The Kansas herald of freedom. [volume] (Wakarusa, Kan. Territory) 1854-1860, 1858-07-03
Mr.. Hutchinson followed, presenting a
general outline of the case and of the law
Of homicide and self-defence.

Oh nomlclde ana seif-de5ence.
The arguments of Col Young and the
conclusion by District Attorney Stafford,
we had not the pleasure of hearing, but
learn that they were able and equal tothe
occasion.
In conclusion, We have, in this article,
given indetail, every important point inthe
testimony of the defence, scarcely allud-
ing to the opposing testimony for the pros
ecution. We do this, that it may clearly
appear that We are dealing fairly with
Gen. Lane. The whole case of the prose-
cution, if stated in full, would show this
state of facts Gen. Lane was boarder
with person who had rented Of him, but
having. so far as any proof shows, no right
to lease, the tenant moves out, leaving
Lane in possession Of the house. There
is well adjoining the house, which Jen-
kins had used constantly, for more than
| two years, and it was on the claim of J en-
kins. No person had disputed the right
curing this long interval. When Lane
got possession of the house, he commenced
his aggressions upon the rights of jenkins.
He first demanded that jenkins should
get the water by a circuitous route, to the
inconvenience of both Jenkins and Lane.
To crafty his malign:ty to the deceased,
he was even willing, perhaps, to put him.
self to inconvenience,-if this were not,
as it probably was, the merest pretext
to cover the purposes of his murderous
heart. He nails up the gate, which, if
the proof had been admitted, would have
been shown to have been built by Gaius
Jenkins himself, and which, in the most
favorable case for Lane that can be sup
posed, being gate between the field of
jenkins and the yard, was the common
property of Lane and jenkins. When
Lane nailed it up to prevent sick family
from obtaining water, he committed an
inexeusable outrage upon the rights of
hospitality and the rights of Gaius Jen-
kins. This, and carrying out the same
object by locking the well, were the
original cause of this terrible deed. And
what will our readers say, when, with an
unparalleled assurance, Lane comes in
court, and pleads that he acted in self
defence? Is not this superadding insult
to murder? He was the aggressor he was
the trespasser, and jenkins was the party
acting, step by step, in this transaction, on
the defensive. Let not the public, or our
readers, be deceived by the clouds of false
rumors in this case. There is not, in this
evidence, so far as we have examined it,
one item rejecting on the honorable and
forbearing conduct of Jenkins. 1t were
strange if it should be otherwise. Jen-
kins was well known, and, by the unani-
nous voice of this public, he was a most
truthful, kind, generous and heightened
gentleman, the very soul of honor, and
morally incapable-we repeat it, MORALLY
INcAPABLE-of deliberately infringing on
the rights of his neighbor. We have
given candid hearing to both sides, and
we have before us all the important facts
of the evidence, and do now deliberately
repeat what we have before said, that,
taking into our Judgment the whole con-
text of facts, this was a deliberate, pre-
meditated, malicious homicide, without
excuse and without justification.
LANE DIsCHARGED.-We learn that the
three justices have, after considerable dis
cussion, agreed to discharge Lane. This
inexcusahle outrage upon the moral sense
of every person in this community, and
upon the Laws of the Land, was not en-
tirely expected, though it has been appre-
hended from the pertinacious, prejudiced,
one-sided course of two of the justices
sitting in the cause.
No Indifferent spectator. as we have
been informed, could have listened for a
considerable time at this trial, and left the
room without the reflection that there
were two parties litigant, and he would
have been extremely likely to confound
these justices with the defendants coun-
sci. In their rulings, as We have good
authority for believing, they have heaped
contempt upon common sense and law,
set at defiance the authorities applicable
to the cases of evidence arising before
them, with the same nonehalanee as they
would slice an orange-charged their
rulings to suit the occasion, and, at every
step of progress, manifested an answering
bias in favor of the defendant This has
been matter Of public observation and pub
lie remark.
1t NAV be true that a few individuals
oppose Lane, for personal motives; yet,
when we reflect that the justices have
only to find probable case of some offence
having been committed, and they might,
if they saw fit, either commit him for
murder or recognize him to the District
Court, in any of the degrees of manslaugh-
teri, the public will see the true charac
ter of this horrible outrage which these
4
men, whom they have elected as conser-
yators of the peace, have done this COM
munity and to Justice. They have most
emphatieally converted themselves into
the perUertors and enemies of the peace,
and have, by their judgment, offered, in
the most offensive and public manner. a
premium upon murder. They have avow-
/