The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-10-08
THE ARGUMENT.
A Summary of the Five Speeches-The
Instructions.

An hour before noon the argument began
Mr.. Sedwick. the deputy prosecutor for
Morgan county, opening. He first outlined
the different degrees of murder Pre-
meditation, he said, did not have to exist
for any considerable length of time, accord
ing to recent Supreme Court decisions.
Just as soon as the intention enters the
mind it becomes generalization.
The state had showed that Ferriter and
his companions were quarreling in the rear
of the Cincinnati Brewing Company's Of
fee The defendant had hurled a brick at
inland after their combat. TN fix YOU
were the angry words of Ferriter He was
the kind of a fellow that knew how to
''hx' men, insisted the attorney. When
INLAND came back it required the efforts of
four men to keep Ferriter from jumping
on him. Mr. Sedwick insisted that Ferriter
must have heard the officer order the crowd
TO dispense. When Ware called to Ferriter
It was to give advice, the attorney
thought. The policeman had known Fer
ritter fifteen years. and knew what sort of
q character he had to deal with Ware be-
lieved then that Ferriter had a revolver.
How could the beer have reached Wares
breast unless it had been thrown on him?
If 1t merely had been split the beer would
have fallen on his trousers. When Ferriter
threw the beer he committed an assault
and battery. That moment Ferriter was
an assailant, and the policeman, to protect
himself, had to subdue the tough. MIR. Sed-
wick Gid not think Upton saw any of the
circumstances he described. Ferriter is
quick IS a cat, and strong, having been
employed for a considerable time at heavy
labor He knew his strength when he at
tackled the officer. AS the attorney pictured
the tragic death of her husband Mrs. Ware
wept copiously, and the little son, seeing
his mother shedding tears. alphabetically
joined her. Mrs. Ferriter the mother of
the accused, ON the other side of the room,
glared fiercely at the eloquent young at
torney. Every act, every movement of
Ferriter. contended the state, showed that
he had perfect control of his faculties
He Is the most desperate man for his
age you ever saw" said Mr.. Sedwick to the
jury. when Patrolman Rockford arrested
him he said: My God, did l kill him. 1
didn't intend to- It was weak subterfuge
for him to say this. His call on the AL
mighty one Was a sacrilege then Had he
called on his God in his childhood days he
might not have been where he is to-day.
We insist that he is guilty of murder in
the first degree. Don't compromise among
yourselves, gentlemen of the jury, and give
him a slight punishment"
At this juncture Mr.. Potts objected, con-
tending that Mr.. Sedwick was about to
tell the jury that if it gave Ferriter a
sentence under the indeterminate sentence
law he might possibly escape with a few
years. The court checked Mr.. Sedwick in
this direction.
MR. POTTS'S ARGUMENT.
After dinner Mr.. Potts discussed the case
lafa rs~.-
courtroom was crowded for the first time
during the trial. He first asked the jury to
consider conditions among the poorer
classes of Indianapolis, where the "growl-
err is matter Of household economy 1t
was no offense for a group of young men
to drink beer from a bucket in an alley
Ware readily said that it was no ofrense
per Sc when he remarked: Its pity
you fellows can't drink you beer without
so much trouble" Nor did Mr. Potts think
witness should be attacked because he had
been arrested for drunkenness To
strengthen this assertion he cited the re-
and this brought Mr.. Wiltsie to his feet
The prosecutor thought it improper for Mr.
Potts 70 bring such an averment into the
trial of Ferriter. There was not even any
record that Mr.. Colbert was drunk
Mr.. Potts maintained at great length that
Ferriter had right to strike at the police
Tense. The admission Of Hensley as TO his
sympathy with the prisoner was dwelt upon
for all 1t worth. Mr.. Wiltsie would not
permit Mr. Potts TO say that Ferriter's nose
was broken across the bridge. 1t was the
right nasal bone that was broken, and real
~ could have been broken by a fist MIR
Potts was sure the jury would believe Up
toms testimony. He was a farmer and had
no opportunity to educate himself as
thoroughly as the States attorney. who had
interrogated him. The prosecutors In
situations against Upton were resented. Mr.
Witsie spoke up. you know Mr. Potts
the state would have had no right to intro
duce any such evidence" Mr. Potts having