Wichita eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1883-1888, 1885-01-16
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT.
Proceedings Of the FEDERAL Court Yesterday
The Thurmau-Smith Murder Case

'esuhy, MI. oeugwick having previously nj
tended to that matter. The wit
a ness Jim Arthur, whom the gov
! eminent put on the stand tn
e previous evening, the prosecution CLAIM
rnisled them us TO the testimony he woul,
give in the case; therefore the prosecution
did not put him on the stand again, the dc
Tense, however, did.
As want of space precludes the possibilit,
of going infinitely into the evidence, we vii
: briefly review the leading features of tn,
case in the light of the evidence.
, In yesterdays report We stated that tn,
deceased was foreman of the Dominion Cat
tie company, and The defendant foreman o
the New York Cattle company; that there
had been dispute about certain camp
built by the Dominion company; that on the
lst day of September, 1888, aboet noon, after
what, in caw-boy phraseology, is called a
'round up which means separating OF
different herds, Smith, the deceased, in CON-
pany with about ten other cattlemen, among
whom was Jockson, the manager
of the New York Company's
ranch and three or four of his men, were at
point near Buzzard't Roost, in the territory,
having general talk, when Alfred p. Thur
man, the defendant, rode up and asked Smith
what he was going TO do about moving tina.
camp. Smith replied that he had orders
from his company not 10 move il, and that
he would not. The defense then claim that
Thurman asked Smith 10 let him move it for
him, thereby relieving Smith from the posi-
ton of having disobeyed orders. Defense
then claim that Smith replied that he had
better not NEEDLE with the camp if he did
he would get into "d-n bad trouble; ;"
that then Tburmrn said if there was to be
trouble, all right; that thereupon Smith,
who was yariously estimated to be anywhere
from six TO fifteen feet from Thurman, ac-
cording 10 the testimony of the
various witnesses, drew his six shooter and
pointed it at Thurman; that the defendant
then spurred his horse on towards Smith, and
at the same time pulled his revolver quickly
and pointing it across in front of his stom-
ach and over his left arm, fred. the bullet
entering Smiths head about half an inch TO
the rear and about an inch below the lobe
of the right ear, and coming out near the left
ear, and that Smith dropped dead from his
horse. The testimony for the prosecution
agreed in the main with the foregoing until
1t came to the point of drawing the weap-
Gus. The governments witnesses swore that
Smith was sitting on his horse with one leg
thrown over the pummel of his saddle, with
his head bent down, when Thurman shot
him, and that he had not at any time during
the controversy, drawn. or attempted to
draw his revolver, aud that Thurman ele-
waited his pistol as high as his breast and
pointed it far out in front of him when
he shot Smith. 4 wide difference
existed between the witnesses as to where
Smiths pistol lay on the ground after he
fell from his horse; in this respect the wit
nesses of the government agreed that the
pistol lay by his left side and about the
middle of the body. This statement was
corroboratcd by Thurman himself and by
Jackson, while the other witnesses for the
defense claimed it lay in front of his right
side Thurman swore that while Smith Law
on the ground after the shooting, he called
all the boys to witness the presence of the
pistol. They then all rode away leaving the
body there None of Smiths EMPLOYEES or
associates we've present. Five or six of the
New York companies people were there in
close proximity to the parties during the
tragedy. \ wide discrepancy existed be-
tween the witnesses as to the position Of
those around as well as to that of the prin-
cipals in the affair. II looks almost impossi-
bic that the ball could have struck Smith as
it did. and taken the direction it did, IL Thur !
man was right up against his horse when he I
shot, ana did not elevate his weapon higher |
than his abdomen. Another singular cir
and one to which Col. Hallowell |
alluded in his argument was, that after all |
the witnesses for the defense had seen Smith 1
so distinctly draw his revolver and point it
at Thurman, that the latter should call their I
attention to the pistol lying on the ground 4
nea Smith, as if TO have them note the fact /
that he had pistol. Another point some
what inexplicabie was, that if Smith wanted |
to shoot Thurman, if he had tie drop on
him as the defense claim he did, why did he |
not shoot He certainly could have
done so. There was no attempt made |
to prove that Smith discharged his
weapon at all, nor did the defense deny the
killing by Thurman.
At 2:25 p. m. the defensed rested their
case. The court remarked that one half
hours ought to be long enough for each
side to argue the case, This was agreed
upon, and Mr.Sedgwick, of Emporia, pro-
ceed with the opening argument for the
government. AT this juncture Judge Fos-
ter said he had been informed that Judge
Sluss had considered it unsafe to hold court
in that building while full of people as i.
was now; therefore, be ordered all those not
seats to leave the room. Mr..
Sedgwick reviewed the evidence tn the case
and referred to the impossibility Of the
shooting being done as the defense claimed
be also made other good points. lie was
followed by WIN. Seward Scott, of Kansas
,ity, for the defense, who entered into very
minute and exhaustive review of the testi-
argument extending shout an
hour Col. r. o. Boggess, his associate, fol-
owed, occupying the remaining half hour
Both these gentlemen displayed fine legal
lttainments and perception in grasping the
eading points in the case.
Col. J. r. Hollowell, district attorney, fol-
owed-his argument occupying about half
IN hour. His argument was the most clear
pointed, fair and eloquent argument ever
made in court in this county. He grasped
Ill the most salient points and pre-
ented them in a wonderfully clear,
ogical and forcible manner. He made
profound impression upon all who heard
him and all who heard him said it was
powerful argument. He closed at precisely
I:45 and the court proceeded TO charge the
ury.
He said that the killing was admitted and |.
ha. the jurisdiction Of this court had not
been questioned. He read the law defining
murder, msnslaughter and justi6able homi-
.de; told them they could bring verdict
# manslaughter under the indictment-de-
lined reasoable doubt.
The jury retired at 5:l0 and the court took I
n intermission, instructing the marshal to
ct him know if verdict was reached DUR
ng the night.
CA. r. AT VALLEY CENTER.
Valley Centre was the theatre of an in