Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1881-05-13

Darn oy travelled road. in broad dav-
light If he had designed to COM
nit the murder, would he not have selected a
different time and place for the deed: The
evidence brought By the government is not
submit, sufficient to prove that the prisoner
did with malice afore'hough, murder his
mother If the government is correc; in its
theory the man is not sane. Blu; he is not
insane. The prisoner has proved to nv sat
isiaction and, believe. TO the satisfaction of
the jury, tina, he committed the deed in
moment OF blind passio-. He felt the instincts
of self preservation which never leave a man
under any circumstances. In his paroxysms
of fear. he attempted 10 get rid
of the body of his mother by mu-
'iiating and burning it. leave the
case in your hands now, conscious that YOU
will discharge your duty
Mr.. Fairs appeal occupied an hour and a
quarter in its delivery. aud produced
marked effect.
The CoUNrY ATTORNEYS ARGUMENT.
Charles E. Merrill stands indicted for the
the importance and solemnity of the oeca-
sion. 1t seems to he conceded BY the pris-
oners counsel that if YOU believe the confess
sions made to Mr.. Libby, he is guilty of muir
der in the first degree If YOU believe his story,
Mr.. Farr would have YOU think that he is
guilty of mansaughter only, which deny.
The question, Re duced 10 lis simple elements
is. whether you believe the story told to Mr..
Libby or whether You believe the story told
on the stand to-day? II has been proved on
the stand that the confessions made TO Mr..
Libby. Mr.. Jewell. Mr.. Murphy and others,
were not induced by threats or promises.
There is not a scintilla of evidence to show
that he was compelled TO confess to these
gentlemen. There is nothing in the sur
roundings that affected his mind When he
told his story to Mr.. Libby, it was on Sunday
afternoon in quiet country village. IL is
admitted now that if that confession be true,
Merrill is guilty of mos, atrocous murder
without single palliating circumstance.
His confession detailed to you, is untrue.
for great many reasons. If it were true, he
would have told it to Mr.. Libby. When a
man is confessing crime, his first statemen Mt
is the most liable to be correct. He told the
story, substantially as he told it at first, to a
score of persons. When six or eight weeks
had elapsed, after consultation with his coun-
sci, he relates different story. While in Jail,
Merrill learned that there were different
Son. IL
edition of his confession. | say that his
story told on the Witness stand is untrue, be-
cause on the Saturday night in which he
killed his mother, he slept as well as usual.
Science will tell you that the blood cannot
flow from the brain to other parts of the sys-
TEN, when man is in such state of mental
perturbation as he is represented to have
been in. Was he frenzied when he delber-
ately planned to cut, mack, mutilate and burn
his mothers body! Again, his story is un-
true because it is impossible. He says that
he was assaulted by his mother with pitch
fork handle. Ii was demonstrated on
the cross examination that the ''provocation"
was blow upon lis right arm. Mr.. Heath
produced plan of barn floor, and referred
to the careful cross examination of the pris-
oner, and proved that it would be impossible
for his mother, standing as Merrill alleged
she sto,d, to strike him upon the right arm.
The prisoner said that the blow which pro-
voked him to make the assault with the ham
mer, was so heavy that it numbed his arm
and took the feeling out oft. With this be-
numbed arm lie grasped the hammer and
the floor. These facts argue against
his story of the provocation. l claim
that if his unreasonable story were true,
it would not be mansaughter. The law has
grown merciful OF late years. The discrimi-
mating law for manslaughter framed so
that persons who inherit an ungovernable
temper, should not be punished with death
tor what they could not help. 1t has been
proved here that the prisoner has always
been noted for his peaceable disposition. The
counsel tor the defense claims that If the
government proves its theory, the prisoner
is insan. because the crime is atrocious.
What an absurdity. II this were true, every
criminal would mutilate bis victim as sho OK
ingly as he could, in order that he might be
thought insane. He dwells upon the law of
character. and says that man
cannot cross the chasm from
good to evil in one day. | admit this,
and claim that the same law of character
would criminate Charles +. Merrill. He
did not fame out uf his usual stoldity in a
second of rage. IT was no sudden cataclvsm
of anger in which he killed his mother; but
deliberately and with malice aforethought,
he struck her upon the head with ham,
mer The malice sforcthought, as in nearly
every case of homicide, was of exceeding
short duration. The cause for the deed may
have zen slight one, the origin may have
been slight; but small sparks some
times kindle large fires. Wasn't it
something of family trouble that
kept mother, daughter and son apart for
months? All this time the bitterness ranked
in his heart. There was state OF affairs ex-
isting between mother and son which was re-
markable. TO say the least ! ask that, with
out anv sympathy for him, without any cold
ness toward him, you will weigh the evil
dence and upon the face OF it will find him
guilty of murder in the first degree.
Mr. Heaths argument was very lucid and
powerful. He spoke in his usual distinct
tone of voice, and his summing up of the
case was listened to with rapt attention.
The JUICES CHARGE.
Judge Whitehouse then proceeded to in