The Tiffin tribune. (Tiffin, Ohio) 1868-1887, 1876-12-07

NAAU ~ y - NLGl NaiDNaC1- D-A1
] laps hands were loose, and several c
. the witnesses before you say that b
] was striking blows in several pSrts G
i Manhart's body, while Manhart'
2 hands were upon his shoulders. I
{ circumstance has been introduced q
show you that Dnnlap had an instru
I ment to enable him to perpetrste thi;
deed, aud in the way too, suggested D.
his action. But 1 know bow thi
will be treated by the defence. /
will be considered 3 trivial eire1m'
stance that this man had his sharI
pocket-knife out ia his hand all th'
: evening; but, gentlemen, there Is no
8 lingering dOubs ia my mind, and
think there cannot be in yours, thai
he had that knife out there and kepI
it out there for purpose aud now
gentlemen, the purpose was accom-
plished. A man has been killed-s
human life has been taken.
Now our consideration must be
turned to the inquiry what degree
Of crime has been committed ? The
Court has instructed as to the law and
your duty under it, and now let me
call your attention to the grade of this
crime. This involves an Inquiry in-
to all the facts ss they transpired.
The question requires the discussion
OF all the facts
Many witnesses have testified here,
and we find all, or most these parties
in the saloon Of Leidy. 1t Is not my
province or intention to ask tOhy
they were there. What were
the conditions of these parties ?
What is the condition OF
Dunlap? He came there to settle
with witness-Joe Nedry. Nedry did
not want for some reason, to settle
that night, and it made Dunlap
mad be was stirred up and excited.
Dunlap said he would fetch somebody
that would make Ne1ry settle. Wit
ness says Dunlap was excited, ner-
vous, angry, and seemed bent on
some mischief. The old man Green
after this came in with him and said
they were going to have q 'rOlO"-in
his broken English, or Scotch, calling
it ''rlte." Did Nedry say anything to
provoke this anger? Is IL not, how
ever, in testimony that Dunlap moved
about nervousIy and unessily? We
can not tell, gentleman of the Jury,
what is in q mans heart. We must
| Judge from the actions what the prob
able thoughts and intentions are.
Henry Manhart had not said word
or lifted q finger, therefore he was
simply a quiet looker-On. Dunlsp's
anger toward Nedry, and Green's
determination to have row
brought on the fuss, but not
until we get on the outside. There
they talk about foOt-rscing and horse
pulling until Green finds occasion
TO commence the row Green
came up aud chugged ManbArt
in the breast, but he was go0d-na-
tured did not resist this. No; he
was calm and collected, and moved
away, and seemed quite determined
to preserve the peace nay, he even
tried to laugh the old man out of his
foolish attack, and walked away ten
feet or more and did not seem to care
until Green threw off bis coat and
came upon him and struck him hard.
He then grappIed RHd threw Green
down. Now / have brought you to
this point, but We are not trying
Green we are trying Benjamin
Dunlap. What is he doing? Where
was be ? He was beside Joe Nedry.
What was he there for -? Why, he
said before he would make him
Manhart-settle. With malice in his
heart and anger shaking his frame,
he starts out full of this purpose.
Then afterwards when Manhart
and Green were engaged In their
scuffie, where was Dunlap? Why, he
was ty the side of Joe Nedry his
knife still perhaps in his hand. They
will attempt to show that he wanted
to relieve Green, his fsther-in-law,
from Msnhart. But why did he go
in the manner in which he did
Why did he attempt to strike and
il the manner of his striking {; the
striking over9 He would have had
his arm in a different position il he
had desired to separate the parties.
Nedry tells US that was the position
or Dunlap. Is not this the very testi-
mony Of the spirit and feeling of his
heart at this time ? Am 1 not right
in the conclusion that he was imbued
with malice
The Court has very properly in
strueted you in the law of this case,
and may at once call your attention
to the testimony.
The testimony shows that Green
followed Manhart ten or fifteen feet
after he had been taken away from
him. During this time Dunlap was
held by Joe Nedry and Dee Melroy.
Just so soon as Green turned back
from following Msnhart, Nedry let
Dunlap loose (; and they Dunlap and
Greenl met. They turned and went
off and talked. The court says we
may infer that these parties had this
conference from this action, but no
one except God in heaven knows
what was said between them. Now
we may infer that this is the moment
when these parties determined to kill |
this man. This is the moment when |
murder was perfected in their hearts. |
Does not their subsequent action |
Justify US in this inference still more |
strongly a? The witness says they |
were there from three to five minutes. l
We could not prove what they said |
there but what do we find |
them doing immediately after
Now, do not actions speak as plainly |
as words, especially when the actions |
were at the time so full of meaning |
With what gait did they walk =? In |
what direction Toward whom ? |
What does this testimony Of the wit |
ness show? Was not the walk rapid |
Did they want to go and get in the |
buggy? Who was In advance Dun
lap was first. Would they thus go If |
this was their intention ? Besides
they were not in the direction OF the |
buggy. Mr.. Nedry says that direct |
line to the buggy would be twenty |
feet north of where Manhart was |
standing. Did M4nhart go twenty |
feet to get in the way of Dunlap On |
the contrary, gentleman, Dunlap went |
directly toward where Manhart |
stood. The testimony agrees and Is |
that Dunlap walked |
fast and went straight to Manhart |
with the declaration "I can whip |
him with his Coat on or off," That |
is q curious course to take il he only |
desired to preserve the peace.
1t seems to me that there can be no
question rs to the real intention OF
Dunlap. The whole testimony shows |
a plain contradiction OF the theory OF /
Dunlap's peaceful Intentions. | say /
that these parties had time to deliber-
ate. Here is Dunlap and here is
Green, who followed Manhart after
he was separated from him after the |
first battle. He had said that he
could whip hi cut of him. He was
defeated, and he was exaspersted, and |
to punish Manhart some |
way. 1 have pointed out to you that
Dunlap had hatred in his heart |
against Nedry and now this hatred |
was turned towards Manhart in SYM |
pathy with Green.
Green is the fSther- in-lAw of Dun |
lap, and there is the reason for turn |
ing his hatred. Malice ranking In |
the heart taxes ones judgment away,
and he seems to have turned his |
hatred away from Nedry to Mauhart. |
Singing with this feeling, then, these
parties go off together. Defence will |
agree that this cannot be-thst Dun
lap only wanted to preserve the peace. |
Can you believe it ? Do you believe |
he is the man to be q conservator of
peace e? Is he the man for this Does |
his evenings action show him in such |
light?
II, gentlemen, these parties had de- |
sired to save further trouble, it |
was easy for them TO keep Of. Man
hart had gone away and left them. |
They had followed after him Instead, |
and the moment Dunlap came within |
striking distance he delivered the first |
hIOw