Bismarck weekly tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1884-1943, 1898-12-23

at the request of the court. He thought
the fact and manner of the murder suf-
ticiently established.
Attorney Stambaugh, who appeared
for the prisoner in the absence of At
torney Hughes, spoke briefly in the case.
He said he had no doubt all legal for
malities in the case had been observed
and that all the interests of the defend
ant, so far as it was possible to care for
them, had been cared for by Mr.. Hughes.
The latter had had a long conference
with the prisoner, and, without advising
the prisoner to plead guilty, had per-
mitted him to do so, as thus complying
with all the apparent desires and wishes
OF the defendant. He had not felt it his
duty as an officer of the court or an at
torney to advise the plaintiff to ask for a
trial of the case. Mr.. Stambaugh said
that he was satisfied that the then situa-
ton of the defendant was identical with
what it would have been at the close of
a trial. 1t was a question which of the
two penalties provided by the law would
be the most merciful, or which it would
be more merciful to impose rather than
the other. 1t was for the court to de-
terminc. He would, if possible, like to
relieve the court of some portion of the
responsibility but it was impossible.
States Attorney Allen, speaking for
the state, said the case was u peculiarly
heinous one. There appeared no sorrow
or regret on the part of the defendant.
TO intiict lesser penalty than the law
made most severe would be to recognize
the existence of %extenuating circum-
stances, of which there were none. The
state, regretfully, was forced to ask that
the extreme penalty be inflicted.
Judge Winchester set forth briefly the
law in the case. He gave it as his inter-
probation of the intention of the law
makers that the provision for the inflic-
ton of a lesser penalty than death was
made for application to cases in which
there were circumstances tending in
some name to extenuate the crime
to excuse the defendant from the full
burden of guilt. Personally, he believed
that no person had the right to take
away the life of another. But in obedi-
ence to his oath, he must apply the law
as it stood and as he interpreted it. The
crime was a heinous one. The defend
ant had cut off the young life of a mere
girl, an honorable, upright, active young
woman, in whatever walk of life she
might be. No. punishment that the
law could intlict would be commensurate
with the crime. But punishment was
exemplary as well as retributive, and it's
object was to deter others from the COM
mission of like offenses. The case de-
manded the severest penalty.
The prisoner was then sworn and in
terrogated briefly by the court. He
stated that his name was James w. Cole,
that he was born in Charleston, S. c., in
1860, and that he had lived in this county
seven years.
Judge Winchester thcn passed SEN
tence of death on the prisoner. He said:
1.-The order and judgment of the court is
that you be remandcd forthwith to the
Burleigh county jail, and that you there
be confined safely until the 24th day of
March, 1899, that you then be taken
thence to an enclosure situated upon the
block in which is the court house and
Jail aforesaid, then and there to be
hanged by the neck until you are dead.
and may God have mercy on YOU soul"
After the passing of sentence. Sheriff
Taylor and a guard removed Cole from
the court Dom. He seemed stupefied
and had almost to be lifted from his
chair and staggered out between the
sheriff and the guard.
Bucklen'S Arnica Salve.