The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1893-12-28
THE JUDGES CHARGE.
Cienr Exposition of the Law for the
benefit OF the Jury.

and the case was left TO the jury
l. Gentlemen of the Jury-The Indictment
In this case Is In two counts Inc nrst
count charges that on the I'D day of May,
1888 I'm this county and state. the defend
ant Anna Wagner. did unlawIully, Ielo1i-
ousy willfully. purpOsely and with premedi-
tated malice. kill and murder one Cara
Koesters. by then and there unlawfully,
feloniOusly. willfClly. purposely and with
premeditated malice, administering to the
said Clara Koesters a certain deadly poison.
commonly called arsenic, which the said
Clara Koesters then and there received at
the hands OF the said Anna Wagner, and
which she. the said Clara Koesters. then
and there swallowed, and by reason of
which she then and there died; She the said
Anna Wagner. then and there well know
ing the said arsenic to be q deadly poison,
and wickedly intending. then and there. and
thereby, feloniously. willfully and purposely;
and with premeditated malice, 10 Kill and
murder the said Clara Holsters, contrary 10
the form OF the statute in such case made
The second count of the Indictment is
substantially the same as the hrst with the
been administered Is described in such sec
ond count as Rough on Rats"
. To this charge, so preferred against
entered plea OF not guilty, and the burden
rests upon the State TO prove the material
allegations OF the Indictment beyond a rea-
sOnable doubt. in order TO justify convic-
ton.
g. The law of this State provides that
whoever purposely. and with premeditated
malice. or In the preparation of, or attempt
M any AN rSPe 0oisaS or OF
causing the same to be done kills any hu-
man being. is guilty OF murder in the first
degree and upon conviction thereof, shall
suffer death. or be imprisoned in the State
prison during life. in the discretion of the
jury.
VARIOUS DEGREES OF MURDER.
4. The statutory provision which / have
just set out defines the highest grade of
felonious homicide. and to constitute this
crime. the elements Of purpose, malice and
generalization must concur in the killing.
BY generalization is meant that the slayer,
before the killing had time and opportunity
for deliberate thought, and If. having these.
he consciously conceives the homicidal
thought meditates upon IL. and deliberately
forms the resolve TO kill and does KILL pur-
pOsely and maliclOusy no matter how soon
thereafter the act Is committed, 1t Is muir
). The law of this State further provides
that whoever purposely and maliciously.
but without generalization. kills any human
being Is guilty of murder In the second
degree, and upon convection thereof shall
be imprisoned in the State prison during
6. You will see that under the statutory
provision defining murder i'm the second de-
gree. this Offense is one where a purpose.
design or intention is formed by the slayer
20 Kill human being. and the act of kill
Ing Is done with malice, but without pre-
meditation.
u Another provision of the Law, Of this
human being. without malice, express or i'm
piled. either voluntarily upon a sudden
~. ",
sion OF some unlawful act. is guilty of man
slaughter. and upon a conviction thereof.
shall be Imprisoned in the State prison. not
more than twenty-one years nor less than
two years.
s. Manslaughter. as thus defined by the
II the killing be done Intentionally. upon a
sudden heat. without malice. without law
ful excuse, and before the passion has had
slaughter, but II the killing be done unin-
tentiOnaly. but In the commission of an
without malice. n
voluntary manslaughter.
g. Malice. within the meaning Of the law
relating TO felonious homicides. includes
hatred and revenge, and also denotes an
action flowing from any wicked or corrupt
motive. and attended with such circum-
stances plainly indicate heart regard
less OF social duty and fatally bent on mis-
dence. such as prior threats. seeking an OPP
portunity to do the act, or the like. or II
the the act Is done purposeIy. without legal
excuse. or reasonable provocation; and IL
a deadly poison is unlawfully administered
person. malice may be presumed.
THE PRESENT CASE.
10 In the case before you the defendant
is charged with the murder OF Clara Koes-
tiers. as previously stated. by administering
TO her a deadly poison alleged in one count
to be arsenic. and in the other count to be
Rough Rats. and IL thsf defendant is
found guilty by you. OF any offense as
lation TO the death of said Clara Koesters,
and to the death OF no other person and
you not, upon this inquiry. concerned
with any question or questions relating to
the alleged death of Clara Koesters except
in so far as you shall determine that they
affect the defendant.
II II IS necessary, among other things:
Clara KOesters Is dead. that her death was
caused By poison and that such poison was
purposely and feloniousiy administered to
mr. hos On IN he cor ia
llcti-in other words. To the body of the
crime charged, and if all or either OF them
be not Shown beyond a reasonable doubt,
there cannot be a conviction. But IL you
shall determine that the corpus deficit is
proved, then 1t shall remain Tor you to CON
slider whether the State has proved To the
same degree OF certainty that the defend
ant administered the poison to said Clara
kOesters, charged in the indictment.
T. III you should determine that the
pursuance OF said plan and purpose.
State has adopted and proceeded upon the
theory that the defendant desired TO be-
come the wife of Charles koesters: that
Sns mao 40 l bIn , her mina pn or pun
herself and said Charles koesters. that N
pursuance of said plan and purpose.
OF Charles. 10 be an obstacle In the way OF
its accomplishment. she took the life of
said Clara kOesters. as charged then you
may properly determine that the charge
made against the defendant must stand or
tall upon such theory; and It Is your duty
% give all the evidence in the case a care
full and intelligent consideration. 10 the end
that ~ the defendants guilt is shown to
that degree Of Crtainty required by law
justice may not fall and also TO the end
that II her guilt Is not so shown. she may
be acquitted and justice be likewise done
e. But even IL you should find IL 10 be
true under the evidence. that the defend
ant aid desire To become the wife OF
Charles l.. KOssters. you will have the
right 10 determine that this fact alone Is
not sufficient to show that she took life TO
accomplish her object. but IL is "A circum-
stance which IL proper for you !. TO con-
slider. with the other evidence in the case.
that design, purpose, or plan OF this kind
NAV. or may not exist. nor that human life
may may not be unlawfully taken in
pursuance thereof Whether such design
purpose or plan. did exist in the mind OF
the defendant. and whether In pursuance
thereof. and In an effort 10 accomplish the
end in view the defendant did take the life
or Clara KOesters. as charged, ques-
tiOnS or fact 20 b. determined by you on
the whole case as IL is presented
Is II YOU find that the defendant enter
tained a desire 10 become the wife OF Chas.
KOesters. and that she formed a purpose
or conceived a plan which she determined