the ceiling, descended the ladder, lifted down the ladder, tried the valves that turned on and off the gas, walked down the steps of the gallery down to the audi- torium, crossed the auditorium to the rear, de- scended the attic stairs and burst on King’s vision two or three minutes after he had sat down to the piano. I submit that no man could go through all this performance in the time that he says he did. What was the mat- ter with these burners that required fixing? Nothing so far as we know. He never told a human being except Blanche Lamont, the dead girl, George King, the organist and his mother ‘what he was doing or going to do. Not a word {‘o the janitor or trustees or to any other human eing. The mother of the prisoner s moved to tears. Bunch all these denials together and what are you going to do? What about the aggre- gate collective mass of damning facts? To what irresistible truth can a candid and fair mind arrive? Durrant has helped to convict himself by robbing the dead. Why he should have taken the rings of murdered girl God alone knows. But he took them,and as he dragged them off that girl's Lllflenin%fiu ers he must have felt in his dank and flabby hair the tirst cold breath of the harvest that was to come. As he had sowed so he should reap. He had sowed misery, blood, sorrow and tears. He shall reap detection and exposure. It was at this point that Mrs. Durrant’s long-pent feelings gave way under the ter- rible strain. She wept silently on the risoner’s shoulder, until the customary rief recess was taken. When court was called to order again Mr. Barnes spoke feelingly of the inciden In crime the guilty suffer with the l'mlngenLy o While I was talking before the adjournment there wes before you, gentlemen, a very sad, very natural and ‘very proper exhibition of feeling. We are not here—I[ would not speak of it, gentlemen, but I consider it my duty to do so—we are not bere, you are not here under your oath, nor I am here under my oath, to try this case upon anything but theé evidence of the law. Tt is perhapsone of the saddest phases of crime that with the_guilty suffer the inno- cent. Itisalwaysso. It is unfortunate, it is unhappy, but it is nevertheless true. I can ap- preciate fo the full and Isympathize with, to the bottom of my heart, the grief that comes to the unfortunate relatives of this defendant who listen to the analysis of the evidence. Their sympathies are entwined around the ob- ject to whom this analysis applies, and yet as it comes, proof upon proof, it wrings the heart- strings of these relatives. It is unfortunate, gentlemen, but there is something else to be considered. Consider the woc of the mother in Montana. While I sympathize with this unhapp; mother, there is another mother to whom call your attention. Remember the 16th da; of April, when the body of this mangled girl, escorted by her little sister, was taken to her home in” Montana, and where that other mother sat in tears and sorrow waiting to receive the meager little body from which life had been strangled in San Francisco, waiting, watching, listening for the little footsteps that would never be heard again, listening for the gentle voice stilled in death, yet in the hope of meeting again that little girl whose life had been taken. Now in regard to the testimony of Oppen- heim. Do you doubtit? What motive could lead Mr. Phillips in a matter where it was per- fectly indifferent to him whether the defend- ant were acquitted or not, engaged in making his own living, having nothing to do with my department, or Captain Leesor Theodore Dur- rant, totally and wholly uninterested, it mak- ing no difference to him whether this man were acquitted or not—why, I say, should Phillips come here and tesiify that outside Oppenheim’s annahb?p he saw the defend- ant, Theodore Durrant Are all the witnesses banded. 1in @ conspiracy against Durrant ¢ Is he joined in the conspiracy with Mrs. Leak, Martin Quinlan, Mrs. Crossett, Miss Lani- Efln and Miss Pleasant and the other witnesses? a5 he joined with all those to swear away the life of an innocent men? Phillips did not know Oppenheim to speak to, nor did he know n:{ of the other witnesses, and Oppen- heim did not know that there was such a man_as Phillips 1n existence. TIs this, then, another case of failure of identification? Is it the same mistake that Mrs. Vogel and the other witnesses made? The contention is made that it might have been Lenihan that he saw. You ‘have seen the difference petween Leni- han’s ring and that of Blanche Lamont. You have seen him with Durrant’s overcoat on. They do not look any more alike than I look like’ Captain Lees.” Where are any of those nine men who saw Lenihan’s mustache? We have had something from Mr. Peixotto, from General Dickinson and from Mr. Deuprey about echo answering. Now it is my turn, and I ask, “Where,” and echo is silent. The same defense made by the irs maraeryr 4 Oppenbeim saw the man who brought the ring to him. Phillips saw the man, but did not see the ring. He tells you how his hair | Was worn on that occasion. He tellsyou of a movement of the visage, a muscular contrac- tion which this defendant has, & pursing up of the lips. And they, Phillips end Oppenheim, say that the man who was in Oppenheim’s store was Theodore Durrant. Gentlemen, crime must be punished. It is the safeguard put by the Almighty Maker of us to preserve innocence, to preserve the stmple and the good inations of the evil and wicked. two sides to a_story, even What is the defense? What testi- to & crime. mony have they brought before you to confute the terrible force of these facts. What is the defense, gentlemen?—the defense tnat was made by the first murderer, an alibi and a good charecter. Mr. Barnes then, with telling effect, quoted the passages from the Scriptures wherein Cain answers to the Presence, “Am I my brother’s keeper?”” From his- tory he gescended to fiction, as he said, uoting a page from the celebrated trial of %nrdwell against Pickwick—‘‘a trial that never took place”—wherein Sam Weller gives the adyice to ‘“never mind the char- acter, but stick close to the alibi.” There was another passage quoted from Justice Shaw in the Parkman murder, and then court adjourned until this morning. MRS. SPRAGUE CALLED. Second Unitarian Church’s Repudiated Female Pastor to Assist Her Hus- band at Chattanooga. Rey. and Mrs. Leslie W. Sprague have been called to a joint charge at Chatta- nooga, Tenn., and will in all probability aceept it. In response to Mr. Sprague’s request that he be relieved from the contract binding him to the Second Unltnrlgn Church of this City, the trustees have writ- ten signifying their willingness to release him from the terms of such contract, which will enable him to assume his new charge at once. ¢ The church has heard but one candidate thus far, Rev. H. Rice, but on the 10th inst. Rev. A. J. Wells of Redlands will appear before the church in that Cnpaclt{._ Jobn Montieth will fill the pulpit Sun- day morning and probably in the evening as well. Rev. N. A. Haskell, who has been invited to officiate at the latter ser- vice, may not be able to bLe present on ac- count of the critical illness of his wife. AOLAT STEVENSON'S SON He Arrives Here on a Trip to the Orient for His Health. Although an Illinois Man, He Favors Bringing the National Conven- tion Here. Lewis G. Stevenson, son of Vice-Presi} dent Adlai Stevenson, arrived in the City yesterday on his way to Japan. Thisis not Mr. Stevenson’s first visit to Cali- fornia. He was out here several years ago and spent a winter in San Bernardino County with an uncle. “I came out for my health then,” he said yesterday at the Baldwin, where he is staying, ‘“‘and have been singing the praises of California ever since. I am oing over to Japan now and shall return 1mmediately had become run down, and so am taking this trip simply for that reason.” Mr. Stevenson will sail from here about the 12th. Mr. Stevenson, although from Illinois, is heartily 1n favor of the bringing of the National Republican Convention out here. “I don’t think that Chicago is making as much of a fight for it this year as usual,”” he said. “I see by the papers that our Na- tional committeeman says that if Chicago wants it she must fight for it. He does not seem inclined to make it in the com- mittee. Those I heard in Chicago speak of San Francisco’s chances seemed to think they were very good. It would be a great thing for this State. Just get all those people out here once and they will all in- dorse California. I hope they come. I want to see them appreciate this State as Ido.” Mr. Stevenson has served a term as a California journalist. During the winter he spent in San Bernardino he was for a time connected with the Colton Semi- Tropie. DOUBTED HER MARRIAGE Perplexity of a Wife With a White Seal on Her Marriage License. “I want a new seal put on my marriage license,” said Mrs. Kitty Fickson to “Cupid” Danforth Wednesday. “What's the matter with this one?” asked the clerk, picking up the license and carefully examining the seal. *“Why, it's plain,” was the reply. “All my lady friends have seals of gold or red paper, and that one is plain white. They laugh at 1t, and declare I'm not married.” “Didn’t you go before a minister with William Fickson ?"” “Yes.? “Then I guess you're married about as tightly as the law can marry you. The ctfior of the seal does not cut any figura, The office ran out of red and gold paper some time ago, and in the last few months several hundred people have been married with plain white seals affixed to their licenses. They seem to be pretty well satisfied with the color.” “But I ain’t,”’ insisted Mrs. Fickson. “I've got a friend and she’s got a gold seal on her license. 1 know she's married, and I'll never believe I'm really, truly married till I have a gold seal like hers on my license.” *‘All right,’” said Danforth, giving up the contest. “I'll marry you in proper fashion,” and he went out to a stationer’s store near by, bought a piece of gilded paper, pasted it on_the license ard affixed the same seal that had already been stam on the license. 4 thank you so much,” said the de- lighted Mrs. Fickson, receiving the paper. “Now, I know I'm really married for sure.” And she hastened to join her lady friend waiting for her in the corridor. “Don’t hngfir longer, Lucy,” softly whis- %l:dkl)nnfor , a3 he went back to his oks. Mrs. Jordon played Juliet but once or twice, and had no more success with it than had Mrs. Siddons. Mrs. Stephen Kemble was a famous Juliet. I F EVERYTHING else has FAILED The Ideal Tonic INVARIAB S mRovva Efflcaclous RESTORING HEALTH This is asserted afte 1 30 years’ uniform Mailed Free. i experience. INTERESTING COLLECTION OF Portraits H OF NOTED CELEBRITIES. i Benej le.. P very Tost Eroves Reputation. Avold Substitutions. Ask for‘Vin Mariani.’ At Druggists and Fancy Grocers. MARIANI & CO., R CHILD-STEALING CHARGED A Wealthy Young Harvard Grad- uate in Trouble Through Drink. HE TOOK A BABY FOR A RIDE. The Child Was Not Returned and the | Distracted Parents Allege Abduction. William Fallon is about to be tried on the charge of child-stealing as the result of his very peculiar actions. Fallon is a young man of fine attain- ments, a graduate of Harvard and at one time a iaw student. He is theson of a very | wealthy mother, but is said to be addicted | to drink. Mrs. Fallon is said to be worth betweena | half and three-quarters of a million dollars. She owns considerable valuable business | property on Market street and bas other profitable investments. The son was raised | as a gentleman’s son and the heir to large | estates should be reared. But his love for whisky — much whisky—has placed him | in a difficult position. | On the 29th of March of this year Fallon, while intoxicated, stopped to caress a little | cbild. She was three years old and the | baby daughter of Mr. and Mrs. R. S. Boyd | of 816 Twenty-sixth street. The child was | talkative, and being too young to mark the | distinction between a man drunk and a | man sober Fallon easily won her baby con- | fidence and friendship. i _When asked if she wou!d like to take a ride on the electric car she readily assented and was lifted on to the next car going to- ward the center of the City. Fallon took her to the corner of Twelith and Market opposite his mother’s house. They went into a grocery-store, where Fallon proceeded to load the baby with cakes and candies and incidentally to increase his own cargo of whisky. The distracted parents found the child at the place mentioned after they had | been looking for her for several hours, assisted by friends. An officer was called on to arrest Fallon, but declined to do so on hearing the latter’s story and being un- able to discover any sinister motive in the | carrying away of the child. The baby was as happy as any baby may be with chubby hands full of pastry and confections, and did not want to leave her new friend. Fallon was arrested subsequently on a charge of child-stealing and 1s about to be | tried. He admitted theact, butdisclaimed | that he had any object in taking the child for a ride on the cars. Being drunk and in an affectionate humor the baby offered the first object on which he could lavish his maudlin tenderness, and he petted her and took her out on her first ride in strange company. Attorney F. K. Kase, for the defense, thinks he will be able to convince the jury of an entire absence of motive on the part of the defendant. He says he has witnesses who will testify that Fallon tried to in- duce a number of persons in and around the grocery-store to take-the little girl back to the place whence he took her, showing that in his befuddled condition he | dimly realized that her parents would be | worried about the child. | __*Of course we admit the act,” said Mr. | Kase yesterday afternoon, “but the hard | feature of the case will be in convincing the jury of an entire absence of object, pur- pose or motive beyond that of a kindly, though maudlin desire, to afford the little one pleasure.”’ FOR HIS BOY'S SLAUGHTER. The Father of Luigi Giorno fues the Market-Street Company. Frank Giorno, father of Luigi Giorno. a child 9 years of age, who was killed by the Kearny-street electric cars September 30, brought suit against the Market-street Railway Company yesterday, claiming damages in the sum of $25,000. e S Firuit-Growers’ Convention. The Fruit-growers’ Conventton that will open in Sacramento next Tuesday, to last four days, promises 1o attract nearly all the prominent orchardists in the State. A number are now on their way to Sacramento. Several passed | through this City yesterday and called in at | the State Board of Horticulture rooms in the Mills building. Among these were N. W. Blanchard of Santa Paula; W.I. Rice, Horti- cultural Commissioner of Venturs Thomas, a Commissioner from Visalis M. Bowman of Suisun 104 We will give to every person making a purchase at our stores one full size 15c cake of PEACH BLOSSOM TOILET SOAP FREE. This Soap is made in San Francisco and is guaranteed by the Yucca Root Soap Co. to be absolutely pure. Call early. Mail orders inclose 4c for postage. NO PERGENTAGE PHARMACY, 853 Marlkel Streot. FERRY DRUG CO., No. 8 Market Street, S. F., CUT RATE DRUGGISTS. A MASS MEETING IN THE INTEREST OF WOMAN SUFFRAGE Will be held at Metropolitan Temple, Fifth Street, near Market, on Friday Evening, Nov, 1, At 8 o'clock. REV. ANNA H. SHAW. CONGRESSMAN MAGUIRE,7 HON. TAYLOR ROGERS, ‘Will Speak. Admission Free. JSTHEVERY BESTONETO EXAMINE YOUR yes and fit them t0 Spectacles or Eyeglasses with mlml?enu gfeem (:;ln”-hvu&u. whose superi a8 not been eq ‘sucosss Boen de 2o the mesits of miy waek. e Office Hours—12t0 4 F. M. TAMAR INDIEN GRILLON A laxative refreshi fn"bllozenn,n‘ - very agrecable to take. CONSTIPATION X m;..l’é’:. {roubles and eadache arisi from them: © E. GRILLON, 33 Rue des Archives, P Sold by all Drvgaiaa®