The Ohio Democrat. (Logan, O. [Ohio]) 1886-1906, 1894-01-27

called and sworn. Tho testimony
showed that Edwards was of a
peaceful disposition when sober,
that he had started for work that
morning but had quit and returned
to Murray City and commenced
making the rounds of the saloons
and drinking a large amount of
beer and became greatly under the
influence of the intoxicating bever-
age. Defendants testimony is that
he was totally unconscious of all
that occurred after he had taken
several drinks. Did not know he
went to Sellers house, had no rec
ollection of shooting Mrs. Sellers,
never made any threats, knew
nothing about his arrest and did
not realize where he was until he
found himself in jail at Logan. At
the close of the testimony of the
defense, no evidence was offered
in rebuttal and Court adjourned.
On Thursday morning ex-Prose-
cutor j. B. Riason made the open
ing argument to the jury in mast
erly plea, lasting three hours in
which he fully analyzed the law of
murder and demon strated that the
circumstances of this case fully
warranted the charge of murder in
the first degree, and that the evil
dence clearly supported the prin-
ciple points of the charge, that the
killing was done maliciously and
after due deliberation and preme-
ditation.
He was followed by G. H. Buer-
haus, who, in very able argument
maintained that the shooting was
done by the defendant while he
was laboring under temporary in
sanity, caused by the excessive use
of intoxicants.
o. w. H, Wright, on the part of
the State presented the facts of the
case in one of his most able and
winning efforts and we doubt if
Mr.. Wright has ever made a more
able argument than the one made
on this occasion.
Col. 'Weldy took up the night
session by one of his usual strong
arguments or the defense.
The Prosecuting Attorney, r. F.
Price, closed the argument Friday
morning by giving a general re-
hearsal of the entire facts in the
case.
Judge Huffman then rendered
his charge to the jury. He explain
ed to the jury the law in the case
in full. impartial and concise
manner and hewed close to tbs
line, which convinced every one
present that he fully understood
the law in the case and that he is
one of the most able jurists that
has filled our bench for years.
The jury retired and after DELHI
Grating one hour returned a ver-
dict of guilty of murder in the first
degree.
The Counsel for defendant gave
notice of a motion for new trial,
which will in all probability be
over-rulei.
The verdict in this case was full
ly warranted by the testimony,
and was n vindication of law and right. Had
we turies like this in prece eding years, the
fair name of our County would never have
been darkened and stained by the tragical
history of SO many criminal cases. Hereto
fore it has been the practice of the juries to
bring In verdict ofmurder in the second
degree when the evidence in thu cas-, would
warrant different verdict. In the last
three years til ere ha been no less than foui
cases in our county in whrch q verdict fol
murder In the first degree should have been
rendered, and in the three preceding cases
the juries have looked q I'D searched for some
grounds or excuse upon which: to render @
verdict of manslaughter or murder in the
second degree, the result of which has been
tosimpose upon our people cold blooded
murder in less than year.
This verdict should demonstrate the fact
that the crimeof murder will not be tolerated
in our county by the honest, law-abidine
citizens. We believe that few such juries
as this would effectually put stop to the
damnable practice of shedding human blood
Court Notes.