Dodgeville chronicle. [volume] (Dodgeville, Wis.) 1862-current, 1870-10-28
Circuit Court.

john Weber VS.. James Mckinley
stricken from the calendar & ~ sfd
David w Jones VS.. James Spenscly-
continued. "a a1es }'dH
John @. Morgan VS.. John White, ct al.
continued. .8f@8.}fa ee
Thomas Adams VS.. Thomas w. Adams
settled. M {..,,.t,,,.f. ..tt ~, ~.
State of Wisconsin VS.. Henry G Foltz-
continued under recognizance of 90.
Edward Cronin VS. Caroline c. Cronia-
venue changed to Dane county.
John Shannon VS.. John Theobald-c
t;nued on terms. u e. q
State of Wisconsin VS.. Samuel Smith
the defendant not appearing, the bond was
declared forfeited. sl,d
N. W. Dean VS.. John B. Smith-verdict
for the plaintiff and the damages assessed
at five cents.
Charles Nimmock vs. Matthison & Heg-
ler-continued. n.8
Robert Quick vs.. Thomas ct al.-.judg-
ment for plaintiff. a
Mark Gilbank VS.. Moses Stephenson
Referred to r. L. Read. aaT
State of Wisconsin VS.. William Moon
indictment for the murder of Richard
Strike, in Mineral Point, in 1868.
There being no evidence tending to con-
vict the prisoner of the charge in the in
dictment, the court gave the jury the fol-
lowing charge:
The defendant is indicted for the murder of Rich
ard Strike in the city of Mineral Point, on the It'll
| of February, 1868. .t
| The prosecution claims to have proven, that on
that evening, Strike and Thomas Champion, in Par
| ish's saloon, quarreed concerning 50, which Cham,
| pion contended he had won of Strike at play; and
that Champion threatened to take Strikes life II the
! latter did not pay him the money that champion
went ut from the saloon and procured shotgun
| which loaded Seveal persons were IN the sa;
| loon and left very late in company. Champion got
the gun and went toward Strike in position to fire
| it. Wallis went up to him and attempted TO wrest
! the gun away from him in the scufle the gun was
discharged that the defendant at this time came up
and wrested the gun from Champions hands and
struck blow with it the breast of the deceas
ed, of which blow he died the 4th of March there
| after.
| One of the principal points of difference between
the prosecution and Defence is, the defendant IN his
| testimony states that the blow upon the breast of
the deceased unintentional his part, but that
in jerking the gun out of Champions hands, amp hur-
ling ii around in his own, that the blow was given.
AS have said, the prosecution contends the blow
was inflicted by Moon purposey in order to assist or
avenge the quarrel of Champion You are the Judg-
| es of evidence and facts
| 1t appears that Wallis, after Champion had prom
ised peaeeable behavior, allowed him to get up, and
/ then the company continued on their way. Some
one calling to Strike to come along the latter cried
out 81 cannot am stabbed and bleeding to death.
Champion had stabbed him on the right side OF the
| neck with butcher knife. The defendants coun-
| sci contend this the mortal wound; the defend
ant testfying that as he and Strike were walking
| in the street, somewhat in the of the others,
/ that Champion who had procured a butch er-knife
/ rushed up and inflicted the blow Strikes neck or
| shoulder and that the defendant not knowing the
extent of the injury and hearing Strike say he had
| been stabbed, pursued Champion into his house
where the latter for short time secreted himself.
| You are the judges of the evidence, and have
written this general outline of the facts that you
have better understanding of the law applicable to
| them. The indictment is for murder. but under it
you may find any degree of manslaughter, the def
! milton of which accords with the proven facts
There are three degrees of MURDER but the evidence
in this in any reasonable view of it, will not jus
| tify you in finding the defendant guilty of that
| crime. If guilty at all the blow inflicted on the
deceased does not appear have been the result of
generalization, which might be murder if death
sued but it was done in the heat of passion not ac
I cdentaly.
| The second degree of manslaughter applies to
/ case where the accused person, without design TO
effect death, kills another in the heat of passion in
| cruel or unusual manner.
The third degree of manslaughter applies to
wher the accused party not intending to take life
strikes another with dangerous weapon, such a
gun, club, or an axe, in the heat OF passion, and
! death ensues.
The fourth degree of mapsIarg hter applies to any
not excusabIe homicide specifically described in
other degrees of murder manslanghter. verdict
of jury will not be set aside which finds grade of
crime less in punishment than the facts Will warrant
| though the jury should not find crime of higher
grade than is jusifable from the evidence. If the
defendant In this prosecution is found guilty, his
crime does not reach higher grade than the second
| degree of manslaughter
To find the defendant guilty you must be satisfied
beyond reasonable doubt that the blow he inflicted
on Strike was Intentionally given. If it was an &C
cidental blow given in Wrestling the gun from the
hands of Champicn. you will find him not guilty
If you should be of opinion that the wound on the
neck caused the death of Richard Strike the defend
ant cannot be found guty, unless he was present
| aiding and abetting Champion when he inflicted
| this wound
1t does not excuse, although it may mitigate the
homicide, to show that the fatal effects of the wound
were FASTENED by maltreatment of physicians, or by
the imprudence of the deceased 1t is sufficient if it
| appear that the blow inflicted dangerous injury
and that the death would not have occurred when it
| did but for the injury.
If you are satisfied from the testimony that the
defendant not in anger heat Of passion at the
time he hit Strike With the gun, then crime Hos
been committed.
Ifyou have reasonable doubt as to what caused
the death of Mr.. Strike whether it be from the blow
on the breast from the cut in the neck, from
any other cause, then you must acquit the defend
ant. @G5
The jury, after an absence of only five
minutes, returned with a verdict of mot
guilty" -
G. S. Willard cs John Graber-This is
case on which the jury disagreed at the
last term Of the court.
The court gave the following charge to
the jury: