The Bottineau courant. (Bottineau, Bottineau County, N.D.) 1895-1929, 1904-01-22

ted to the use of cigarettes. but had not
smoked any for four years. and then
only four or five a day. and that he
was examined by doctor and told that
he had weak heart.
DR.. A. R. Mckay was called to the
stand and testified that he took spec
ial course in insanity in the hospi tai
Of the insane in Toronto. He said
that he had examined the defendant
and that wound such as the defend
ant had received, did not generally
cause insanity. He said the defendant
had weak heart but that the smok-
ing of four of five cigarettes day
might have no effect on him, and that
in case of spells as the result of smok-
ing, they would only last from two to
ten minutes, and that they could not
possibly last long enough for the de-
fendant to perform the acts testified to
in regard to the taking Of the horse.
The doctor further said that there was
no form of insanity that was char
acterized by these spells alone.
George A. Former YVES recalled and
said that the defendant told him that
he took the horse and rig with the
intention of going to Philadelphia to
be. married He said when they search
ed the defendant and took his watch
and chain. he broke down and cried.
Fred Rice was recalled and swore
that defendant told him that he put
up for noon ON the prairie. The state
rested, and the jury after listening to
the arguments of the attorneys and the
charge of the court, brought in ver-
dict Of guilty.
Court convened Monday morning
and it was found on calling the jury
roll that Mr.. Fisher, one of the jury
men in the Brown case, was absent.
owing to his wife's sickness, and the
jury was excused until 30 After a
few minutes delay, court adjourned
until 1:3O. 1t was found on calling
the jury at the time of meeting as per
adjournment that the absent juryman
had not returned and the balance of
the jury in that case was excused until
Tue 'day morning.
The case Of the State VS.. Fred Fry,
charged with assault with dangerous
weapon was taken up and the jury
secured State called as it's first wit
ness, Herman Deschamps, who swore
that he was working in George Perrin s
livery barn at the time of the shoot
ing, and that he saw the defendant al
the pool room before the disturbance.
He said that the defendant came to the
window of the barn Office and said thai
he wanted his team. They asked who
lit was, and the reply was that p. it was
Fry. He was told that he had ne
team there He then ordered them te
open the door, an d they refused
Immediately thereupon a shot was fired
and the witness was hit in the leg.
Witness testified that he recognized
defendant face at the window, and
that he remained there about minute
and that it was about two seconds afte1
that when the shot was fired. He sale
that he and Fry left the window
at the same time Witness further sale
that he was taken to DR.. Stewart 8 Office
and the bullet was taken out of his leg
Witness said he noticed defendant il
the pool room, because he was drunk
and that he watched him for abou
half an hour He said the window t.
which the defendant came was abou
three feet from the door and abou
four feet from the ground. He testifie'
that there were no lights in the bari
at the time but that there was lam
in the Office which was turned low
He said there was another man wit
TRY, while he was in front of the win