St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1885-03-06
NEARING THE END.
The Cantieny Trial Over-Judge Rooms
Charge to the JttrU-The Prob
able Result

1he Cartieny Trial Oyer-Jtdge Rooms
Charge to the Jury-The Prob
able Result.
Promptly at 9 o'clock yesterday morning
Judge Koon began his charge to the jury
which is to decide as to the guilt or innocence
Of Antony Cantieny, indicted for the muir
der of Robert Laughlin. The attendance Of
spectators was somewhat smaller than on the
preceding days, although the seats and
standing room outside the railing were en-
ireiy occupied. The charge lasted two hours
The judge evidently apprehended the difficult
ty the jury would have found in determining
just what should be considered as evidence,
and was at pains to specify some OF the IT.
relevant matters that had crept into the case
in one way and another, and which were not
strictly offered in evidence, and should
therefore be carefully separated and brushed
aside. He seemed to make an especial effort
TO be impartial and at the same time to in
struct the jury as to just what the law is as
affecting the many phases of q peculiarly
intricate and difficult case. After referrin q
briefly to the occurrences which led to Can
tieuy's indictment and TO the careful man
ner in which the case had been presented,
he said that the questions as to the CREDIBLE
ity Of the witnesses, the evidence to be be-
lieved or discarded, would devolve upon the
jury for determination, but the questions Of
the law must be settled by the court. If he
made a mistake there is a higher court which
will correct the error, but if the jury erred
there would be no remedy. In the first
place, the accused is entitled 10 the presum p
ton that he is innocent and a law
abiding and law-respecting citizen.
&c
heir minds beyond a reasonable doubt, not
a captious doubt, but a reasonable doubt.
So far as the principal facts are concerned,
there is no question to be settled, for it is
admitted that Cantieny shot and killed
Laughln, and the reasonable doubt applies
to the attending circumstances, which indi-
cate either the guilt or innocence of the de-
fendant. Antony Cantieny is indicted for
murder in the first degree, but if found
guilty he may be convicted of any Of the
other degrees or Of any of the four degrees
of manslaughter, or if it is found that his
act was justifable, then he should be adj
judged as guilty Of no offense.
Manslaughter in the first degree excludes
the idea of intention; in the second degree
Is where the killing is ommitted in the heat
of passion upon sudden provocation
but without reconciliation; in the
third degree, where the person killed is COM
hitting trcspass or an unlawful act, and a
dangerous weapon is used; in the fourth
degree, a dangerous weapon is not the in
strumcnt 1t is apparent that the accused
cannot therefore be found guilty in either
the third or fourth degrees of manslaughter
After explaining at length the intention and
meaning Of the law concerning these differ
ent degrees Of crime. the requests
OF defense before mentioned were taken
up and considered. The requests were
based upon the theory that Laughlin's at
tempted arrest of Cantieny was unlawful,
and was not in accordance with his right or
authority. The court said emphatically that
he did not concur with the statement by the
defendants attorney to the effect that Of
lenses against the public peace prohibited
by ordinances passed by the city do not
constitute unlawful acts. The city council
is given the right by the legislature to make
regulations ''to be and to have the
force Of law" and it is the
right and duty of policeman
to arrest persons transgressing these ordi-
nances in his presence, and he may use
reasonable force If resisted or endeavor 10
capture the offender if he fees. The defni-
ton Of a felony was given as n 'public
ofIcnsc punishable 10y death or imprison
ment in the pcnitentiary, every
other public ofTense not so punish
able being misdemeanor. An
arrest is the taking OF person into custody
that he may answer for public ofTensc. The
arrest may be first by peace officer with Il
warrant; second, by an officer without 4
warrant; third, ~ private citizen. Whether
Canticny and his two com panions were VIC
latuC section > OF city ordinance No. :,
question to be settled by the jury. The
theory OF the defense is that they were not
and that the officer exceeded mis- authority
that OF the prosecution is that they were
breaking the law aud the officer was doing
his duty in arresting them; further that they
had no right to resist or to attempt to es-
cape.
The Judge said he did not think it either
proper or necessary to review the testimony.
1t is for the jury TO investigate that, and in
SO doing 1t is proper 10 look at the character
Of the witnesses, to mark their manner, to
judge as 10 whether they told true or manu-
featured stories. Put aside all feelings of
sympathy and use the lceneSt discernment
TO discover the truth There has been a
great deal OF talk by the defense concerning
the police force, and insiuuations made as 70
the manner in which they have been in the
AAhlk OF making aEItStS- II -AlOulu ut pOi ut III
mind that it is Cantieny who is on trial and
not the police OF Minneapolis. The fact that
Il mob beSieged the Jail and sought to defeat
the course of the law by hanging Cantieny
also should be entirely removed from con-
sderatiou The Judge then closed with some
minor instructions as 10 the form OF the YER
dict, and the jury retired.
TALKING IT OVER.
Al the conclusion OF the trial compare
lively few left the room, but remained until
adjournment at noon an hour later. The at
torneys and others at once began to discuss
the probable verdict 10 be returned, aud the
opinions advanced were various. Some
thought murder in the first or second degree,
Others only manslaughter. County Attorney
Davis said it would be murder, while John
Il. Noolley, Canucuy's attorney, predicted
msuslaughter In the second degree or ae-
Qujttal If Cauticuy is 10 be found guilty, -
ne said, a hope II viii be for murder in the
first degree, for then the verdict cannot
stand" Quite u number OF court prophets
predict disagreement. Judge Rooms charge
is regarded as 4 very able and impartial ef-
fort, and the point upon which the case
turns is the question IS to whether LaughHn
MAS doing his duty when he arrested Can
ueny.