The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1895-01-16
NO VERDICT REACHED
JURY STILL OUT CONSIDERING WIN
ME- SMITHS FATE.
John u. EIam Makes a Strong Appeal
I'm Behalf of the s~tate-Judge
McCray's Instructions.

floor of the courthouse. What has been
the character of the deliberations of the
body not even the bailiff who has been con-
stantly In attendance can say.
The case, which has increased steadily in
interest since it began a week ago. was
concluded yesterday at noon. The culmi-
nation Of the trial was characterized by an
eloquent appeal from the State that reached
the jury through attorney John B. Elan.
The usual crowd of spectators occupied
the chairs of the court room and hung over
the balustrades of the gallery at the hour
Of opening yesterday morning. The pris-
oner came in for the first time looking
worn and anxious. During the progress of
the States last argument the lines of care
and worry appeared to deepen in his face.
Mrs. Wands, mother of the prisoner, was
not present. Since the opening argument of
Prosecutor Wiltsie Mrs. Wands has avoid
ed the court room during the prisoners
arraignment by the State. Attorney Elan
spoke for two hours, in accordance with
the agreement made with the counsel and
the Court. His conclusion was the signal
for the display of renewed interest among
the spectators. The audience understood
the case was lone and that it was about
to go to the jury. Before submitting his
instructions Judge McCray INDUCED a short
recess. For ten minutes the crowd gos-
siped and specllated on the result. At the
call for quiet again the spectators obeyed
with admirable discipline. The intense ST.
lence that reigned during the speech of
attorney ELAN and the reading of the
Courts instructions was indicative of the
absorbing interest in the case.
The last argument in the case was mai lie
by John B.. Elan. who since the opening
day of the trial has not been absent from
his place at the prosecutors table. He COM
menced to speak promptly at 9 O'Clock yes
terday morning. At ten minutes to II o'clock
he concluded. The attorney for the State
reviewed a great deal of the argument of
those who preceded him for the State before
entering actively into a discussion of the
testimony. He desired to say the events If
the past week. in which the prosecution was
vitality interested, were not chiefly for the
condemnation of any person living or dead.
They had a higher purpose.
Nothing we can do" he continued, "can
give back to the kinsmen Of w. 3. Thomas
fitful fever, he sleeps well. Nothing further
can touch him. Murder has done its worst.
broken by sorrow. are absent. Except his
mutilated and bloody garments. we have
buoyant. joyous life that was cut off SO
suddenly and cruelty. The. defendant, sits
among us. surrounded by his loving kins-
the here to enforce the law. 1t is true we
must deal here with the conduct of two
character of them. 1t has not been pre-
tended by the State that these two men met
on those grounds by the defense might
have been left unsaid. 1t was a man of
straw built up by the defense and knocked
pu .tw. B sen Themas w Tse a w %aa f # g0 ssy r ef
coded by the defense that his reputation as
a peaceable and quiet citizen was good;
aye, more! There was nothing that fatal
night that showed he was in i'll humor and
quarrelsome. Thomas goes to the Beach
o largely air FOR Tb 5ne bpe ur did wr 90 rid IN so IN, the fe
the road house, every one comedies, but he
was congenial and g-ood-humored. Let us
fresh from an all-night debauch. AS Mr..
Duncan so pleasantly says, he had been
trees Your attention has been called to
the fact that he took his little nieces out
~iding.took them for a ride while he
Let them have that. 1t is the only time
they are able to connect their client with
purity and innocence.
SMITHS MORAL CHARACTER.
THE defense says we should have shown
who the people were whom Smith met at
Kisselrs. They knew them. If they were
respectable, why did they not bring out the
names? You have heard the General moral
character of the defendant is bad. We are
entitled to the full benefit of that proof
that he was of bad moral character. Why
did they not prove his character? 1t is sug-
gested that we might have brought out
facts as to his previous record. 1 do not
so understand the law, and l presume that
il we had dared to ask the witness whether
If in such a saloon he cut a man, or in
such a place he struck a man, we should
nave inS, f had his ~ tho counsel Kina Of on m their feet object .
debauch. full Of drink, full of i'll humor.
Mr.. Elam devoted several minutes to the
dissection of the testimony Of the wit
ness Suss. He conceded the witness to be
through his testimony. certain touches Of
nature. which seemed to impress him with
ney referred refsr d se eas msS : to st the rec rme Of aft the
defendant in the Police Court. He main
s ssinsd the he first FIRST signs Of Ill humor were
| pictured 'thrillingly. the scene in the bar
room, where Smith had first shown his
There were present in that saloon seven
men: One of them lies still in death and
Dan Lynch is not willing to arise to the
requirements of the defense. and SO was not
SSilHai nne Hunt are and dhe the M bsrtend oysrts Mf,
Elan read the testimony of these witnesses
separately and continued:
Myrtle Overturf heard so little. of that
conversation that her testimony is not
worth considering. Mr.. Smith admits, in his
the truth of most of the con-
LAoIs DC-
yond any doubt, you are driven to the con-
clusion that the conversation was friendly
on the part of Thomas and ill-natured on
the part of Smith. Now, do you believe
that, at the end of this conversation,
Thomas made such i deadly assault upon
Smith that 1t was necessary for Smith to
take his life in self-defense? Whatever the
witnesses at the Beach saw, in their
drunken condition. there can be no question
as to what the doctors saw. They were not
befogged with liouor. Smith was not hurt.
Thomas was cut to his death. Did you
ever hear of a man making a deadly as
Sault by grabbing a man by the ear? The
marks of violence found on Smiths face
We're SO slight that they we're not to be
seen by the ordinary man. The officers
did not see them. No one was there to see
them except a medical gentleman, called
for the purpose, who held him to the light
before even he could find them.
WHO WAS THE AGGRESSOR?
Il tell you this evil-disposed man was
the aggressor and that touch of nature in
Suss's testimony gives the key to the whole
situation-Tll meet you i'm the court or or
the gallows.' He wanted notoriety and hs
las got it, Look at the knife. See how
hard it is to open. and tell me If a mar
assaulted, as smith says he was, could have
found time to open 1t. / tell you that knife
was open all the time. and the assault wa.
planned. III Thomas had struck Smith woulo