The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1901-10-03
FOR LIFE OF j. D. KEITH
CONTEST ny HIS AM STATES At
TORNEYs ~ SUPREME COURT.
Argument bx Defense that Death PEN
atty Law l. DefectiVe-O;her
News of the Courts.

The central event in higher court circles
IN the ~statehouse yesterday was the oral
argument OF the case in which Joseph D.
Keith Is under sentence TO die Nov. 10 for
having killed Nora KifeT, in Warrick
county. The prosecuting evidence IN the
trial OF the case was 90 show that Keith
killed his victim and threw her body into
an old well near "a clearing on his farm IN
Warrick county. and that afterward, be-
coming uneasy. took the body out again
and carried it 10 a bridge over Pigeon
creek. near Evansville, dropping it into
the stream.
In the argument yesterday morning the
convicted man was represented by Dewitt
&. Chappell and Frank b. Posey, Of Ey-
ansvillc. Mr.. Posey has been for years a
prominent figure in state politics. The
States interests were looked after by At
torney General William l.. Taylor, Prose
cutting Attorney Thomas W. Lindsey and
Deputy Attorney General Cassius G. Had
ley.
keith's counsel, in their addresses, made
much OF the proposition that the con-
demncd man could not be executed be-
cause there was no law i'm Indiana prOvid-
ing how the death penalty should be exc
Cuted when the verdict Of the jury was
rendered They said that under the law
OF lSSJ ne would have been executed at the
southern prison, in JeffersOnVtlle, Dut
that IN 1897 that prison was abolished and
the ReformatOry took its place, hence
there WAS no Southern prison in which
Keith could be executed. The Legislature
of 1901 amended the law of 1889, and pro-
vided that the death penalty should be
inflicted at Michigan City for all counties
III the State.
The State. by the attorney general. the
prosecuting attorney and the deputy at
torney general. commended that the act of
Ike was nnf Grrrnraada1 hU the TafDTma-
tory law, and that the prison was not
abolished, although the name was changed
and some OF the functions of the insttu-
ton We're changed II was also argued
by the States counsel that the act or the
last Legislature was passed before SEN
tence of death was pronounced on Keith.
and, since the law did not change the char
acter OF the punishment nor add n new
punishment. therefore it was not what is
technically known as an ex post factO
CATER the fact') law.
Attorney General Taylor read the defini-
ton or murder IN every statute passed, not
only in the Northwest Territory beginning
with 11S1, but also by the Legislature of
Indiana Territory beginning in 1907, and
all the definitions of the crime made since
that time. Mr.. Taylor also read the method
prescribed for inhicting the death penalty.
The definition of murder. he said, has
been substantially the same since 1851 down
To 1881, and at that time the option was
given TO juries TO imprison for life instead
of commanding that the death penalty be
Mr.. Taylor said there was no statute
down TO 1913 that provided who should
execute the death penalty or where il
should be inflicted. In that year, he said.
It was provided that the sheriff OF the
county in which the defendant was con-
victed should execute the death warrant.
He said that up to that time death war
rants were all executed by sherifs, but
such execution was pursuant to the COM
mon law. IF all the statutes on the sub
Ject of defining the place and manner of
executing criminals and naming the Of
ficer who shall execute the same were. abol-
ished." declared the attorney general, THE
common law would furnish a complete
process"
Besides the proposition mentioned. coun-
sci for Keith relied chiefly upon three points
10 save their client: First, that the killing
of Nora Kifer had not itself been proved:
second, that the body could not have been
identified, and third, that the evidence of
three persons tending to show that some
other person had m the murder, if
committed at all. was wrOngfully excluded
by the trial court.