Madison times. (Tallulah, Madison Parish, La.) 1884-1???, 1885-04-11

AIltI INT III ~ LIIdI, Ni'i' "''' !
not the faintcst hope Of q fair trial !
for the accused. No man who /
could read or hear, could help |
knowing that it would be unsafe !
for any jury, to fail to convict the
accused. \ change Of venue should
unquestionably have been granted,
but the court seems to have never
made ruling that was not mtavor-
able to the prisoners ; Justice was
an impossibility.
The verdict of the jury was 81
J. Ford, VIM. j. Caulficld and VIM.
II. Buckley, guilty ofmanslaughtcr;
Pat Ford and. John Murphy,
guilty" Itwas proved conclusive
" that Judge Ford was not at
the scene Of the killing, and
the prosecution did not
claim it. 1t was then absolutely
impossible for him to be guilty OF
manslaughtcr. No evidence was
produced to show that Caulfield or
Buckley either, fired shot; how
then could they be guilty of man.
slaughter. Pat Ford admitted hav-
ing killed Cap Murphy, but claimed
that Cap Murphy started the shoot
ing, and his pat Ford's) shooting
was in sclf-defcnso, and the wit
nesses produced to show that such
was the case, We're. of much better
quality than the witnesses of the
prosecution.
The Exposition was on hand,
and en- effort was being made to
show New Orleans in the most
favorable light, to expected North
ern visitors, and here was a chance
to prove that crime was promptly
punished i'll New Orleans. 1t was
overlooked that the men charged
with the crime had not been con-
victed, but they were assumed to
be guilty, and there arose the
united voice of the city press, clam.
oring for their death. This howl was
persistent, the language used wa;
violent, and incendiary in many
instances, and the people of New
Orleans came to think that the
death of these men was necessary
to the well being Of New Orleans
That the Second jury was fully i'm
pressed with the fact that their per
sonal safety depended on thcil
bringing in a verdict of guilty o
something, is plain, and the state
ment of Victor Harris shows how
little the evidence had to Go will
the verdict. Here is what he says
True" said he, 1--WE were in.
structed by his honor regarding
constructive presence, which com,
pretended The instructions by
my oath, were to try the case OF
the evidence adduced and the Law
laid down by his honor, the judge
Pat Ford and Jno. Murphy, it had
been proven, did the killing as wa:
admitted by them in their state
ments, and SO we gave them the
full penalty of the law, inasmuch
as the theory of self-defense didn't
work with us. | was very careful
in arriving at a verdict, and the
reading Of passages from the his.
tory of England by Judge Braughn
which showed how many innocent
persons had been convicted ant
hung on pure circumstantial evi
dence, had its effect upon my mind
The evidence against Tom ForC
twas purely circumstantial, and i
was only on the wave of the hanC
that he was convicted by me.
took no notice Of the evidence o.
Fleming, the State having admitted
that Tom Ford was not present
The circumstantial evidence wa:
not strong by any means. l tool
no notice of Pollock's evidence, fol
the reason that the two officer.
whom he swears overheard thu
conversation were not produced
AS to the evidence of Ware anC
others relative to Ford telling
Murphy to give it to him, l an
morally certain that Ford didn't
want Murphy killed in the court
room, and it was evident that they
had no liking for Ford. | did no
believe Schlessenger, Call. Lowen
thai and Mrs. Smythe and NJ,
Mahon; | watched their eyes, ant
could tell that they were not pres
ent, and were not telling the truth
l don't believe they were at or nca
the shooting at all. As a whole
the evidence against Tom Fore
was very weak. Caulfeld and Buck
ley were convicted by me becaus
they were seen with pistols in thei
i. hands.
!, He did not believe much of any