33

PLEADING FOR A VERDICT

SIX HOURS OF EARNEST ORATORY.

The Opening Arguments for the Three Parties to the Great Sheedy-McFarland Case.

County Attorney Snell Reviews the Evidence Generally in a Masterly Manner--Judge weir's Dignified Argument for Mrs. Sheedy.

Mr. Woodward Gets Fairly Begun.

The seats in the courtroom allotted to the public were not nearly filled yesterday morning when the opening hour arrived, but the arguments were not far advanced when not only the seats, but every available nook and corner in the large room were occupied by attentive and interested listeners. There were many more ladies present than at any time in the course of the trial and court officers and janitors had obligingly brought in a large number of camp chairs, which were placed inside the enclosure for the occupancy of the ladies, it was noticed that among the latter were many prominent Lincoln ladies who had not heretofore visited the trial, Mrs. Sheedy came into court accompanied by her uncle, Mr. Biggerstaff, and her three sisters, as well as Mr. Baker of Saline county, her brother-in-law. She was robed in the heavy mourning which she was worn during the trial and which becomes her so well. Her three sisters were arrayed in more cheerful colors. They had all made their toilet with unusual care, and as they reached the first-floor corridor coming from the jail they stopped just inside the large folding north door to submit to mutual inspection and put the finishing touched to the arrangement of their garments. Mrs. Sheedy appeared to be in an unusually cheerful mood. and smilingly chatted with her escort. While they stood thus employed Monday McFarland came in at the same door in the care of Deputy Sheriff Hoagland, conversing pleasantly with his sister, and followed by two other colored ladies. They passed the sextette at the door and repaired at once to the court room. where Monday resumed his accustomed seat at the end of the attorneys table.

It was several minutes ere Mrs. Sheedy came in and immediately every feminine neck in the court room was craned to catch a glimpse of the pale, composed face that looked out from the folds of the ample mourning veil. The members of the part appeared to be totally oblivious of the attention they were receiving, and quietly took their seats in the accustomed row facing the space between the court and the jury.

All of the attorneys were present except Captain Billingsley of McFarland's counsel, who appears to have dropped completely out of the case, having been supplanted by his partner, Mr. Woodward. It was thought at first that the attorneys would not probably consume more than two hours each, but the [?] of the case are so varied and exhaustive that one can hardly do justice to each feature of the evidence in that time. The eight arguments will, therefore, probably consume three entire days this week, closing probably tomorrow evening with the state's final argument by Mr. Lambertson.

It would be impossible to attempt to reproduce the arguments and the public must be content with a condensed statement of the substance of them without any reflection of the convincing language in which they were clothed.

Mr. Snell Opens for the State.

At 9:25 Mr. Snell took up the opening argument for the state. He began by describing the premises accurately and in detail, and how at 7:30 on that Sunday night John Sheedy stepped out of his door and was [fouily?] assaulted and murdered.

"When darkness folded her sable mantle and wrapped its pullover 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 their hideous deformity, and pilloried the accomplice before the gaze of a startled community.

He detailed the arrest and preliminary proceedings after suspicion had settled upon the defendants and showed how Monday McFarland had been a barber employed occasionally at the Sheedy home in dressing Mrs. Sheedy's hair, and that while so employed, an hour or more at a time, in such instances Mrs. Sheedy had ample opportunity to sound him and ascertain in what way she might avail herself of his services in securing her freedom.

He then took up the testimony, beginning with that of Mrs. Charles' Coil, who had frequently seen Monday McFarland hanging about the corner of Thirteenth and P streets, endeavoring to disguise himself and escape observation, and compared it with the confession of Monday, wherein he told of having stood at that corner to see Mrs. Sheedy go walking with her lover, the man who she said was ready to do the job if Monday didn't. While the defense had industriously and ingenuinely endeavored to make it appear that on standing at the corner of Thirteethn and P streets could not see the Sheedy residence, Monday McFarland's confession told how he had stood at that very corner and had seen John Sheedy come out of the house and go down town on that night when Walstrom took a walk with Mrs. Sheedy.

He told [?]ow the testimony of P. J. Stepney, Monday's cousin, showed that Monday had secured Stepney's overcoat on the Tuesday previous to the assault, the very day upon which Monday had also purchased the cane of Goldwater, showing that he was then formulating his cunning plans for the murder.

The took the testimony of William Chann showing that Monday was at the witness' room up to 6 or 7 o'clock, and how at a late hour he again appeared at Tinn's place and said he had lost his cane. He called attention to the failure of the array of counsel for the defense to allow where Monday was during the hour upon which the assault was committed.

The defense had endeavored to throw suspicion upon Gleason and Williams, the gamblers but they had not made a single effort to bring these parties to an accountability, and the testimony of Mr. Courtnay as to the threatening letter had been called in at the eleventh hour, when the state had no opportunity to meet it.

"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 statutes? 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 dwelt at length upon the efforts of the defense to show that the most amicable relations existed between Mr. and Mrs. Sheedy by such witnesses as E. H. Andrus, C. O. Whedon and W. J. Marshall. witnesses who would not be at all likely to ever see John Sheedy pounding his wife or hear Mrs. Sheedy scolding her husband like a fish woman. The defense had purposely called witnesses who knew nothing of the facts and had studiously failed to ask any of their own witnesses, who were qualified to know, whether or not Mr. and Mrs. Sheedy lived happily, not even Mrs. Dean, the sister of the defendant, who lived in the family.

He then took up the evidence of the witnesses for the state--that of Mrs. Swift and Mrs. Hood, who unwillingly testified that their relations were anything but amicable, and that of Johnnie Klausner, who said that he had found Mrs. Sheedy once in tears and she had said she was going to get a divorce.

The record in the case failed to disclose that any domestic infelicity had ever agitated the Sheedy family until after she had returned from Buffalo, bringing with her the picture of young Walstrom, and said that while the defense will endeavor to make it appear that Mrs. Sheedy's friendship for Walstrom was a harmless one, still it is probable that each members of the jury will reflect that when a married woman evinces such an interest in a young man and exhibits his picture so proudly to her friends, he will arrive at the concinsion that he would prefer it were somebody's else wife than his own.

The speaker referred to the relations existing between Walstrom and Mrs. Sheedy; how he came to the city soon after her return, hunted up Johnnie Klausner and introduced himself as the young man of whom Mrs. Sheedy had already spoken to Klausner; how they went together to a room in the Heater block, Walstrom paying two-thirds of the room rent, how soon afterwards Johnnie Klausner began carrying sealed notes, which were not addressed, between Mrs. Sheedy and Walstrom. If those notes were harmless notes why in the name of Mrs. Sheedy's innocence had not the defense brought at least one of Walstrom's notes, which were undoubtedly in their possession, into court to show how innocent they were. And it is a little remarkable that Mrs. Sheedy never sent any lunches to Klausner's room until Walstrom came to room with him, as Klausner testifies himself.

The speaker also referred to the purchase of the night shirts and other gents' wear by Mrs. Sheedy; how she may have said that 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; wherever he may be. He told how 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 Henry" did it, [?] 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 took up Monday's confession and gave its chief points briefly, showed how every after fact confirmed the story, and how utterly impossible it would be for Monday or any other man to invent such a story.

He said that the defense would endeavor to create a sympathy for Mrs. Sheedy by picturing an ideal woman and dwelling upon the fact that John Sheedy was a gambler, but Mrs. Sheedy had married him with her eyes open. She knew he was a gambler and married him because he was a gambler with money and she would have little or nothing to do. He said that there was nothing preposterous in the supposition that Mrs. Sheedy had committed adultery with a black man when it is known that a woman with murder in her heart will do anything. The counsel for defense had already frequently referred to her as the "sad-faced" and "pensive-faced" woman and other sympathetic terms, but they could much more appropriately have designated her as the woman with an iron nerve and a desperate purpose at heart. Mr. Snell picked Monday's confession to pieces and told in detail how every known circumstance brought out in the testimony corroborated the entire truth and wonderful accuracy of that remarkable story of the criminal conspiracy.

He detailed how the finding of the solid gold ring in the pawnshop, where it had been left by Monday, corroborated the latter's statement that Mrs. Sheedy gave him a gold ring. He had said in his confession that on the morning of the assault he had cut a little boy's hair in the house just east of the Sheedy place. When the lady who lived there testified she said that Monday had cut her grandson's hair the morning of the assault. On the evening of the fatal assault, Monday claims in the confession while he was waiting in the back yard to see the east window curtain go up, Mrs. Sheedy came out to the pump and got some water. Some time afterwards she came out and worked the pump again, but did not get any water and did it merely as a subterfuge. It was then that she talked to him. When Mrs. Sheedy testified before the coroner's jury, she, too, had said that she had gone out that evening to get a pitcher of water. He explained how Mrs. Sheedy's own testimony before the coroner as to the east window curtain, had substantiated the darkey's story, showing that Mrs. Sheedy had pulled down the curtains a short time before her husband went out. This would permit her, by pulling up the curtain, to signal Monday that he husband was coming out.

Mr. Snell then took up the testimony of the defense and touched up Mr. W. W. Carder., for the readiness and positiveness with which he had identified the fatal cane as his own, and compared it with his total inability to identify his own hand writing in the police register when it was introduced in relation to whether or not the patrol wagon went out that night.

He took the confession of Monday McFarland in relation to the shot tired in 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 and 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 the porch just after firing that shot, and very strangely both Mr. and Mrs. Hosman testify that after firing the shot the man whom they identified as a white man fell down at the corner of the porch. He showed the utter fallacy of their positive assertion that the man was white by quoting the assertion of Mr. Hosman to the effect that when the man fell down, although it was late at night and the fugitive was some thirty feet away in the darkness, the witness could see that he wore three or four days growth of beard. He said that it was very likely that the supposed growth of beard was none other than Monday McFarland's swarthy complexion, else how did Monday McFarland, long ere it was known that Mr. and Mrs. Hosman would testify in the case at all, know that the man who fired that shot fell down at the corner of the porch, or any of the other facts as related by him and afterwards proven?

NOT COMPLETE 5/24

PLEADING FOR A VERDICT

SIX HOURS OF EARNEST ORATORY.

The Opening Arguments for the Three Parties to the Great Sheedy-McFarland Case.

County Attorney Snell Reviews the Evidence Generally in a Masterly Manner--Judge weir's Dignified Argument for Mrs. Sheedy.

Mr. Woodward Gets Fairly Begun.

The seats in the courtroom allotted to the public were not nearly filled yesterday morning when the opening hour arrived, but the arguments were not far advanced when not only the seats, but every available nook and corner in the large room were occupied by attentive and interested listeners. There were many more ladies present than at any time in the course of the trial and court officers and janitors had obligingly brought in a large number of camp chairs, which were placed inside the enclosure for the occupancy of the ladies, it was noticed that among the latter were many prominent Lincoln ladies who had not heretofore visited the trial, Mrs. Sheedy came into court accompanied by her uncle, Mr. Biggerstaff, and her three sisters, as well as Mr. Baker of Saline county, her brother-in-law. She was robed in the heavy mourning which she was worn during the trial and which becomes her so well. Her three sisters were arrayed in more cheerful colors. They had all made their toilet with unusual care, and as they reached the first-floor corridor coming from the jail they stopped just inside the large folding north door to submit to mutual inspection and put the finishing touched to the arrangement of their garments. Mrs. Sheedy appeared to be in an unusually cheerful mood. and smilingly chatted with her escort. While they stood thus employed Monday McFarland came in at the same door in the care of Deputy Sheriff Hoagland, conversing pleasantly with his sister, and followed by two other colored ladies. They passed the sextette at the door and repaired at once to the court room. where Monday resumed his accustomed seat at the end of the attorneys table.

It was several minutes ere Mrs. Sheedy came in and immediately every feminine neck in the court room was craned to catch a glimpse of the pale, composed face that looked out from the folds of the ample mourning veil. The members of the part appeared to be totally oblivious of the attention they were receiving, and quietly took their seats in the accustomed row facing the space between the court and the jury.

All of the attorneys were present except Captain Billingsley of McFarland's counsel, who appears to have dropped completely out of the case, having been supplanted by his partner, Mr. Woodward. It was thought at first that the attorneys would not probably consume more than two hours each, but the [?] of the case are so varied and exhaustive that one can hardly do justice to each feature of the evidence in that time. The eight arguments will, therefore, probably consume three entire days this week, closing probably tomorrow evening with the state's final argument by Mr. Lambertson.

It would be impossible to attempt to reproduce the arguments and the public must be content with a condensed statement of the substance of them without any reflection of the convincing language in which they were clothed.

Mr. Snell Opens for the State.

At 9:25 Mr. Snell took up the opening argument for the state. He began by describing the premises accurately and in detail, and how at 7:30 on that Sunday night John Sheedy stepped out of his door and was [fouily?] assaulted and murdered.

"When darkness folded her sable mantle and wrapped its pullover 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 their hideous deformity, and pilloried the accomplice before the gaze of a startled community.

He detailed the arrest and preliminary proceedings after suspicion had settled upon the defendants and showed how Monday McFarland had been a barber employed occasionally at the Sheedy home in dressing Mrs. Sheedy's hair, and that while so employed, an hour or more at a time, in such instances Mrs. Sheedy had ample opportunity to sound him and ascertain in what way she might avail herself of his services in securing her freedom.

He then took up the testimony, beginning with that of Mrs. Charles' Coil, who had frequently seen Monday McFarland hanging about the corner of Thirteenth and P streets, endeavoring to disguise himself and escape observation, and compared it with the confession of Monday, wherein he told of having stood at that corner to see Mrs. Sheedy go walking with her lover, the man who she said was ready to do the job if Monday didn't. While the defense had industriously and ingenuinely endeavored to make it appear that on standing at the corner of Thirteethn and P streets could not see the Sheedy residence, Monday McFarland's confession told how he had stood at that very corner and had seen John Sheedy come out of the house and go down town on that night when Walstrom took a walk with Mrs. Sheedy.

He told [?]ow the testimony of P. J. Stepney, Monday's cousin, showed that Monday had secured Stepney's overcoat on the Tuesday previous to the assault, the very day upon which Monday had also purchased the cane of Goldwater, showing that he was then formulating his cunning plans for the murder.

The took the testimony of William Chann showing that Monday was at the witness' room up to 6 or 7 o'clock, and how at a late hour he again appeared at Tinn's place and said he had lost his cane. He called attention to the failure of the array of counsel for the defense to allow where Monday was during the hour upon which the assault was committed.

The defense had endeavored to throw suspicion upon Gleason and Williams, the gamblers but they had not made a single effort to bring these parties to an accountability, and the testimony of Mr. Courtnay as to the threatening letter had been called in at the eleventh hour, when the state had no opportunity to meet it.

"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 statutes? 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 dwelt at length upon the efforts of the defense to show that the most amicable relations existed between Mr. and Mrs. Sheedy by such witnesses as E. H. Andrus, C. O. Whedon and W. J. Marshall. witnesses who would not be at all likely to ever see John Sheedy pounding his wife or hear Mrs. Sheedy scolding her husband like a fish woman. The defense had purposely called witnesses who knew nothing of the facts and had studiously failed to ask any of their own witnesses, who were qualified to know, whether or not Mr. and Mrs. Sheedy lived happily, not even Mrs. Dean, the sister of the defendant, who lived in the family.

He then took up the evidence of the witnesses for the state--that of Mrs. Swift and Mrs. Hood, who unwillingly testified that their relations were anything but amicable, and that of Johnnie Klausner, who said that he had found Mrs. Sheedy once in tears and she had said she was going to get a divorce.

The record in the case failed to disclose that any domestic infelicity had ever agitated the Sheedy family until after she had returned from Buffalo, bringing with her the picture of young Walstrom, and said that while the defense will endeavor to make it appear that Mrs. Sheedy's friendship for Walstrom was a harmless one, still it is probable that each members of the jury will reflect that when a married woman evinces such an interest in a young man and exhibits his picture so proudly to her friends, he will arrive at the concinsion that he would prefer it were somebody's else wife than his own.

The speaker referred to the relations existing between Walstrom and Mrs. Sheedy; how he came to the city soon after her return, hunted up Johnnie Klausner and introduced himself as the young man of whom Mrs. Sheedy had already spoken to Klausner; how they went together to a room in the Heater block, Walstrom paying two-thirds of the room rent, how soon afterwards Johnnie Klausner began carrying sealed notes, which were not addressed, between Mrs. Sheedy and Walstrom. If those notes were harmless notes why in the name of Mrs. Sheedy's innocence had not the defense brought at least one of Walstrom's notes, which were undoubtedly in their possession, into court to show how innocent they were. And it is a little remarkable that Mrs. Sheedy never sent any lunches to Klausner's room until Walstrom came to room with him, as Klausner testifies himself.

The speaker also referred to the purchase of the night shirts and other gents' wear by Mrs. Sheedy; how she may have said that 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; wherever he may be. He told how 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 Henry" did it, [?] 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 took up Monday's confession and gave its chief points briefly, showed how every after fact confirmed the story, and how utterly impossible it would be for Monday or any other man to invent such a story.

He said that the defense would endeavor to create a sympathy for Mrs. Sheedy by picturing an ideal woman and dwelling upon the fact that John Sheedy was a gambler, but Mrs. Sheedy had married him with her eyes open. She knew he was a gambler and married him because he was a gambler with money and she would have little or nothing to do. He said that there was nothing preposterous in the supposition that Mrs. Sheedy had committed adultery with a black man when it is known that a woman with murder in her heart will do anything. The counsel for defense had already frequently referred to her as the "sad-faced" and "pensive-faced" woman and other sympathetic terms, but they could much more appropriately have designated her as the woman with an iron nerve and a desperate purpose at heart. Mr. Snell picked Monday's confession to pieces and told in detail how every known circumstance brought out in the testimony corroborated the entire truth and wonderful accuracy of that remarkable story of the criminal conspiracy.

He detailed how the finding of the solid gold ring in the pawnshop, where it had been left by Monday, corroborated the latter's statement that Mrs. Sheedy gave him a gold ring. He had said in his confession that on the morning of the assault he had cut a little boy's hair in the house just east of the Sheedy place. When the lady who lived there testified she said that Monday had cut her grandson's hair the morning of the assault. On the evening of the fatal assault, Monday claims in the confession while he was waiting in the back yard to see the east window curtain go up, Mrs. Sheedy came out to the pump and got some water. Some time afterwards she came out and worked the pump again, but did not get any water and did it merely as a subterfuge. It was then that she talked to him. When Mrs. Sheedy testified before the coroner's jury, she, too, had said that she had gone out that evening to get a pitcher of water. He explained how Mrs. Sheedy's own testimony before the coroner as to the east window curtain, had substantiated the darkey's story, showing that Mrs. Sheedy had pulled down the curtains a short time before her husband went out. This would permit her, by pulling up the curtain, to signal Monday that he husband was coming out.

Mr. Snell then took up the testimony of the defense and touched up Mr. W. W. Carder., for the readiness and positiveness with which he had identified the fatal cane as his own, and compared it with his total inability to identify his own hand writing in the police register when it was introduced in relation to whether or not the patrol wagon went out that night.

NOT COMPLETE 5/24