The daily gazette., 1878-12-09
FIRST EDITION..
arr COUNTY COURT

az Bropn's Triai-7he Sequel to
r{ {T,rin Urecker's Inhumdn Act
Y, ", Char Charge Of The Conrt-7he Jury
is ,s, m 1bsence of about one Hour
5a,n 81" a Verdict Of Mdnslaughter-
9l1 m, 1BalIoting IN the Jury's Chamber.
n', la' The Prisoner Receiped The Yer
TI@-Uhat I the People Think Of It.
NJ Penalty for ihe Crime Of Man
tmgAter.
stll to the Gazette.
y,, CASTLE, Dec. THE proceed
> d Court subsequent to those pub
IA in Yesterdays issue are as follows :;
~ r. ,be Brown case Mr.. Pennington for
!. State said: Harley Brown was an
4 abroad man fully aware of the
.nn consequence of placing an OBJ
zion upon a railroad track. II was,
.onling to his first statement, to inter
!, be accommodation train-he had
r. an application TO Mr.. Hodgson for
,ualou, his application was pending
hi the accommodation train struck
N distraction there might have been a
nsDry caused and who so competent to
shai vacancy as he, an old employee
,lN railroad company? Here you
m find his real motive, the workings of
.und when lie plotted the destruction
,bat accommodation train. Then take
slement, II found the tie wedged
there and / could not pull it out"
Ta caused him to change this STATE
.sn2
Tie fact that it was not consistent with
b, result, the track was not torn up, had
NJ track been torn up that tie would
lr. been wedged there, for all Harley
AEn would ever have said to the con-
ng, But his reason told him that no
~ Vould believe such a statement and
n avs to himself: 81 must change my
.Es will admit that | placed it there
81 lld that | took it out again and
s1sht threw it off the track, and that
Ai no intention to wreck the train"
rhs had not intended to wreck that
al could he not have thrown that tie
Z the track as easily as he left il lying
-.a tie track? No! lie intended to
esE the train off the track to wreck
destroy it.
Il can only get at the inward work
y Of a mans heart by what he does.
sfey Brown had some intention in his
nj suppose you or | were TO find an
la1ction on a railroad track which we
= entirely competent to remove but we
a'r il there and pass On--are we guilt
an the eye of the law? Guiltless be-
, God? How much more so would
1ey q. Brown have been had he
4el, a, he said, this tie on that road
nlark secluded spot at that hour of
1nsht and left it there with the intent
t'Gh the conductor of an approaching
nl that there was such an obstruction
e,e way? If his reason were as the
sia,e would have you believe, so de-
'Eael that he was incapable of distin-
:aAls right from wrong, would 1t have
1'ed into his mind to go back and
'I1 An approaching train? Would he
M aiher have stood in unreasoning
r .oating over the wreck he had
liie?s
Sta wicked man; could not have per-
Fiiird this crime, because in Mr.. Tag
aFs opinion "there is not a bad line in
afnures." Is that to stand up and
slIaig the fact that is proven? Con-
llhg he said: ave do think in our
-4nOe opinion a clearer case has not
ven proved to our knowledge in any
l'lT Of Justice. We think and believe
ave can do nothing less in the dis
'afSe Of our duty, than ask you for a
a4d q guilty against this man as he
shs indicted. We feel and believe
ave should be derelict in the discharge
y Ile responsibilities imposed upon us,
I'VE lalled, thus to ask you, may not
NNyou, gentlemen, that whilst it is
A!olI power to render such verdict as
sFa' 10 you proper under the evidence
"ahhol see and do not see how you
W ~ u''chatge your duty and render any
.a'' verdict than that of "guilty in man
W. ava form as he stands indicted" ="
o4 u III your minds you ccme to the con-
mon That you will render verdict of
" I guilty" against him, do not do it,.
IVY ol you III this hall Of justice better
=, .' atll some midnight hour, by some
~-g rdllroad, where a train hurrying
IVA, Nlh It's thousand passengers is
.le4 INTO destruction and there-if
~. 'al-amid the cries of those who are
unfortunate as to be lhere-amidst the
~, Wv AIld shrleks of those who are looking
" 'lell parents-with Sa'an looking on
~ wv say'hg, "liere my agent has placed
a., a ai'tfuction and has gathered into my
- ,,4 nose who are summoned so hastily
,,' T.ltIT account, and here comes my jury
.'. .suN 10 discharge their du y; here they
c1l, c.a'' 10 say "yea" and "amen" TO that"
I'', 'u lflIen leave this case in your
n vGlo I at 1.3. took a recess until 3 o.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
nun T reassembled at three o'clock.
hA D. Nniei justice charged the jury III
~ Drown case as follow:
one' ~ehNlLEMEN OF THE JURY The pris-
riM. a' The bar stands indicted Of the
h % S1..o ol murder of the first degree; and
ds ',o y, yes upon you to say, by your YER
form "nether he is guilty in manner and
j.,a., ,n ds he stands indicted. If you shall
len ',',llle t he is not so guilty you are
mrdo " consider whether he is gully Of
"" "4sr ", IN the second degree. Should
h i' 'ol believe from the evidence that
Iop guilty Of either degree of murder
A., are 10 inquire whether his offence is
fan,oa % inanslaughter only. We feel war
ptcS Il III saying to you from the undis-
prisOadp % p ool made in this case that the
o,bar bpr AZ the bar is guilty of one or the
.bowr VI u those crimes /; unless he has
nEt ~