Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1899-01-04

So Far Made.
The main topic of interest at the
Court House yesterday, was the open
ing of the arguments for a new trial
in the cases of Johnson and Devinney,
lately convicted of the murder of
Charles Mclaughlin. The arguments
were before Judge Hugus, of the trial
Court, and were listened to with the
greatest interest by a large number of
people, the Court room being comfort
ably filled. Captain B. B. Dovener
will make the concluding address for
the defense this morning.
Mr.. Boyce, of counsel for defense,
opened the argument at eleven O'Clock
in the morning, speaking until half
past twelve, when Court took a recess
until two o'clock
After preliminary statement to the
effect that the verdict was one not war
ranted by the Indictment Mr.. BOyce
pdSStu W d dLlOA VI IllC III
structions allowed for the State, and
cited several of these instructions,
notably Nos. 8, and 6, as being i'm
proper in his judgment. He also made
the point that defendants had not
pleaded except through their attorneys,
and claimed that such a plea was a
nullity. The record book of the Court
was ordered brought, and it showed
that the defendants plead not guilty.
Captain Dovener here interrupted to
say that the record was erroneous, and
moved to strike out the statement that
defendants had plead. He was prompt
ly overruled.
Mr.. Boyce then resumed his address,
passing to a consideration of the pre-
judice existing against defendants in
this community, and particularly held
that the public mind had been poison
ed by publications, notably one in the
Register, giving the criminal history of
defendants. AS to Mr.. E1Oward's adj
dress to the jury, Mr.. Boyce thought it
violated all law and precedent, and in
timated rather strongly that Mr.. How
ard was the real life and soul of the
prosecution, and not the Prosecuting
Attorney of the county.
At half past twelve Court took the
usual recess.
AT THE AFTERNOON SESSION
Mr.. Boyce resumed his address, taking
up that portion of the speech to the
jury made by Mr.. Howard, of counsel
for the State, where he said lynching
was sometimes resorted to because
juries failed to do their duty, and that
other remark, about the practice of
bringing relatives of defendants into
Court for the purpose of exciting SYM
pathy, "and yet" said Mr.. Boyce, The
said nothing about the sisters of the
dead man who were present, and in
whose name Mr.. Howard demanded of
the jury verdict of murder in the
first degree. 1t was the right
of the sisters of the deceased to be pres
ent; it was also the right of the gray
haired father of one of the defendants
TO be present when his son was on
trial for his life, and to call attention
to his presence was a violation of the
right of the defendants to a fair and
impartial trial"
Mr.. Boyce took up other features of
the argument by Mr. Howard, saying
Mr.. Howard not only went outside of
the evidence in this case, but he dis
torted and falsified the evidence in the
case, for he told the jury and argued
that the man was shot in the back.
Mr.. Boyce referred to the evidence of
Annie Robinson, Scroggins and DR..
Armbrecht on this point, and cOnclud-
ed that Mr.. Towards presentation of
the matter to the jury was wrong, "and
vet for one-half 2<s Eour Mr.. Howard
Numbered in the ears of the jury that
Charles Mclaughlin was shot in the
back and demonstrated it by putting
the coat worn by deceased on the page
of this Court. He could do that with
safety, because he knew that the lips
of these defendants were sealed, as we'll
as the lips of their counsel"
Mr.. Boyce thought
ANOTHER GRAVE ERROR
by Mr.. Howard was contained in the
statement that before the speaker (Mr.
Boyce) was employed in the case he
(Mr. Howard) had been appealed to by
the brother of one of the defendants,
and had refused to have anything to
do with the case, and that there was
not enough money in the world to in
duce him to defend two cold blooded
murderers IF l could have replied to
MIR. Howard | would have said that
there was not enough money in the
world to induce me to prosecute any
one charged with a capital pffense.
8 l tell Mr.. Howard he never
was approached before l was employed
in the case, and he only refused to be
because he had already been
engaged on the other side. i
That was an error, and was an imma-
terial matter dragged in to the preJu-
dice of the rights of these defendants"
Mr.. Boyce proceeded with his review
of the address, alleging that in some
instances the evidence had been mis-
stated and falsified, and that "a threat
had been held up to the jury-the
threat that if they dared render a YER
dict of not guilty their twelve names
would be engrossed upon a monument
as evidence of their infamy." Mr.. Boyce
TOOK FORCIBLE EXCEPTION
TO Mr.. Towards remark that the de-
i -