Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1868-01-08

+ Ii1Ai-oS . H's e4'@0A "a f099Sd VI
implied.
The terms "premsditsted desigu,' as
used il the statute, and "mslce alote-
/ thought" as used in the common law de-
fnition which ] have given, are synony-
NOUS terms. They reed moment $ at
tenlion. Il is the formed design, .he de-
i llberate intention, to take the life ofthe
/ person killed, OF. soma other human. being,
without sufficient cause, II must be pre-.
smeditated and delibersted upon. if but for
a moment. There must, at any rate, be
| In the mind The thought, Il wilt Kill"
| when the injury IS iLf1icted by which death
| is caused Ii the mind .deliberates at all,
il but for a sufficient time to prove the de.
| sign 70 murder and adopt the means to
pat such design into execution, ii is mai
Ice. pfepense, aud shows wicked, de-
prayed, aud malignant heart.
= 1 wlllllustrate = traveller. OF a peeson
10 q atremote and lonely place, meets, OF is
with one having treasure, or his enemy.
at time when he supposes no eye sees
him. The time and place suggest, the
thought $ [ will Kill" !" to a mind wicked
and depraved enough to RECEIVE and act
upon it, and the will at once directs the
hand;to7execute what is thus wickedly eons
eeiyed- This would be murder, although
no tboughtlof mlirdering the person killed
ever entered the mind Of the slayer before
such opportunity occurred, and although
the opportunity, the design, the. execution,
may have occurred, been conceived and
executed, in moment of time, and with
the suddenness.. Of a single operation of
mind, or the quickness Of the conception
Of the thoughts necessary to conceive and
execute the design The law. implies that
a person wicked and depraved enough to
kill under such circumstances is as much
guilty Of murder as one who has long
harborea revenge or malice, or an inten.
tion to. kill from any motive. s...
Again; malice is either expressed or
implied. 1s Express malice is evidenced by
external circumstances, as antecedent
menaces or threats, and former grudges
A gain a. man is presumed to intend the
ordinary consequences ofsuch an act as
he performs, and from such means as he
uses. IF one snaps loaded pistol at an
other, or strikes him il place likely to
Froduce death with dangerous weapon,
or administers poison, and de4th ensues
by any Of these means, it is sufficient
proof Of malice, because death is the or
dinary conseG Guence Of the act done or
performed. In such a case, the law ina
plies malice. although no particular en-
nifty can be proved. And, if a man kills
another without any considerable provo
cation, the law implies malice.
All homicide or killing is presumed TO
be malicious until some circumstance Of
j Justification or provocation il shown, or IS
fairly to be inferred from the testimony.
Now, gentlemen should you find that
Charles Schnepf is dead, that he came
to his death at the hands Of the defend
ant in any manner charged in the indict-
ment, or by any means uhknownas eharg-
ed in the indictment,-was the. Killing
perpetratod with premediated design to
effect death, applying the rules which I
have just stated? IF 50, it was murdoc..
Asa rule no person should be convict
ed of murder unless the body Of the de-
ceased has been found; but this rule must
be taken with some exceptions or qualif-
cations. The proof may be sufficiently
strong to show the fact of murder though
the body has never been found.
g TO warrant a conviction Of murder in
this case the evidence that Charles
1Schnepf is dead must be certain, such as
| to leave no room for, the existence of any
doubt that he is dead. The proof does
not show this when there is the least un-
certainty as to whether he is dead or not.
Ia@ Ia identifng the remains ofthe deceas-
! ed, If they are muti]ated the prosecution
must clearly and satisfactorily show that
they are the remains Of human being,
and of one answering to the size of the
deceased, and the agency Of the prisoner
in the mutilation, or the jury must acquit
the prisoner. And, in determining these
questions, you should consider both the
positive and circumstantial evidence
- If you are satisfied beyond all reasona-
bic doubt, by the direct testimony Of
those Witnesses who testified to the find
inc of the bones and other articles in the
ashes, that the remains or bones were SO
found; and if you are further satisfied be-
yond unreasonable doubt, from the medi-
calor other testimony, that they are the
bones of Charles Sehnepf, it is sufficient
/ TO establish the fac6 Of his death. Upon
this subject the evidence ought to be 50
. strong and intense as to produce the full
+ certainty that they are his remains. The
e evidence should be such as to render
g that facumorally certain and leave nc
g reasonable doubt IF there is direc
+ proof that the remains wore those of
II human being, and found in the ashes o
1t a log OF brush heap which the. defendah
e hnilt and burned tna .ialanfificatin O