The Indianapolis leader. (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1879-1890, 1880-05-01
W ADE NORSTED
In His Trial for the Murder Of John
g. F. Brown.
The Jury Return Verdict Awarding
Him the Death Penalty.
Row ,he Verdict Was Received py WADE
Mrs. Brown ana tn People-Tne
judges Instructions.

the Court ROOM ard Mr.. herr. nis attoiheJ,
col Guided the argument for the defense.
Prosecutor Elan occupied the time up to II
o'clock in his closing argument for the State
Judge Heller then delivered the following
INSTRUCTIONS TO THE JURY:
The S. ate OF Indiana Joseph Wade. In
dietment for murder In the first degree.
GENTLEMEN OF THE JURY-In this case 10.
ph Wade and Mary Brown are jointly In.
ui:ued for murder In the fi st degree; IL pelDg
char gtd that on the otn day o. Fepruary' 1ooo,
feioniOusy. purposely and with premeoltateo
ma ice K lied ~ nj murdered John Brown by |
beating, striking and MORALLY wOund1ng nlm |
with certain weapons named, and other dan |
gerous and deadly ones, a particular dtscrlp-
ton of which is alleged to be unknown TO the
grand jury, and therefore not nam d. which
wearons Ii is charged were had and held In
the hands of defendants
tried hae he state elected to first put
defendant Wade upon his trial. and
he having entered his plea Of not
called to try and determine the issue Joined
according to the law a. d the evidence.
dne p,e s,e OF ao' ct sonsiit1tSns
each olfense embraced in the Indictment, aud
you are required by the law to presume bin
Inne cent of all until under the issue joined
this pre sumption has been removed by proof
beyond q reasonable doubt of every material
fact constituting one of the OffeDses charged.
Murder in the stcond degree and voluntary
aud Involuntary manSlaughter are embraced
In the Indictment Tor murder In the first de-
murder In the first degree Is defined by our
law as the killing of human being by per-
son OF sound mind, purposely and with pre-
Murder in the second degree is the killing of
one person by another purposely and malici-
In this degree the purpose to M must be
fol- med, but the formation OF the pu' pose is
followed immediately by the act, and is not
ifofp nd m
not such as TO allow deliberate thought.
| In the first degree there must be time and
opportunity for deliberate thought aftef the
| mind has conceived the thought of taking the
| life. II the concep ion Is then medtfated upon,
| and deliberate determination Is iormeo 70
the fatal resolve is carried into execution, 1t Is
| murder in the first degree. nae 90 -
| The law defining voluntary manslaughter
provides that any person who shall unlawful
| ly kill any human being without malice ex-
press or Inn piled, vountarily upon sudden
| as when upon adequate prnvocation the pas
sion has been aroused and the fatat act IS I'M
| lawfully and voluntarily committed before
snfficient time has elapsed to allow the pas
Involuntary granddaughter is the killing of
| involuntarily, without malice. in the commits.
sion of same unlawful act. =
murder ON mansiaughter includes not only
special malevOlence TO the individual slain,
but also generally wicked. deprayed and
m Il,
duty and fatally bent on mischief. ANY Kill
ing Of q human being purposely that Is LOT
excusabs or done In The e neat a5 o.
iOus; and, If the killing was done without pre-
meditation, nc Ia murder In the second degree
If with Fermentation, 1t would be murder IN
II You entertain a reasonable doubt OF de.
fendant's guilt OF murcer or msnslaughter al
| defined you Oue ut to a -qu e him. .ts-. -
Facts and circumstances to be considered
against the accused must Do proved
o.o be an rne th Ssxond tending al as S
favor need only to be proved by evidences SUI
, hcient to cause reasonable belief OF thei
| truth
Evidence is sufficient to remove REASONABLE,
doubt when IL convtnces the judgment Of ordi
| narIly prudent men OF the truth Of PROPOSE
ton with such force that they would volun
tariiy act upon that conviction without heal
tstion In their own most important affairs.
Where there Is reasonable doubt In which
| of two or more degrees of an offense an &C
, cused is guilty he may be convicted OF TIT
You ave the exclusive judges Of the law ant
the facts You alone determine the weight ,1,,
circumstances proved, and also the CT. aipiit.
. ton their conduct, intelligence, manner, OPP
poriunities OF xnowing the facts to which the:
testify; their ability TO retain and communi
cate them the probability OF their testimony
It's consistency or inconsisten cy with the othe
evidence; the witnesses In teIest bias 9r PREV,
any, as to their general reputation for trutl
and veracity In the neighborhood In which
o
! have associated, did business, and by whom
they are known. -. ..-
Where testimony has been INTRODUCED tend
ing to impeach n witness, whether such wilt
| ness mas been Inn peached or not, you have TIT
; tight TO receive NO much OF their testimony a
or In wSce al or eject may yeSr du
| To reconcile the evidence, as far IN practicable
fit be found lrreconcisbe, then It Is You
, | will receive and what reject.
II you believe from the evidence that Mar.
u | Brown struck the fatal blow, and that the de
q iendant at the time the blow was struck, db
/, | not know that she intended TO strike the de
- ceased, and that there was no understandln
x | would innict upon the deceased any unlawfu
h act, anu that the defendant did not contribut
q 10 the death OF the deceased, you VIII nm
i Where two or more combine for the purpos
ofcommiisns felony, Tor what ea "a, "a does \
o responsible. For example: II Wade and Mr.
: Brown mad previously formed design TO TAX
the life of John Brown, and they pr ARRANGE
! the time and circumstances for the perpetra
r, ton OF the homicide, then ~ Mrs. Brow
n standipg mad by them, Wade il IA responsibI
u for H. a. IL he alone had commit, IL.
RI II, however, you should and from the ev
70 dancr beyond u reasonable doubt, that one {
. the two persons charg committed the Grim
q charged, and you should have rcasonabl
n tween them for that purpose aud which ON
did The act, you ought 10 acquit the defendan
y Where oircumstantiale evidence In relied up
crimipatIng circu instances are susceptible (,
explanation upon reasonable bypothes
= sSe s"ry TO @couit. II. however, they are nc
: so reconcilabie, and are sufficient TO establis
" guilt beyond any other reasonable solution
n | then you ought TO convict. s.f.
10 the section OF the statute defining the o
~ Tense OF murtier In the first degree nxes "a
penalty at death by snps sec aarc secto
~ their discretion To substitute for the deaf
- | penalty, imprisonment for life. III, therefor
nf mr. Iflari I'm IA FIR
Q. degree, IL will be your duty To say which per
u II You shou convict him OF murder In tn
'r second degree, the penalty is imprisonmer
IN You should convict him OF manslaughte
you may imprison him not less tnan two ne
n exceeding twenty one years.
. II a re-. sons BILE doubt exists of his guilt. yo
VI should dnd him not guilty
a Although the Court room was orowde
ne during the reading CT the Judges instru
ID tons, pin could aave been heard II dro
ne ped at any time during its delivery. II
crowd remained about the Court room unit
~ supper time "waitipg for the verdict" al
az then only portion left.
he THE RxpEcrANr CROWD,
~ after dusk, again began to flock to the Cou
so House, evidently anticipating q verdict du
no ing the evening and seemingly determine
ne TO stay until II was brought in The
es alone would have filled the Court ROOF
w but another audience equally as large ht
er cole ctsd to hear Mrs Foster, OF lowe, {
IN temperance topics. The two crowds WI
o. came from different motives flsdsll Il
tie available space in the body OF the room al
aa the galleries, while an immense concour
=, gathered around the door ways, intent {
,,w hearing and seeing whatever might be goiI
:" on.