The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1896-01-18


ions Of bis brilliant young relative, Thomas
S. MORGAN Jr. His remarks when he pic
tured Alr- M%rean learning Biblical history
az Justice TwIgEs' knee were touching in
the extreme. Alr. Barrow took up the ges-
timour OF The Witnesses for the state one
Boy one and commented on their contradic-
tory evidence. Mr.. Barrow expressed his
reEret thai Oh health prevented him from
doing himself or his client full Justice. Ills
speech did not carry out his assertion.
solicitor General W W Fraser
closed Tor the state. lie com
mcucsl by quoting the cases cited
hT ar. Barrow, and threw some
what different light on their construction
ln tle course OF his speech Ar. Fraser
quoted a case not hitherto quoted. 10 was
promptly objected 10 by Mr.. duBlgnOn,
who. under the rules Of practice, claimed
DIS right TO examine and reply TO the case
in question. II was allowed By Judge Fali-
gant.
Mr.. Fraser saiu. we merely demand jus
uce. We ask you 10 decide If the man who
killed Frank keenan, is guilty Of murder
or mauFl laughter
Mr. Fraser briefly and clearly described
the circumstances which led up 10 the
shooting. He was interrupted by Mr..
Barrow who drew his attention 10 the fact
that hc omitted 20 state that Ponder ln ms
statement claimed that Keenan, mad per
s0ualy thrcatcncd him. Mr.. Fraser cor
rcCtcd his statement in conformation to
the objection and incidentally got back at
Mr. Barrow for his remarks about MS
piercing eyes and other characteristics.
AtE. D IaSeE quoted the testimony oA lllt
boy Moses Gordon, who stated distinctly,
that he saw the men talking, Keenan, out
side, and thea Ponder stepped out ana
commenced shooting. Mr.. Fraser said that
the boy did not see the first shot, but his
attention was attracted by IL. Mr.. Fraser
spoke Of Leuders' testimony and the at
tempts Of some outsiders and others TO at
tack him.
AR Fraser made a mastery summing
up of the case for the state. He weighed
the evidence throughout, bringing out the
Inr an ID ts frra m q
the evidence. and not even under the state
ment Of the defendant himself was he JUS
titled in taking the life Of man VINO
favorable light for the defendant had done
no more than attempt an assault upon
him Under the law he argued that the
defendant could only have the right TO de-
fend himself with deadly weapon in case
an attempt to commit felony upon his
person was made.
that each counsel contended that the op-
position was afraid TO put Beranc on the
where is Beranc?" was the undercur-
rent of melody that ran through. the en-
tire trial.
Mr.. Fraser concluded with the strong
point that Ponder, not content after the
first shot, to stand aside satisfied that
he had prevented a continuation OF the
alleged assault. continued to fire bullets
into his unfortunate victim.
At the conclusion Of Mr.. Fraser's speech
Mr.. duBignon attacked the reading of
case cited by the prosecution. MI. Qu-
Bignon's reading differed materially with
Mr. Frasers. In explanation, Mr.. Fraser
claimed he read the case of the defense
and Mr.. duBignOn that of the state.
The judges charge was listened to with
the deepest interest. He read and eX-
planned the customary principles of law
in connection with such cases, as laid
down i'm the code. and instructed the jury
to apply them to the facts as they had
been heard from the witness stand. He
commented on the fact that the jury
had "a serious matter in hand and duty
TO perform 10 themselves, to the law and
to their state. Whatever might be the
result Of their investigation, he said, the
jury should march up to it fearlessly,
whether 20 led to conviction or acquittal.
The differences in testimony they should
judge for themselves, and try to recon-
Gle all conflicts without imputing perjury
to anyone He made some remarks upon
the doctrine of reasonable fears, showing
that If the circumstances had been such
as TO Justify such fears on the part of the
defendant that an attempt to commit
felony upon his person was to be made,
then he had a right to act whether the
danger was real or apparent The portion
Of the charge which was considered by
some as being in the defendants favor
was substantially as follows:
Il charge you, gentlemen of the jury
that If you believe that keenan, as a
discharged employe re-entered the engine
house to attack and injure an employe
who was employed there, then Keenan,
had no right to be there. l will not
charge and never have charged, that a
and where he belongs, should retreat when
he is assaulted. If you have any rea-
sonable doubt, you should give the pris-
oner the benefit of II and acquit him."
The Jury retired about fifteen minutes
before O'Clock, and dinner was ordered
for it shortly thereafter. 1t was about
o'clock when It began to deliberate
about the case. A member CT the jury is
quoted as saying that it was one of the
most pleasant and unanimous juries he
had ever served on. Each of the jurors
a,l nj 70
body at any stage of the deliberations at
ter it had been discharged he said so he
would not say how they stood at the
start He did say, however, that they
were practically Of one mind all the way
through. and that the only question was
as to the recommendation 70 the mercy
There were several reports, however,
after the verdict was rendered as to the
standing of the jury on the first ballot.
One was that six were FOR murder out
right without recommendation; five for
manslaughter, and one for acquittal. The
other that there were eight for murder
outright, three for murder with recon-
mendation, and one for manslaughter
one of these reports is as the defense
heard it and the other as the state
The jury has been in the tolls for four
days, but it was well taken care of and
the courts treatment was appreciated.
The following note of thanks was given
to the Judge after the jury had been dis
charged:
To His Honor, the Judge; We, the jury,
would like to return thanks TO yourself
and officers for your kind and
considerate attention during the trial of
this case. Most respectfully yours, S. L.
Newton Foreman.
Savannah. Ga. Jan. II, 1896.
Judge Falligant thanked the foreman
and the jurors for their consideration, and
their careful and close attention to every
detail during the trial of the case. The
verdict was discussed on all sides, and
was the subject of as many varied COM
ments as there were features in the trial.
NEARLY ONE THOUSAND VESSELS.