Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1880-08-25

ence of the Governor willing to be convinced
of Surap,,e's innocence, but nothing he had
heard had convinced him, and now, at the
close. he was settled in his conviction OF
Spragues guilt.
as To PETITIONS,
He placed little value upon them. Generally
he didn't believe in them in favor OF or pro-
test against pardons. Men sign petitions be-
cause asked But in this case petitions are In
fashion. He then read memorial signed by
/ nine of the Jurors that tried Sprague. reaf-
irming their verdict, stating their present
continued belief in the justice of Sprague's
conviction, and asking that the Governor will
not interfere with the course of the law.
These men had watched the progress of the
case, have been in the country ever since,
and if they had been convinced of
injustice being done to Sprague they
would be first to sign for pardon.
1t had been general rule with Governors
not to grant pardons on petitions unless
! signed by the Judge trying the case and the
District Attorney. and at least some OF the
Jurors. In this case the District Attorney,
at the time of the trial, had, prior to his cleo
ton, been counsel for Sprague, had been re-
tanned by him and was disqualified from act
ing as District Attorney in this case because
of that. The present District Attorney was
counsel for Sprague, and circulated the petit
| petition for pardon, but as one OF the sign
ers puts it with his name he thinks in view
of the recent devs lopments that Executive
clemency should be extended Independently
of the opinion as to Sprague's guilt or inno-
cence.n The Ventura petition is adroitly
drawn to permit of any opinion regarding it.
| Governor Perkins-What, General, do you
think of men who sign petition for pardon
one day and an affirmation of their ver-
dict next? What value is to be placed on
the petition of such men?
General Hart-But three are in that posi-
ton. They are men, he presumed, suscept-
| ible TO sympathetic appeals, but on sober
second thought seek the first opportunity to
state to,the Governor their real sentiments.
A discussion between the Attorney General
and Governor here took place as to sympa-
thetic appeals, in which the Attorney General
insisted that such appeals are always for the
defendant, and not for the law and the peo-
pie, and seldom is sympathy awakened even
for the friends of the murdered man. 1t is
all solicited for the living defendant and his
weeping family.
AS TO PERJURY,
Mr.. Hart declared that Brown had COM
mitted no perjury. Brown was corroborated
| by Sprague, for it is true that Sprague took
the stand and testified that Brown had asked
him to go into the scheme to kill T. Wallace
| More. That is true; true that Sprague
admitted he and Brown did talk of killing
More. and that he (Sprague) refused to do it.
But Brown says that Sprague told him of it
and sought his aid to do it. So it is admitted
the proposed killing of More was matter of
conversation, and so Sprague corroborates
Brown, and SO much for him. But defense
challenged the prosecution to show the muir.
der was not committed for robbery by show
| ing that Mores house was not robbed.
Who ever heard of challenging one to prove
q negative? Three years have gone by and
over, and in all that time not whisper OF
robbery has been heard of, not breath of
suspicion; no examination before ottcera, or
| by Them of members of the household as to
whether there had been robbery. 1t is all
specious and ingenious defense, but exists
| only in the imagination of counsel. No,
there was no robbery. Robbery was not the
motive, but revenge, by men who complained
| of wrongs they may have believed they suf-
fered at the hands of More, bat twas never
thaless murder. The act had its motive, and,
as stated to Austin Brown. was the feeling
that they 1.-THE settlers) had been oppressed
by More. Sprague told Brown that Hines
| said the settlers no longer had legal
remedy; that they had formed league
to kill More and wanted Brown to join It,
| and this was drawn out by the question OF
Brown relating to a former statement of
Sprague, that More would long since have
been killed had any one been detailed to do
it. Then Sprague went on and told Brown
how to reach the rendezvous, the DISCUSSES to
be worn, the turpentine ball to fire the barn,
the others of the gang to act as guards while
be- Sprague, shot More down as be came
out. Why guard? To ward off
any approach of the men from the
sheep ranch in case of an alarm. Now the
fact of that threat and plan being stated by
Sprague, and the fact of the events happen
ing Just as planned, irrevocably fixes the guilt
where it belongs, and the only way to defeat
the consequences is to attack and impeach
the testimony for the prosecution. This
man Brown, they say, sold his property and
| left, He did leave in fear of his life and sold
property that cost him 81, 500 for $4,000. and
defense therefore claims his testimony is not
worthy Of belief.
AN AFFIDAVIT.
Mr.. Har. then read the affidavit of r. B.
| H all, the detective in the case, stating that
while he was working up the case he received
a letter warning him to leave the settlement
at once, and the letter was signed with a
deaths head and cross-bones. That fact
showed that violence was threatened the
prosecution. Hall says the letter was vulgar
and violent that the sentiment of the settle
ment then was in favor Of Sprague and all
! the others, and of his own knowledge he
knows the More brothers used no money to
corrupt witnesses.
But the testimony Of Ramirez and Olivas,
Ferguson and the Cninaman. all corroborate
Brown. Sprague told Brown that Cook, Curlee,
| Churchill and Swanson were to be present at
the murder, and the testimony shows that as
Curlee told Brown it would, it did occur that
night, and all the facts as to DISCUSSES, fire
and shooting developed just as told to Brown
they would No doubt Brown did conceal
his knowledge no doubt he sympathized
with his fellow settlers no doubt he feared
the terrible vengeance to follow any who
revealed, and hence it ia he did not see the
FIRE that nigAt. Mr.. Hart said neither would
he have seen it had he lived in that
community and had that knowledge. He
too would have hidden his head, or left the
community. unless he had the willingness and
the bravery to go over there and resist that
gang of murderers. But because he did or
did not see the fire is not material to the issue,
aud does not affect his testimony. His denial
| shows his unwillingness to be a witness for the
| People, and strengthens his statements in
! the case. But Brown was corroborated by
| Hickerson Mr.. Hart said he was discussing
the testimony, not because he believed it
right to do so before the Governor but because
| the defendants counsel had discussed the
| testimony. But Hickerson was charged as
periurer Mr.. Hart reviewed the facts con-
/ corning Hickerson, and his removal from his
| farm to town, that he and his family might
escape the vengeance of the gang of murderers
who threatened all with death who obstructed
them the offer of the brother of More to pro-
tect him and aid his removal, etc, and held
there was nothing to show corruption. That
he did not testify before the Grand Jury
amounted to nothing. The defense was not
allowed to ask Hickerson what he said to
the Grand Jury, because that by the
Penal Code is a sealed book. with two ex-
ceptions, and neither applies in this case.
Hickerson was right as to his action
relative to the Grand Jury, for his
statement to it could have no effect, for as
any one knows. Mozart, whose case was be-
fore the Grand Jury, could not have been
held on the statement of Hickerson, as to
! Sprague's confession to him. So Judge Faw-
cett was right in his ruling relative
to the proposed impeachment of Hickerson.
Mr.. Hart recited the statements of Kicker
son, detailing Sprague's confession to him as
the two lay in the woods, and the details of
which all correspond with the facts and cor
roborate the statements of Brown as to the
proposed plans Mr.. Hart then began
review of the testimony of Jones, but as it
| .ron II oIclo.l, NJ Williams suooastad an