Barton County democrat. [volume] (Great Bend, Kan.) 1885-1915, 1899-03-24

M IL delay sentence. At
request of the county attorney we here
with give Judge Clark's remarks upon
theocase:
Now1 don't know how other people
look upon this case. must decide
this matter according to my own ludge>
ment, and the way look at it. Of
course we have gone over part of the
history of this difficulty twice now. Mr..
Kelly is a stranger to me. Personally
I know nothing about him, and certain
ly have no ill-will toward him, and I
have refrained, as far as possible, from
learning anything about the case except
ing here in Court, but SO far as Mr..
Kelly himself, as an individual is con-
cerned, have listened to peoples con-
versation and have not tried to prevent
people from talking in my presence as
to his general character, standing and
reputation.
Now there are times when light
punishment to person would be just
as good as heavy punishment. Again
there are people who can only be tanned
and forced to settle down as peaceable,
quiet and law abiding citizens by severe
punishment It seems to me in the
trial of these cases Mr.. Kelly has gotten
off very easily. Of course so far as the
other diffic ulty was concerned, the
other trial was had and the jury re.
turned a verdict of not guilty. No
person has a right to question.
suppose, no right to publicly question,
the verdict that was rendered 1t was
a very close case and probably all
hinged on one little question and the
jury gave the defendant the benefit of
the doubt.
In this case, have no doubt in my
mind if the jury had found Mr.. Kelly
guilty of the greatst offence with which
he stood charged should have been
compelled to approve Of the verdict,
although there was chance for parties
to disagree. Two individuals might
look at things in different ways and
there might be- disputed question as
to whether there was an intent to kill.
Of course ordinarily we expect that
person really intending to kill another
will use the most efficient means be has
at hand to accomplish that end: There
are times when be does not do that,
and we eaqqot say what the intention
was. If it was simply blind passion,
regardless of whether he took life or
not think no one would haye right
to complain very much if the jury had
said he intended to kill / have no
question about this revolver in the
manner in which it was used, having
been deadly weapon. I would have
no doubt whatever of the correctness
and justice of verdict finding that Mr..
Baker was wounded under such
circumstances as would have constitut.
ed murder or manslaughter if death had
insued. There is no question about it,
and how anybody could say that when
other over the head while running up
stFeet, following him $50 or RS feet.
with the victim continually crying for
help, and then say that if he had taken
the life of that individual he would not
have been guilty of murder is more
than / can see, l don't know how an
individual can come to any such con-
clusion, but by some sort of reasoning
unknown to me this jury have arrived
st such CONCLUSION and returned
verdict here, which In my judgement,
is not for as great an offence as is
proven by unboubted testimony, and if
the jury had found this defendant
guilty under section AZ. haven't very
much doubt in my mind but what he
would have received the full penalty of
the law. / know of nothing more helm
Gus, more cruel. more unbecoming a
citizen who has any regard or respect
for humanity or law, than to slip up
behind another man and strike him oyer
the head with deadly weapon.
know this fact is disputed, but this
is sufficient to satisfy me that that is
just exactly the fact in the case. But
even if it were not the case; if the blow
had been struck with the fist and the
fist alone, and Mr.. Baker had attempt
ed to escape. crying for help and en-
deavoring to get away. and was followed
up the street, according to the testimony