WITNESSES UNAWARE:

New Zealand Graphic, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 25, 22 June 1907, Page 36

WITNESSES UNAWARE:

The Story of a Secret Crime

By

JAMES R. PERRY

w HEN Walter Chester was shot BA/ and instantly killed one mornB/B/ ing as he was entering his office f j the rumour ran over the town of Wentworth that *’ Bob Templeton had killed Walt Chester.*’ u I thought he’d get him some day,” would be the hearer’s instant comment. “ I guess ’twon’t surprise anybody,” would be the retort. But another rumour followed fast on the heels of the first. “ ’Twasn’t Bob Templeton that did it after all. Bob was down in his store when the shots were fired. They don’t know who did it.” ••’Twai Ed Cummings who shot him. Chester got him convicted for burglary three years ago, and he’s just out of the pen. He came straight to Wentworth to get revenge.” With such minute explicitness was the third rumour clothed. But when the facts became known a vague bewilderment fell upon the excited citizens. Told in straightforward fashion, it appeared that at about nine o’clock that Tuesday morning Walter Chester, the leading lawyer of the county, issued from the post-office, crossed the -street diagonally to the office entrance of Templeton Block, ascended to the second floor, and passed down the hallway to Room 11, occupied by him as an office. It further appeared that while in the act of unlocking his office door, or just after unlocking it, as he was about to enter, an unknown person fired several shots at him in rapid succession—some who heard the reports said four, others thought there were only three, while Peter Barrett, a dentist haviim an office next to Chester’s, asserted In* heard five shots. Two bullets took effect, one entering the left arm near the- shoulder, and another penetrating the heart. Both shots had been fired at Chester from behind. Peter Barrett and his assistant, Miss Bromley, rushed into the hallway and were the first to reach the murdered man. Barrett asserted that it was barely two seconds after the final shot before he was ati the dead man’s side, yet the hallway was apparently deserted. 'The murderer must have fled with surprising swiftness. Smoke from the weapon stilt hung in a thin clou* near (hester when Barrett reached him. Several ways of escape were open to the assa<-in. He might have fled down the front stairs, passing the door of Barrett’s office as he went, and thus escaped to the street. Or he might have descended a stairway and passed out by a rear exit into the alley behind the building. That he would take the first path was improbable, as it would lead him directly into the street where persons were constantly passing. The rear exit seemed the one he would most probaldy use. though it soon transpired that Brunetti, an Italian fruit vendor, was in tho alley at the time, not more than ten rods from the rear exit, and he saw no one coming from the building. There Mas a third way by which escape might have been made. On the side of the hallway opposite that used as offices was a large room originally designed as a dance and assembly hall. This part ot the building had never been finished, and for some years had been used by Templeton. the owner of the building, as a More room. Nearly opposite the door ot Barrett’s office, and at least t welve feet from the door of Chester’;* office, was a door opening into this unfinished room. This door was usually kept dosed, but

not locked. The murderer might have passed through this doorway into the unfinished dance-hall, and thence through one of the windows to the low roof of an adjoining shed. A drop of only eight or nine feet would have brought him to the ground. The townspeople were treated to another milder sensation within an hour after the knowledge of Chester’s murder first reached them. Templeton, who had listened calmly to the news of Chester's death, a little later had ascended the stairs to view the scene of the assassination. On the top step he had suddenly toppled over in a swoon and fallen backward down the stairs. He was picked up unconscious and carried home, where, upon examination, it was found that his left leg was broken, and that he had suffered internal injuries. The belief that Templeton had himself committed the act, at first almost unanimous, was soon dissipated, for no less than three witnesses asserted that the hardware merchant was in ms store at the instant the shots above were heard. Ono of these witnesses, a carpenter named Adams, was in conversation with Templeton when the shooting occurred. Adams stated that lie was looking at chisels, and Templeton had just stepped to the farther end of the show-case to get some larger ones to show him when the shots were heard. According to Adams, Templeton had turned a startled look on him and exclaimed, “What’s that?’’ Templeton’s clerk, Asa Harris, was waiting on a customer at the next showcase. This customer, a woman named Wallace, and the clerk both testified that Templeton was behind the chisel show-case when the shots Mere fired. They all agreed that it was impossible for Templeton to have tired the shots that killed Chester. Whether or.not he might have hired some one t.o do it was, of course, another question. That he had ample reason for M’ishing the attorney out of the way was common gossip. Two out of every three citizens who expressed an opinion said they didn’t blame Bob Templeton if he had shot Chester. But it is unnecessary to go into the causes of the growth of this powerful motive of Templeton's for desiring Chester’s death; it Mould open up a too unsavory subject. The two men had formerly been friends, and it Mas during that period that Chester had taken a five years’ lease of the office, Mhich accounted for his bring a tenant of Templeton Block. A horde of newspaper correspondents descended upon the town, each one a self-constituted sleuth bent on ferreting out the murderer. In addition to these amateur detectives, the local police under Chief Hanahan at once set to work on the case, and on Wednesday, the day after the shooting, a private detective from New’ York, named Higgins, appeared on the scene. The first belief of Chief Hanahan,like that of his fellow townsmen, was that Templeton had killed ( hester. but when there appeared indisputable evidence that the hardware merchant muis in his store at the time, he changed to the opinion that Ed Cummings, the ex-con-vict, had committed the crime.

It was believed that Cummings had a strong motive for killing Chester. Tn fart, it was known that three years before he bad threatened to ‘get even

some day’’ with the lawyer. While Cummings was a hard character, it was not generally thought that lie was guilty of the particular crime for which he bad been sent to the penitentiary. The evidence upon which Chester, then assistant state’s attorney, had secured his

conviction had been purely circumstantial, and if it was true that Cummings was innocent it would naturally make him all the more bitter against the man who had caused his conviction. The fact that Cummings had completed his

prison term and been discharged only a week before gave colour to the theory. The ex-convict had been seen around his old haunts in Wentworth since the previous Friday, but his exact whereabouts between eight and nine o'clock Tuesday morning was not clear. According to his own statement he left his boarding place a little past eight that morning and went up the west bank of Mill River to fish. The fish did not bite, and he returned empty-handed about eleven o’clock. A schoolboy named Fred Williams slated tiiat when or. his way to school at half-past eight he saw Cummings at the corner of Main and Elm streets. If the boy’s statement was true the ex-convict was within three squares of Templeton Block only twenty minutes before the shooting. Cummings, however, denied emphatically that he was there at that time. The evidence against him, flimsy as it was, seemed strong enough to the police to warrant his arrest. On Thursday one feature of the shooting that had . puzzled the poliie was cleared up. That four shots had been heard —five, according to Barrett’s version— was the testimony of several witnesses, yet evidence of only three bullets being fired had been found. Two of these had entered the body of Chester and a third had passed through the office door and imbedded itself in a heavy oak book-case. A rigid examination had failed to show where the fourth bullet had struck. This mystery was solved by Higgins, who dug the flattened bullet out of the book-case, and found a. second bullet behind it, showing that two of the shots had followed identically the same path. But while this discovery explained why four shots had been heard it threw no light upon the deeper, mystery of who did the shouting. At the end of a week that mystery seemed no nearer a solution than ever. The newspaper correspondents scattered to other fields, and the metropolitan dailies, that for two or three days had printed news of the affair under largo scare-heads, ceased to mention the matter. In the neighbouring town of Hamilton —a summer resort up in the Like country—two men were silting on the piazza of Wildwood Inn the following Tuesday —just a week after the shooting. Ono wore spectacles and had the indefinable

scholarly air of a college professor. It was Professor Hillman of the Urania

University, an astronomer whose nanio was known to tivo continents. The other was Milton Ransom, an artist. Both were guests at Wildwood Inn. “ By the way,” asked the artist, “what do you make of that shooting mystery over in Wentworth last week? When I read about it I told my wife that if anyone could probably think out a solution, Professor Hillman was the man. You see, professor, your friends have all heard of your successes as an amateur detective.”

The older man made a grimace of distaste, and after a moment’s silence said:' “ I haven’t heard about it. I was very busy this last week at th_e university, and hardly glanced at a paper. What was it ? ”

Ransom told him the circumstances as far as they had been revealed in the news dispatches. “It's only a dozen miles, or so, over to Wentworth; we might take the trolley and ride over,” he concluded. Anq that was how Profesor Hillman came to be engaged on the case. Accompanied by the artist, he visited the scene of the shooting, and carefully examined the building and its surroundings. The next day he came alone, and after interviews with Chief Hanrahan, the private detective Higgins, Barrett the dentist, and others, he made another close examination of the premises where the shooting occurred. It was after this examination that Hanahan. Higgins and several others gathered at 1 lie office of the murdered man in response to an invitation from the professor. He had made an important discovery, he told them. “It is. perhaps, nearly as much of a surprise to myself, gentlemen,”'said the professor, “as to you. that I' should have devoted any time to the solution of the mystery in this shooting affair. I am staying in Hamilton for a few weeks to get rested after an -arduous year in college, and when my friend Mr. Ransom mentioned, this case nothing was further from my intention than trying to discover who did the shooting. Mr. Ransom’s account of the case, however, awakened my interest, and interest was further stimulated by my visit here. So, almost before I Was aware of it. I found myself intensely curious to know who could have done the shooting and so quickly vanished into thin air. This element of mystery piqued my fancy, and I found myself considering this and that theory in an attempt to explain the puzzle. This, then, was my reason for working on the case without being requested to do so by anyone directly interested in the matter. So much by way of preface. “This question of motive in matters of crime is. as yon all know, one of prime importance. This particular case

was unique, in that prior to his establishing a flawless alibi, the opinion was almost unanimous among his fellow townsmen that Templeton did the shooting. That means that Templeton had a motive for desiring the death of Chester so strong that practically everyone in town knew of it. Without entering into the causes of this desire of Templeton’s, it is perfectly plain that lie had a strong motive for desiring the death of enemy. The mere fact that all his fellow citizens believed, until afterward disabused of the notion, that he had shot Chester, is proof of that. That the ex-convict Cummings had a motive for killing Chester is also clear; for ib seems that the instant it appeared that Templeton could not have done the shooting, the suspicion of the citizens was direct toward Cummings. That Chester had other enemies is doubtless true; but the enmity of these two men was so strong as to at once single them Out as the ones most likely to have done the shooting. Considering the matter, then, purely from the standpoint of motive. suspicion would rest first upon Templeton, second upon Cummings, and third upon this or that other man who Was known to have had differences with the lawyer.

..‘•Turning to an examination of the case as regards the first suspect, the question seems to be at once disposed of. Templeton was in his store at the precise instant that shots were fired. To suspect him would seem absolutely illogical. That he might have hired someone to do it was, of course, possible —even probable, you might surmise. As regards the second suspect, only one person, a schoolboy, seems to have seen Cummings in the vicinity the morning of the crime. I am tola that Cummings is well known here, and is is certainly remarkable that he could be in the vicinity and have been seen and recognised by only one person. You will Bay, perhaps, that he could have disguised himself, and thus escaped recognition. That is true. But if he wore a disguise it could hardly have been ha whom the schoolboy saw, as the boy does not claim that Cummings was dis-

guised. An ex-convict, bent on c nnmitting murder, would not be likely to come within three squares of the scene of the contemplated crime before assuming his disguise, provided he ha 1 one. So we must presume one of three things; That Cummings, undisguised, was seen by Williams, and no one else; or that he was disguised and Williams was mistaken in thinking he saw him; or that Cummings really was not in the vicinity and consequently was not collected with the crime.

“Regarding the question of suspecting some third enemy of Chester, the field widens, and suspicion might, perhaps, fall with equal weight—though lightly, withal —upon anyone of a dozen men entertaining dislikes for the attorney. “Considered from the viewpoint of motive, then, Templeton was the man upon whom suspicion would rest most heavily, whereas, considered from the viewpoint of circumstances he would be absolved from all suspicion. That these absolving circumstances were precisely as had been reported was one of the first things to feel assured of, and, therefore, I hunted up the carpenter who was purware merchant at the moment the shots were fired. Together we visited Templeton’s store, where Adams described the exact position of himself and the hardware mercant at the moment the shots wore heard. 'The show-case in which chisels are displayed is located not far from the front of the store. Between it and the show windows forming the front of the store, is one other show case, in which small articles, like wire picture-cord, picture-hangers, etc., are kept. It was at this counter where Templeton’s clerk, Asa Harris, was waiting on Mrs. Wallace. Adams was standing not more than a dozen feet from Harris and Mrs. Wallace. Just before the shots were heard Templeton, according to Adams’ statement, went to the other end of the show-case for some larger chisels. He was then, perhaps, eight feet from Adams and twenty feet from Harris and Mrs. Wallace. He was bending over a little, reaching for the chisels, Adams says, at the instant the shots were fired. Adams heard the shots distinctly

he says, noting particularly the rapidity with which the one report followed another. He h“ard at least four shots, he says. Templeton came hack to the end of the show case where Adams stood, remarking * Wonder what that was,’ or

‘What was that*’ Adams is not certain alxHit the exact words; but that was the substance of his remark. Mrs. Wallace says she happened to be glancing towards Templeton at the moment the shots were heard, and saw him behind the next counter precisely as described by Adams. Hanis was not looking at the exact instant the shots were heard, but glancing back an instant later he saw Templeton standing behind the show-case and heard him speak. He thinks he said. ‘ What was that noise?’ or words to that effect, but as he did not speak in a loud tone is not certain about the exact words. He says he notied nothing unusual in his employer’s appearance. though Adams states that Templeton seemed a trifle agitated ami that his voice was husky. “ I asked Adams to go behind the show case and indicate the position of Templeton during the shooting, as well as just before and afterward. 1 followed him by going through the same position ami found that as 1 stood behind the show-case, where Templeton had stood befoie the shooting. 1 could look through the large front windows and see the post-office entrance nearly opposite. Templeton, if he had happened to be looking, could have seen Chester come out of the Post Office and cross the street. Chester, as you know, was a large man, and his step would naturally be heavy. If Templeton had chanced to see Chester crossing the street, and then had listened for his step, he could have hoard him ascending the stairs and walk back to the door of his office. 1 know, because I made a test by asking Adams to go up the stairs and back to Chester’s office. Standing where Templeton stood I ould hear the carpenter’s tread on the stairs and in the hallway overhead. “ You may wonder what significance could be attached to this fact. How

could it point toward Templet on’< guilt? you may ask, and my answer would be that it would not necessarily point to it at all. If he saw Chester in the street and heard him go up to his office, and the instant his steps ceased heard several shots fired, then heard a body falling heavily, he might surmise that someone had shot his enemy. T his might account fur any agitation shown by him, making it uniivcc-.

sary to assume that he was in any way implicated in the shooting. On the other hand, it might have quite another significance. Assuming that he had hired an assassin to slay Chester those sounds would convey to him the knowledge that the plot had been executed. I confess that 1 had some such notion in the earlier stages of my investigations. T he strength of Templeton’s known motive for wishing Chester out of the way would not permit me to abandon the idea that he was in some way responsible for the shooting. “One circumstance that seined sir ju lar, if not significant, developed while I was in the hardware store. W hen 1 went to the end of the showcase w h re Templeton stood at the time the shots were heard, I looked for the large chisels that the merchant had ostensibly gone to get. 1 saw' none, and asked Harris if they had been moved since the morning of the shooting. He looked surprised and said they had not; chisels had never been kept under the counter at. that end of the show-case. If that were true, Templeton must, then, have gone there for some other purpose. Standing there, he was nearly under the spot where Chester was shot. Did this mean that he knew an attempt was to be made on the lawyer’s life that morning, and that he went back there in order to hear the more clearly what was transpiring <nt the floor over his head? “After examining th? hardware store T went upstairs, and hail an interview with Mr Barrett. Barrett told me he was positive that five shots were tired. His assistant. Miss Bromley, did not feel so confident about it. but she also thought she heard five shots. Evidence of only four shots had been found, how-

ever, leaving one of three theories open to the investigator; first, that Mr Barrett was mistaken, and only four shots had been fired: second, that on? of the five cartridges had been a blank and left no trace; and third, that five shots had actually been fired, and the course of the fifth bullet, in spite of rigid scrutiny of the apartments, had not yet been traced, 'rhe first and second theories obviously would be difficult of proof. The third, if true, could be proved in only one way—■

by a yet more rigid examination. I had already carefully examined the walls, floor ami ceiling adjacent to the spot where the shooting occurred, and discovered no fifth bullet. The discovery of Mr Higgins that two bullets had fol lowed tht* same course was known to me. Jf five bullets had actually been discharged. and only two had entered the body of Chester, as t li > autopsy showed, there were three to be yet accounted for. Now. if the most rigid examination failed to disclose but one bullet hole on the premises, the deduction would be that two other bullets had entered the hole made by the first. 1 say that would be the deduction -a deduction simple enough, however improbable the fact itself might appear. Had the one bullet hole in the book-case been fully’ probed? 1 did not know; but obviously it should be further examined, if only to prove that the idea of three bullets entering one identical spot was as chimerical as it seemed. 1 certainly did not expect to find a third bullet in that hole; but that one chance in ten million that it might be there must not be overlooked. So, with my pocket knife, .1 dug into the book-case, and lo! deeply buried, 1 found a third bullet. Doubtless the utter improbability of three bullets striking the same spot was what caused Mr Higgins to overlook this third one. It was deeply imbedded in the wood that it could not be seen when I began digging for it. “This discovery, as you will realise, furnished food for serious reflection. The book-case which the bullets entered, we must remember, stood at the opposite side of the lawyer's office and, therefore, must have been from twelve to fifteen feet from the muzzle of the weapon they issued from. The deflection of a hair's breadth in the aim would have caused a bullet at that distance to enter another spot. Steady’ indeed must have been the hand that could shoot a second bullet into the hole made by the first. Obviously bin h a feat could not be due to steadiness of aim under circumstances such as must have surrounded the assassin when firing, ami must, therefore, be set down to one of those singular chances -one of those strange coincidences- which investigators observe and marvel at every now and then. Upon that thcoiy. of course, had the fact of the two Indicts entering the one spot beta accounted for by Mr Higgins and others. “But when it comes to the problem of three lulle.s following <»n« unswerving path then must you not only discard the idea of a steady lulnd. hut you must also abandon that theory of chance, which I have just mentioned. There might hr one chance in ten thousand perhaps. thiU a sc< omV bullet would follow the course of the fir>»t. but hardly one chance in ten millions that a third bullet wot.ld follow the same path as the other two. chance so remote would safely bp a negligible quantity. Leaving out, then, the theory of chance, the discovery point - i plainly to one certain fact: the weapon must have been held rigidly in one um hanging position while those tlneo shots ware fired: and. therefore, it could not have been in human hands at the time. If not in human hands, where was it? and how could its discharge have been effected? To learn the approximate position of the weapon whin discharges! ought not to be diflicult: for it was e\ i I ml that at leas* one of the? bullets ami. therefore, all three, presumably had passed through the outer door of the cilice before entering the book-ca-e. I measured the distance from the bullet hole in the d« or to th;« floor and found it to b<» about forty-nine inches; the distance from the floor to the bullet-hole in the hookca-i 1 proved to be a fraction of an inch greater. That indicated that somewhere out in the hallway. at a height of approximately fortynine inches above the floor, the weapon had rested when discharged. The door to ( hosier’s office was unlocked, but not open when Mr. Ba nett found the body. The key was still in the keyhole, showing that < he-ter had just unlocked (he door; presumably l.r had not had time to open it before the fatal shut struck

him. If. then, the door was shut, a hue drawn from the bullet-hole in iho book-case to the bullet hole in the door, and extended into th* hallway, should show the previse linear position of the weajron. ( alcidating its position thus, it appeared that the weapon at the time of the shooting was held in a fixed position a trifle over four feet from the floor, and directly opposite the left panel of the doer —that is, the panel nearest the k?y-hile. If the weapon was held rigidly m one position whi’.e three of the live shots were being tired, presumably it was in the same fixed position while tn? other two were being fired. Would the facts bear out this supposition? Investigation showed that they would. The bullet that killed Chester entered his back at o height of about fifty-one inches from the floor, assuming that he was btaroing erect at the moment of impact. But the key in the lock shows that he was in the act of unlocking the door, ard therefore he would be bent over a little as he reached down to turn the key. This would bring the bullet hole in his back down to a height of about forty-nine inches above the floor. As a matter of fact, the course of the bullet in the body as traced at the autopsy showed that it followed a slightly upward path from the back toward the breast, which is the same as saying that it followed a level course if the body was bent alittle forward. It is true that the wound in the shoulder does not support the theory, except negatively. It is some fifty-six inches from the floor when measured with the body in an erect position. If, however, we assume the first shot fired was the one that killed Chester it is reasonable to presume that he had swung partly round and was in the act of falling when the second bullet struck him. Under such circumstances a wound, such as was made, would actually be inflicted. “We have thus made it clear that the weapon not only might have been, but most certainly must have been, in a rigid position, and that that position vertically and latitudinally, was easily aseeitainable. It remained only to learn its distance from the door through which the bullets passed. “ Mr. Barrett was in the hallway almost as soon as the last shot was fired: powder smoke could still be seen and smelt. Yet of the weapon itself there was no trace. How could a revolver rigidly fixed, be removed so quickly from sight? Obviously it was impossible. The conclusion then was that it was not in sight: indeed, that must be presumed in any event; for had it been in view' Chester himself would doubtless have seen it and avoided getting within its range. If not in sight before or after the shooting it could not have been in the hallway; it must have been in the room beyond. But if in the room beyond the* bullets must first have passed through the opposit wall of the hallwav. There was no bullet-hole to mark their transit, however. That side of the hallway, as you know, is still unfinished. It is an. unpainted beard wall. In one spot was a spatter of brown glue, as if it had been thrown against the wall when soft, and had run down a. little distance before hardening. At first thought there seeded nothing particularly remarkable in its being there. It might have been there since the days when the building was under construction, thrown there, perhaps, by a careless or sportive workman. On the other hand, it might hive been there less than a week. The remarkable thing about it was the fact that it was at the exact spot where my hypothetical weapon should have been. With my. knife 1 pri<*d of! the caked glue, and under it found an auger hole about one-third of an inch in diameter, Going round into the store-room beyond 1 found a lotof screen-doors placed against the wall next the hallway. Removing them, I found nailed firmly to one of the upright beams a five-cylindered revolver with its muzzle pointing through the auger hole. Cunningly attached to the revolver was an electric wire running to and disappearing through the floor. Descending to the store below’, I di.-covored where the wire came down, ami tracing its c’everly covered course, J found it was connected with a concealed key under the counter where Templeton was searching for mythical chisels when the shots above were heard. Templeton, as we know, was an electrician before he entered the hardware business, and turning his knowledge to account, he thus plotted against the life of his enemy, working patiently for months, perhap-, before

putting his plan int<f execution. _ On that Tuesday morning everything war? ready. He had calculated to a nicety the position Chester would be in as he licnt to unlock his office door, and had aimed the revolver accordingly. With his clerk and customers in the store with him he believed he could prove an unassailable alibi. Listening for .Chester's well-known step after seeing him cross the street, he heard him ascend the stairs and walk back to his office. The footsteps ceased, and he knew’ Chester must be unlocking the door. Then he pressed the key under the counter live times, to make sure. Once would have sufficed, and his secret never been revealed, perhaps; but he pressed it live times, and so left a record that could be traced step by step towards unravelling the mysierj. Of course, he had counted on being able to remove the revolver before it should be discovered, and so destroy forever all trace of the way the crime was committed. His physical weakness and its resulting accident, however, prevented that. “In order that prying eyes niiglTt not at once detect the auger hole and what was behind it, he must early that morning have put the soft glue on the wall. He knew it would slowly harden, ami that a hole made by the passing bullets would close again and so concert! the fact of their passage. ”He plotted cunningly, and then spoiled it by this timidity at last—his fear of only wounding and not killing his hated foe.

“Thus,” concluded the professor, “doos this case present the curious spectacle of persons witnessing unaware the committing of murder—murder committed so cunningly that the very witnesses of the crime were the persons relied upon by the murderer to establish an alibi that should prove him innocent.”