The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1858-07-01
FROM KANSAS.


They are having a preliminary trial, or ex'
animation, of Gen. Lane, in Lawrence, Kansas,
ust now, for the murder of Col. Gaius jenkins,
the particulars of which must still be fresh in
public remembrance. The general impression
is, that Lane will be acquitted. A correspond
ent of the St. Louis Democrat, writing from
the court room, June 18th, says
"The room in which the hearing was held
was thronged with an anxious crowd of the
friends of Jenkins and Lane. There were FIVE
lawyers employed on both sides. Gen. Lane
was represented by Col. Samuel A. Young. of
Independence, Mo-. James Christian, of Law
renee; -, and Thomas Ewing, ir, of
Leavenworth and John Hutchinson, of Law.
renee.
"The counsel on the part of the prosecution
we're, Mr.. Coe, Mr.. Collamer. (Iate of Boston,
s. N. Wood of Lawrence, Ex-Secretary Stan.
ton, and Mr.. Stafford, prosecuting attorney.
"This preliminary ex animation will probably
friends of Lane, that this will be the last of the
affair that he may be acquitted at once, with.
out having to appear in higher court. The
friends of Jenkins, on the other hand, have
expressed their determination to have Lane re-
arrested in the event of an acquittal now. All
parties, however, seem to have perfect conf
dence in the court of magistrates"
The testimony taken in the case is very volu-
minous-but we do not see that anything is
elected that was not already known. In the
course of the proceedings, we get now and then
an incident graphically illustrative of life in
Kansas, and the refinement characteristic of the
Kansas bar:
witness. told Mr. Jenkins Ia not work
that day-the day of his death-and he said
very we'll after breakfast, took the pail, and
started after more water; | found the we'll I'm.
licked, and drew two pals of water; this was
between seven and eight o'clock after l drew
the water-as was going out of the pate-I
heard some one hail me- set down the pals.
and looked around; saw it was Gen. Lane |:
he said:
IF you come in this yard again, III shoot
you, you id scoundrel
" ssid-'The hell you wll'
. He repeated the same words over again.
told him to shoot and be d-d!'
" This is all the conversation that occurred
Question. Do you know who made that
CATER
ANSWER. Yee.
Mr.. Thomas Ewing, jr., objected. The ques-
ton as to who made the gate had no connec-
ton with homicide or motives of either party.
Mr.. Stanton said that the question of the
ownership of the property had good deal to
do with the homicide. He proposed to show
that the property belonged to Jenkins that he
built and rented the house, and Lane got into
the house through Jenkins's tenant.
Mr.. Ewing repeated that the court had no
right to inquire into the title.
Mr.. Coe said that the title to the claim was
not in question but it was pertinent to know
who owned the improvements on it, as it had q
very material bearing on the case.
"Mr. Ewing said that such course ofinquiry
would inevitably result in bringing up the whole
question as to the title to the claim for, if they
introduced evidence to show that Jenkins built
this gate and laid this fence, he would introduce
evidence to show that the farm was Lanes.
"Mr Stanton replied. The prosecution did
not propose to inquire into the title 10 justify
Jenkins, if he did wrong but he insisted that
everything that tends to exasperate the feelings
of party was pertinent in the case. Such eVi.
dence would render the offence Of either or
both parties, as the case might be, more or less