The Columbian. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1866-1910, 1877-03-02

cover Of the organization have beeen at war
upon the peace and good order Of the COM
monwealth and almost subver,ive of its pow
or to protect the persons and property Of its
citizens. He says, however, that at the rcgu-
lar meetings of the society, crimes are MT
concoctcd nor approved for the reason that
there are members in whose presence such
proceedings are never had nor would be tole-
rated. He admits himself to have been ono
Of those of the order who followed those bad
practices. He comes here with the moral
tant of guilt resting upon him. Neverthe-
less, if the jury are satisfied that from any
cause or motive he came upon the witness
stand with the full determination to make a
clean brea.t of it and to tell the whole truth,
hit where it may, and the jury can be salts.
fled that he has done So, not only by the tes-
timony which he has given but also by c,r-
roborating circumstances material to tie case
and connecting the prisoners with The crime
for which they are on trial, they may give to
his evidence such belief as they think it en-.
titled to.
In examining his testimony, you will take
into consideration his character for truth, and
also all material contradictions of his testimo-
ny and also the points wherein he is corroho
rated by reliable evidence. To be corroborat-
ed to such extent as gives him credit with
you, it is not necessary that he should be cor
roborated as to every fact he testified to- in
order to act upon his evid nee as an accom-
plice, for if an sccompice must be corrobora-
ted as to every fact to which he testifes, the
rule which admits an accomplice as witness
might as well be abolished lie ought how.
ever, to be so far corroborated as to carry be-
lief to the minds of the jury, whether that be
as to the whole Of the facts, or only to por-
tion of the material facts which connect the
defendants in some manner with the offcnsc.
1t is contended by the common wealth that
the prisoners fed when arrests were begun
for this murder. In almost every criminal
case the conduct of the party in reference
to the offense charged is pertinent and ma.
terial to be inquired into The legal presump-
tion from fight is against the prisoner, aad
it lies upon him to rebut it. Right may be
| very strong evidence Of guilt, or it may
| under which it takes place. 1t is always i'm
portanl to be considered, aud combined with
other circumstances may be stro'g evidence
| of guilt. The circumstances attending the
| flight, such as assuming another name, are
| important as imparting character to the act
| a. Intentional, ~ distinguished from a mere
ly fortuitous occurrence. If, after an offrnse
Is committed the party fees before he i nc
cused the circumstance is stronger against
him than flight aiter accusation. One who
knows he ia accused of high crime, how
ever conscious Of innocence, might not have
the courage to stand trial, but might
| think it necessary to consult his safety in
| flight. Whether the fear that prompts
fight proceeds from the consciousness of
guilt or from the apprehensions of unde-
served disgrace and punishment ard the de-
ficiency of moral courage, lis a question which
can be judged only by reference to concomi
| tant circumstances.
Did these defendants, or either of them
fee on account of this murder? The arrest
of Donohue and Duffy was made on the 18th
of November, 1868, charging them with the
crime. On that day, after Mr. Morrison
heard of the arrest OF Donobue THAT arrest
having been made about six o'clock on the
evening of November II, 1869, he testified
that he saw Smith, Aleck Latferty ,McHugh,
| Tully and Kelly going towa'd Hester's, be-
tween seven and eight o'clock in the morn.
ing, not in their working clothes. He did
not see Hester after that until Re had been
here in Jail MAY, 1859, nor McHugh for
three or four months, nor Tully until be saw
him here in court, and before that he saw
McHugh and Tuliy almost every day. 1t
does not appear that the witness saw them
at Hesters. The daughters of Hester testi
fy that they were not there, and Garner
Pepper, who was at the elr house, does not rec
ollect of seeing them. jesse Hensel testi
fies that Hester and three Others, with twt
buggies and two horses. or a horse and {
mule, came to his house on the 18th of No.
vember, 1868, between the hours of clever
and twelve at night that Hester said he
had fallen out of his buggy; his face wa
swefled that he wanted to see about som,
kme for plat ring RunkePs lime kiln wa
about a quarter Of mile off; hut when the,
started from the house, witness says they die
not go in the direction OF the lime burners
but went in a direction toward Sunhury
Witness states that he made mem orandun
in his book of the time aud is positive it wa
the 18th day Of November. Had heard q
the arrest of Donohue a day or two, an,
may be week before; couldn't tell th
, time. William Leisure testified that h
lived about four miles from Shamokin OF
, the road to Sunbury that Hester and thre
Others came to his house with two buggies
about one O'Clock in the morning about tn,
middle or after part Of November. The
were going toward Sunbury. Hester got
' lantern which was sent back the next day
In the letter from LaSalle, dated Novembe
,, 81, 1868. addressed to Hugh McKeon, on tn
. envelope, without n signature, but testifie
I TO by Mr. Bridge and Mr.. Schilhorn to b
I in the handwriting of Hester, and addres,
t ed on the inside to his family, that letter
, states that he left Sunbury on Thursda
, morning, which appears by the almana
4 TO have been the 10th day of Novembe
t Mr. Morrison testies to seeing Aleck LAT
!, erty with McHugh, Tully and Kelly on tn
! day after Donohue's arrest. If that be 8,
and Hester had left on the 10th, you wi
J naturally inquire when or how they got 4
I gether to take the cars at Sunbury, as state
, in the letter Did Hester go to Sunbury @
q the night of Monday, the 10th, and renal
until Thursday, the 10Th, or is there mi
: take a. to the time when he left home? YC
o will resolve this matter in his favor, if yc
e can do 10 consistently with fair and rel
. sonable view of the evidence.
On the part of the defendants, testimor
l. has been given for the purpose of contradc
e log the testimony of Daniel Kelly and al
e showing that Hester left home for the we
" before the arrest Of Donohue, and to sho
tn his leaving was for other reasons tn,
those attributed by the commonwealth
le Con O'Garragh teslifies that he WAS marie
at on the 10Th OF November, 1868 that Mar
1t Hester, now Mrs. Dooley was bridesmai
"a and she testified that her father left hon
y that evening was gone when she return
as home. The two other daughters of NJ
b, Hester testify To the same fact, and Garn
e Pepper to the same, as to the time of /
NJ leaving. It is also testified that he was ; e.
:: on his route that night of the 10Th of n
- vember on his way to the west, and it is t.
at tilted by these witnesses that he left hoI
1t for fear OF trouble in regard to illicit dsti
a ing of whisky and of trouble with his vi
" in regard to another woman If these W
nesses are correct as to the time and a.