The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1899-06-29
WAS CLANCY'S FAILURE
He Didn't Properly Instruct the
Jury.
NEW TRIAL WAS GRANTED
Case of the State VS., Martin Harr,so,
Plaintiffs Right to Prior Lien
Denied in An Answer by
Martin Turk,

Inc written opinion of the s,1nrema
court reversing the case of the state
against Martin Harrison and ren,and
ing 1t for new trial was received Nv
.ne clerk OF the courts Yesterday Az
staeeu III the Standard Tuesday morn
Iis, the case was reversed because ar
o!uuse Clancy's failure to instruct the
MY r,s on the presumption of innocence.
- ne reused instruction reads as fol-
Tvs. 1ou are instructed that the law
Pieeuiles person innocent until he is
proved guilty. and this proof must be
VI nature to satisfy your minds be-
Sohd a reasonable doubt of the suiIt of
the accused. The mere fact that an
lnlornatlon has been filed charging a
peison with a crime does not in itself
raise presumption of guilt. A req
sonable doubt within the meaning of
the law, is not a mere imaginary or
possible doubt, but a substantial doubt
based upon reason and common sense,
ana induced by the facts and circum-
stances attending the particular case
and growing out Of the testimony 1t is
such doubt as will leave ones mind,
after careful examination of all the
evidence, in such condition that he
cannot say that he has an abiding con-
viction to moral certainty of the de-
PENDANTS guilt as charged. The pre-
sumption of innocence has the weight
ants behalf, as this should continue
until it is rebutted by competent EVIL
dence which displaces any reasonable
doubt you might otherwise have of the
defendants guilt
The supreme court, in the course of
IT'S opinion, says: mo instruction of
any kind was given telling the Jury that
defendant was presumed to be inno-
cent until he was proved guilty be-
yond reasonable doubt, although a.
reasonable doubt was elsewhere de-
lined as an Independent proposition, but
the mere definition of a reasonable
DOUBT did not supply the lack of the in
struct1on requested, by which a knowl-
edge OF the presumption of the defend
ants innocence was communicated to
the jury by the court. The cour. ought
not to have refused the instruction re-
quested, which was correct, although it
was not obliged to accept the precise
definition of a reasonable doubt con-
tanned in it. We believe, however that
its definition of reasonable doubt was
good, and that the whole instruction
was correct on both points covered by
it's language"
In a suit of Toney Hoff against Frank
Hoff, John Rezik and Martin Turk. an
action to recover possession of lot I. in
block 6, of the East Butte addition,
upon which the plaintiff claims to have
had lien for labor, the defendant
Turk, yesterday filed an answer deny
ing the plaintiffs right to a prior lien
and alleges that he got the property
under an attachment and execution. He
charges that Toney and Frank Hoff
who are brothers, are in a conspiracy
and collusion and are falsely and
fraudulently trying to enforce lien on
the property for, the purpose of de-
frauding him out of his rights.
w. P. Coyie yesterday commenced an
action against John B. Knight, a con-
stable, and his bondsmen, James H
Lynch and Fayette Harrington. for $sII7
damages which he alleges he sustained
by reason of the defendants wrongful
and Acknowledgement and sale of some
personal property owned by the
plaintiff. Az
Joseph A. Coram, whose petition for
a supplemental order of distribution of
the, Davis estate was recently overruled
by Judge Lindsay, yesterday filed in
court bond on appeal to the supreme
court in the sum of $500, with William
McDermott and George W. Irwin as
sureties.
County Physician Sheeran yesterday
filed complaint against James Kehoe
charging him with being mentally de-
ranged and unsafe to be at large.