The Portland gazette. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1818-1824, 1823-05-13

hlnd on lis shoulder The ltlnlkerChicf was
then hanging loose about Coles neck. 1t would
he question for them whether the loosening
had not occurred during the absence of DIM
ming. The handkerchcfmu have been pulled
by one or the other Of tire two combatants.
There was no evidence Of Coles ever disccntln-
uing his original hold. The handkerchief was
wound three times round the neck. Dr. Sntth
had described the manner. On pulling it would
not render, aud whatever it gained II held and
was found buried in the neck. 1t was e@dent
! this must have been effected with great force aud
I violence, which must have been employed by
! Cole or Coombs, and exerted with very consider
/ able strength whether by the deceased or the
prisoner, the Jury was TO determine. An l0gcp-
ions suppostion had been suggested and argued
| by the prisoners counsel 10 sIeW how ID might
have been done by the deceased himself The
Jury could Judge OF IFS possibility, ard OF It's prob
ability. Was it at all probable Would the
deceased have been able TO use the force neces-
sary to be used according to the testimony Of
DIR. Smith Was il conceivable that he would
have continued ID apply the augmented force,
feeling the increasing structure Would he not
have endeavoured to effect it by single and
conyulsive effort Would not such jerk have
broken the handkerchief? If, upon the other
hand, it had been the object Of Cole, to produce
! the stranrulation. would not the slower and more
/ pro,racted mode have been likely TO have been
| employed ? II this was not done by the deceased
il was impossible 70 avoid the conclusion that II
must have been by the prisoner. lt was argued
that the deceased could not have sustained hlm-
SELF more than short moment after the hand-
kerchef had been drawn tight around the neck
But it might be supposed that it was gradually
drawn tighter and tighter, holding as II gained,
until he finally choked, sailed away and fell.
This particular violence might have been eXer-
csed upon him during Dunning's absence, and
the crisis occurred near the instant Of his re-
turn. All these circumstances were 10 be con-
sidered by the Jury who were 20 draw their own
conclusions and form their Own final judgment.
If thew were satisfied that the act was by the
hand Of Cole, it was their duty to convict. a
reasonable doubt on their minds was to operate
to his discharge.
The jury rendered verdict of guilty. lie
was afterwards sentenced to six months solitary
Imprisonment and four years hard labour.
The following persons were also convicted and
sentenced;
Nathaniel Harding, for assaultiDg female,
&c. Plead guilty. Fined 500 and costs.
H1Uinne Mason and John UfLtioms-tirst in
dctment, for stealing clothing from dwelling
house, sc. second, tor stealing IRON the store
Of Messrs. Princes. They plead not guilty. Sem
fenced on the first charge to months solitary
imprisonment, aud one year hard labor; on the
second to three months solitary imprisonment
and four years hard labcr-to be executed after
the first sentence.
.John Porers FOR larceny from a dwelling
house. He plead not guilty; but was convicted,
and sentenced TO tire months solitary impris-
onment, and six months hard Iabour.
H1Liiaa Corners, for larceny in dwelling
house lie plead guilty, and was sentenced to
three months solitary Imprisonment and SIX
months hard labor.
JohH Parker, for larceny from shop. Sen
fenced t. three months solitary Imprisonment,
and Six months hard labor
John Hodgkins, for larceny in dwelling
house Plead guilty. Sentenced TO three months
solitary Imprisonment and six months hard labor.