255

BOTH GO FREE!

Mary Sheedy and Monday McFarland Acquitted.

CROWDS DRINK IN THE ELOQUENCE.

Attorney Lambertson Closed the Arguments Thursday Afternoon and the Case Was Given to the Jury at Six O'clock--A Remarkable Trial--Synopsis of the Arguments.

The evidence in the Sheedy murder case closed Saturday with some unimportant rebuttal testimony offered by the state. In the main, however, it was simply a denial of certain points brought out by the defense. However, the state dug u Mrs. Margaret Skinner who roomed in one of the O street blocks just back of the Sheedy residence, and sought to prove by her that on the night of the assault she saw a negro run from the Sheedy house to the alley and out on the street immediately following the shooting. But this could not go in as it was no rebuttal, and if good for anything at all, should have been brought out before the state rested. The fact that it was not so brought out gives it a fishy appearance. In the argument over the question of its admissibility, the attorneys for the state managed to tell the court and in the presence of the jury, what they expected to prove by her. This nestled the attorney for the defense, and Judge Field ruled it all out and struck the objectionable language of the states' attorneys from the record.

County Attorney Snell's Talk.

The people always flock to "the pleadings" as they term the argument of counsel in such cases, and last Monday morning proved no exception to the rule, and soon after court opened on that day standing room was above par, and among the interested spectators were a number of prominent Lincoln ladies. Mrs. Sheedy and her sisters, with Uncle Biggerstaff of Boise City, Idaho, occupied their usual places and Monday McFarland, with a number of his friends, sat just back to the long table assigned to the attorneys.

County Attorney Snell made the opening argument for the state, beginning at half past nine. He described the house and its surroundings with patient accuracy, after which he said: When darkness folded her sable mantle and wrapped its pall over this city on the evening of January 11 last, there had been planned and was on the eve of execution a murderous conspiracy, which for devilish malevolence and hideous cunning and depravity stands out bold and alone in the criminal annals of Lancaster county. I refer to the assault made that evening upon John Sheedy, and which culminated in his death the following day. The preliminaries for the commission of this murder had been arranged with careful reference to detail, and the parties concerned would perhaps have escaped punishment, had not the principal actor in the assault, stung to remorse by a guilty conscience, revealed the infamous conspiracy by a confession, which revealed the details in all its hideous deformity, and pilloried the accomplice before the gaze of a startled community.

He then told of McFarland's employment by Mr. Sheedy to care for his wife's hair, and how she had opportunity during the hours they were together to thoroughly sound him on the point which was nearest her heart; how Mrs. Charley COil had seen him standing at the corner of Thirteenth and P streets anxiously watching the Sheedy house; how the defense had failed utterly to show where he was during the time the assault was made; how the defense had signally failed to throw suspicion upon gamblers Gleason and Williams, and then said: No man ever committed the awful crime of murder without a motive. What, then, was the motive that startled the nerves and seared the conscience of Monday McFarland? What prompted him to the commission of the most awful crime known to our statuses? There was a motive; what was it! It was Mary Sheedy, the wife of the man against whose life she was conspiring, and she urged him on not alone by the promise of great financial reward, but, as he says in his confession, by the sacrifice of her chastity to him. Still he could not nerve himself to attempt the life of a man who had been his benefactor, and to whom he had every reason to consider he owed a debt of gratitude he could never repay.

He discussed at some length the effort of the defense to show that the Sheedy home was miniature Garden of Eden, and how they had called witnesses who knew nothing and simply said that they never saw any trouble between the husband and wife. How Mrs. Swift and Mrs. Hood, friends of the family, and Johnny Klausner had told of relations between them that was anything but amicable, and of seeing her in tears and hearing her talk of divorce. However, the evidence failed to show any trouble between them until after she had met Walstrom in Buffalo last summer. Her friendship for Walstrum was then commented upon, and inferences drawn of this relationship that was far from complimentary to the fair defendant. He also referred to the purchase of the night shirts and other gents' wear by Mrs. Sheedy; how she may have said they were for her husband, but that the defense had failed to bring them into court from among John Sheedy's effects because they were in the possession of A. H. Walstrom had gone to Mrs. Carpenter's home with her and the latter's sister had gone after Mrs. Sheedy, who came at once; how immediately after the assault Mrs. Sheedy first called for some one to go after the priest and the very next moment for C C Carpenter to go and tell Walstrom that Sheedy had been assaulted; how she called Walstrom her sweetheart and on the night of the first assault had said that people could not say that "her Harry" did it as he was at work that night, and how she sent word to Walstrom that as he valued her friendship he should come to Sheedy's funeral. He contended that the only reasonable explanation of all these acts was that Mrs. Sheedy was maintaining criminal relations with Walstrom, and said that it was shown by the testimony that not until after Walstrom arrived that Mrs. Sheedy complained of her treatment by Sheedy or that John Sheedy threatened to shoot her.

He then discussed McFarland's confession and claimed that it had been confirmed by every surrounding circumstances, and how utterly impossible it was for him to invent such a story. Of their alleged criminal relations he said that there was nothing preposterous in the supposition that she had committed adultery with him, as a woman with murder in her heart would do anything and stop at nothing. The defense would attempt to make capital out of her "sad face" and "pensively sad face," but it was rather a case of iron nerve than anything else. She knew John Sheedy before she married him, in fact had sustained widely relations with him for some months prior to the actual wedding, and no sympathy was due her as a "gambler's sad faced wife."

The details of the horrible confession were discussed item by item and made to dove-tail into established facts that Monday sat uneasily in his chair and Mrs. Sheedy buried her face in her handkerchief.

Mr. Carder's positive identification of the cane compared with his inability to identify his own hand writing on the police register. He took the confession of Monday in relation to the shot fired on the night of December 9, and showed how every minute feature of it was corroborated by the testimony of Mr. and Mrs. Hosman, except as to the color of the assailant. Even the relative positions of the parties, the clothing which the assailant wore at the time at which the assault occurred were the same in both statements. In Monday's confession he told of having fallen down at the corner of
(Continued on page 4.)

BOTH GO FREE!

Mary Sheedy and Monday McFarland Acquitted.

CROWDS DRINK IN THE ELOQUENCE.

Attorney Lambertson Closed the Arguments Thursday Afternoon and the Case Was Given to the Jury at Six O'clock--A Remarkable Trial--Synopsis of the Arguments.

The evidence in the Sheedy murder case closed Saturday with some unimportant rebuttal testimony offered by the state. In the main, however, it was simply a denial of certain points brought out by the defense. However, the state dug u Mrs. Margaret Skinner who roomed in one of the O street blocks just back of the Sheedy residence, and sought to prove by her that on the night of the assault she saw a negro run from the Sheedy house to the alley and out on the street immediately following the shooting. But this could not go in as it was no rebuttal, and if good for anything at all, should have been brought out before the state rested. The fact that it was not so brought out gives it a fishy appearance. In the argument over the question of its admissibility, the attorneys for the state managed to tell the court and in the presence of the jury, what they expected to prove by her. This nestled the attorney for the defense, and Judge Field ruled it all out and struck the objectionable language of the states' attorneys from the record.

County Attorney Snell's Talk.

The people always flock to "the pleadings" as they term the argument of counsel in such cases, and last Monday morning proved no exception to the rule, and soon after court opened on that day standing room was above par, and among the interested spectators were a number of prominent Lincoln ladies. Mrs. Sheedy and her sisters, with Uncle Biggerstaff of Boise City, Idaho, occupied their usual places and Monday McFarland, with a number of his friends, sat just back to the long table assigned to the attorneys.

County Attorney Snell made the opening argument for the state, beginning at half past nine. He described the house and its surroundings with patient accuracy, after which he said: When darkness folded her sable mantle and wrapped its pall over this city on the evening of January 11 last, there had been planned and was on the eve of execution a murderous conspiracy, which for devilish malevolence and hideous cunning and depravity stands out bold and alone in the criminal annals of Lancaster county. I refer to the assault made that evening upon John Sheedy, and which culminated in his death the following day. The preliminaries for the commission of this murder had been arranged with careful reference to detail, and the parties concerned would perhaps have escaped punishment, had not the principal actor in the assault, stung to remorse by a guilty conscience, revealed the infamous conspiracy by a confession, which revealed the details in all its hideous deformity, and pilloried the accomplice before the gaze of a startled community.

He then told of McFarland's employment by Mr. Sheedy to care for his wife's hair, and how she had opportunity during the hours they were together to thoroughly sound him on the point which was nearest her heart; how Mrs. Charley COil had seen him standing at the corner of Thirteenth and P streets anxiously watching the Sheedy house; how the defense had failed utterly to show where he was during the time the assault was made; how the defense had signally failed to throw suspicion upon gamblers Gleason and Williams, and then said: No man ever committed the awful crime of murder without a motive. What, then, was the motive that startled the nerves and seared the conscience of Monday McFarland? What prompted him to the commission of the most awful crime known to our statuses? There was a motive; what was it! It was Mary Sheedy, the wife of the man against whose life she was conspiring, and she urged him on not alone by the promise of great financial reward, but, as he says in his confession, by the sacrifice of her chastity to him. Still he could not nerve himself to attempt the life of a man who had been his benefactor, and to whom he had every reason to consider he owed a debt of gratitude he could never repay.

He discussed at some length the effort of the defense to show that the Sheedy home was miniature Garden of Eden, and how they had called witnesses who knew nothing and simply said that they never saw any trouble between the husband and wife. How Mrs. Swift and Mrs. Hood, friends of the family, and Johnny Klausner had told of relations between them that was anything but amicable, and of seeing her in tears and hearing her talk of divorce. However, the evidence failed to show any trouble between them until after she had met Walstrom in Buffalo last summer. Her friendship for Walstrum was then commented upon, and inferences drawn of this relationship that was far from complimentary to the fair defendant. He also referred to the purchase of the night shirts and other gents' wear by Mrs. Sheedy; how she may have said they were for her husband, but that the defense had failed to bring them into court from among John Sheedy's effects because they were in the possession of A. H. Walstrom had gone to Mrs. Carpenter's home with her and the latter's sister had gone after Mrs. Sheedy, who came at once; how immediately after the assault Mrs. Sheedy first called for some one to go after the priest and the very next moment for C C Carpenter to go and tell Walstrom that Sheedy had been assaulted; how she called Walstrom her sweetheart and on the night of the first assault had said that people could not say that "her Harry" did it as he was at work that night, and how she sent word to Walstrom that as he valued her friendship he should come to Sheedy's funeral. He contended that the only reasonable explanation of all these acts was that Mrs. Sheedy was maintaining criminal relations with Walstrom, and said that it was shown by the testimony that not until after Walstrom arrived that Mrs. Sheedy complained of her treatment by Sheedy or that John Sheedy threatened to shoot her.

He then discussed McFarland's confession and claimed that it had been confirmed by every surrounding circumstances, and how utterly impossible it was for him to invent such a story. Of their alleged criminal relations he said that there was nothing preposterous in the supposition that she had committed adultery with him, as a woman with murder in her heart would do anything and stop at nothing. The defense would attempt to make capital out of her "sad face" and "pensively sad face," but it was rather a case of iron nerve than anything else. She knew John Sheedy before she married him, in fact had sustained widely relations with him for some months prior to the actual wedding, and no sympathy was due her as a "gambler's sad faced wife."

The details of the horrible confession were discussed item by item and made to dove-tail into established facts that Monday sat uneasily in his chair and Mrs. Sheedy buried her face in her handkerchief.

Mr. Carder's positive identification of the cane compared with his inability to identify his own hand writing on the police register. He took the confession of Monday in relation to the shot fired on the night of December 9, and showed how every minute feature of it was corroborated by the testimony of Mr. and Mrs. Hosman, except as to the color of the assailant. Even the relative positions of the parties, the clothing which the assailant wore at the time at which the assault occurred were the same in both statements. In Monday's confession he told of having fallen down at the corner of
(Continued on page 4.)