The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1889-05-11


in, and boastful of Wnat he had done
Would not a sane man have become uncon-
| trOllable under Such circumstances! In
those days men carried pistols because the
law did not afford them protection -
Judge Judd-Stop that, Brother Young
Keep inside of the evidence.
| Mr.. Young-I am. ] was referring to the
condition of those times.
Judge JudG-DO you say the revolver
was above the law?
Mr. Young-In those times and under
those circumstances, yes. It
Judge Judd-Well, you can stop. That
cannot be allowed in court.
Mr.. YOung-All right, sir; then l will
| have to refrain.
| Mr. Young closed, and arecess was taken
| until 80 o'clock. On reassembling,
ARTHUR BROWN
arose on behalf of the defendant. He de-
nned murder in its various degrees as the
law views it, and laid particular stress
upon the fact that murder must be premed-
itated and malicious. The offense of man
slaughter was killing upon provocation,
which must be judged of by the circum-
stances. The nature of the prOvOcatiOn
must be considered III saying what would
be the proper time for the cooling down of
a reasonable man. In this case we see that
Pike, in violation of the permission granted
by his superior officer to Spencer to stay
till morning, followed Spencer to the cor
raj in Rush Valley and without proVOca-
tion struck him down. Mr. Hiles has said
that he was not allowed to prove anything
to the contrary. His statement is untrue,
and l am surprised that he should make
it. He doubtless thought it would have
great weight with you, but he was mis-
taken. We have it as an undisputed fact
that Pixies assault on Spencer was I'M
iustifiable Was that assault provOcation
enough TO take life in return I say it was;
and sane or insane, you and l would have
killed the man who assaulted US in that
way, if we had the opportunity. l do not
say it was right. The law says it is wrong.
1t would be manslaughter. If Howard
Spencer had been sane, and had killed Pike
in the manner claimed, it would have been
manslaughter under the law. We should
take into consideration the times and cir
cumStanceS, not as Justification, but in eX-
PLANTATION of the impulses of human nature.
But even to make manslaughter of this,
they must prove generalization and sanity.
The other side has very adrOitly endeav-
Ored to prove a conspiracy, and they have
rUng the charges on Bill Hickman's name.
They try to make something out of the
stories they have been told of that notorious
character Take the facts of this case, there
is nothing to connect him with it, even if
Gushing and Phillips had told the truth,
which they did not do, for they are CON
tradicted by all the other witnesses for
both sides.
If party to a suit secretes evidence, it
causes a suspicion. The Secreting by the
prosecution of material facts is cause for
suspicion in this case. Their silence for
thirty years is suspicious. 1t means that
they wanted the witnesses for the defense
out of the way. Now, Mr. Hiles says it
have shown was manifeStly untrue. But
that was no excuse for not finding an in
which was not done till the
thirtieth year after the killing. / don't
think Hiles believed himself what he said.
He simply thought his word would have an
effect upon you. Thirty years have elapsed
without prosecution, and the question arises
as to whether Pike attempted himself to
shoot the man who shot him. The case has
been delayed 50 that that fact could not be
proven.
1t has been urged that he was in the Gus
tody of the law. The evidence has been
shown that he was in command of his
troops, or so many as a sergeant can com
mand. Was he unarmed? He had on his
belt for carrying his knife and revolver.
His knife was there; one man says his re
vOlver was, and another says it was not. In
all probability he drew his revolver, and
did not have it on when he was carried up
stairs. My brother HileS speaks of the
of Pixies dying declaration. |
say that Leonard Phillips manufactured
that dying statement out of whole cloth. He
is cOntradicted by the only two other wit
nesses present. This might have been
shown had the trial been held thirty years
ago: but because there was no case against
the defendant, he was not prosecuted If
Mr. Peters should claim that the courts
then would not mete out justice, he gives
a justification for the killing of Pike
The prosecution says that the plea of in
sanity admits the killing. I say it does not.
We put in issue every statement OF the in
dictment There is evidence that Spencer
killed Pike; there's just as strong evidence
that he did not If he did, it is clearly the
evidence that it was while ne was insane.
As to the insanity, we proved that beyond
a doubt Mr.. Hiles says the physicians
testimony should have little weight That
NAV do for his own witnesses, not for ours,
who are the leading medical men OF the
city. Mr.. Hiles admitted their long eXper-
fence and competency, and what klnG OF a
face has he to state now that what they say
is of little consequence! l say their testl-
mony is of great weight and Importance.
They say that man injured as Spencer was
would remain insane for time, or even
for life And we know it is n fact that
man thus affected would develop insanity
on each occasion of unusual excitement. 1t
is claimed that his running AVA was proof
conclusive that he was sane. We all know
that an insane man IS Liable 20
run as sane man. l apprehend that the
court win charge you that If you have a
reasonable doubt as to the sanity OF this
defendant, you must acquit We have
shown you beyond any doubt that he was
not in a sound state of mind. We have
shown YOU that his entire nature was
changed If he was sane and it was shown
that he killed Pike, the verdict should only
be Inanslaughter But he was insane, and
on that we demand verdict of acquittal.
We demand of you. gentlemen of the jury,
that YOU sustain the majesty of the law.
There is no excuse for this prosecution. 1t
was well known to the public at the time
Pike was killed that Spencer was not in
frame of mind to be responsible, even If he
did it, therefore they did not prosecute him
With these facts we ask and expect YER
dict of not guilty.
THE CLOSING ARGUMENT
on behalf of the prosecution was made by
Mr.. Peters There had been considerable
criticism because the prosecution was in
stituted at so late a day. | have no excuse
to make. If murder was committed thirty
wears ago, and the criminal escaped, it is
! time Justice was melted out If he is
wrongfully accused the people should know
that he is innocent. l think the history OF
this territory from 1S47 to 1882 is an answer
for the delay. The prosecution assumed
| in this case to prove every element of muir
der. and we believe we have done it. 1t is
idle for counsel to claim that we have not
proved that the death of Pike was caused
| nv the defendant SDencar They saw the