Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1892-05-24

statements: their stories could not De
harmonized, and they did not harmo-
niZe. One Of the witnesses for the State
Mr.. Burkhardt-had even said when he
looked up the street DR.. Baird had his
left hand up within a foot Of his shout
der. That was a remarkable corrohora-
ton OF the evidence Of the defendant.
1t bore out the material assertion OF the
defense, that there had been a hostile
demonstration.
Proceeding, he SAID his consideration
Of the case made il clear that no one
knew Just what had taken place on
Eleventh street, except DR.. Garrison, and
that the movement made by DIR. Baird,
sufficiently impressed DR.. Garrison
with these threats ringing in his ears,
to create well-fOunded belief in the
mind Of Dr. Garrison that his life was
in danger, and he acted upon and under
that belief DR.. Baird got out Of his
buggy 10 hitch his horse; there was no
doubt OF that. He had even started 10
hitch it; but he did not do it. He left
his horse unhitched. Something took
him away from it. He must have doGe
lust what DR.. Garrison said he did. de
flew into a rage and left his horse, and
followed DR.. Garrison down the street.
He referred TO the testimony OF Netf
Laing, Mr.. McGrew and l. ID. Prayer,
in this regard, and made the point very
effective, concluding that there could
be no other tenable theory than that
DR.. Baird had left the ring and gone
east OF it.
He forcibly reminded the jury that
they must place themselves In DR.. Car
rison position, on that morning. He
was law-abiding and entirely reputa-
bic citizen, while DR.. Baird, as the
evidence showed, was one Of the most
violent men who ever lived. There
had been good deal said about the
kind-hearted nature Of DR.. Baird. He
would leave that, in the light of the
evidence, with the jury. He said that
for some reason Dr.. Baird had con-
ceived a violent hatred OF DR..
Garrison, and then, passing to
the gas office fight, he dwelt
upon the "moSt awfully revolving
language" there used by DR.. Baird, &C
cOmpanied by threat to "cruSh Dr.
Garrison 10 the earth, and blow" He
said one witness had thought DR.. Baird
might have killed DR.. Garrison then and
there, had il not been for interference.
DIR. Baird said he would do it, and men
of his character usually mean what
they say" The speaker went clear
through the fight, followed it with q
narration Of subsequent abuse, and then
asked the Jury whether they did not
conclude DR.. Garrison had ample reason
TO anticipate an attack. The State had
10 show that DR.. Garrison
had killed DR.. Baird because he called
him vile names, and asked, II that was
true, why DR.. Garrison did not kill
him upon one of many occasions,
and not let the matter run on for
months. There had been many OppOr-
tuuities when DR.. Garrison might have
acted, but there had been no occasion
when DR.. Baird could act until he met
DR.. Garrison face to face, on Eleventh
street, on the morning of March 18th. II
Dr. Garrison intended TO kill Dr. Baird
on that occasion, why did he not kill
him as he approached him? He did not
do it, but passed on, and only turned
around when he heard DR.. Baird follow
ing him. Whatever might have been
the fact, il DR.. Garrison believed and
had reason 10 believe that DR.. Baird in
tended TO do him bodily harm, and that
he was in iminent peril, he was per-
fectly iustifable in acting, even il sub
SeQuent investigation showed that he
was mistaken. But was he mistaken?
l think, in the light Of the evidence,
you will conclude that he was not"
In concluding Mr.. SOmmeryille said
so far from having any further suffer
ing or indignity put upon his client,
who had already been torn from his
family and confined in the Jail Of Ohio
county for more than year, he thought,
il it were possible, be should be in some
manner compensated for the suffering
he had undergone, and he knew Of no
better way TO do that than to give him
a triumphant acGuital.
Mr.. SOmmervile concluded at half
past three, aud after the jury had been
given a short recess, Col. Arnett began
his remarks.
COL. ARNETT's REMARKS.
Col. Arnett began by saying he in
tended to dwell upon the law as he
it, and the facts as he be-
.ieved they had been shown and as they
really existed. and then passed To an eX
PLANTATION Of the various Verdicts which
might be brought in under the
referring, in passing, to the
fact that murder in the first degree had
been eliminated from the trial. His
narration OF the law bearing upon the
case was q clear exposition of the
statutes and their Interpretation by the
Courts, his main topic necessarily being
in its various phases, as
axemplifed in the claims of the defense
.n the case at bar. He dwet with force
upon the assertion that IL Or. Garrison
believed DR.. Baird intended to take his
life or 90 do him great bodily harm, and
had reasonable cause for that belief,
then he was justified in the act commit
ted, and was entitled 10 be discharged
at the hands of the jury. He took up
these two points, belief and the cause
for belief, and made them the text OF
powerful appeal to the jury, bringing
out aud applying facts and circum-
stances which, in the opinion Of the
speaker. made up complete case,
emitting the defense to an ac-
1uittaL Referring to the evidence, the
Colonel said that throughout the entire
feud, from September "A, 1890, to
March :, 1871, no one could find Z single
unkind word or a single hostile demon
stratlon made by DR.. Garrison TO DR..
Baird. He defied anyone to point TO
n hn
uttered one word showing an unkind
thought, word or action by DR.. Garri-
son toward the deceased. There was
nothing calculated TO excite even the
iiSapproval to say nothing Of the ami