Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1901-09-18
TRIAL BEGINS,
Cases Against Frank A. Me-
Clench and Charles |. Payson.
Indicted for MansIaughter in Causing
Death Of Frederick H. Farnham.
Tae First Case oil It's Kind 10 Be Tried in
This Country.


o. G. HALL, Judge
w, 5. CiiOATE. Clerk
y. l.. McFADDiIN, Sheriff.
THOMAS LEIGH, County Attorney.
FRED ". LEE. Stenogra phet.
The trial of Frank A. McClench and
Charles l.. 'Payson of Hallowel. in
dlcted at this term for mansiaua hter.
began before Judge Hall III the Ken
neboc county superior court. Tuesday
morning The government alleges
/ that Frederick II. Farnham met mis-
eJdeath at Hailowell ON July last, from
acute alcoholism. due from excessive
tsi mixing of liquor on the previous
evening at the saloon OF McClench.
aQld being persuaded and urged to
/ drink this liquor by Payson. This is
1.-The first case. so far as is known. to
be tried in tnis country. County At
ktorney Thomas Leigh appears for the
State, while McClenCh is defended by
Arson Nj. Goddard. ESQ. of Augusta
and Fred Emery Became. ESQ., of nal
kloWell, and Payson by ex-AttOrney
General Crville ID. Baker. Thirty-fiv
witnesses have been sworn by the
government. Several sharp and inter-
csting passages occurred during the
al tcl HUH SCSSlbI bttNttD NountN Al
, to:ney Leigh ana Attorney Baker.
At 10 o'clock. Tues day mo, ming. TIE
prisoners. McClench and Payson. we. e
arraiGned and plead not guilty" A
delay waS necessary as train No. GA
from UP river on which We're several of
The iurymen was 50 minutes late.
Judge Hall ruled that the defence was
allowed but two pcremptory chal-
4
! special venire Of II jurors had been
| made. At 10.i The empanelling of the
! jury began.
| L. NJ. Norris of Wayne was first
| called. He had never read an extend
! cd account of the case had formed no
| opinion. and had no individual inter
! est in temperance OF intemperance.
| He was accepted as juror No. l.
John y. Hall of China was accepted
as juror No. as he had formed no
| opinion.
Lester A. Simpson of Winslow did
not recollect reading the case and was
accepted as juror No. 3.
Frank Abbott of Sidney was ac-
copied as Juror No. 4.
| Will Fitzgerald of Randolph was
| challenged by the government.
charles \. Stilson of Vassalboro was
! accepted a : Juror No ).
| .. J. Pelletier Of Waterville was &C
cepted as Juror No. 6.
T.. G. Wardwell of Watorville was
excused by His Honor. Judge Hall.
g. f. Pierce of Augusta. was chal-
! lenged by Payson's counsel.
Archie W. Hall of Vienna was ac-
! cepted as Juror No. :.
| Josiah w. Bangs of Augusta was
challenged by counsel for Payson.
| William A. Winter of Hallowell was
| excused as he said he had business re-
lations with one of McClench's rela-
tlvrs for 80 years.
George f. Stevens Of Farmingdale
| Was challenged by the State. He tes-
| titled that he had worked in the same
| shop with Payson for three years
| ]. +. Moody of Monmouth. Peter
| Marshall of Waterville. Andrew j. Tcz-
! Ter of Litchfield. Parker Pow
! ers of Pittston and George T. Haley
t of Gardiner were accepted as Jurors
| Nos s. .. 10. II and II respectively.
| Charles A. Stilson of Nassalboro was
| appointed foreman of the jury.
! County Attorney Leigh began his
| opening to the jury at lilo O'Clock.
Mr.. Leigh began oy saying that the
! spirit of the constitution. the spirit OF
/ liberty which animated its trainers and
! has always guided our lawmakers in
| the enactment of statutes affecting
persons charged with crime, ana the
| judges whose duty it is to interpret the
constitution and the laws, have always
| recognized the safeguards thrown
| about persons under accusation. ana IN
their interpretation have been ied nN
the spirit of the fundamental law. II
should be remembered. however, that
the great object ard purpose OF judi
| Cial proceedings is the administration
of Justice and justice requires not Only
| .he acauitaI Of the innocent. but the
ccnviotio of the guilty
..Frrthermore continued Mr.. LciSa,
| an the pres,,mptionS of the law. i1-
dapendent of any evidence to rebut
them. are in favor Of good. rather thAn
owl The law never presumes vice
and crime: it never presumes quit.
, If left merely to the presumption OF
the law in the absence of any eVideh e
to rebut it. the Law plesumeS inno-
cence.
In all criminal prosecutions the &C
!. cused is presumed to be innocent IN
til the contrary is proved. The pre-
, sumption Of innocence ATTENDS nm
throughout the trial respond III
Who is not indicted. i not called up III
To establish his innocence. put ne ~
the right to call upon the state. Whic'
has preferred the indictment agar .
him. TO substantiate the charge &C
tanned therein. beyond reasonah'e
: doubt. This presumption of lnn9cefce
attends every man arraigneo III :,
court of justice. as it should atteho
every man out of it. until 1t is oNes-
come by some evidence. consequently
e ir the trial of criminal causes uc
. eminent is obliged to first open IT'S case
, aud present its proof. If a contrary
rule existed. if man was presumed 10
be guilty, the order of proof would ne
reversed and the defendant would t'
called upon first to olter Pro"i vi l. =
Innocence But the method OF prooe /
wv. in coIlrt i- pursuance VI tiii'