Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1882-01-13
A MURDER TRIAL.
Chas. ". Hayes Convicted of MamsIa"0hter
and Sentenced for One Year.
Especial Correspondence to the Globe

Hon. j. L. Mcdonald, judge of this
district, the trial of Chas. W. Hayes who,
as is already known, was indicted by the
grand jury of this county at the Novem-
Der term of court for the malicious and
premedltated murder of James E. Ches-
ley, Of Hutchinson, by striking him on
the head with pitchfork from the effects
of which he died.
The trial was begun at the November
term of court, but owing to the sudden
illness of one of the jurymen it was adj
journed to the day above stated.
The state was represented by County
Attorney A. P. Fitch, E. G. Rogers, Of
st. Paul, III. j. Peck, of Shakopee and
j. G. Hill, of Montevideo. The attorneys
for the defense were w. w. Irwin and
Gen. j. B. Sanborn, of St. Paul and Lewis
& Nelson, of Hutchinson. The prisoner
sat beside his counsel, small man, weigh
ing about 125 pounds, and looking any,
thing but the dangerous character which,
from the nature of the indictment, one
wonld naturally expect to see Mr..
Hayes is cripple, having suf-
fered an injury of the spine when he was
a boy and altogether his walk
and general appearance indicated mis-
fortunate cripple, who knowing his in
firmities had, in a moment of fright at
the consequences of an attack made upon
him by as strong man as Chesley was
known to be, struck blow in self de-
Tense, which unfortunately had resulted
in the death of the assailant
; Mr.. Hayes has already been confined in
the county Jail of Sibley county since the
9th of June, 1881, when he was commit
ted there by the examining magistrate.
He appeared to regret deeply the unfor-
tunate and accidental effect of the blow,
and his wife who sat by his side betrayed
by her sad and mournful look how keenly
she felt the position in which her husband
and the father of her children had been
placed.
A large number of witnesses had been
subpened by the prosecution, of which
only few were examined. 1t was no.
ticeable fact that the witnesses both for
the prosecution and defense differed very
little in their statements of the circum-
stances as they took place at the time of
the affray, the only disagreement being
as to how far Hayes retreated and as to
the number of times which he told Ches-
ley to keep back before he struck him.
1t appeared substantially from the evil
dence that Hayes was the lessee of a farm
belonging to Chesley, and had been for
number of years. That at the time of
the affray they were engaged IN threshing
the grain raised on the farm; some dis
pute had arisen in regard to the division
of the grain, Chesley taking more of the
dry grain than was rightly his share. To
this Hayes objected and to avoid further
trouble, left the division of the grain to
stack to work, remarking as he did so
"that he was going away to get rid of
having any fuss" While there he saw
Chesley still continue to take the dry
grain and leave the wet and damaged
grain to him and he remarked that it was
an unfair way of doing. To which Ches-
ley replied by applying foul epithets to
him. He replied by applying abusive
epithets to Chesley, who thereupon in an
angrs manner demanded of Hayes what
he had said and Immediately started for
him for the purpose, as Hayes and others
present believe, Of assaulting him.
When he got within few feet Of
Hayes, who was working with fork in
his hand, he was ordered by him to go
back, and menaced with the fork, but
needing neither the warning Or the
menace, he kept advancing, and Hayes,
after retreating few steps, struck him a
blow on the head with the fork. This
did not have the effect of stopping him,
and Hayes, after stepping back another
step and again ordering Chesley to go
back, which order was still unheeded, he
struck him second blow with the fork,
which knocked him down in the straw,
whereupon Hayes stuck his fork into the
straw, and when Chesley attempted to
arise he hit him with his fist
By this time others had reached the
parties and interferred. Chesley there
upon went to his house, and in about six
hours he died. At post mortem exam
ination it was ascertained that death re-
suited from compression of the brain,
caused by fracture of the skull.
The prosecution produced witnesses to
prove that threats had been made by
Hayes towards Chesley previous to the
affray. These were, IN measure, ex-
planned away by the defense, who also
produced witnesses to prove that Chesley
had made threats towards Hayes
This was in substance the testimony in
court upon Friday morning, E. G. Rogers
presented the case to the jury on the part
of the state. His argument occupied
nearly two hours. 1t was an able effort,
and reflects great credit upon the gentle
man both as an able attorney and an
effective speaker.
He was followed by w. w. Irwin for
the defense, who, in opening, thanked
the court on behalf of the attorneys in
the case, for the gontlemanly and cour-
teous manner which he had exhibited
towards them throughout the entire trial,
and for the impartiality displayed in all
his rulings.
He then turned to the jury, and for
over two hours held their closest atten-
ton, as we'll as that of the large audience
of ladies and gentlemen who filled the
court room, in an argument in which he
sustained the reputation gained here on
former occasions. He displayed great
ability in the minuteness and mastery
manner in which he reviewed every
possible feature of the case.
The judge then delivered his charge to
the jury, explaining to them in very
clear and concise manner the different
classes of homicide and the law applica-
bic to the case. Nearly an hour was oc-
cupied in delivering the charge, which
was not excepted to by the attorneys but
was said by them to be one of the most
impartial and able charges which they
had ever heard delivered in a murder
trial.
The iury retired about 4 O'Clock D. M,