The Carbon advocate. [volume] (Lehighton, Pa.) 1872-1924, 1878-04-20

imp of darkness. He complained that
neither of the squealers could remember
dates. They could not tell when they were
in this and that place, nor how old they are.
"Gentlemen of the jury" said the speaker,
"they have not produced single respect
able witness that connected the prisoner
with the horrible murder of George X.
Smith. Upon whose testimony then does
the gentlemen on the other side expect to
consign the prisoner to a felon's grave? The
testimony of men whose hands are stained
with human blood? Gentlemen, if the low
er regions should be explored TO its lowest
depths it would be impossible to find brace
of such villanous, fostering, hang-dog fiends
as Mulherrin and Kerrigan." a sort of
panegyric was then pronounced on "Hairy,"
which would have sounded very nice were
it not for the fact that Mcdonnell is con-
fessed murderer and if he should ever reach
Pottsville epithets similar to those hurled at
Mulherrin and Kerrigan will be shot at him
by the counsel for the defense in the case of
the Commonwealth VS.. Kane and Bergin.
Mr.. Longstreet spoke for almost two hours,
and did all in his power to make the jury
believe that the prisoner was innocent.
At $3.50 o'clock Mr.. Meehan commenced
his address for the defense He spoke for
half hour when court adjourned until Mon
day morning.
MONDAY MORNING.
Court opened about o'clock. Upon enter
ing the courtroom we found the prisoner al
ready seated, with officer Williams ON one
side and his wife on the other.
p. j. Meehan, ESD, re-opened his address,
first presenting the following points, which
he requested the Court to charge the jury:
]. That Mulherrin and Kerrigan, being
self-contessed murderers, they ought not to
be believed by the jury, unless they are cor
roborated as to material facts of the conies-
sion by the testimony of credible witnesses.
2. The jury ought to acquit the defend
ant, unless the testimony Of Mulherrin and
Kerrigan, as TO the confessions of the parti-
cipatiOn of the defendant in the crime, is
corroborated by the testimony Of credible
witnesses.
3. That if the jury have a reasonable doubt
as to the truthfulness of the confession of the
defendant as participating in the crime or
killing of Smith, they must ocquit the de-
tendant
4. If the jury find that the testimony is SO
conflicting as to create reasonable doubt in
the minds of the jurors as to the presence of
the defendant at the killing of Smith, and
that there is not sufficient evidence to salts
fy the Jury beyond reasonable Doubt that
the defendant conspired with the others to
murder Smith, the verdict must be not
guilty.
5. That the jury must be satisfied beyond
a reasonable doubt, to a moral certainty,
from all the circumstances in the case, that
the defendant is guilty before they can con-
Vict.
6. That Mulherrin and Kerrigan, being
of such doubtful character, the jury should
After reading the above points, he contin-
ued his plea. He said on Saturday when
l closed, was telling you about doubt and
suspicons; | spoke to you about your oaths,
about your verdict. | told you that the
prisoner was innocent until proven guilty,
and that if the testimony pointed to the
guilt of the prisoner, yet ifthere remained
reasonable dopSt Of, his guilt, he should be
Ocq.litted. Here the speaker read some eX-
tracts as 10 what constituted reasonable
doubts and confessions. Mr.. Meehan then
said we start out with the proposition that
the prisoner is guilty of murder or guilty of
nothing; that il he was present at the muir
der, he is guilty of murder in the first de-
gree. Mrs. Smith and Mrs. Hess say they
would know the men whom they saw that
might, and they say that the prisoner is not
One of them. Why, gentlemen, it seems TO
me that the commonwealth, i'll their eager
ness to convict this man, want 10 do it ON
the similarity of looks, We tell you that
the stories of Mulhcrrin and Kcrrigan are
not true you heard Mulherrin tell that
story; now tell me all the names he men
toned. ! can't tell them now. Mulherrin
and Kerrigan not only told the names but
mentioned circumstances. When we asked
him whether he had told Mrs, Mcdonnell
that he knew nothing against her husband,
he said Yes" and then said he had been
put up to it by Captain Pecler. How do
you know that he spoke the truth? He
spoke of Mulherrn's coming to this country
in 1868, and yet says Stinson was present at
the murder; a man who cannot remember
when he was born does not know when he
left his own country; does not know when
he joined II secret society; does not know
when he entered the conspiracy to murder
jesse and William Major, Is il possible for
Il man like him TO tell a true story? The
gentleman said Kerrigan came on the stand,
crossed his leg, and shook it like n dog
does his tail when he is about to enter Il
sight. He remarked that it had been said
rhat these men had reformed, and wanted to
know what evidence there was that Kerri-
gan and Mulherrin had reformed. Is it re-
forming to come ON the stand and tell a diff
terent story every time? He said it was
mot necessary for the defense to prove the
innocence of the prisoner, but the common
wealth must prove his guilt; he believed
that they (the detense) had witnesses that
the commonwealth could not impeach
The commonwealth says that Mcdonnell
was q captain of band of drafted men
said the defense had proved that the pris-
oner was living in Schuylkill county at the
time, and asked what occasion there was tol
him 10 come from Schuylkill county to Car
bon, to lead a band Of drafted men. The
speaker, continuing his remarks upon the
testimony Of Kerrgan and Mulherrin
asked whether it was possible for Kerrig II
10 remember story told him eleven yeIrt
ago, not having spoken to any one upon tn,
subject and the witness then being young
man.
General Albright then commenced hi
plea to the jury, and, after making few re
lnarks to them, said You are sworn to try
this case. You were selected because yoI
expressed a cleamess of conviction on you
part that you were impartial. The speaker
referred TO the attributes of the Deity I,
the necessity of Furnishing those who d,
wrong; referred TO the law given from
Mount Sinai, "Thou shalt not kill"
quoted that terrible edict, Whose sheddetl
mans blood by man shall his blood b.