Telegram-herald., 1889-10-12


lhtn4 oi any ether flal. oIs.noa.
lne N0ee oi tae paeT anl teeo.e
musi ls listened lo Nlto tlle salat at.t.s-
Npn alla lateacC n eQun ut 1usttt
As ls tilU dNusslfa i.F fHl'teeilu ts p,it
De Qincefs 1nf deisutaHt Is elEttl
a. lroteelou tof HIs oiilC.aI Acts 0oue
wtam tlt souIA ol h.s au4nufiH. lat
the Ilamlh ma.. i.a ilv aeu.ta ls.lfts
lQI nis wrong. q tae oDftadatf tril..
sceHdsa hls ponef ana tse nIanlu ias
sustained lalura lttfelgnH
III sou boa upon uas quesilou .n
favor pl tat Aa..lid. theus sou y 81 lla-
Cela O. as~ess tlt damage upoa tss
ll 81. hereafter -all aoeu.
hui sou sapall ha4 fas Fuapa
Iou lH favor of lue defendant tea t.l
ueNf tuluIfe luow thf fkia ..tt. .lia aI
termusf l4 g, gatd g. iae ll4ln a t..
paluta tD4. uit punsalafat oi tr
mates NIth ia.s Instrument Aas nlli.A
tue meaning oi the constitution ans
laws, uulsaai or cruel auu HfHuuaA 80
cuslomariX inflicted in ins plissa sl
tlr Uuls ht Nas punished.
Ihe court hAs reo.sFed evidence oi
what has heen usual l fils a4a either
prisons ot tle Stale. ana though having
some a0ubi whether lt ls noi q qute.lul
"a law, has concluded O. treat "a as
question ~ laei ioI 3o0 a. determine
whether tbs mode SO punishment nas
ier a long time, reaching hagk - int
enactment % tAe Jaw, been iu common
uss -n oar penltcn.lares. II you tua
that t has then the punishment ie nol
unusual. and tle defendant would uat
bc lauie upou the CLAIM tlat a. Was sa-
As L. the clam taat thc punishment
was cruel Ant muuman, J Instruct Aua
Z that to make 10 80 o must hc sach o. Co
/ shock the scnslbltys aud feelings oi
moral and civilized community
which the general sentiment oi tae
I people would deprecate a. bariAI gus.
AGAIN, some testimony has been n-
/ uOduood lu behalf 0i both thc parties
upon the question whether tAe defend
ant knew, oT had any good reason 20
/ expect, tlst n consequence oi A4s rep
reservations o. the PRISON officials the
1 punishment oi the plaintiff would take
l place without the physlclans super
4 vision required by law.
Ia regard a. thls ! instruct YOU that
/ If you believe, from the evidence that
/ the defendant al l1e time De sent john
SOL 10 puLlshment, did know or have
/ good reason % expect that tht physl-
. clan would bee deferred, tv what tie
warden had said 20 hlm, from cKecut-
/ ing the duties of supervision, be COM
mitted an unlawful act, and s Tesp0n-
| sible Tor the consequence of such want
Of supervision # that was not gwen.
II YOU find that the plaintiff IL not
! entitled 10 recover upon any oi the
| grounds, YOU viii find q verde; for tAc
defendant But Il YOU find that the
plaintiff should recover YOU wlli then
/ determine what damages be should
have.
Considerable testimony from medi-
cal and surgical witnesses has been re-
| ceiyed, both IN regard 10 johnson r
actual condition AT and since the time
OF hle alleged injury, and IA the nature
I of opinion a. experts. Tins medical
testimony seems directly u conflict On
the most vital points % which d relates.
You viii get what light you can from 70.
Correct scientific testimony ought to
/ commend itself 10 common sense. IL
should Cve us an insight which thc
mind would gladly follow in Its search
for the truth, anG when d docs THIS u IS
a valuable help. But a medical eN-
pert comes 10 Us az partisan, and
manifcstly under bias. and WITH "a
strong predlspOs 10 testify 10 what
VIII probably help one SIDE, and wa.
thwart the tendency Of any cirCVm-
stance tending 10 aid the other, hf
testimony j. likely 90 be dangerous =
the right II YOU believe that any
ness has testified before YOU in suci
character and with such 3 disposition
the court would sdvse YOU to be care
ful about relying upon any portion o'
/ ms testimony. Ana u respect 20 th'
matter 10 which al the medical test
mOny relates, YOU should, as in otho
matters, reduce 10 by the test Of your
own sound judgment and common
sense, and determine the truth % b
what your own convictions upon toe
{ whole believe II 10 be.
in considering the weight 70 be given
T. the testimony OF witnesses Il ls, az
general proposition. trun that II a VT
ness has wilfully and intentionally test
fed falsely I'D regard 10 any materla
point the Jury would bc liberty 10 dis
: regard the whole OF his evidence, unlcH
where II IS corrOb0rated by credible
testimony. But after al the credit q
be gwen 20 any witness ls wholly
matter for the sound judgment OF TIE
jury. THIS proposition has been in-
voked bv counsel in argument ~ ap-
plicable 10 the testimony Oi the PLAN
tiff and DR.. Way, but il applies equaiiy
20 al the witnesses.
Much criticism has been bestowed
upon Dr. WAY. How much ground Tor
Z tthore is YOU must search the evidence
e to find. II Won find such YOU must
consider il 81 far as \ auecls hiIh ii'
the character OF a witness. on VIII
: however. be careful. r. remember tna'
Z the mann issue here y not upon tne
: / merits or dement's of Df. way nor
. does the fact that Dr. Way neglected
( the dgtv Of supcry Eon, - olo
neglect Il, deprive ihe pia-ntn on iii'
p III CIT / the order of pun snIneut - inf
r. warden was unlawful.
II tae p.a.utiH . entitled - recover
e the deusrls should D. estimated hs
b tot,r- MO- the account. the loss of ths
& ,s.rff of histImc since hls leaving ih'
b rr 81 aud in the future foT ~ l0uE
- erat.tne extent That nls injury result
r. i.v from the punishment is likely q
- r.1t.nre In addition - that DO a
4 e-t+Ird - recover for the pam and
q .nHerng he has already undergone
b and is fikelv 90 undergo hereafNr-au
u for su~n mort fc8fiDu for the degrad
q sf-oa and mutliafion ~ BE body So ne
q naturally suffers in consequence ~ fl
INJURY.
Tnrreis no evidence g. show that th
c drtrnfarf was artoated fv any ua "a
8 ar had fafth and no dsmages beyond
far esnlncnsation cau fe allowed. To
b dffrraarfs belief however. thst th
; punishment wss perfnis Hie ooes no
maka i ~.
! - a--l-rnrr. E-n VI ] a-- .-rl