New-York daily tribune., 1858-07-08
Ntwglork DAILY Gribn,te
KANSAS.
,,,, uou,cIDE AT LAWRENCE.

LAWRENCE, June -, 1870.
x,..,, xou an elaborate and impartial report Of
- Ca, Lane. So far the evidence ID 80 con-
ne ~ a N minute particulars and prominent
"'s,, ,v,o,,is of the arguments of the counsel
:, "a. i. peoesssry 10 proper comprehension
e., Lang ,peeches-perhsps eight-~in be de-
go. the verdict of the Court Is pronounced
OF Stanton and Coe the part OF the
'-s,;on and Of Col. Young and Thos. l. Sing, Jr,
.,e defense. will cover the entire field OF law ana
...,;nopv: and, therefore, both in Jus'ce 70 tne
suorV Of the deceased and to the charactef OF Ine
n,,sn.r will send you brief abstract OF the sPseches
Of these gentlemen. +.
Toa.v Saturday, Mr.. STATION opened the case for
IN. p,esecutoa In Q speech OF consl1ersDie aohIy'
sa.rscterized by an impariaty and gentle can
dor rarely found in prosecuting counsel hs anay''
ef evidence was rather imperfect as to msterS oil oo
dst. yet he used the salient points oi te caS' WIN
t,lersble ,kin, while his legal Argument was iui'y
vsrtby Of his high reputation as lawyer.
Mr.. stanton, after some preliminary remarks, pro
tested sgsinst that decision OF the Cou'. ny "HON
La sv;dsnce as to the ownership of the house Lane
,n The fepce gate and well, was ruled out as r
,seyapt especiay after IT had permt,ed the uslense
IA move posse OF the pTemses -h Whc1 oecsoh
Tie full merits OF the prosecution cannot come before
this tIlbunsl OF the puDllc. -, ;,
T, 20 admitted that In consequence Of the dispute,
there were spgry feelings existing between Lane ana
J.Dkns 1t in evidence, that Lane stated 10 Juoge
Nmith an unimpeach8ble witness, that Lane hau
ttr ateped 70 take the life OF jenkins week Del)r
the homicide if he came again on the promises
70 get water while 1t il also IN proof tns Jenkins
mttnd,d 10 have water at all hazards-peacefully II
he could forcibly if he must-aDd tnat this inentlon
came to the ears Of Lane. The threat stated BY
NicbOls that jenkins would force Lane on MS chln,
aead OF alive even true B not tes tim0ny as IL was
not communicated 10 Lane tiii alter tne nomoioe.
"A q hon
an both sides ON the part of Lane only there are as
tipet snd pnequvocal threats OF shooting IL rs eV-
dent that JeDkJs had no other purpose out 10 oota
water and tba. Lane said distinctly that ne Wouid
,hnot him il be came for water. Mr.. Stanton then
alluded 70 the alteration between M jenkins ana
MIS- Lane Some harsh words passed, but nothng W
hastily i'll feeling being held as jenkins had desisteu
1,sm obtaining water when requested to do so by
Nrs Lane until her husband was present, quietly,
peaceably, honorebly and freely, a. any man OF
proper sentiments would have done III the Preu''
is4, This transaction is important in connec-
tiop with the killing becauee " SHOWS Tue haiu
Of circumstances upon which the mnd OF Lane
evidet tly dwet because he has spoken OF as one Oh
the eiIcumst ances that he thought woud palIae OF
Justify his conduct. The legal Inference Is iha II was
The tcundation Of grudge; aoircunstsnce calculated
to show malice but gathering force and Increasing I'LL
he took the life of jenkins. One or two other CIR uu-
stances deserve note tending 70 show the defend.
ants state Of mind. He borrowed gun and procured
ammunition in such small quantities that the mer-
chants did not charge him for 1t. Evidently therefore,
NOT for an ordinary emergency bat for particular
occasion The fact that there was only enough tor
two or three loads was evidence OF premedltstea
purpose of occasion foreseen, antcpated ON which
there would be the necessity for perhaps but single
lesd Of powder and shot. Ar. Stanton maintained
that the threat made TO Green the morning OF the
day on which jenkins was shot (that IT he returned
again he would shoot him calculated 10 elucdate
Abe settled feeling of hatred that existed In the bosom
Of defendant toward jenkins. THESE crcunstsnoes
the threat to Smith, the borrowed gun! Tue Smhii
quantity OF ammunition, the threat W oIeuu, h;
y IA. hv i IanA
lady-were calculated, the counsel thougnl W BLU"
mahce Af0rethOughf. 49,. ,r rI:.
TIE counseI proceeded TO vindicate Mr.. jenkins
from spy other intention than TO obtain water IL was
IN evidence that JeDkne claimed the house, the gate
the fence the WE'LL that he had obtained water tnere
uhdstuIbed for two years. that the spring was unie
far use by rains which must have caused an abundance
of water in Lanes we'll and that the nelgh0ors were
permitted to use il. Jenknss act, therefore, was not
ospricious. designed to disturb or incommode Lane
otner neghbOTs were using the well al tne ume' ana
Jsrhirss family were in absolute need OF II.
Jenkins then (said Mr.. StantoD). went for water ~
avell which be clsimed az HE Own through gate
vbieh he claimed as his oTn through q fence wn,cn
he claimed ss his owp and which actually surrounded
his swn premises and in the prosecution OF this pnr-
pose was deliberately shot.
The coutsel then argued from the evidence that
Jslkns cid not anticipate any difficulty; his careless
se,s in taking poor weapon and imperfectly Rad
ing it was evidence Of that fact and co. also, was his
statement 10 Green that he took his AK solely Tor the
purpose of effecting entrance and If he took 1t
into the yard at a-Hhch is not material TO tue case
of breaking open the well; that no sane msn would
have chosen such an implement 10 attack an armed
enemy WITH jenkins went partially armed TO protect
his rttainer-whose life had been threatened; to hsVe
water at all hazards
A material point was that Lane came out unarmed
before jenkins entered the yardretreated to place
Of safety and then deliberately returned with deadly
weapon. All the witnesses agree on that point.
Jtwss the next most material point to determine
fhe position Of the parties IN the yard Although the
n "
Of his house until his antagonist had crossed tue
theshhold sti he would not ipslst on that point ne
would say that Lane was justified II there was any
evidence TO show, or If he could have had reasonable
gIsu0d for supposipg that jenkins was advancing to
his Aonse. But there no scnhlla Of evidence to
show that his purpose was other than 10 go TO tue
vel, lie was shot at a distance variousy estimated
At rem 25 TO A. feet-in path which leads both TO
the heuse and WELL and before he came TO the fork
which leads to the well Tnst jenkins was deter
mined to have water at the cost Ct resistance to
opposition to the death he admitted; but the theory
that he intended TO invade Lanes house was clearly
aegstiyed by the evidence. Believing las Jenkins
die) thst tie well was bis, he jus hed III neces
ssryl in asserting his right to i by force.
Mr.. Stanton then aDsy zed the conflicting testimony
to who fred the frat shot said that the testimony
Of Nis Wenda could not by any possibility be coz
rest, and maintained that the evidence Of the wit
rssses for the prosecution had been u corroboraed
sna vas the most probable aud natural acconnt of the
hansacticp. He advanced the theory tast Lsne
came ont the first time TO noter ana seeing tnst
the party we're unarmed flor the pistol Of Green was
eonesAled dee rmined under preext Of self defense
without danger to hinself-to kill his socient
enemy. Isensatiop.l It wac improbable, he
said, for any man, however brave, cooly TO
shoot down the only unarmed mai in the crowd, n-ss
certain witnesses for the defense ssdhe was covered
with three pistols at the time. He would not hsve
sxpoeed himself to fifteen shots he woud rather have
ked Green Of those who had pistol, for then
he could easily have escaped from Jenknss az in
hst, he did eicape from the sol tsry pistol pointed at