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

prisoner had made that request of tn,
court, he would comply with 1t. Al
he desired to reduce the charge to
writing, he would adjourn the cour
until tomorrow morning at 8 o'clock
Court adjourned till Thursday morn
ing, Nov. 30.
The court delivered the following
charge to the jury:
JUDGE PILLARS CHARGE.
Gentlemen of the Jury 1T is no
controverted or disputed In this case
that on the night Of the 25tt
Of last April, one Henry Man
hart was stabbed in several places OF
bis. person f; that one of these stabl
was in the lower part of his abdomen
or belly. and went through into his
intestiDes, and cut one Of them that
this wound was fatal, and that
IS q natural consequence, he died
from il. These facts, 1 say, are moi
denied, or disputed. The prisoner,
Benjamin Dunlap, is charged in the
Indictment in this case, jointly with
one Matthew Green, with having
given MaDhart this death-vound, and
therefore, with having killed him.
Your first inquiry, then, must be,
did the prisoner, BeEJGn1iH Dunlap
qiUe AdnhdTt this fatal around. II
you are not satisfied beyond q reason
able doubt, by the evidence in the
case, that the prisoner, Mr.. Dunlap,
gave this wound, your verdict must
be, not guilty, and you need have DO
further deliberstiOn, but If you are
satisfied, beyond a reasonable doubt,
from the evidence, that the prisoner
did give Manhart this wound and
thus killed hin, you must then deter
mine from the evidence, whether the
prisoner is guilty of murder in the
first degree, or 10 the second degree, or
of DldnSLdughter.
To authorize you to find q verdict OF
guilty of murder IN the first degree,
you must be satisfied beyond reason
able doubt, from the evidence, that
the prisoner, Mr.. Dunlap thus killed
Henry Msnhart.
F7r8t-puposely: That, is, that
he gave him this fatal stab with the
puTpOSe-the intention to Kill him:
Second-That he did this with NAL
ice. That is, that he stabbed him
with this purpose and intention to kill
him, to accomplish some object ; or
to attain some end or to crafty q
wicked Rnd disordely feeling of
hatred, or revenge toward him.
Third-That this malice was de-
H6erdte and IOreDleditdted. That Is,
that the prisoner, before gratifying or
carrying out, this malice, thought
about It, entertained Il in his mind,
deliberated upon it, and determined,
or concluded to carry it out, or crafty
it, by killing Manhart, before be
stabbed him.
It is no matter for how short time
the prisoner may have so thought
about, or entertained in his mind and
deliberated upon this subject only
so that he did so previously think
about it, deliberate upon it, and en-
tertain 1t in bis mind.
If then you find, beyond q reason
able doubt, that the prisoner thus
ptITposely and of deliberate and pre-
nleditGted malice, killed Mr.. Man
hart, by giving him this fatal stab,
then he is guilty of murder IN the first
degree and your verdict should be
accordingly.
If, however, you find, beyond q
reasonable doubt, that the prisoner
killed Manhart (by giving him this
fatal stab pllTposely and DldliciOusLy,
Rs have before explained but with
out this deli6erdtiOn and IOreBleditd-
tiOa, which I have above mentioned,
then he is guilty of murder IN the
second degree; /; your verdict should
be accordingly.
If, agaiu, you find, beyond a rea-
sonabIe doubt, that the prisoner
killed Manhart (by giving him this
mortal wouEd) puTpOseLy and fatefs-
tiondLly, as 1 have above explained
but without this malice, which have
above mentioned, upon q sudden
quarrel, then he is gully Of man
slaughter; and your verdict should be
accordingly.
Or, IL you should find, beyond q
reasonable doubt, that the prisoner
gave Manhart this wound that killed
him /; but, that, at the time, he did
not intend to Kill him, or to give him
a stab that 1Uould kin him, and that
he intended only to cut or wound him
to give him bodily injury, then,
and in that case, also, the prisoner Is
guilty of nldnSldughteT /; and your ver-
dict should be accordingly.
After the charge of Judge Pillars,
n. L. Brewer addressed the Jury in
behalf of tbe prosecution.
Mr.. BREWERS ADDRESS,
Gentlemen of the jury
Seldom In your lives, perhaps, will
you be called upon to deliberate upon
so important case-perhaps never
again. Never before in my life has
It been my duty to address a jury on
so serious charge. The more Sc
rious the more serious our duty. We
should, therefore, disabuse our minds
of ell prejudice and bring our minds
to look dispassionately and calmly
on the facts and questions of law be-
fore US.
am glad the Court has delivered
the law in this case-yOu are to be
guided by it. desire only to be
governed by the law and my duty to
the State in this case.
There is no question in your minds
or in my mind that Henry Manhart
lost his life by violence. There can
be no doubt that he came to his
death by wounds received at the
hands Of some party In the affrsy
which the testimony has brought out
before you.
Now we can do nothing for Henry
Manhart-he is dead.
1t then becomes our duty to inquire
who is the guilty party. Who cut
Henry Manhart so that ne thus suf-
fered and died? Can there be q
single, lingering dodbt in your minds,
but that Benjamin Dunlap inflicted
these wounds, and especially the NOR
tai wound?
Let US look at this for q moment
let US inquire carefully.
Did Dunlap stab Henry Manhart ?
There is no question at all but thst
there are only two parties with whom
this charge can be lodged. Dunlap
aud Green are together, or singly,
responsible for this crime. Now,
wher this thing occurred, who were
with Henry Manhart? ? Did Dunlap
intend only to strike with his fist
He struck over-net as il he wanted
to strike cut an effective fist stroke
and knock Manhart down. Hestrikes
over as if be was using 3 knife. What
does the testimony say? Look at the
evidence Of Mr.. Nedry. He says the
second blow was delivered In such q
manner-a sort of underhand blow--at
Q point below the left breast, as, s,would
show that be did hot want to give
q simple fist stroke. Now look at the
manner OF that blow. 1t was struck
under and upward. Why should
Dunlap be striking in this way if be
was making fist fight? Was it not
to deliver cut in an effective place
Cuts were made ia several parts OF
the body, and when we turn aside the
clothing and look at the cuts thereon
il shows just the points or places of
the cuts to correspond with the
wounds IN the body. The testimony
shows that no one struck Manhart in
this part of the body except Dunlap.
Does it not show, gentlemen, that no
one else struck In that part of the
body2 Does it not force upon Us the