Oxford Democrat. [volume] (Paris, Me.) 1833-1933, 1894-03-13

VINO ure0 the fnlaI elb0< tnstGoo OF yule
respondents. And Il IL argued q TILE ~
spondeut intended to take life, even
though u b. for . moment bcfprs The
shootlng Was done, Why dldut hs shoot
Newell, the man with whom he was
grspplisgt u II claimed In defeucc that
u 1horue had nred under the clrcum-
stauc~s developed In this cave, that
Newell would have known Il and been
able 10 testlfy In different manner than
hc has. On tho other hand q u clained
that NJ. Newell did 80 and that bile
tsstlmony 10 that The dash was right
therv. "lt hashed up 10 my eyes,
bright" IL the testimony Of, Mr.. Newell
II the time when Il Il claimed On the
part Of the government that this fatal
shos was nrcd.
TIE respondent claims through HE
counsel that there were seven 90 eight
shots fired and the question IL asked u
there we're On many shots nrcd and the
testimony satishes you that Garland
fired only thrve at one time aud two
down In the street, where did the others
come froms The government claims that
this respondent fired oucc nj least, and
possibly twice, and one Of those sh0ts
vas the fatal bullet that resulted In the
death of whitman.
II 10 claimed on the part Of the de-
fence that you have not sufficient cvi.
dencc before you to warrant you In ind
Ing this respondent guilty beyond .
reasonable doubt; that whitman Was
not In range of Thorne 81 the time he
VAS shot. That isa question addressed
to your discretion and good judgment.
where Was whitman ut the time the
fatal shot vas nreds The evidence tends
10 show that he vas somewhere near the
centrv of the casterly aide Of the hay
scales, o little southeast of the door en-
tering the store. Il II claimed that you
are Justified In coming to the conclusion
that Garland through HE rccklessuess
Was the person Who caused the death of
whitman. u u argued that he wss
..r.ttled" ~ % IL termed. and that he
fired when Newell Was on the plafss and
graphing With this respondent, and Il IL
argued that while he testines he could
hear Newell call Tor assistance; that he
not only had - callbrc revolver hut
Was also the possessor of one Of -
calibre; and u u claimed that he covers
up the facts aud has not told them cor
rectiy. IL IL for you to consider the
force and plauslbility of these arguments
aud decide whether Garland has testi-
ied correctly. You have heard his tee
timouy, that he had with him on that
night only one revolver, that the other
VAS In his house; aud you have heard
the testimony OF Mr.. Garland's wife and
the young gentleman Who vas living
there at the time, Of having gone Inn.
medlstely after hearing the shots aud
finding the - callbrr revolver In the
drawer. Aud the government claims
that the three shots fired by Garland
demonstrates the fact from the evidence
In the case that they came from D
callbrr revolver. While tho fatal bullet
came from q revolver of - cslibrc; and
u IL claimed by the states counsel that
that IL evidence sufficient Ia satisfy you
as reasonable men that t WAS not q bul.
let or ball from the revolver held by
Garland az that time which INFLICTED the
fatal wound.
% IL introduced In evidence that the
ball which caused the death of whitman
Vas Of ~ cslibrr, and ! don't know as u
IL coptroyerted By the defence. You
have heard the evidence of those Who
extracted the hall and of those Who en-.
smib~d u, and " has been introduced In
evidence before you. II IL claimed that
the evidence 10 conclusive that the hall
which caused the death Of Mr.. whitman
Vas . - calibre ball fired from -
csiibse revolver, and str~nuousiy IL u
argued that Garland VAS not the person
~ho fired the fatal shot. for the bullets
taken from the eide of the building show
they are bails dcnominatrd n calibre.
And the government further ssys that
the respondent within q few days has
made . statement 10 Mr.. Newell Who
-a. stars,nr outside ~. ~, ny The Win:
aow Ia relation To the firing Of thls shot.
The government relies upon this state
ment, aud upon another made to Mr..
stone, and call your attention IN those
statements. You should BE- careful that
the statements which have been given To
you by the witnesses here are the state
menis made "a tbem by the respondent.
A party testifying 10 . conversation az
q statement made by another may he
mistaken, and the jury should carefully
weigh such evidence and be sAtishcf
that the statements made by party 10 .
witness are CORRECTLY detailed to them.
because the changing % . word might
make material difference. Mr.. Newell
says; ~ went over 10 the jail and vent
to the window, and asked him II be had
taken my note book out of the safe, and
explained to him ~hat Kind OF book II
VAS, the width aud length, and he said
he had not, he didn't take u, and ~e
talked about the book some little time,
and I told him 10 could do him no good
II he had got u and Il might me, aud be-
.ald certainly that De didn't take any
pspsrs out Of that sAfe kno~ingiy; and
then we talked about shooting Harry
whitman, aud ! said regretted that
that Vas done, VAS sorry that that Was
done, and don't know whether asked
him or how Il came around. I think per-
haps I said 90 him, Chandler says you
nr~d twice and Abner says No, did
not, I didn't fre but once"
Are you satisfied that the respondent
used that word "hrei-, Has Mr.. Newell
detailed to you correctly the eonversa-
tlon so far ne Il IL materially What was
aid about dlschsrgins the revolver may
be considered by you and should have
lie legitimate force. You may feel that
Mr.. Newell may have misstated that con-
versation and have used the word "hrcd"
instead Of some other word used by the
respondent.
The government says that the state
ments have been correctly detailed 20
you by Mr.. Newell, and that u IL corrob-
Grated by an admission made to kimbsll
stone In relation to q shell. Mr.. stone
testified that the respondent told hlm be
took shell from his revolver while 20
Ing around In the rear of the buildings
Of this village on the night In question
on his way To Mr.. Ripley's, and also told
him that he fired but once, and directed
him where the shell coold be found-ln .
button box at Mr.. liipley's - and he
substance that this respondent stated 20
him that he knew he fired but once, be-
cause he took the cartridges from the
revolver, threw them Into his hand On
his way home, aud there Was but one
empty shell. You should scrutinlse that
testimony carefully and ascertain ~ beat
you can from the appearance Of Mr..
stone aud the probability Of his telling
you the exact language, whether or not
be has detailed 90 you the conversation
In relation To that ~ it actually took
place. IBID he use the language, 81 fred
but once"y II he used that language,
aud said that he knew he fired but once,
it IL evidence which you have right Ia
IA. "A. -
Who committed the act shIch resulted In
the death Of Harry whitman. Did he use
that language OF use language Of differ