Sunbury American. [volume] (Sunbury, Pa.) 1848-1879, 1872-03-23

been overrued by the Court in your hear
ing, and now we solemnly declare that
what remains to be done is the most un-
pleasant and painful duty we have ever per-
formed, and hope it will be the last of The
kind. As long, however as we hold this
position we shall not shrink from doing
that which the law plainly requires to be
done by the Court And whilst we would
have been satisfied with a verdict of guilty
Of lower grade CT homicide, it is not for
us to say that the verdict is wrong. The
jury were told that you had the right to de-
mand that this case should be decided ac-
cording to the law and the evidence, and
from which they had no privilege to turn to
the right nor to the left, and we must take
it for granted, then, that in the performance
Of their duty, they conscientiously obeyed
these instructions. And now, in the dis
charge of our duty, The Court must not
turn to the right nor to the left. That you
killed Martin Oberdorf, the deceased, was
admitted fact on the trial. and to take your
own narrative of the occurrence, as made
by you on the fatal night and persisted in
up to the time and on the trial, you were
wholly unjustified. The deceased commit
ted no crime, and according to your own
declarations he was moving in the oppo-
site direction from you, when, without
warning, or any attempt to arrest him, you
took his life. \ private citizen, without
warrant, has no right to make an arrest
unless a crime has actually been committed.
Much less has he the right to take life on
mere suspicion that crime has or is about
to be committed. But whether the deed
was rashlY, thoughtlessly or careless
ly done, and without deliberation and
! premedltation, was question for the
jury. There was some evidence of malice
express, and, perhaps, considerable that
wo not consistent with the story you ieat-
ed after the killing The manner in which
the deceased was shot, the torn and lace
rated condition of the body, the direction
in which the ball was found to have struck,
and many other circumstances went to con-
vince the jury that your account of the
transaction was mere fabrication. They
were told that in order to find you guilty of
murder in the first degree, they must be sa-
tislied that the killing was wilful, deiber-
ate and premedtated, and that if they had
a reasonable doubt in relation to this, it was
there duty to give you the benefit of that
doubt, and either to acqu!t you or find you
guilty of less degree of homicide. This
was question Of fact entirely for the jury,
and the Court is not prepared to say that
their conclusion is erroneous. The penal
ty Of your crime is death. and you must
now prepare to meet another Judge. Your
time in this world will probably be short,
but you need not despair. He who said to
the dying malefactcr OH the cross, To-day
shalt thou be with me in Paradise" will
receive you if you will but believe and re-
pcnt. Do not hope for pardon in this
world, but let me admonish you that from
henceforth let all your thoughts be directed
] to, v -it,s, ,,,,, l. 4. IL
We must now proceed TO pass on you the
Judgment Of the law, which is That Perry
Haas, the prisoner at the bar, be taken
from hence to the Jail of the county of y or
thumberland, from whence he came, and
! from thence to the place of execution, and
that he there be hanged by the neck until
he is dead ; and may God have mercy on
your soul.
In delivering the above opinion the Court
could but decide upon its bearing upon
principle of law. They could neither turn
to the right nor to the left. In duty bouid
to expound the question involved in ac-
cordance with legal decisions, they have no
right to preiudge and no province to exer-
else sympathy. a Judge must steer clear
of tears, and waverinG opinions Of senti-
mental bystanders. His duty is simply
one of legal aight-forwardness. His
tenderness must be turned into Judgment
his pity into sternness. In pronouncing
the sentence Judge Rockefeller evinced
more feeling than the condemned prisoner.
His own heart melted, and his lips quiver-
ed. If the prisoner is insane, rs the senti-
mental public are now wont to assume, his
own counsel contended against it. One of
them says he is perfectly sane, or they
would have put insanity in rs defence on
the trial.
In the case of Com. VS.. Charles White,
for highway robbery, in Sunbury, Novem-
Der, l, 1871, upon John limerick, citizen
of Jefferson county, the Court sentenced
/ the prisoner on Saturday morning last to
five years in the penitentary. The public
is already familiar with this case, rs it has
occupied the attention of the Court and
county since November last. The case
was once considered settled by argument
| Of prosecutor, but at January term the in
detatiguablc District Attorney brought the
case up for trial. An indictment was
! found, and upon legal technicalities was
! quashed, and then taken to the Supreme
Court by the prisoners counsel, ). B. Boy
er, Esq. The reasons which Mr.. Boyer
/ presented for discharging the young man
were not acceGed to by the Court at Phia-
delphla, and he was remanded back for
| trial On the trial last week the evidence
seemed strong in favor of the young mans
| guilt, while the cross-eXamination and the
| evidence OF the defence did not detract any
from it. The District Attorney, Gen.
Clement, deserves general credit for his un-
tlinchng endeavors to bring guilty offend
ers to justice, while the prisoners counsel,
). Is. Boyer, certainly will be accorded
! praise for his earnest and untiring efforts
/ in behalf of the young man, White, whom
he so ably defended The prisoner is only
young man, and halls from Ohio. His
mother, a fine and young looking widow,
was present during the trial, and of course
evinced a mothers solicitude and a moth
| er's loYe for her wayward son.