Daily State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1863-11-13
Trial of James sutherland for the
Murder of "a. A. small -sutheriand
Acquitted.
FOURTH DAY.

Court met ut so o'clock The prisoners wife. !
boy. and father. present
John " Ray. Esq made an argument IN ia /
vor oi the prisoner He dwet upon the differ
ence of the degrees of murder; Sutherland might /
be guilty Of one degree OF crime and not OF an
other Mr. R,v. with great power OF logic. ar
guesi his clients innocence. His theory Was that
Small was living in wait for Sutherland in gro
eery near oy. before Sutherland killed him.
Mr. Raw was followed by : mes A COlley, |
who reviewed the case generally. The whole
thing turned upon principle which had been
administered by mankind thousand times Tor a
thousand wears. Mr. Coley's argument was
powerful, eloquent, and almost trumphantly
conclusive The learned gentleman went into
the Law, into the testimony. and urged every ar
gument which could be urged for his ciiert.
Mr. Colley is orator, lawyer BY intuition.
and, rs criminal pletder he stands without a
superior OF our bar. HIS argument went tar ia
favor of mis- client.
AFTERNOON
W W Leathers for the prosecution followed
lie discussed briefly the duties OF jurors. lie
had no personal feeling sgainst the prisoner He
was glad to see the prisoners wife hnd little ones
surrounding him The prisoner had able counsel
To defend him he proceeded - make strong
argument based upon the testimony VI the quit
OF premedi,ated murder ON the part OF Suther
land
The killing Of the defendant. uaarmed. running
and CRYING out "ion't shoot" was wholly urlus
tiEable Il was cowardiy and malicious xii
iag Small VAS .aised OF a. dangerous nan
His conduct upon the evening he met Ms death
satisfied him <Lsathers) thai il vas not Small,
but Sutherland who the dangerous mtn. W
weapons we're found upon Snail. Sutherland
WAS armed The pistol which lie had u>ed m
dealing death 20 Small had been produced IL
vas now in court The carving Of such weapons
WAS proof of malice de drew il and used It
upon a defenseess msn. sgains; whom be enter
tanned a gRdge. originating about matters IN
which both were concerned in the ] c +. X.
m,rhine shop With this malice 10 his heart.
sitbout sufficient rrovocatiou On tie occasion on
the mart of Small. Sutherland deliberately Killed
small Therefore Sutherland ~as guilty of
/ murder in the first degree Mr. Leathers LEGAL
argument IN this connection was IA 'stetly tie
f coinbttted RAYS theory OF Smaus lying III "Ait
+ tor SGtherland
Mr. Fishback for the defense. followed FOR
the frst time IN his life he lifted las voice IA
behalf Of tie accused de had 10 appeals 10
make 10 the ssmpathies of the jury he shouid
I appeal 10 their manhood he should sppeai 20
their patriotism. He should appeal 10 then' a.
! American citizens loysl citizen had right 10
i defend himself against the violence OF tufouient
men He proposed, therefore, 20 vindcaie rignt
I AGAINST Law le~sness There are cases when The
1 in,,vjduaI must assert his rights. not waiting
for the lAw A man NAV take the life ot one per
,ec,lv innocent and vet be justified. Su'herl'nf
IA this th u - pues &C the best phs ON Il Tor u
nfo.s~niion. That il eoncedirg al that can 10