The New Orleans Democrat. (New Orleans, La.) 1875-1876, 1876-05-20

Closing scenes Of the Trial Before the
superior Criminal Court.

superior Criminal Court.
After our report closed yesterday
afternoon it became evident that this
case-the killing OF Major Hardeman
BY Mr.. James s. Prestidge, two well
known and highly respectable mer-
chants Of this city-would be shorter in
it's duration than would have been gen
orally expected from the large number
OF witnesses that had been summoned
to testify. It also became evident that
the defense would confine it's evidence
chiefly to the character and disposition
OF the accused, and would carry out
their case on the broad basis Of theory
and precedents.
DR.. d. Warren Brickell, who attended
the deceased during his short illness,
was called upon to establish the fact
that he had found no weapon on Major
Hardeman while examining his body.
J Mr.. Wilson. a clerk in the house Of
Prestidge, Graham IL Co., testified that
the next day after the tragedy he had
! found on one OF the cotton tables a
broken ruler, stained with blood and
some Of the hair of Hardemans beard
near it, or on it,
| The two Deringer pistols, Mr.. Ed.
| Keener testified, he had found discharg-
ed on the next morning on the floor Of
the cotton room He further testified to
| the condition Of Prestidge, who was cut
/ on the left side Of the head and whose
| eyes had been blackened by blows, and
| that he had caused his removal to the
| Hogpjtal where Prestidge remained six
! or seven days.
! h.,, ,f hc II trin r.
alton OF Hardeman came up. Mr..
! Perry Nugent, one Of the witnesses to
| the document, Identifying his signature
thereto. Justice J. L. Houston, who
| took the dying declaration, was exam
| ined on the subject. Being cross-ex-
amined he stated that the document had
been written by him, entirely at the
dictation Of Hardeman, without sug
geston or questions from anybody
Hardeman had dictated it from begin
ming to end, each phrase being read to
him as it was written, and the entire
document also read when it was finish
ed. Thereupon Hardeman had express
ed wish to add something, which wish
was complied with by Judge Houston,
and the entire document read again to
him, which he signed with the witnesses
The dying declaration was now offered
in evidence, and objected to rs whole
by the defence, on the ground that it
contained matter foreign to the case
which, if Hardeman, were be alive and
on the stand, could not testify to, be-
cause OF its irrelevancy. The court
overruled the objection. The defense
now sought to have the court to rule
that certain parts OF the declaration,
underlined, should be erased before pre-
senting it to the jury. The court hav-
ing declined to make the order, on the
ground that the jury would be instructed
as to the relevancy or irrevelancy or the
parts in question. The defence here
upon declared their intention to file an
exception to the ruling. The declara-
ton was read, and q recess of half an
hour taken by the court.
At clock the case was resumed, and
after obtaining from Judge Houston the
precise time at which Mr.. Hardeman
died, the State announced that it had
closed its case.
Mr.. Black was again called for the de-
Tense, and being asked whether Harde-
man had said before the shooting that
he was not armed, witness replied that
according to his best knowledge and be
lief he had not; he had only said 81 am
not afraid OF your pistol" Witness, in
| answer to questions, explained that as
| to the money difficulties referred to,
Hardeman meant to charge Prestidge
with want Of due diligence in collect
ing moneys in the country.
The defense now proceeded to eSta b
lish the character Of the accused. Mr..
Joseph Hoy being the first witness who
testified that he had known Prestidge
intimately for three or four years and
that his character was good.
| The examination was now directed to
show the peaceable nature OF Prestidge,
and that II he carried pistols 1t was be-
cause he travelled frequently in the
country.
and In Columbia. He knew him to be in
the habit Of carrying pair OF Deringers.
He always knew him to be quiet man.
With ono or two other witnesses the
defense further directed its efforts to
show that Prestidge, being in the habit
OF carrying arms, had not armed him
self specially on the memorable fourth
OF March, nor with the purpose Of using
his weapons against Hardeman.
L. J. Aldrich was the next witness to
testify to the character OF the accused,
and to the identity OF the clothes OF
Prestidge, which were taken from his
person at the hospital and were now
produced In evidence. These clothes,
which, like the letter from Hardeman
to Prestidge and the clothes OF Harde-
man previously produced, were covered
with bood, and sent thrill through the
audience, and silently spoke OF the
tragic conflict between Prestidge and
Hardeman.
One or two other witnesses were ex-
amined as to the good character Of the
accused, and the defense now asked
leave to offer in evidence the sworn
statement Of the case, made by Pres
tidge before Municipal Magistrate
Evans. The court, however, ruled that
it could not be admitted, basing his rul-
ing on decisions Of the Supreme Court.
The case was closed for the defense.
The jury, as impanneled, is as follows
i. A. Ducros, J. ID. Peet, Cohen NJ. So
ria, John Sutton, E. l.. Giles. Henry
Wassam, Henry Orr, Edward Meagher,
v. Woodwork, w. Sielhorst, g. w.
Macauley, Felix Couvertie.
| The arguments were now opened for
| the State by r H Mari who occupied