y expressed it, to
disentangle the actual facts of the case from the web of casuistry that
has been woven around them.
"Those facts are of extreme simplicity. A safe has been opened and
property of great value abstracted from it. It has been opened by means
of false keys. Now there are two men who have, from time to time, had
possession of the true keys, and thus had the opportunity of making
copies of them. When the safe is opened by its rightful owner, the
property is gone, and there is found the print of the thumb of one of
these two men. That thumb-print was not there when the safe was closed.
The man whose thumb-print is found is a left-handed man; the print is
the print of a left thumb. It would seem, gentlemen, as if the
conclusion were so obvious that no sane person could be found to contest
it; and I submit that the conclusion which any sane person would arrive
at--the only possible conclusion--is, that the person whose thumb-print
was found in the safe is the person who stole the property from the
safe. But the thumb-print was, admittedly, that of the prisoner at the
bar, and therefore the prisoner at the bar is the person who stole the
diamonds from the safe.
"It is true that certain fantastic attempts have been made to explain
away these obvious facts. Certain far-fetched scientific theories have
been propounded and an exhibition of legerdemain has taken place which,
I venture to think, would have been more appropriate to some place of
public entertainment than to a court of justice. That exhibition has, no
doubt, afforded you considerable amusement. It has furnished a pleasing
relaxation from the serious business of the court. It has even been
instructive, as showing to what extent it is possible for plain facts to
be perverted by misdirected ingenuity. But unless you are prepared to
consider this crime as an elaborate hoax--as a practical joke carried
out by a facetious criminal of extraordinary knowledge, skill and
general attainments--you must, after all, come to the only conclusion
that the facts justify: that the safe was opened and the property
abstracted by the prisoner. Accordingly, gentlemen, I ask you, having
regard to your important position as the guardians of the well-being and
security of your fellow-citizens, to give your verdict in accordance
with the evidence, as you have solemnly sworn to do; which verdict, I
submit, can be no other than that the prisoner is guilty of the crime
with wh
|