The sun. [volume] (Morris, Stevens County, Minn.) 1882-1895, 1884-07-24

|
Witness showed on the map how he ran
down on the west side of the Bell shack,
coming round and falling near the east side Of
! the shack.
| toll of Fred Ward On cross examination said
he did not see Lair have pistol nor gun; the
only gun saw was in the shack; went with the
party from the Headquarters building; there
| were three or four little parties; did not see
| any weapons in the hands of any of our parties
from the time of going there to coming back;
| remember the incident of some other mon
coming out of the shack; he was told to
throw up his hands, he threw them up, and
Col Uline said:
| / did not know any man was going I'd sho OF
him. | was thirty or forty. feet from him.
Ledfield, Maly, Mullarkey, Col Ullne and my
self were about him. If there were others
they were Of the same party. There were no
| weapons there that saw. Saw shotgun in
| front of the shack after all was over Ledfield
| wanted to take it along. Uline told him it was
not his and he should let it alone
| Witness was confronted with the different
statements made i'll his affidavit before the cor
oner, and said he was not correctly reported
| by Powell, who wrote the testimony. This
was the complaint Of others who had made
| statements.
| Pat McQueeny, another defendant, said:
! Am twenty three; was behind Bell at Wards
| shack when Bell called.
Bell said; ''Hello, Ward"
Ward said: 'Hello."
He soon opened the door and asked: "What
do you want?,'
Bell told him he came prepared to move the
shack. When Ward came out with his hands
on his hips and said You s-n of b., I'll
down You first" Bell and he then scuffled, and
Charley Ward came in the door and shot five
times. He hit me in my arm.
Witness took off his coat and showed the
mark of the wound on his right arm, showing
als
struck.
did not speak at once till felt the pain,
when L told fhe boys l was shot 1 went about
sixty yards from the shack to Uline. He gave
me handkerchief to bandage up my arm. To
the time of this shooting not one evil word was
said by u.s.
Cross examined, witness said
None OF our party had guns. l heard the
command to scatter and fire into the shack. l
do not know who gave it There was half a
minute between Charley's shots. The fifth
shot struck me. After was shot it was half
a second till felt blood and told the boys was
shot; heard Elliott say sMy hands are up;"
when I went to Uline, southeast
of the shack, when he gave me
handkerchief to bind my arm; Uline walked to
the party; l was sixty yards away; did not see
man run south; think it was Elliott saw run
ming east; did not see any run to Bells shack,
or fall; on the way going up heard some one
say Il think SOME Of the boys were killed" first
morning.
The peaceable reputation of the defendant
was admitted. Rebuttal testimony before the
coroner was admitted under an exceptional.
An offer to prove the declaration of Fred Ward
to United States Receiver Anderson shortly be-
fore his death of his purpose of going on Bells
claim, was ruled out by the court The jury
men admonshed very strictly in the duty to re-
ceive neither spoken nor written communi-
cation and to promptly report any attempt to
communicate with them
The greatest legal efforts ever witnessed i'll
North Dakota are those seen and heard in the
Ward cases. The prayers for charges en-
braced the usual ones in regard to the law of
self defense, weight of testimony, credibility Of
witnesses and reasonable doubt The special
position predicated on the theory of the de-
Tense, that they went to the Ward shack only
with the intent of removing trespassers will
appear in the second request as follows:
If Charles Ward fired his pistol into the
crowd with intent to wound or kill any Of its
members and before any act of violence by any
of said crowd, without previously communi-
eating to such crowd any request to depart
such firing was unlawful and felonious and
could be lawfully resisted by the party to be
injured to an extent sufficient to prevent the
offense, or by any other person in defense of
the person to be injured to the same extent,
provided that the force of violence used in so
resisting was not more than sufficient to pre-
vent such offense; and if by means of such re-
in self-defense and was justifiable.
On the point of threats they ask the follow
ing, in order to determine who made the first
assault:
The jury may consider the testimony of the
threats testified to have been made by Charles
Ward before the fatal collision, even if such
threats were not communicated to the defend
ant or heard by him.
In regard to n-participation directly in the
killing, they ask the following:
If it is not proved beyond reasonable doubt
that the defendant fired the fatal shot, and it
is a reasonable hypothesis raised by the testi-
mony that the fatal shot was fired by some 9TH
er person than the defendant, then you must
acqult him.
In reply to this Wallin, for the dictrict at
torney, maintained that the principles of self
defense were inapplicable to this case and the
defendant was not entitled to instructions up
on that law. Mr. Van Amman further replied,
reviewing the facts as proven, and admitted by
took place before Charlie Ward gave up ran
out and was flying, for his life was immaterial
He denied IN toto the position taken by the cOun-
sci for the defense, and said he was sure his
honor would not be induced to participate in
the attempt to give the jury an excuse to shield
the most dastardIy and unprovoked murder on
principal of self defense which could not be |
invoked by this armed band of twelve against |
two persons. Gov. Davis briefly replied say
ing that the learned counsel in effect asked the
to do under the conshtution-take away
the question of fact from the jury;
whether the facts and circumstances in this
case did not entitle them to inquire into the ap-
plicabil1ty of the right of self defense, and to
instruct them substantially that they must find |
the defendant guilty of murder. The argu-
ment to the jury was opened for the prosecu- |
ton by Deputy District Attorney Pratt, the bar |
being density packed with ladies, almost to the |
exclusion of lawyers. He was responded to |
hv nntn in c1rhfl nd
full two hours speech, in the course of which
he alternately held Dick Turpin up as model |
of courage and of cowardice, and as teller Of |
truth and blackened perjurer and assassin,
as it best suited the explanation of that
nights transactions. The defendant broke |
down, while some of the jurors, especially
few susceptible ones were moved to tears.
The efforts of Van Amman and Davis were
the theme of general admiration, the formers |
for Its familiarity with every legal principle, |
and the latter's for the ingenuity with which it |
clothed the weakest points of the defense and |
made them appear towers of strength. Balls
effort was also a strong one, and as usual |
had great weight with the jury.
In repelling the argument on the assumption |
that the settlement of the Northwest had been
attained by many bloody ARRAYS he said that in
practice of sixteen years he had not heard of |
but one case beside this in which q homicide |
was committed in land dispute in the North
west
Judge Hudson charged the jury at great
length, defining homicide and its different de-
grees. He affirmed some of the points of the
defense, but on the land controversy and SELF
defense principle involved, wholly overruled
them His instruction was as follows:
The controversy between Mr. Bell and the
Ward boys over this claim is not involved in
this trial. You have nothing to do with that
You could not adjust it if you should attempt
it. Whatever the merits of that controversy
may have been cannot now affect the guilt or
limo jence of this defendant and cannot in any
event furnish justification or excuse for this
homicide. Such controversies should be set
tied in the proper form and not on this trial
He stated this proposition in relation to the
principal of self defense:
If you find from the evidence that after the
deceased Charles Ward, had ceased firing
from the door, he cried out that he gave up or
which was heard by those on the
outside, aud he was told to come out and did
come out and run from the shack in an attempt
to escape, and you find that when some dis
lance from the shack he was shot and killed,
this was murder, and nothing that had occurred
previously. furnished any justification for the
killing, either by way of self defense or other
wise-if this fact be true the time for self-de-