The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1880-03-11


been deceived by appearances, or may
testify untruthfully. Hence it is that in
prosecutions for crimes, even the highest
circumstantial evidence is admitted and
sufices to convict of crime, If it be of a
character to prove the guilt Of the pris-
oner beyond the existence Of all reason g.
BILE doubt. Guilt is so proven beyond
reasonable doubt, when the facts and
circumstances proven, exclude every
reasonable hypothesis Of the prisoners
innocence, or when they cannot be recon-
ciled with his innocence.
1 will now call your attention to the
law in reference to the charge against
the prisoner and the issue submitted 70
your determinatidA. The prisoner is in
dicted under a section of our criminal act,
which reads as follows:
"Whosoever purposely, and either
of deliberate and premeditated
malice, or by means of poison, or iu
perpetratlng, or attempting to per-
petrate, any rape, arson, robbery or bur"
glary, kills another, is guilty of murder
in rhe first degree, and shall suffer
DEATH"
So far as the charge in the present case
is concerned, we may read it for the sake
of clearness as follows:
Whoever putposely, and Of deliberate
and plemeditsted malice, kills another,
is guilty of murder in the first degree,
and shall suffer death.
The statute briefly defines murder in
the first degree, to be, the killing of an
other purpOsely, and Of deliberate and
premeditated malice. Before inviting
your attention to the consideration OF
these essential elements of the crime fol
murder in the first degree, in detail, it is
important to bring to your notice pro
vision of our statute in reference to the
trial and verdict of the jury in all cases
of homicide. AS upon an indictment for
murder in the first degree the jury may,
If the proof in the case warrants it, and as
1t may be warranted by the proof, by its
verdict find the accused guilty of mur-
der in the first degree, or if not proven
guilty Of that degree, guilty of murder
in the second degree, or if not proven
guilty of murder in either the first or
second degree, guilty of manslaughter
only; the provision mentioned requires
that the jury in its verdict, if it finds the
accused guilty, must specify, wheth.
or IL finds him guilty of murder in
the first degree, or Of murder in the sec.
ond degree, or Of manslaughter only,
This makes it necessary that the Court
call your attention to the difference and
distinction between these several degrees
Of homicide.
Murder in the FIRST degree, as have
said, is the killing Of another, purposely
and of deliberate and premeditated NAL
Ice. Murder in the second degree may
be defined to be the killing of another,
purposely and mallciously. AS in muir
der in the first degree, so in murder o
the second degree, the killing must bt
purposed and malicious, but is not re'
quired to be, of deliberate or premedita.
ted malice, as in murder of the first de-
gree. Manslaughter is the unlawful kill
ing of another. If the killing be unlaw'
e,,l u ,,oo,,v,ko 70 m o o1uu nhfar vyhathal
or not it be purposed, or whether or moi
it be malicious; except that II the killing
be both purposed and malicious, then, a'
have already statedJ it is murder in the
second degree, and not manslaughter, i
the killing be unlawful and purposed
but not malicious, 1t is manslaughter, and
it is manslaughter, in the same manner
if it be unlawful and malicious, but not
purposed.
will now call your attention to the
consideration Of the elements Of the crime
of murder In the first degree, as charged
in the Indictment in this cause. In order
to sustain the charge as set out in the in
dictment, and to warrant conviction fol
murder in the first degree, the prooi
must establish beyond reasonable doubt
that the accused shot and killed the de-
ceased Christopher Spuhler; that he sc
killed him pu,poseIy; and that he so kill
ed him of deliberate and pTemedttUteo
malice
Passing by for the present, the obser'
vations desire to submit respecting the
act of killing and the proof required to es'
tabish the same, 1 will proceed at once
to the consideration of the other elements
OF murder in the first degree, purposed
killing, and Of deliberate and premedita
ted malice.
First, the proof must show, that the
accused purposeIy killed the deceased
Spuhler, that is, that he intended to kill
him at the time he caused his death. As
to how purpose or intention to kill may
be, and ordinarily is proved, I may say
in the language Of an eminent Judge oI
our old Supreme Court (Wrights Rep'
1921 "The purpose or intent to kill, in
general, is proved by the circumstances
by what the party does, the manner of in'
tlicting the wounds, theinstrument used,
and Its tendency to destroy life, iEpalpa'
bly, calculated to take life," &C., &c.
From such, aud like circumstances, q
jury may we'll presume and find, that the
party did purpose or intend to take life,
This it may do on the natural and rea-
sonable ground that every accountable
human being, is presumed, and bound
to know the natural consequences of his
own voluntary acts. Thus if oneFvolun.
tarily and Intentionally, with loaded
gun or pistol, shoots another in vita
part of his body, in such way that deatt
would naturally result therefrom, anG
death is actually produced by ii, the pre-
sumption would be natural and reasona'
BILE that he intended to kill him. Hence