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

nell, the prisoner at the bar, is on his trial
charged with the crime of murder, the
highest crime known to the law. The com
munity is interested in having crime fer
reted out and punished. This is an import
ant trial. To the community it is import
ant because they are interested in
the suppression of crime. To the
prisoner it is of vital importance.
The case demands close attention, and, |
have no doubt, will receive the attention it
deserves. If the evidence satisfies your
minds beyond a reasonable doubt, you may
render verdict in the first degree, or OF
murder in the second degree, or of nvolun-
tary manslaughter. His Honor then pro-
ccednd to explain the law in regard to mur-
der, after which he said: 1t seems to me
that, if guilty at all, there is no question be-
tween murder in the first degree and mvol-
untary manslaughter. His Honor read a
statute from the law in regard to man
slaughter. The circumstances of the kill
ing have been very fully detailed by Mrs.
Smith, Mrs. Hess, and Mr.. Ulrich. The
question is, who did the killing? Was the
prisoner present? There can be no ques-
tion that all the parties in and about the
house that night were there for the purpose
of taking that life; and all those about the
house abetting the crime were guilty in
some degree. The theory of the common
wealth is that Smith was giving informa-
tion to the officials of the government, and
that through this he became obnoxious to
those of whom he informed. You have, in
the testimony of Charles Mulherrn, the de-
Claration that Smith was killed because of
the opposition to the draft. The common
wealth rests her case so far as this prisoner
is concerned entirely upon the testimony OF
Kerrigan and Mulherrin. They testify of
certain declarations made to them by this
prisoner. Juries should always scrutinize
carefully the testimony regarding confess
sions You should consider under what cir
cumstances the declarations were made !;
whether they were made through fear, or in
the hope of being benefited thereby. At
that time there was no movement by the
officers of the law to arrest this prisoner
at least the evidence does not show it. Par
ties sometimes, when they are under arrest
and suspicious circumstances surround them,
make confessions, in the hope of going free.
Such cases are on record, but they are rare.
So far as the evidence in this case shows,
the declarations made by this prisoner were
made voluntarily. Kerrigan and Mulher-
rim acknowledge that they are guilty of
crime, but not of this crime. They do not
acknowledge, nor is there any evidence to
show, that they participated in the killing
of George X. Smith. If they had, | would
say that you should not convict on their tes-
timony. They acknowledge participation
in other crimes. ! can not, as requested by
the defendants counsel, say that you ought
not to convict on the testimony of these two
witnesses unless corroborated by other wit
nesses. You should scrutinze their testi-
mony. In considering their testimony you
should ask yourselves is it likely or proba-
bic? Consider the relations of the prisoner
and the witnesses. 1t is the truth that we
are endeavoring to ascertain in this trial.
Who was there aiding and abetting that
crime? In getting the truth, it matters not
so much about the channel, but whether it
is the truth. You must determine whether
Kerrigan and Mulherrin tell the truth. If
you are satisfied beyond reasonable doubt,
then you can render verdict upon their
testimony just as well as upon that of any
body else. The burden Of the proof rests
upon the commonwealth, They must sat
isiy you beyond the mere possibility of n
doubt. You are not to go outside of the
evidence, but, as reasonable men, desiring
TO ascertain the truth, you are to take up the
testimony step by step. Where you are not
satisfied because the evidence fails, there is
As a clear proposition of law, a jury may be
/ satisfied of the participation in the commits
sion of crime, and yet be in doubt as to
whether he was guilty in the first degree.
That the man who fired the pistol that
killed George X. Smith intended to kill
him is beyond question.
The defendants counsel, said Judge
Drcher, has requested us to charge you upon
certain written propositions. Ills Honor
then read the first and second points, as
given in M. Meehan's speech, and said (:
10 these two propositions we say the credi-
bility Of these two witnesses is a question
for the jury. If you do not believe them,
you can not convict the prisoner. The
third, fourth, and fifth propositions were af-
firmed by the court, but the answer to the
sixth proposition was the same in substance
as the reply To the first and second PROPOSE
tions.
His Honor then continued: You are to
render verdict according TO the evidence.
If the evidence satisfies you beyond a reas-
enable doubt, then you are to say 50 if, on
the other hand, there is doubt as to the
guilt, then you are to acquit. With few
more remarks the Judge concluded his
I charge.
The jury were then taken in charge by
ollc vi lllc u loldNts ana lell Jne CouIl-IOolll
! 1t was now after three o'clock, and things
| became uuinteresting, for spectators gradu-
| ally left court until the room looked rather
vacant. During this time legal document,
! of various kinds We're presented by different
attorneys to the court for approval. At last
six o'clock arrived, and, no verdict having
been rendered, court was adjourned until
the bell should ring, if it was rung before
twelve o'clock otherwise until nine O'Clock
Tuesday morning The jury staid out unit
about 7:lj, when Judge Dreher was notified
that they were prepared to make known
their verdict The courthouse bell wa
rung, people commenced 10 pour into court
and, His Honor being on the bench anC
the prisoner having been brought into court
the verdict was heard. "Guilty Of murder
in the first degree" was altogether unex
pected, but nevertheless such was the yer
diet found. Almost every one with whom
the writer has talked has expressed surprise
as it seemed to be the general speculation
that the jury would find the prisoner guilty
of murder in the second degree, or no
guilty at all. When the jurors had beei
polled, application for new trial was mad
by the defendants counsel.
TUESDAY MORNING.
Court opened soon after nine O'Clock, Tn
rrpafeP nort nj tla morniug spssinn uaa dull