The new North-west., 1889-12-27

II Has Occupied the District Court the Pas,
Week-Still in Progress.

Dooley was called for trial in the Dlstric
Court on Wednesday of last week. The
whole of that day and the succeeding day
were consumed in the impanneling of jury
the regular panel and a special venire O
twenty-five having been exhausted before
the jury was obtained. Late on Thursday
afternoon, after the jury was sworn to try
the cause, the court on motion ordered tina
the jury be taken to the scene of the killing
on Willow creek, in order that the juror:
might view the ground and thereby be better
able to understand or reconcile the conflict
ing testimony to be afterward given in rela-
| tion to the place where the shooting occur
red. The jury was placed under the charge
| of sworn bailiffs and was taken on Friday tt
view the ground Theodore Branty, Esq.
| going along under the order and instructions
OF the court to point out to the jury the diff
ferent places where it is claimed by the wit
nesses the shooting took place. The jury
after taking in the situation, returned OF
Friday evening and on Saturday, at II a m.
the trial properly began by the statement OF
the prosecution to the jury.
In order to properly understand this case
it is necessary to 60 back few years. Fo,
many years Patrick Dooley had lived on
Willow creek, tributary of Flint creek, a
few miles west of New Chicago. He had
amassed considerable property. While a
man of generous impulses and many redeem
ing traits, he was, whether justly or not we
cannot say, regarded by many citizens of the
vicinity as dangerous and detrimental to the
common veal. Much of the unlawfulness in
the neighborhood was either directly or in-
directly attributed to him, but whether
rightful'y or not, we do not pretend to know.
Passing over several occurrences in the
neighborhood, we come down to four or five
years since, when Michael Dooley. neigh
bor but not a relative of Patrick Dooley, was
killed by man Of the name of O'Brien, an
employee of Patrick Dooley, over a difficulty
concerning water right. O'Brien was con-
victed and is now serving sentence in the
penitentiary for his crime. A year or so
after, Theodore Mlroy married the widow
Of Michael Dooley and thus became close
neshbor of Patrick Dooley. Difficulties at
once developed between Patrick Dooley and
Milroy in truth they began before Milroy
was married, AT one time there was diff
Guilty over highway, at another time over
a boundary line between their adjoining
farms. In this latter difficulty, which took
place in 1855, there were several engaged on
each side, but none were Injured save Milroy,
who was shot in the leg, Prosecutions
against all The parties engaged were insti-
tuted, but only one case ever came to trial,
that Of Campbell, an employee Of Dooley,
who was convicted of an assault with intent
to murder Milroy, and sent to the peniten-
tiary for five years .4a a-
On the morning Of the 18th Of March last
Patrick Dooley and his employees were at
tending his horses. a young stallion broke
loose aud escaped into the adjoining field Of
Milroy. Dooley, with his hand CPerkinsou>
went on horseback into the field after tEe
stallion. Here Milroy shot Doolcy through
the breast, from the effects Of which Dooey
died day or so after, aud this is the killing
which Is the basis of the present prosecution
The Indictment charges murder in the first
degree.
The principal witnesses for the State are
James Perkinson, Blair King, John Doolcv
tson Of Patrick, Martin Manley and Louis
Lain These witnesses testify in substance
that on the morning Of the 18th of March,
1889. they, with Dooley, were about the sta
BILE Of Dooley ens.sod. among other matters
in attending horses that a young Stallion
belonging to Doolcy broke loose from one of
the men handling him and escaped into the
adjoining field belonging to Milroy; that
Perkinson followed after the horse, but soon
came running back, saying that Milroy had
run him out of the field that thereupon
Dooley jumped on his horse and returned
with Perkinson to the field, and that they
rode on in a circuit toward Milroy that
Milroy was on his horse aud had his gun
and when Dooley and Perkinson were ap-
preaching in the direction of Miroy, the
latter got off his horse opposite the side ap-
proaohed by Dooley and raised his gun under
the neck of the horse and fired at Dooley,
striking him In the breast that Dooley had
no gun and was unarmei, and that as soon
as Milroy fred Dooley and Perkinson
wheeled their horses and started homeward,
Perkinson firing three shots out OF his pistol
as they retreated. Blair King, John Dooley,
Martin Manley and Louis Lain CLAIM that
they were standing near the barn of Dooley
and could see all this from where they were
standing. Tbs dying declarations Of Dooley
introduced in evidence are in substance the
same as the foregoing Paul Pelitier testi-
fed that he lived about half mile from
Dooley, and that lie heard four shots, the
first Of which sounded louder than the next
and like the report of n rifle. John Nc
Donald testified that he was working near
and heard four Shots the first of which was
the loudest. Walter White, who was with
Mcdonald, testified that he heard four shots.
Owen strow,l testified that he heard shot
like the report of rifle. Strowd also testi-
~, cha g. l,, n.
and then over toward Milroys and saw the
stallion in the enclosure Of Milroy.
The prosecution also placed upon the stand
Paul Swanson, under rule of the Supreme
Court that the prosecution should call all the
witnesses to the shooting, whether friendly
to the prosecution or not. Swanson was an
elnploye of Milroy and testified that Perkin.
soR fired five shots oul of his revolver at
Miroy before Milroy fired the shot which
struck Dooley, and that the shooting occur.
red at a place in the field which could not be
seen from the place at the barn where John
Dooley and the other witnesses were stand
in the field of Milroy. To the same effect
will be the testimony of Mr.. Milroy. Other
testimony tending to corroborate the defense
Will De lntTOuuCGu- bOtn sues introduce
testimony tending to prove threats. The de
fense claims that there are discrepancies
between the testimony of the witnesses for
the prosecution as given at the preliminary
examination and in this trial.
The case cannot be concluded before to
morrow, if then. The jurors irnpaaneled In
the case are: David Scott, Jesse Miller,
Neils Peterson, Wm. Williams, Wm. Sutter,
A. Chrlstofferson, g. Bowan, Peter johnson,
W. A. Buswell, A. NJ. Walker, Chas. Noble
and Peter Pierce.
The attorneys for the prosecution are
W. S. Shaw, County Attorney; H. f. Titus,
ex-County Attorney, and the Hon. William
Wallace, of Helena, while the defense is
by Knowles g. Forbis, Of Butte;
J. H. Duffy, Esq, aud Hon W. J. Galbraith,
of Deer Lodge.
have the largest and most select stock of
Fine Watches, Jewelry and Silverware ever
before exhibited in Deer Lodge, and invite
every body to come and inspect 1t. The stock
consists of the most unique designs, carefully
~ oknI; ;v,r rr1f for