The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1869-01-30

70 call the attention Of the jury 70 the pOsltlon
found upon ths prsonsrS shir,enifs and collar bad
s S SoissI sn Ss, a
That sms SIhE para, S s Of UoS sS. Ssn
spptss his lands % and nfoS feoS 0sse sse
any bIsins on the poker, DR.. Paine has bssn eS.
This reason was not pressed upon the argument.
SI che pSsOnsr Ss 9aSa is US the
ss1Ssd S ,hns hnssp,ntisgy Tns rss'on then 70
guss that 4 was lat least .iI months 6stor: the
threai Ny notes show thai me de9enda1t used "a
nsp,,isE Language when speaking OF the deceased
mote stalled was no OSscton 70 The rscsp sD
pounded and no morton 20 StrEs o m were pro
wss sn,s in.srDos,d Dos % A. any time;
Sse In IN one OF points presented for charge but
points they were ali WSsrswn ElSt oSeotoS
to ySriGns oneTs.maas when Mr: Gi6srt on The
portions Of his testimony were allowed. Every
into the scale of mercy. and every point which the
g.st was patiently entertained and carefully con-
The ninth reason assigns for error tha. line was
ged gIoLed from Mr. H9llingshead,s testimony. This
iongedihst they belonged to MT. waiisoe St Nor.
sae than % S SS Ss & witness bnS
70 Mr.. WSllace The remedy here 10 move to
should be By the jury NSihSr o tSese
@Hs 10 6 seS 93 G1Gs & Soqa possibly hsye
Hoilingahead,s evidence for It was not oontended
The tenth reason is ans werso by the notes, which
sn1W lhet thcI instruction did not miscOncaive the
The eley euth complains that Altzets testI-
dence upon the question OF the time OF the oommis
sion Si the MURDER. II was intended Ia this part or
wish esses who went Into the house and he
Mr. AltEelt did not belong to this olass and was O.
@ Soi @dingy n n notiGed In this connection, Ne had
jury had been Instructed that IL AItgeit were os,
or ana R2atE'Sy s2sU, %o@iS In
xsss snd aas
other facts you can recall"
Nor was apy DJusce done to the dt fendans IN this
behalf Tor The question of time was In no way with
The twelfth reason suggests that the Judge should
have called the attention OF the 9sy to the fact tha!
sssn two men leave the house and 70 the omissea of
Of very tsnng
by the deisndants counsel, and unless 1t Is the
see tN .
h double T6s sS to 6a
To require that charge should, after such inves
but dwell upon every omission Of counsel. would lnl!
y peTormancs and IN ali Useless IL is spp
eaten: ha -, sSsn & &recaptnSMon OF case WGnd serve
Gis al 10 be borne In mind in the confederation
that mo o?mment the Court might make on the evil
They also Instructed 70 give % 1ae defendant
character. Of the presumption Of inaoo ooence until
guilt e cIesr:y established, and OF every reasonable
Tbey were further warned to "gda,d themselves
esd hs 20 aas "NcH
TsTs s" % a Sad eseH sS s
| look AZ all ths snrroundngi TO see whether they
the court added; Ito accept no concession and to
In suppoft OF the defense that the deed had been
committed by burglar, The .Sstim9ny Of MIR. Altgelt
remind cd that the dsendsnTs wtnssses. Messrs;
that DTh he door % could be unScsed without making
any noSe which GSHd be ~ heard by per,0n on the
oiteo aud the Court added, very much in this
RsnS a Fnp hs Sssn
upon this sHSee or "a yOn @ find nd that a the nSlsS Of
sarah osnp6ell then yon viii OF course reject that
the, jury were also told that II they believed
s or S %0aa h
jury were TOLD they could adopt the theory o. bur
language Of the charge on this point was in these
Iii you do not believe him tAItgelD, do you hud
from the circumstances Of the back doors beng open
misses S" were ere uniawfnlly sntefed9 Is IS for
this point In support OF the allegation OF rsSry
and 1ss SPss PiSe facts YS1 OF
The evidence OF Doctors Gross, MeuIy, Mitchell
s tenn the se ea &c Wund
Se0d S the Rn "a sG % "a ns
in consideration OF this latter point the jury were
rSS i y IN favor q the deenSAn
Mn e ar o aS
TO this was added the admonion TO 'guard Them
mil mil is sometimes incsulionsiy led BY sach spps.r
ances and TO see here as g. ha they uecldea
n nd he sne Of gS S
Of properly stated and the substance of
The various positions OF the defense as 10 the enRr-
Rcter Of Mr. Gilbert the git of the house and iurnl-
absence Sse &c Of bocd stains IN the bass
mso.ISe the impossIby @ Of hearing
noise made In me tne d daSs I sns Is
ihe failure TO find any money weapon In the cess
| pool, and the names OF the witnesses, with the
substance of their testimony. were ali sta'ed at
~ Tne Jury were also reminded that the defendant
had proved good character for pssce ana Integrity.
AND that this evidence only decisive 10 favor
OF defendant where doubt enstsd' out nlgnt oe
acqnttal. And, in conclusion they we're again re-
minded of the rules VIII ch should govern the consi.
them carefully and to give the defendant the benefit
or every rational doubt . . -
that sfter the by the Court all the
rscons suggested by the defenhRnps counsel az %
aISwp. and the pnblIc statement made that there
VIZ no exec ption 10 the charge.
In the atient review we have bestoWsS npoa Ehis
, the reasons. aud oar subsequent perusAi OF Ihe
charge, brethren have been unable 70 iaG mr. ina
| We pass TO the consideration OF the remalolug
reatOns which relate TO the impanel,ng OF sh ths
discovery OF additional evidence. and the ususl sng
sSs0ns thai The verdict d against er ne law Nv SSS sun
venh es for number of talesmen greater than tht
ss0a hSe OF seS passed a. aspp M
ont are stu unsworn' and The defea9ac
Challenges panel bsi1s .exSSGsted BY ehs enge
Tor cause, the Court must ord venre for only on
l. lead 30 most nterminable ava. The sheriff wou,
n have to bring IN the wheel e.sw five nameg selec
he TeturnF TO hla home night, the Trial would b