The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1896-01-15
CASE OF GEORGE ROGERS
Syllabus of the Case Handed Down by the
State Supreme Court.

In the January syllabi Of the supreme
court is found the decision of the
! judges on tlhe appeal of George W. Rog-
ers who was tried, found guilty and SEN
| fenced in the district court of Reno
| county for completely in the conspiracy
to burn the records of Harvey county.
The appeal was taken for several reas-
ons that involved the legality of the
session of the court, the instructions TO
the jury and in the refusal of the con-
tinuance of the case on account of the
alleged sickness of the defendant. The
following is the syllabus of the case:
No. 1875. The State of Kansas VS..
George w. Rogers. Appeal from Reno
county. Affirmed. Syllabus by the
court. Martin, c. J.
l. In a prosecution for a felony the
defendant applied for continuance on
the ground of his sickness and disabil-
ity. The good faith Of the application
was challenged by the prosecution, and
on its request a committee of physicians
was appointed by the court to visit the
defendant and report upon his condi-
ton which they did, and they We're ex-
amined on the subject orally in open
court Afterward another committee OF
physicians was appointed to treat the
defendant until ready for trial and to
see that nothing was given him except
under their direction, and they took
charge of the defendant accordingly for
some days when the case being again
called another application for cOntin-
uance was made which upon hearing
evidence the court OVerruled, finding
that the defendant was able to be
placed upOn trial. and was in fit and
suitable condition physically to be pres
emf. Held that there was no abuse Of
discretion in Overruling the applica-
ton for a continuance.
,. On a second trial Of the defendant
upon an Inflammation for felony the
state offered TO read from writing
purpOrting to be a bill Of exception
taken on the first trial the testimony
given by the defendant in his own be-
half. 1t was admitted that the docu-
ment was such bill Of exceptions and it
is stated in the record that counsel
reads to the jury the following testi-
mony of c. W. Rogers which is in words
and figures as follows, tO-wit:" Held
that the evidence was sufficiently iden-
titled and was admissible.
3. The following instructions was not
erroneous. viz:
You are instructed. that before you
are warranted in finding the defendant
guilty, that each of you must be able
to truDhfuuy and cOnSclenuouSIy say
that his guilt has been esta bliShed by
the evidence in the case beyond reas-
enable doubt; and if. after a Considera-
ton Of the whole case and consulting
with your fellow jurymen. any one OF
the jurors entertainS a reasonable
doubt as to whether defendants guilt
has been established; you can not con-
Wet the defendant; but You can not
acquit the defendant unless all the jur-
ors entertain a reasonable doubt"
4. The practice of calling in a jury
and lecturing them upon the desirab bill
My of an agreement is not to be com
mended; but the oral remarks of the
court 70 the jury in this case were not
so Objectionable as 10 warrant a re-
versal on that ground.
3. The district court may adjourn TO
a time beyond the commencement Of
the regular term in another county Of
the same distinct; and this in the alb
sence of any showing that the court
was held IN both counties at the same
time does not invalidate the proceed
inCs at such adjourned term.
6. The presumption IN the absence
of anything in the record is that the
court discharged its duty in abmonish-
ing each jury as required by the statute
upon each separation.
All the justices concuTTing.