A Body in the Ashes at Rolling Bay

To the Editor: Under the title of "Foul Crime Revealed" in the Post-Intelligencer of January 10, there is such a misstatement of facts in the case that, as one who was present while the inquest was being held, I wish to give more of the truth, so as to make the chances of identification of the poor man more certain.

In the first place, instead of Eagle Harbor, the scene of the murder was at the head of Rolling Bay. As to the tale of "the odor being such as to lead one to investigate the cause," I was within two feet of the body, and no odor such as would be found on one so far gone as was represented was perceptible. Also that "the body was badly burned all over the right side" is a mistake. The right arm was burned to the elbow, and the left to the wrist; the right thigh was badly roasted from the hip to the knee on the outside of the leg. Otherwise there was hardly a mark of fire on the body, only that the clothes had been burned so that the pockets were gone.

The story that "the shoes were congress shoes, and on his feet" at the time of the inquest is all a mistake, as they were lace shoes about number 7, and were tied together by the strings and hanging overhead on the west side of the shack on a beam which ran across the middle. That the feet had been gnawed off by animals and birds was another mistake, as there was no sign of anything of the kind, except on the right foot from the instep to the little toe the rats had gnawed the skin off so that the tendons were showing. This fact of itself disproves the story of the shoes being on the feet; otherwise the shoes would have shown the marks left by the rats.

His hat was a new soft black felt, size about 7 1-8 or 7 1-4, made in Chicago, with two cards with the maker's name and address doubled and placed inside the sweat leather, showing that the hat had evidently been a size too large. The hat was found hanging on a peg on the east side of the shack. Again, the story that "the whole head was far gone with decay" was a mistake, as it was not even discolored (except by blood) only a little around the right eye, close to where the bullet entered at the temple.

Another means of identification which was not given is that there was the remains of a barred flannel chest-protector found tied round his neck with a white cord or tape. As to his height being "5 feet 9 inches," I don't think he was a bit over 5 feet 6 inches in height, or that he weighed any over 140 pounds, judging by the size of his legs and body, which was stark naked, or nearly so, only a vestige of clothing remaining on the left leg below the knee, as the coroner's jury had stripped the body to look for papers or other means of identification.

Now as to the theory that he had been murdered at some other point and brought into the shack to be disposed of in such a manner. It does not look at all reasonable. As the position of the arms and legs would indicate, the body had lain till cold before being taken there. I will give you my theory of the whole matter, as well as that of Mr. Nathan Bucklin, sheriff-elect of Kitsap county, who was with me at the time. The unfortunate man had one or more companions, and had stopped in the little house to stay over night, and had made a fire to warm by. There was a plank alongside the fire, which had evidently been used to sit on. Either this man had money or other valuables, and was killed for it; or the men had liquor among them and had got into an altercation, and the shooting was the result; that the killing had been done right where the body was found, and he had fallen alongside and partly into the fire, and, being dead when he fell, could make no effort to get out of the fire. Everything indicated that the fire had been made there on purpose to camp by, and not for the destruction of the body, for if such had been the purpose of the murderers, they could more certainly have accomplished it by placing the body in the old dwelling, which had quite a large amount of hay in it, and then setting fire to it, as any one capable of murder would not hesitate at arson as well.

That the body had been there three or four weeks I think a mistake, as proven by the condition of the body. Any one who has been in the army and on a battlefield would testify that the first stage of decomposition is the gas bubbling out of the mouth, which sign was absent entirely in this case. Besides, after decay sets in, the face becomes badly discolored, purple to black being the color at that stage.

Now the coroner having the corpse buried without an autopsy or anything more than a very superficial examination as to the cause of death is in itself a very careless way for a public official to do his duty. Besides, there was a camera in Port Blakeley and a photograph could have been taken as another means of identification.

I don't think Mr. Kimpell, who found the body first, was present to be sworn as to the facts in the case, at least not while I was there. All I have said can be verified by Bucklin and others, if necessary.

Mr. Charles Peters, engineer of the steamer Alta, went to Port Blakeley on New Year's day on horseback. On the road ahead of him, at the head of the harbor, he saw two men dodge into the brush till he passed. On his return he met them south of the McDonald ranch. They inquired the way to Port Blakeley. He says they were hard-looking citizens, and that he would be afraid to meet them in the dark on a lonely road.

I don't think the murder dated back any longer time than about New Year's day, as the condition of the body was such as to disprove a very much longer time, the coroner's idea to the contrary notwithstanding.