JOHN ELLER,

    Metropolitan Opera Co., Chicago, Ill.

From this letter it was fairly inferable that although the defendant might be innocent of the precise crime with which he was charged, he was, nevertheless, upon his own evidence, guilty of having “faked” a cheap Nicholas violin into a Strad., and of having offered it for sale for the exorbitant price of five thousand dollars.  This luckless piece of evidence undoubtedly influenced the jury to convict him.

It will be recalled that ten witnesses for the prosecution had sworn that the violin offered in evidence at the trial was not the one produced in the police court, as against the defendant’s five who asserted that it was.

The testimony was all highly technical and confusing, and the jury probably relied more upon their general impressions of the credibility of the witnesses than upon anything else.  It is likely that most of the testimony, on both sides, in regard to the identity of the violin was honestly given, for the question was one upon which a genuine divergence of opinion was easily possible.

Eller’s letter from Chicago so affected the jury that they disregarded his testimony and reverted to that of August Gemunder, to whose evidence attention has already been called, and who swore that it was “The Duke of Cambridge” which Flechter had tried to sell to Durden.  Alas for the fallibility of even the most honest of witnesses!

The case was ably argued by both sides, and every phase of this curious tangle of evidence given its due consideration.  The defense very properly laid stress upon the fact that it would have been a ridiculous performance for Flechter to write the “Cave Dweller” letter and state therein that he was “a violin dealer or maker,” thus pointing, unmistakably, to himself, and to further state that for one in his position to dispose of it would be difficult and dangerous.  The only explanation for the “Cave Dweller” letter which they could offer, however, was that some one interested in procuring Flechter’s downfall had caused it to be sent for that purpose.  This might either be a business rival or some one connected with the prosecution.

While Palmer was summing up for the defense he noticed Assistant District Attorney Allen smiling and dramatically turning upon him, he shouted:  “This is no laughing matter, Colonel Allen.  It is a very serious matter whether this man is to be allowed to-night to go home and kiss his little ones, or whether he is to be cast into jail because you used your brains to concoct a theory against him.”

Another consideration, which seemed deserving of weight, was that if Flechter did steal “The Duke of Cambridge” it would have been a piece of incredible folly and carelessness upon his part to leave it in such an exposed place as the safe of his store, where it could be found by the police or shown by the office-boy to any one who called.