Gloucester County Democrat., 1894-07-26

the truth, it may or may not be easy to
recall just what was said and done on Q
} given occasion after the lapse of time. You
, should bear this in mind, ememberiDg
that sometimes very slight change in the
form Of an expression may entirely change
its sense and give it q wholly different
meaning. 1t becomes important, there
J, fore, to recall the manner of the witnesses
|, their appearance and what they said, and
whether they do or do not, so fae as you
J could judge, possess retentive memory.
All these things, ss well as others, present
to an observing juror, may materially as
sist, from your experience with human
nat ure, in solving this important question.
i Your attention is also directed exactly
to what is alleged to have been said. Did
any statement alleged to have been made
by the defendant amount to an admission
that he bad killed Charles Cans or did it
only amount to an admission that dis
turbance or quarrel had occurred In the
latter case it would NOT be sufficient,
standing alone, to convict this defendant.
| Its only value then would be to consider
it provided of course, you believe it to have
been made in connection with other facts
Your will also consider whether it was
likely under the circumstances that the
defendant would make eliminating con-
| fession. In this connection most careful
attention must be paid to the testimony
of the witnesses who impeach the charac-
ter of the States witnesses on this point
for truth and veracity. You will also COM
pare the testimony of Judith Carson with
sh fsr,nn <.f ~ rusk n-s
it seems to be admitted, was present all
during the alleged interview between her
and the defendant, and what Cripps says
on the point and whether he corroborates
the witness or the defendant.
further call your attentifn to the fact
that witness testifyiDg to certain facts
does not require that you should consider
the facts proved. You are to examine the
reasonability and probability of the al
legged fact as well as the character of the
witness, and if the testimony impresses
you as unreasonable OF improbable, or it
comes from one whose character is i'm
peached or is doubtful, you are at liberty
to reject the testimony.
Another element enters into this case to
which feel it my duty to direct your at
tention. 1t is the element Of the character
of the defendant. In this State the prac
tical operation of and the weight to be
attached to this class of testimony has not
received the clear, Judicial Interpretation
and application desirable. This class of
testimony is undoubtedly legal evidence if
offered by the defendant. 1t rest with him
to open the door by which we way enter
into this investigation. In this case
he has done so, and it is for you
~ n = ! xrha hn
established reputation good in its charae.
ter for peace and quiet. This is the only
reputation you are TO consider in the mat
ter The crime charged is one which in
wolves breach of the peace and the in
quiry as to character must be limited as
to whether the defendant is man of VIC
lence and strife or whether he is not. If
you find that the defendant has, by the
testimony of the witnesses produced here,
established a good character and reputa
tion in the community in which he lives,
as peaceable, quiet man, as man who
has not, and, so far as his past habits OF
life is shown, exhibited inclination to stir
up or engage in physie al strife, that ct
must receive consideration at your hands
in forming your conclusion. Provided the
fact be found by you to be established, it
is then for you to consider whether per-
son whose habit of life has been peaceable
and quiet, would be likely to commit
grievous breach of the peace, such as de-
fendant is charged with. You are to consider
whether this act, being unusual, the person
committing it was Influenced by motives
infrequent in their operation, and whether
person even of peaceable and quiet
habits might, by the force of emotion or
of passion, do that of which his former
course of life gave no sign. Still, in all
cases of crime, high or low, good character
is an element to be considered by the Jury
and, in some cases, may even overbalance
what may De termed direct testimony
Indeed character is an ingredient which |
may en- er into case and render doubtful |
that which would otherwise be clear. |
do not know that / can make it any
clearer to you than by employing the |
language of another who, in speaking OF |
this proof of character, says, at is, in |
truth, a fact varying greatly in it's own |
intrinsic value, according to the proofs to |
which it is opposed but always fact fit, |
like all other facts proved in the cause, to
be weighed and estimated by the jury"
In doubtful cases, that is in cases where
the so-called direct testimony leaves the
mind in doubt, it is entitled to peculiar |
regard and should control, turning the
scale in favor of the one establishing it. |
1t is insisted by the defence that the State |
has failed to show a motive existing and |
operating upon this defendant, leading him |
to the commission of this crime As rule |
that which moves to the commission of
crime is incapable of a direct present |
alton, unless, indeed, il be by the actual |
confession of the individual Motive is |
rather psychological fact and is usually |
arrived at indirectly, by inference from |
different facts. Motive may be said TO be |
that which moves or influences the mind |
1t is the action, or passion or desire which |
impels to action. In other words, it may |
be said to be the reason for the commission |
of an act. If the act be criminal and the |
proof clear there need be little or no |
ipquiJy into motive, because it is not the |
duty of the State to prove the commission |
of the crime and the reason for its COM |
mission it is enough if it proves the |
criminal act, but where the proof be not |
clear, the presence or absence of motive |
becomes very important matter to con- |
slider. For instance, if it be not clearly |
established that the accused committed |
tu6 CIltucy OEg Ii Ouo QucbbAuu DIS u lbS |
conn mission is doubtful, absence of motive |
under such circumstances would be very |
important factor, as human experience |
teaches that, except in rare cases, where |
crime has become almost second nature,
or the mind diseased, or the moral sense |
entirely perverted, men do not commit |
crimes without incentive or motive. 1t is |
something to be gotten by themselves, or |
some feeling, or passion, or emotion to
crafty that usually leads men to the
commission of crime.
Was there motive in this cass? Has
the State shown you that there was
motive? There seems to be no dispute as
to the fact that the relations between the |
deceased and the defendant were entirely |
friendly on their trip to Psulsboro, and |
also when they went to the hotel at Ger
mania Park, and it seems to Rave contin-
ned until after the disturbance between
the deceased and Devault. To such an
extent was this friendship manifested that
the deceased took it upon himself to inter
pose between the defe ndant and Devault |
when he had reason to spprehend some
violence was intended toward the former |
After that, did anything occur which |
would lead tris defendant to desire to in
hict upon Charles Cans an injury, and, in |
the pursuit of it this result was produced. |
A motive is not to be guessed at, except
NOV he inf uUu frnr,. h |