Wood River times. [volume] (Hailey, Idaho) 1882-1915, 1882-07-31
THE, DEATH. PENALTY.
1T Is PRONOUNCED AGAINST SAM.
UEL RIDGWAY.
4 Aotion for New Trial Denied The
Prisoner Sentenced to he Hanged on
Friday, September 2S, 1882.

FRIDAY, September 2S, 1882.
: About half-past 9 o'clock this morn.
ing, Samuel Ridgway, who was found
guilty Of numbering John ("Curly'0
Sherwood, was called up for SEN
tence.
I" His Honor, Judge Pickett, said:
Samuel Ridgway: You were in.
dlcted at the present term of this
Court, by grand jury Of the county
OF Alturas, for the murder of John
Sherwood, at this county, on the 10th
day of June last. To this indictment
you pleaded that you were not guilty,
and upon the issue thus formed YOU
have been tried by trial jury, who
have, upon their oaths, found YOU
guilty of murder in the first degree,
and have returned their verdict ac.
cordingly.
Have you any legal cause to show
why the judgment of the Court should
not be pronounced?
J. H. Harris, Of Bellevue, defend
ants attorney, thereupon moved the
Court for new trial, and made an
argument lasting over an hour in ia.
vor of his motion. He claimed that
the verdict was not justified by the
evidence, and made three or four OBJ
jections, one of which was to few
words addressed to counsel on one
side by His Honor, in open court, dur
ing the trial; the others being to the
written instructions given by His
Honor to the jury.
As he closed D. William Douthitt
arose and said that, by the permission
of Mr.. Harris, he wished to state that
there was a point in this cause that
had not been raised; it was very i'm
portant point. Other points could
also doubtless be raised, and he asked
the Court to delay passing sentence
for two or three days, in order to per-
NIT him and Mr.. Harris to consult the
authorities.
District Attorney Hawley said he
would like to know what this myste-
rous point was.
Mr.. Douthitt said the District At
torncy had no right to ask it before il
was presented to the Court. Besides
other very material points might be
raised.
The District Attorney again OBJ
jected, saying that the opposing coun-
sci had ably defended the prisoner,
and if any very material point could be
raised, an opportunity could be had
OF presenting it at the proper time
and place.
His Honor, Judge Prickett, said
that the time originally fixed for SEN
tence was last Friday; at the request
of counsel for defendant this time had
been extended to Monday. The
Court did not, therefore, feel justified
in postponing it further, especially
when the points which Mr.. Douthitt
proposed to raise had not even been
stated.
Mr.. Harris said that he had Ger.
tainly been treated with great indul-
gence, and the request for another de.
lay was not made at his instigation.
His Honor, in denying the motion
t or further delay, said that although
always glad to receive suggestions,
he was at loss to know what new
point could be urged. He then re
viewed Mr.. Harris's argument, and
said that if the case went to the Su-
preme Court at all, it must be ON
question OF law. If the weight of
the evidence was against tho verdict,
that is to say, if the verdict was not
justified by the evidence, the verdict
should be set aside; but the Court
was satisfied that such was not the case.
The evidence failed to show that an
assault had been committed by de-
ceased, before the firing of the first
shot; and Immediately after that shot
the parties were too widely separated
to justify the supposition that the de-
ceased had committed an assault upon
the defendant. The words objected
to by Mr.. Harris were spoken to coun-
sci, and they were true. 1t were,
perhaps, as well had they not been
spoken, but no objection could be
mode. IN than. fhav wore corrarf