Reporter and farmer. [volume] (Webster, Day County, Dakota [S.D.]) 188?-1946, 1897-02-11

Examined Him By the Ils NJ % ~
Torch.
jury should they, upon the strength OF
merely circumstantial evidence, find
the prisoner guilty Of numbering his
friend, who was, ia all probability, at
that very moment, aGve.and III hiding.
This appeal evidently produced an eff
feet favorable to the prisoner, and
there was a murmur of applause when
the learned counsel concluded.
Then the judge summed up, fairly
and impartially, as the Importance OF
the questions at issue demanded. with
mastery hand he reviewed the evil
dence which had been brought before
the jury. 1t was for them TO decide
how far the evidence connected the
prisoner with the missing man, Ernest
Norton. Admittedly, the two had me
upon the night of April 9th, and there
the mystery began. What subsequent
ly became of Ernest Norton?
The case for the Crow nwas that the
prisoner murdered him, and that his
motive for SO doing was TO secure his
money, drafts and jewels. The defense
set up was that Norton's sudden disap-
pearance was entirely voluntary, in Or
uCt W CBNdlt llOll "a BtUDDStu HILL
riage, and the suggestion was that the
prisoner ~personated his friend at the
bank, with the latter's full consent and
concurrence, acting, indeed, as bailee,
with a strong dash of fraud thrown in.
1t was for the jury to decide, from the
evidence given, which explanation they
believed to be the true n of Ernest
Norton's disappearance.
As regarded proof Of death, this was
not essential in all cases. to Justify q
verdict Of willful murder. Suppose
the case, for example, OF two men put
ting to sea in a boat, and n of them
being heard Of no more. A strong pre-
sumption OF his death would clearly
arise, and this presumption might crys-
tallize In time into a reasonable GER
tainty. And If it could be shown that
the survivor had a strong motive for
comprising his companions death, and
had actually profited by il, a strong
prima facie cas- would exist against
him.
In the present case the jury must de-
eide two questions: Had they any
reasonable doubt as to the fact OF FIR
nest Norton's death? If they believed
him to be dead, then they must further
decide whether he came to his death at
the prisoners hands. II any doubt ex-
listed in their minds, the prisoner was
entitled to the benefit thereof. He then
DISMISSED them to consider their YER
dict.
The jury deliberated for upwards Of
two hours before the foreman was In a
position to announce that they had
come to a decision. Somerville cast a
rapid, keen glance at the face Of each
as they entered the court. but he gave
40 other sign Of the terrible anxiety
that must have filed his heart at that
supreme moment. In reply to the usual
question, the foreman said they were
agreed as to their verdict.
Then, how say your aueried the
clerk Of arraigns. rs the prisoner
guilty or not guilty?'
"GuiltyP' answered the foreman.
A wild, despairing shrek resounded
through the court, and the senseIess
form of a m clad In black, was
promptly carried forth, amid whis-
pered assertions that the unfortunate
woman vas the prisoners wife.
The judge produced the fatal black
cap, and, as usual, asked the prisoner
If he had aught to say why sentence of
death should not be pronounced
against him.
Richard Somerville passed his
hands several times rapidly across bis
forehead, as though nerving himself
for a last appeal.
"Since you permit me TO sneak. nv
lord" he said, in low, deliberate tones
81 wish to say this: Ernest Norton did
come 10 his death by my hands, but
solely through misadventure. At his
W request. | subjected him to hyp-
notic influence. aided by the electric
current. The experiment succeeded.
but his hearts action failed under It.
n he died In my operating chair. So
soon as | had recovered from the
shock of the disaster. the temptation to
profit by 1t assailed me with irresisfi.
BILE force. ! subsequently threw the
corpse into the river and appropriated
the dead mans wealth for myself.
This Is the full and rigid truth OF the
matter. 80 help me Godr'
a murmur of amaZpment and mora.
duilty ran through the crowded andi.
ence. but this vas instantly sun.
pressed.
II have heard your statement. pris,
oner at the bar" was the judges com.
ment. "and shall make a note or n,
hut what yon have said can In no wa '
Interfere with the painfui task which
II Ia now my duty to perform. After :
patient and exha ustive trial. you I'M We
been found guilty by q Jury OF you,
ceuntryipen. Of the murder OF q nnr
who had sought the hospitality Of
your roof. and with that finding /. ne
your Judge, fully coneur. You your,eii