Herald and news. [volume] (West Randolph, Vt.) 1878-1943, 1909-03-25

"Wilkie Reynolds is the ordinary kind
OF Vermont Yankee; just such man as
each one Of you is. He has lived his life
of fifty years in Kingston, aud il you ask
Kingston people about him they win say,
He's good man and citizen, square as
brick, constant with his friends and
fair fighter with his enemies.' He hasn't
the mark of q murderer about him. The
ability to think out crime and plan it
ahead; to wait on his victim; to fire ia
tai shot knowingly; to gloat over the
death struggle OF his enemy-that ability
is not part Of Wilkie Reynolds make
up. He's a genial, whoIe-souIed fellow.
without trace Of deep malice in his
heart"
After describing the shooting, Spencer
"You have heard from his lips, corrob-
GRATED by others, how he rushed forth,
caught this poor boy up in his arms, car
ried him into his house past his faintinR
wife, and how great drops of sweat stood
upon him when he realized what had
happened. Is this the conduct Of a cold
bIooded murderer"
As to motive, Spencer said:-
High crime is not committed without
malice aforethought. There must be the
deep hatred that demands blood as its
sole recompense. In this case, there is
no motive. The state has failed to show
the slig htest i'll will hsrbored by the re-
spopdent against the boy. The intima-
tion that Reynolds dislike for the bows
father answers for a sufficient motive is
far-fetched and will have no weight with
you. II his hatred for Squire Edwards
demanded q victim. it would have been
the Squire himself, not his innocent son.
But there is nothing to indicate that his
dislike for the Squire amounted to more
than one OF those unfortunate discords
arising between varying natures. coupled
with incidents calculated to feed it,"
"You have noted,' he said, 'sthat our
witnesses have been few. The conditions
compelled il. On the one side were a dis
orderly lot OF roysterers, to call them
nothing worse, VINO could give their YER
sion OF the affair. On the other. Mr.. and
Mrs. Reynolds, only. his evidence il
that of an interested party, With his life
in the balance. His wife, the sad PARTNER
OF his misfortune, who would give her
life willingly to go on the stand and sup
port all that he has said. is siIencsd By
the rule that wife shall not testify.
ask yoa to consider this when you recall
the evidence"
SpenOer's closing appeal was a tender
plea for justice and such mercy as seemed
meet. He did not weep and wall, AMI yet
there we're tears in many an eve when be
told OF the weary, heart-sick days of the
wife, and how much the verdict meant to
her. He summed up all in q few closing
sentences:-
"And now, gentlemen, we rest our fate
in your hands. There has been no muir
der here. Such a thing was not written
in the mind of the man who now awaits
your decree, whether he shall live, or
whether he shall die. Make no mistake;
give US the benefit of any reasonab bic
doubt you may have; and live to rejoice
over, and not regret, your part in this
trial"
In the hush that followed, the opinion
settled into conviction that with WiIkie
Reynolds cause pleaded so mastery, ac-
quittal would follow. II was the first
real hope that Mrs. Reynolds had felt,
aud she extended trembling hand to
Spencer to show her feeling.
The prosecuting attorney started in by
telling one or two pointed stories shrewd-
ly calculated to undermine Spencer's inn
preston, and to place himself in real har-
Inony with the jury. Then he launched
out into a version of the crime quite
different than Spencer's. The killing, IL
net long premeditated, was most wanton
and foul. Regard for human life is les
sening here in Vermont. Are you going
to say, gentlemen, that, admitting every
claim the defence makes OF provocation;
accepting their own story at its face val
ne; are you going to say, ats all right7''
What effect would such q verdict have on
laentiment7 Would it not add to the con-
tempt for Law now so general, extending
even to murder itself2 We do not ask
for vengeance; God will exact that. But
we do ask for strict justice in the case Of
this murdered boy, and for the protection
OF others.
The prosecutor closed with a careful
analysis OF the crime, seeking to show
that mere homicide would not cover 1t,
and that it wss murder, rather than man
slaughter. He made plea well calculat-
ed to reach the obtuse and prejudicial
minds that he discerned on the Jury.
Much depended on the nature Of the
courts charge. 1t was q jury that dread
ed responsibility and stood ready to fol-
low any line indicated by the Judge. In
effect the court charged: That the shoot
/ ing Of the victim was either justified by
circumstances, or was murder or man
slaughter. II there was animus and pre-
:
/ Nor did it require to be shown that the
/ identity of the victim should be known
to the slayer. II a man unlawfully
points his gun in the direction he has
reason to believe some person stands and
fires it, il is a wanton killing, and the
law defines it as murder. II, on the other
hand, you find that respondent had rea-
son to fear an assault on his home, or
that his life or the life of his family with
in his domicile was threatened, you must
find that he was justified even to the
point of killing the person or persons
seeking to intrude. II you find that the
respondent was simply angry at the an
noysnce and the insult and fired his gun
needless of human life to give vent to his
feelings, you must render b verdict of
guilty under the indictment, for the law
provides other ways Of righting ones
wrongs than by assassination. Such a