The Cairo bulletin. [volume] (Cairo, Ill.) 1872-1878, 1873-01-05
CRIME.
CONCLUSION OF THE STOKES
NtE TRIAL. gf
MURDER IN THE FIRST DE.
M GREE
u THE vERDlcr OF THE JURY
IN 3 sfoK "a raIAL.

phOA - heAAks
NEw YoxR, Jsa. A.-Thsrs we're great
crowds around the court Of oyer and ter
miner to-day, whore Mr.. Trsmain 10 max.
ing the concl ding portion Of bic argument
for the dsfsnse OF Stokes. His animadver.
sions upon the character Of Fisk we're
quite bitter. He claimed that the shooting
Of Fisk BY Stokes, under even an impress
sion Of danger, IL that impression was sin.
cers, was q justinsbls defense. After an
exhaustive argument in which the
character Of Fisk and the wit.
pesses for the prosecution we're
severely szcoristed, Mr.. Trsmain closed
bis efforts Tor the prisoner There was
grea. applause from the audience, upon
the conclusion Of his address, which was
suppressed by the judge After recess
Mr.. Beach commenced his reply for the
prosecution, and for several hours he re.
viewed q. length the testimony Of the
principal witnesses, and called upon the
Jury 70 judge whether from the story Of
Stokes himself, the case WIS not one Of
murder. Stokes early csesr and the
circumstance Of the murde- were COIN
mented upon with severity. Tae question
of generalization Beach submitted to the
jury on the broad princ,pls whsther 81
the momen, OF ar,ng the fatal shot, the
prisoner intended to kill.
INV IuDay
When Mr.. Beach lad concluded, the
Judge at once proceeded TO deliver bis
charge. After compli,nenting the jury
counsel and press for abstsining from
criticisms in the case he charged that oil
questions we're TO be discarded which bore
upon the character and habits, or social
/ surroundings OF either deceased or pris.
oner. The killing being practically con.
coded, the question was whether thn,
killing was crime. 1t was agreed on both
sides that the killing was either murder
Ia the first degree, manslaughter in ,bs
third degree, or justi6sbls homicide
To determine the point At issue, it was i'm
portsnt to determine were there two pie
tolls found, and whether the prisoner wa
acting in seif-defsuse. That there wer,
, two, he intimated that the jury might con
slider another theory, viz That The psto
found by the lad wa. dropped by the pris
oner, though this theory was irreconcilia
BILE with the testimony. No one testiHe
10 seeing u pistol in Fisk's hands excep
| the prisoner. The silence Of the prisone
when arrested did not necessarily involv
. guilt. If the jury believed the prisone
!, fred from prerned,tated design to xii
without danger, they should fod . Yer
dc. of murder 10 the first dsgre'
unless they found . verdict q
msnlaughter in the third degree, AZ
on tie latter poiat they were 70 consids
il thae was . Conflict and whether th
character Of Fisk WAS such ~ from mer
ancss lead to the apprehension Of dsI
ger, onthsl point only, viz; whether d.
ceased vas personally = violent and daI
gerous nan or net we're they TO consie'
his character. 1t was the duty Of the pr
oner to satisfy them that the killing ",
not murder. His honor then explaine
the kind OF doubt to which the prison'
would be entitled, and in conclusion, said
1t would DO great misfortune If the jur
now disagreed. Ordinarily twelve homes
Intelligent men do after Considerable
MAKE up their minds to agree. Whs
passion, prejudice, obstinsncy, or oth'
motives are present they do not. 3
made these remarks because the jury c
the former trial disagreed. The prison.
WAS either guilty, and should be convicte'
CT innocent, and acquitted. His hone
did not anticipate disagreement in tn
case. The jury then retired.
THE judy
After being out some few hours, entere
about ll:l2 o'clock, and rendered ve
dict sgsins. the prisoner ofmurdsr in th
frat degree. There was = msrke
} sensation in court at the Announcement {
the verdict, the prisoner turned ashy pal
and his sister w.pt sloud. Assistant Di'
trict Attorney Fellows moved that th
} sentence Of the law be pronounced, but 4
the suggestion of Tremain, the judge d.
fsrred pushing the sentence until Monda.
The jury, it transpired, on retiring steo
ten for
MURDER IN THE FIRST DEGREE,
Two for manslsughter In the third degre
Fiom information derived of some Of II
, lawyers Of Stokes 10 ~ interview, it
thought NO exception 10 the verdict wi