17
· 127 · 17 Miss Bond, her mother, sister, and father arrived this morning from Taylorville . . . . Miss Bond was closely veiled and leaned on the arm of her father. —Chicago Tribune, December 11, 1883 monday, December 10, 1883. it was a mild winter day by all standards as the victim and her family moved swiftly and discreetly through the throngs of train passengers in Hillsboro. They headed straight for their private lodging, where emma was tucked safely away. Her father then reappeared and was immediately overtaken by reporters. At first, he was reticent to answer their barrage of questions, but to placate the journalists, he acknowledged that his daughter was doing well and was ready to testify. Then he spoke of a recent, troubling occurrence at his home: “it appears that last saturday night about ten o’clock, miss Bond was awakened by a noise at her window. she screamed to her father, who was sleeping in an adjoining room and he came at once and found her in a great state of excitement and fear. An examination of the window showed that someone had been trying to get into her room. The slats in the blinds had been cut and tracks were seen on the ground outside.”1 With the mild December temperatures, emma’s window might have been left ajar; but cutting the blinds seemed strange. Assuming this was another attempt to silence the victim, whoever had sought to accomplish it had failed miserably. Those lucky enough to squeeze into the Hillsboro courtroom that monday were met with disappointment. some of the key players were absent, forcing Judge Phillips to declare a one-day postponement. Whatever their reasons, weather was not one of them, as the lightest of winds and clearest of skies graced the day. The Tribune blamed the delay on “the non-arrival” of the two most experienced attorneys involved—Judge Vandeveer of the prosecution and Judge Thornton of the defense. Former governor of illinois John m. Palmer—a late addition to the prosecution team—was also a no-show, although he was now expected to withdraw from the case. 128 · nameless indignities There had been some other changes to the state’s team since the hearing. montgomery County’s state’s attorney, Amos miller, would join Drennan, Vandeveer, and Taylor while esteemed former judge Ben edwards would be taking Governor Palmer’s place. And for good measure, another private attorney from Hillsboro, G. W. Paisley, would assist them. The defense team had also been expanded. Thornton, mcCaskill, and mcBride, who had worked so well together at the hearing, would share their table with two more private attorneys— a mr. Truitt and a mr. steven. The nation’s editors were sorely disappointed as well—expecting, as they were, some sensational news to splash across their front pages on Tuesday. Their readers yearned for particulars—anything that would make up for the recent drought in the Bond saga. But because of monday’s unexpected hiatus, journalists were forced to tap into their more creative sides. Accordingly, they poked around Hillsboro, seeking comments from any of the main participants. Not surprisingly, the families involved were not cooperative. one correspondent tried to downplay the touchy situation: “The montgomery brothers had a thing or two to say to the journalists. John C. montgomery was accompanied by his wife and child. Pettus’s mother came with him. They say they will be acquitted and that there is nothing to the case. John C. montgomery’s brother expressed a general contempt for newspapers and reporters.”2 The pursued were plainly fed up with their pursuers. in the absence of anything better, the press offered suppositions: “it is thought that the defense will not be satisfied with proving an alibi, but will attempt to smirch the young lady’s character. . . . Just what effect this line of defense will have is not known, but some think it very indiscreet on the part of the accused.”3 in a society that still relied on the printed word to spark its imperfect imagination , good descriptions were paramount. early on, John C. montgomery had been portrayed in the simplest of terms as “a man of medium height, probably weighs 160, wears chin whiskers, and has the general appearance of a farmer.”4 Now, with the trial underway, one writer offered his readers a more satisfying depiction: “There is nothing very striking in the appearance of John montgomery . . . . A detective would hardly take him to be a criminal. His features...
OR
Buy This Book in Print