The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1891-05-27

Judge Campbell and the lawyers re-
mained in the court room consulting
about the instructions to the jury till
after midnight on Monday. Conse-
quently court did not open till $3.50 yes.
terday morning.
There was not quite as good an audi.
ence at the beginning as there was the
morning before, but as the Captain
warmed up there was fully as much
interest shown, and as the morning
wore on the room filed up till it was
almost jamIned.
General Alfred Caldwell and George
B. Caldwell, nephews OF DR.. Baird, and
DR.. Reed NJ. Baird and Will Baird, sons
OF the deceased, occupied seat on the
steps OF the judges platform. Inside
the railing there was quite a number Of
friends of DR.. Baird's family, and the
usual quota OF lawyers and regular at
tendants of the court.
DR.. Garrison and his wife and several
membersof his fathers family were in
the prisoners box, but little George and
the baby were not there.
AS soon as Captain Dovener arrived in
the court room he went to the sheritf's
desk and took out the photographs and
plat of the scene of the homicide, DR..
Garrison's pistol and DIR. Baird's glovea
and placed them upon convenient
table for reference.
Captain Dovener began few minutes
before 10 o'clock. He thanked the jury
in about the same terms used by his, co.
counsel. He then said that it was q
hard duty for him to call to the iury's
mind the facts and the evidence in the
case but it was duty he owed to the
State and to society to do his part toward
enforcing the laws and maintaining
the power of the law to protect the peo-
pie. The jury is in no wise to blame for
the prisoners being in court to answer
for his crime. The jury has no right to
be guided in its deliberations by any
feelings Of mercy or sentiment. The
jury does not convict; 1t is the evidence.
1t is not the jury that condemns at is
the law that says that he who batheg
his hands in the blood OF another shall
suffer the penalty.
The jury is here simply to decideupon
the evidence and the law, and 1t has
nothing to do with the result save to :
announce it and allow the penalty to
follow.
The State has redeemed her promises
in the case. 1t has laid before the jury
all the facts it promised to prove and it
has brought evidence to substanttato
every statement.
Captain Dovener then began with the
inception of the case. Two men Of an
honorable professionalism finely edu-
Gated and who should be citizens Of
whom the community could be proud,
are the principals. One OF them haa
been laid in his grave and Is here no
more. You have been told of the per-
secutions that have followed one Of
these men. These things can be repeatJ
ed so often that they are believed BY
those who utter them.
DIR. DA1RD's ER1ENDsH1P.
This defendant has said that DR.
Baird was friend in time Of need;
that for eight long years he stuck to
him closer than brother; closer
friend than father or a mother. This
friendship lasted for eight years, and
in q political campaign, where this;
friend did not deem him fit for an Office
he sought, he opposed him. There has
been nothing shown here to prove that
Br. Baird did in any way prove faith
less. If DR.. Baird was in any way to
blame why was it not shown here? II
he was not blameless, then somebody
has failed to do his duty in this case.
II that was not doneit is not the fault
OF the state. The first thing that Is
shown in this case comes from the gas
office. There DR.. Baird, who was
friend Of this prisoner, was met by this
man in the prime and vigor OF mans
hood and that face that had beamed
with friendship for this prisoner was
beaten into mass OF bruises and scars.
Then and there was man who was
in an inner office. He came here and
said he had heard voice he recognized
as that OF this prisoner say, He struck
me-" Where arc the witnesses who saw
the origin of thequarrel? Whereare AL.
bert Franzheim and John Shellhase, and
the others who were in that office at
that time, and who saw 1t all? They
were called here and sworn as witness.
es, but they were never allowed TO tell
what they saw; and why? This de-
fendant has taken upon himself to mako
his own conclusions and his own inter-
enCes from the threats he says he heard.
He did not bring these men here tosnb-
stantiate these threats, simply because
he dare not do it.
What did Dr. Baird say to him2 Sup
pose he did call him these names? They
are meaningless terms and can have no
weight. They are idle terms, and at
common law are not even slanderous.
II he called him thief, and there was
no resentment at law or otherwise, 1t
may be concluded that there is some
truth in it. If he call him robber, he
can defend himself at law. But these
words have no meaning and can have
no meaning.
sMARTtNd WITH DEFEAT.
While DR.. Baird was there in the gas
office, smarting under the humiliation
and disgrace OF having been beaten bya
Young man for whom he had done so
much, he said "I'll kill YOU" That was
simply an idle threat made under the
surroundings that cause men to say
such things, There's not q man upon
the Jury who ever saw conflict but mad
heard the same threat. Itis 1 common
word to use when two men are in con-
i AtNk ThaRA Uentlnman who conduct