The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1897-10-24

apart to meet. She had no i'll feelings
towards him. On the other hand, she
loved him. and she was hoping that he
would give her back her home and
take her back to his bosom again. He
encouraged these hopes never meaning
that they should be realized.
The rebutting testimony of the pros
ecution was referred to and attention
called to the testimony Of NIr. Calder.
who said that Hamilton had told him
that a peculiar thing about Mrs. Ham
nton's shooting was that when she fired
q shot from pistol at Il target praC-
tice she could not stop until she had
fred FIVE or six shots in quick success
sion. yet Mrs. Calder, a minute or two
afterwards, said that she saw Mrs.
Hamilton shoot at board and that she
fired only once. Testimony of this kind,
although no doubt perfectly true, was
valueless SO far as the defendant was
concerned.
The story of the defendant was a
probable story. If ii is a probable story,
q reasonable doubt arises as to the
guilt OF the defendant. and she ought
not 20 be convicted. The fact that the
pin was found on Hamilton's body bore
out the statement OF Mrs. Hamilton and
showed that she had given it to him.
and that she was on good terms with
him at the time.
DEFENDANTS CASE CLOSED.
Court here adjourned until D. m. and
on reassembling, Judge Powers said Ia
the jury that he was not in the pay
of anybody in this case; that he was
simply doing his duty to his client.
and that was his excuse for going into
the case in such great detail
Speaking OF the night of the killing
counsel argued that Hamilton was
seized with an uncomfortable fit of
jealousy and the impulse grew upon
him All the trouble he had faced for
weeks rushed upon him and he was no
more a man but q demon, he pushed
her. and as his passion grew he drew
the pistol. pointed IL at her and tried
to XIII her Then the instinct of self
preservation came to the woman and
she. rushed towards him and the hus-
band and wife grappled in deadly
struggle and in that struggle the
weapon was DISCHARGED, which carried
she missile of death TO John H. Ham
lton.
Judge Powers illustrated with Mr..
McGurrin how the struggle was en-
acted and how the barrel of the gun
became pointed towards Hamilton S
heart. The wound on the WomanS
lips showed that there had been a
light between 1hem and cOrroborates
her story. Her story was not only not
improbable, but was very probable
Counsel then. enumerated % incidents
Of the testimony which c0rroborated
Mrs. Ramilton'S story of the manner
OF the shooting
Have / not 9, right to believe then
that you viii set her free? asked
counsel
The testimony of Mrs Wright, coun-
sci argued, was unimpeacGed. Her
character was unassailed and the jury
was bound to accept it. She was the
only eye witness and what she saw
and what she testified to c1TroborateS
Mrs. Hamilton. The rule OF law
moreover is that the defendant be
given the benefit Of the doubt.
God grant that your verdict be Just;
Gcd grant that you arrive at the
truth. Let no injustice be done to this
girl whose cause l am pleading. There
is out lltLle you can give her. YOU
may open the prison doors and set her
free, but there is in her young heart
vacancy which can never be filed.
Sadly her feet as she treads LIES
journey viii echo the ghosts of van
sshed joys; buried are All her hopes,
bent and broken her woman's heart
until she shall reach che end of the
journey and a merciful God viii take
her home.
leave her case with you, may God
in his mercy be as just to You as you
viii be>to tRiS poor. lonely and almost
frIendless girl
COUNTY ATTOREY VAN COTT.
1t was ten minutes TO 3 O'Clock when
Judge Powers closed his argument and
Mr. Van Cou directly after arose to
make the closing talk for the prosecu-
ton, and a most eloquent, logical and
drgumentatiVe address he gave
AIR Van COtt conlplimented Messrs.
Powers and NIcGurrtn on the able and
thorough defense they had made, Ieav-
Ing nothing unsaid. nothing undone
which would heip Mrs. Hamilton.
required a six hour talk from the
ablest criminal lawyer in the west to
attempt 70 refute MAS not built uD on
50 unsubStantial foundations as the
defense would have the jury believe.
Mr.. Van Colt then referred to the
character Of the deceased as pictured
by those who knew him and by his
wife, who knew best of all. She testf-
fed that he was kind, considerate,
generous, manly. a gentleman before
marriage and after marriage. He was
not the character, he mad not the
characteristics which counsel for the
defense would have you believe.
Hamilton might have received a death
nioW. he might have lost an eye he
might have lost n limb, but such a
blow would have been nothing com
pared TO the blow he received on that
o-h day OF March when he learned of
his Wife's infdelLty. Yet he behaved
ike man, he was eonsiderate
Of his wine, ne didn't wound
her feelings in any way. she
had TO complaints to make
quite the reverse she says he was al
ways a good and generous husband
Counsel denied that Hamilton ever
caught his wife by the hair of the head
and threw her 10 the floor. This was
introduced. said counsel for the pur-
pose of founding an argument on for
the support of the theory that he was
such a man as would xii his wife.
Counsel said he did not desire to
wound Mrs. Hamilton unnecessarilv
out there we're things which must be
said which must be laid before the
jury.
Lou Hamilton. said counsel did not
love her husband as we have been told
she did. Her husband did not have all
her love by any means. Was it the acr
ton OF woman who loved her hus-
hand to GO sell herself TO a lihertine
for four dollars and six bits? Had she
acted under the influence of great lave
for q man. under the influence of pag-
sion, 1 could forgive her. said counsel
can forgive a man or a woman for
many things when acting under the
impulse OF great love, but she. like A
wanton who sits a the gate, sold her
self to q ibertine for silver. Mir. Nc
CSurTi1'S practical 2 sso7--;r,r, ~, -.