MAXWELL IN SAN FRANCISCO.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1396, 24 September 1885, Page 1

MAXWELL IN SAN FRANCISCO.

In the New York World’s report of an interview with Frank Schlesinger, Preller’a cousin, living at Brook street in that city, this individual pronounced the Philadelphia despatch “a preposterous lie.” “Preller,” he said, “ was insured for only £IOOO sterling in a London Life insuiance Company, and the money has been paid t© his relatives. It is hardly likely that that would have been paid had proofs not been received that the dead man was really Preller. The body was seen by intimate friends and fully identified, they mourned for him as dead, and everyone who knew Preller in life is firmly convinced he is dead.” Further ghastly facts are disclosed by the authorities that Preller was not dead when his murderer placed him in the trunk. Congestion of the brain and the condition of the larynx, which indicates strangulation, were shown. The theory of the prosecution is that Preller, being of fine physique, strong and sound limb, resisted the effect of chloroform to such an extent that Maxwell was compelled to choke him to death. That, too, after he had placed his victim in the trunk. All sorts of stories are afloat about Maxwell and his crime. Preller’s body was exhumed on August 16th in a good state of preservation and will be produced in Court. Maxwell arrived in St. Louis on August 16th. His trial will take place in October. He appears to be perfectly indifferent to his fate. R. G. Rodgers, of Philadelphia, the man who affirms he saw Preller last May, still adheres to his statement, Ha says that he will go to St. Louis and swear the man calling himself Arthur C. Preller, whom he met at the Continental Hotel last March, and the man who denies that his name is Preller are one and the same person. From New York comes the news that one of Preller’a relatives was Richard Power of 97, Glinton Place, With him lived James Taylor, who went to St. Louis in April last and saw the body found in the trunk. He reported it was certainly Preller’s. What convinced him, he said, was the peculiar scar on the fore-finger of Preller’s right hand. Taylor had been intimately acquainted with Preller for many years, and ho knew the story of the scar.