The Redwood gazette. [volume] (Redwood Falls, Minn.) 1873-1940, 1890-04-03
TO SAVE HoLpEN's NECK.

TO SAVE HoLDEN's NECK.
Marshall News-Messenger:-
The Redwood Reveille is making a
manly and dignified effort to prevent
the hanging Of q possibly innocent man,
and the only criticism against that pa
per comes from certain members of
the jury that convicted the prisoner on
circumstantial evidence, with the
mighty peculiar request that the evil
dence be submitted without argument
by the attorneys request that i'm
piled to court and lawyers that YER
dict of acquittal was determined. The
verdict also included recommends
ton to mercy, implying life sentence N
instead of hanging. The Reveille has
reasons for doubling Holden's guilt,
but at most only pleads for commute
ton of the death sentence, Just as the
jury recommended; and yet the edit
or is abused by certain jurors in the
language of Billingsgate. However,
the Reveille has the endorsement of
fair minded men and the press at
large, and it can we'll afford to receive
its abuse with silence, when SO promi-
nent, just and true a man as Hon. O..
B. Turrel comes to it's support in the
cause of humanity and justice. Hold
en- may be the murderer, and we think
he is, but all the circumstances in the
case demand the closest scrutiny by
Gov. Merriam, and guilty or not
guilty, Editor Hayes is to be honored
and commended for demanding a
practical exemplifcation of the declar-
alton that it were better that ninety and
nine guilty men escape, than one limo
cent man should suffer.
Perhaps too much newspaper senti-
ment as to the Holden conviction has
been INDUCED in already, and for this
reason the Gazette has not been swift
to put in its oar in the way of idle con-
troversy. The Holden jury needs no
justification or apologist at home. But
a number of newspapers abroad have
taken up the assumption of Holden's
counsel and their friends, that Holden
has been sentenced to hang because
the jury blundered in rendering their
verdict upon the evidence offered.
Holden's attorneys presented the legal
aspects of these alleged errors to the
Supreme court, in an argument filling
several hundred printed pages. The
highest court of the state ruled that
these alleged Irregularities were not
such as to demand a new trial of The
case. That ought to settle that aspect
of the case with the editorial fraternity,
as it has with the courts.
We agree with the ews-Messenger
that no person should be prescribed
for expressing opinions they have
formed. The editor of the News Mes
senger will also agree with us that this
rule should apply with especial force
to good citizens who are called to the
jury box to express their opinions in
the way prescribed by law, after hear
ing all the evidence that can be pro-
duced by able counsel to clear a man
charged with crime, as well as the ev-
idence of the prosecution. Surely the
opinion of these men is entitled to as
much respect as that of the editor or
other citizens who gets his facts large
ly at second hand. If Editor Whitney
will take the trouble to make trip to
Redwood Falls, he will easily be con-
vinced that public opinion here is not
favorable to hanging either the mem
bers of that jury or the editor of the
Reveille, but that it is in favor of en-
forcing the law against murder, after
a fair conviction.
As to circumstantial evidence, take
a familiar parallel case-that of VIM.
Rose. The evidence offered in that
case was much more complicated and
more 'ruly: circumstantial than in the
case of the Dodge murder. And yet
any effort at this time to secure execu-
tive clemency for Rose on the ground
of such circumstantial evidence, would
be hopeless in this county at least.
After three murderers from neigh
boring counties have made Redwood
county the field of their exploits, and
when to this disgrace is added an ex-
penditure of nearly twenty thousand
dollars to secure the conviction of two
of the murderers, our citizens may be
pardoned for feeling considerably in
earnest in regard to interference with
the regular course of the law. Mem
bers of the jury have stated clearly
and unequivocally that their recon-
mendstion of mercy was presented to
satisfy the demands of one or two of
the jury who we're opposed to capital
punishment, as we'll as to cover the
possibility that Holden was so nearly
non compos as to be less responsible
for his acts than a man of sense. Their
action may have been a mistaken one
from the point of view of lawyer, and
in the same view their request to dis
pense with the one-sided summing up
of the respective attorneys may have
led to expectations which were not
justified by the verdict. But had these
variations from precedent been vital to
the case, the courts that have reviewed
them would have SO ruled.
HHolden is guilty as we think-and
as the editor of the ws-Messenger
says he thinks-we don't want such
doubt thrown on the manner of his