The Barre daily times. (Barre, Vt.) 1897-1959, 1905-01-25


nounced until action upon these excep
tions has been taken by the court.
Deliberations Of the Jury.
After celebrating for nearly three
hours without agreeing on verdict, the
jury was allowed to go to supper, and
they returned to the jury room ct z
o'clock.
AT $50 o'clock the jury filed into the
court room in order to have the court
instruct them as to the exact legal mean
ing of malice aforethought" and also
to define the different degrees Of MUIR
der and manslaughter. As soon as Judge
Sheldon had concluded his Instructions
the jury again retired.
At 9:45 the jury once more came in
and asked for instructions as to the
words deliberately premeditated malice
afoFethougbt," used by Judge Sheldon in
his instructions as to murder in the
first degree
Twenty minutes later there was much
suppressed excitement in the court room
when the attorneys took their aecas-
toned places, and soon after the jury
men took their seats and Judge Sherman
and Judge Sheldon entered the bench.
In response to the question of Clerk
of Court IIurd if the jury had agreed
upon verdict, Foreman knight replied
'sWe have
"What IS the verdietgp asked the
clerk.
Guilty Of murder in the first de-
gree" answered the foreman.
As these words were pronounced, the
boyish-looling prisoner sank into his
chair, buried his face in his hands, and
then fell forward to the rail separating
the prisoners cage from the bar in
closure, sobbing violently all the while.
The prisoners counsel, although ap-
parentlv surprised and shocked at the
verdict, rushed to his side and tried to
comfort him, but their efforts were in
vain. A few minutes later Tucker was
half led, half carried back to bis cell
IN the county Jail. Here be collapsed
completely and the prison physician was
obliged TO give him stimulants to revive
him.
Immediately after the verdict was re-
turned, Judge Sherman thanked the jury
men for the attention they had given
the case and then discharged them, ad-
vising them not to discuss the occur
rences in the jury room.
1T was Awful. That ii All"
Attorney General Herbert Parker last
night said regarding the case:
what can | say Of the verdiots Only
thiss The people of the commonwealth
should give the Jury which tried Tucker
tie credit of having faithfully, honestly
and uprightly rendered verdict in ne
cordance with their own conseiences.
No more can ]. or viii | say about
this awful case. Il was awful, that ii
all :
The Judges Charge.
Judge sheldon charged the jury IN
part as follows:
After reviewing IN outline the cir
cumstanee Of the ease, the judge In
formed the jury that the law required
Ia unanimous verdict. He said
sThe jury room Is no place for pride
| Of opinion. or for any such persisteney
as may bairly be called obstinacy. OF
course You are not to surrender your
own deliberate and well founded con-
viotions, but yon should not obsl1nately
adhere to any conclusions without hay-
| ing first exercised the greatest care to
be sure that they are deliberate and well
| founded.
with great care and at length, the
Judge defined the rights Of the prisoner,
Icreditahiiity OF witnesses, the weighing
| of evidence, and the difference between
direct and circumstantial evidence He
said;
Nothing must be taken for granted
nothing can be presumed agaiEat the
prisoner The fact that he stands here
IN the dock prisoner is not to weigh
against him. The proof of his guilt
tmust be beyond q reasonable doubt, OF
he is entitled to verdict OF not
guilty.
Proof beyond a reasonable doubt has
| been defined as proof to that degree Of
certainty upon which reasonable men are
accustomed to act in the most import
ont affairs Of their own lives
"You are to decide this case upon
the evidence given in open court by the
4 witnesses who have testified before you
Statements made by any of these wit
Inesses elsewhere, either outside Of court
OF III any of the investigations whiet
have been made heretofore, which art
lin any way inconsistent with their testi.
tmonv given here. are to be considered
lonly 50 far as they may assist you il
determining the credit to be given Ii
those Witnesses. But any statement:
freely and voluntarily made BY the pris
oner, whether or not they were made
lin answer to questions put to him by
officers, you may consider as evidence
against him.
"The prisoner, as lie has the right Il
do, has chosen not to testify iii thi:
case, and it IS his right that he shal
in no degree be preiudiced, and that
Ino inference shall be drawn against hin
lby reason Of this failure"
Tn defining circumstantial evidence
the court gave several Illustrations.
Having covered these points, the eoHrt
Icontinued
"Ihere are some circumstances IN dis
lpute here, to which your attention ough
Ito bescalled little more in detail. aht
first and most important Of these i
whether or not the prisoner was III Til,
Page house at the time Of the commits
sion Of this murder. Ii he was no
there, OF IL, upon this evidence, you ar
lIeft in q reasonable doubt whether HI
WAS there. then OF course lie must 81
acquitted; if he was there, then unde
the circumstances of this oasein Hiew o
Continued on Fourth Page.