The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1899-05-18


| cabin next to Saints. She had some
| friends visiting her at the time OF the
! shooting She said she heard no
knocking on Santis cabin door ana
| distinctly remembered hearing Two
| shots fired. Upon cross-examlnatloh
| she said that there was possibly al
| interval of five minutes between the
| shots.
| The defense at this point introduced
| their character witnesses, VINO sa a
| that Santi bore good reputation ana
that they had never heard anything
to his discredit. With this the defense
| closed its case.
Deputy Clerk of the Court McGinnis
was called by the state. He testified
| relative to hearing four shots fired at
| the time of the shooting, an interval
| of about five minutes between the NlfSt
| two and the last two.
Jesse d. Searles was the last VII
ness for the state. He interviewer
| Santi at the Butte Jail in his capac-
| ity as a reporter for the Standard. He
| said that as we'll as he could recol-
| lect Santi, in reply to the question
asking him why he shot Hamilton,
said:
He kick at my door. He kick it
down-raise hell. l shoot one, two,
three or four times"
Assistant County Attorney Casey
then opened the argument for the state
Mr.. Casey's address was terse. vivid
and to the point. 1t made an excellent
impression and paved the way to Mr..
Duffy's brilliant effort in closing
Mr.. Casey began by saying that the
present case was one of the most Sc
rious that had ever been tried in Deer
Lodge county in many years. An at
rocious crime had been committed. A
human life had been cut off. The ques-
ton for the jury was whether or NOT
another life should be demanded to pay
the penalty exacted by the law.
There were three points to be ascer-
tanned and proved They were: was
Hamilton murdered? Did Santi Kill
him? and third, Is there a preponder-
| ance of evidence showing justification
| in any form?
Mr. Casey then made a careful an
| alysis of the testimony bearing on these
three questions. To the last that OF
| justification, Mr.. Casey argued that
there was no justification; that SAINT
committed this murder because stung
| by insult in the presence of the Wo-
| man with whom he was living IN
open adultery. Why did he flee to
Butte if he was justified in his act?
Mr.. Casey closed by insisting on the
absolute lack of justification and the
! conclusive evidence of the states po-
sition saying the burden of vindica-
ting the law rested on the jury
| Mr. Oles' summing up for Santi was
| evidently an earnest attempt to make
| the best of bad case. Mr.. Oles pro
| ceeded to give an analysis of the testl-
mony as reviewed by the defense. He
combatted Mr.. Casey's assertion that
Saints killing of Hamilton was proved.
Even Santi himself did not know that
| for a fact. He was drunk and excited
at the time. 1t would be impossible for
any one to give exact details of such
hurried scene He then gave an eX-
| tended review of Saints testimony, in
sisting upon its absolute accuracy and
| said that the fact of Santi acknowledge
ing Tille Carr as his mistress went far
to show that he was telling the truth
about the rest of the affair. An ex-
animation of the testimony given at
| the coroner's inquest corroborates in
every detail. he said, the evidence Civ
en- by Santi. so Title Carr's testimony
was carefully 'analyzed and dscrepan-
cies explained. The impeachment at
tempted by the state was failure. The
| threat to kill was made not with any
| murderous intent, but for the sake of
it's moral effect on Tillie, SO she' would
| stop having men hanging around his
| place.
Further on Mr.. Oles defended Santi's
right to shoot down the men who were
trespassers on his rights. Hamilton
was the aggressor and disturber; Santi
had a right to defend his home.
Mr.. Oles considered the upward d.
rection of the path of the bullet in
Hamilton's head as strong evidence
that the shot could not have been fired
by Santi with murderous intent. San
It's flight to Butte was to avoid mob
violence.
| 1t was late in the afternoon when
County Attorney Duffy arose to make
one of the most brilliant addresses ever
made before a Deer Lodge jury. The
court room was crowded The jury,
tired as it was by two long days work
never missed a word of his argument
Their attention was captured by the
first sentence of his address and the
interest never tagged during the hour
and half that he was talking. 1t was
an able effort, persuasive without
sophistry, convincing without bitter
ness.
Mr. Duffy began by saying that il
was not a pleasure for him, for the
jury or for the court to decide Whethe,
or not a man had the right to live, He
was doing only his duty and that was
what the jury was likewise called upor
to do. There was no desire to do hin
harm for the fact that he was an Ita
ian or for any other reason and if tn,
state fails to make out it's case it il
the 1ury's duty to return verdict TO-
Santi.
Then he proceeded to draw a vivit
ana realistic picture of the scene which
took place at that cabin on the nigh
or the murder. The unholy compan
lonshlp in adultery of Santi and hi
mistress; the evil mind aroused t.
jealousy by the fear that his nephev
would supplant him in the affection
or Iillie Carr; the quarrel he had wit
her and the Interruptions by neighbor
VINO wished to sleep in peace Their
was the efficient cause of the tragedy
Mr.. Duffy said the case was made II,
of link upon link of circumstance
which were of irresistible strength an,
proved beyond doubt the guilt of IL
defendant vi
Then he proceeded to subject the ties
tlmony of Tille Carr to a most thor
ough analysis. and when he ro
through, it and her character were i
shreds. A liar, he said, can be he
heved only when corroborated by cir
G4nistances and truthful witnesses
Her lies were evident, woman irwin
to save the life of her paramour