The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1884-10-23

iB the conduct or the defendhnJ thht ID
under consideration now. How ala ne
Appearp How did no conduct himselir
IL 10 claimed by the state as u clrcum~
stance that after lao wus aroused, OF
about that time, he wab seen TO 90 u
his priyy and remain there but Tor u
moment, 40 the State claims 10 have
shown To you. simply going II, shutting
the door and coming out. That that
was repeated. What does that circum'
slance indicate To you under the charge
that was made In the casey
1t is claimed that he remained about
the Kirkland place and his own place
until perhaps 7 O'Clock OF That morning,
and then went away. ~ 10 claimed
that he made no effort TO lind the Durgs
lar; that he made no Inquiry about the
matter. IL Is claimed That Instead or
that he got upon q beer wagon with a
friend aud rode to Fulton, under the
semblance OF having business there
that no goes to Fulton. IL Is claimed
by the Stats that he had no business,
and YOU have heard th0witnesses that
he remained with this Young man oil
the time aud returned sometime IN the
afternoon. IL 10 claimed IN addition 10
this that sometime after this he engaged
10 work at the bridge, and II ID claimed
from shOeA that he had while working
AZ the briIee, that he wore They are IN
court; you have them before you FOR
another purpose, IL is claimed by the
STATE, and when | say claimed by the
State | mean they claim through lheli
GrsLlmOny, that they have given trAIi-
mOny tending TO show that Wafth0rBt
was without employment ordinarily (;
That this WAS an exceptional thing, his
going 10 work at this bridge or place
where he was working, " 10 for you
TO determine what weight you would
attach and what conclusion you would
draw from any and al OF
these circumstances. VIII hOJ
undertake 10 enumefale Them
all, ! am only giving YOU specimens or
what they claim, drawing your allen-
tlOn TO them, and 10 advise you OF their
importance, and their Importance 10
Thu State ana their Importance 10 Inc
defendant,
| may Say here IN this connection
lhat JhlA defendant 10 NOT under oDI'
galiOns 10 show who committed that
burglary. That burden rests upon the
stale, But the slate have the benefit
vi what They claim " have shown be-
lore you as they CLAIM, demonstrated
That IL WAS not done by aburglar. Blu
the buruen ~ upon The SAFE. They
must satisfy SOu vi that by full proof.
IL ~ claimed upon the part OF Tue de-
lendani, and IN that connection, thaI
on That night there were numerous
persons around and about that neigh
%DUruUuu, ana nOtab y IN lht highway
un OAK street, neal The Kirkland house,
ana perhaps near Wellmun street. That
numerous lTaCka were seen about these
places In the street, some OF them nav
lug ahues, uLhers barefoot, ANA QUE IL
SAID had Il buniOn, or something OF that
sort upon his foot some develOpement
That was unnatural ana Therefore the
mark was easter distinguished il0m
Ulner tracks. Upon The part OF the do
tense proof has been given 70 YOU
tending 10 show that these persons were
somewhat numerous ny there, The
number you VIII have 10 determine
from the proof, whether two or three
or four or what number. And TINS 10
suggested upon the part OF the deieilbe
10 weaken the testimony Ln the part OF
the state. Not that they feel under
any obligations TO show, ~ i have sa'd,
who did that burglary, but for The pur'
pose Of weakening The testimony olathe
State, so that They could clam ~ your
hands the TACT that no sufficient proof
nad been made here 10 satisfy YOU, hes
lond v reasonable d0uOt. either That
WOrth0rsC committed the burglary up
on his own house, or, when IL more
important and connected with ",
whether he shot Mrs, kirkland.
Now, you have heard all OF that tes-
timnuy. H. ~ for you to determine The
natutalness Of IL. Because testimony
IA valuable only when IL has some
pointed Ol distinct Significance, more on
less, some applicability 10 the thlnR
under inquiry. II " has no applies
bilny TO the matter under inquiry 4
becomes n matter Of indifference and
could not aid very materially Ia deter"
mining the main question That IL before
yoI.
will say 90 you that IL 10 your duty
TO look Gatetuily into tho testimony
that IL submitted 10 YOU upon me part
Of the defense IN regard to these trNmpS,
II does not follow that because nobody
demonstrates that this woman WAS
shot 10y Il tramp that therefore you are
to disregard the tramp question:. ~ Is
IN the case, and Ia The way that ! have
indicated,
But upon the part Of the State II Is
claimed that IL " unnatural That THESE
lramps could have committed that
murder. And among other thlugi " IN
suggested by the State, as showing lhA'
II WAS northumberland " Is Tor You "a
determine that tins kirkland house
was open from It's fear To ltS front, oil
of The windows substantially, " IL
claimed, were open In that house on
that warm night; that there was u
light burning IN the house, aud At 10
claimed, that II an ordinary tramp
were there he would De There Tor plunN
der, and that II he vas there for plun-
der he need not have gone to that din
cult place upon the roof In front OF The
house In order 10 have gov into that
room. say these are circumstances
they are natural circumstances that you
are To look 10 for the purpose OF deter
%mining-ioI the purpose OF reading the
acts OF these tramps. Would "A tramp,
u stranger who had no interest but
gain, have worked his way around upon
that dllicvlt place for the purpose
OF getting in their TO commit Il
robbery, to steAlY IL IL claimed by
the State " IL all unnatural. And 81
claim the suggestion, or The proof that
is made here with regard TO the decla-
ration that "a tramp, or supposed tramp
was heard TO say something about
shooting the damned rascal. To whom
could that applyp Under the natural
circumstances VI this case, 10 whom
could that applyp 1t Is for you to In
quire.
IL is claimed upon the part of The
State In argument, and II Ia proper fol
your consideration, would u tramp, OF
tramps, who had been engaged in shoot
ing a person., had taken the life OF some