Santa Fe new Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1898-1951, 1911-06-28
HARD DAY
FOR HENWO0D
Prosecution Scores Bar Room
Murderer Numerically
in Argument
JUDGES CHARGE UNFAvORABLE
Declares That Verdict Under
Evidence Cannot Be For
Manslaughter.

tBy Special Leased Wire to New Mexlcany
Denver. Colo, June 2S.-There is
no manslaughter in this case" impress
sively, said District Judge Greeley NJ.
Whitford in reading the instructions
to the jury in the case of Harold F.
Henwood this morning.
The court charged the jury that
there were but three possible verdicts
in the case: First degree murder; sec
ond degree murder and acquittal.
The jury was also directed that
should it's verdict be first degree mur-
der a penalty should be fixed, either
Of life Imprisonment of death. Should
the verdict be second degree murder
the court itself imposes the penalty,
which. under the Colorado statute is
from ten years to life Imprisonment.
The elimination of manslaughter
from the case caused Attorney John T.
Bottom, for the defense, to take ex-cep.
tons.
He stated to the court that he be-
lieved this should have been included.
The jury was charged that shot
fired with malice and premeditation,
death resulting, although the shot was
not directed against the person killed,
constituted crime OF first degree
murder.
In ~ ryc bn {o1 III
ing of George E. Copeland, for which
Henwood is being tried, by bullet in
/ tended for Sylvester L. Won Phui,
justifies verdict of first degree mur.
der providing that Henwood intended
maliciously to take Won Phul's life.
The court charged the jury that evi.
dence of threats and gun plays on the
part of Won Phul against Henwood, or
previous quarrels between them was
admissible only to show the condition
OF Won Phul's mind at the time they
occurred; that when Van Phul knock.
ed down Henwood in the barroom of
the Brown Palace Hotel but made no
further attacks, and Henwood then
fired, there was no self defense and il
Henwood fired deliberately and ma
liciously," the crime was first degree
murder.
Intent" was defined as intent to
kill' and not to kill any particular per
son. The presumption of law as to the
sanity of the defendant was explained
and reasonable doubt, which, the court
said. must amount to an abiding con-
viction"
| Previous to the reading of the in
structions the court permitted Attor.
ney Bottom to recall Henwood to the
stand for the purpose OF identifying
the the so-called "Mable' letter sup
posed to have been written by Won
Phul from the Baltimore Hotel in Kan.
sas City.
The letter was ruled out yesterday
and the court reaffirmed this action.
This letter contains a reference to
a certain "double-crosser' who was
in the habit of visiting the ranch of
John w. Springer. husband of the prin-
cipal witness in the case 1t threaten.
ed ito knock his block Off" Both at
| torneys admitted that Henwood was
not meant by the expression double
crosser' and the court held that this
being the case, the letter could have
nc bearing on the trial.
i Mr. Springer, it has appeared from
the testimony, was the only other man
who frequented the Springer ranch.
Denver, CoIo, June 2s.-Assistan
District Attorney John Horne Chile,
opened the argument for the prosecu
> ton with scathing denunciation o
Henwood as ''the destroyer" of tn;
home of John w. Springer, wealth.
Denver banker. He deprecated th,
lnaudlin public sentiment that woult
tula murderers loose to prey upol
the public, and appealed to the jury
to enforce the law, particularly il
this instance, and render a verdict O
murder in the first degree.
He pictured Henwood as a self
constituted hero and protector" who
was taken into the bosom Of tn,
family of John Springer, introduced
to his wife, took advantage Of hi.
kindly courtesies and then destroyed
the Springer home"
| Mr. Chiles asserted that the firin,
upon Won Phul, which resulted il
Won Phul and Copeland's death, wa.
the work of man fired by jealousy
a man with damnable hell fire in hi
heart"
l There was no justification, no self
defense, urged the assistant distric
attorney. Henwood. he said, was act
1 ing under spirit Of revenge.
Illicit Relations With Mrs. Springer
! HE had had illicit relations will
| Mrs. Springer" said Mr.. Chiles, "an,
[ he was afraid that Won Phul stoo,
high in the affections of that fai
creature" Therefore, he declared
Henwood wanted Won Phul out Of tn
way.
Mr.. Chiles dwelt upon that phas,
of the law which requires a man Il
endeavor to avoid danger before b
strikes a mortal blow.
He charged that Won Phul, afte
striking Henwood down in the ba
room Of the Brown Palace hotel, turn
ed his back upon him. and that the
J HenWOod began shooting. He ars,,o
that Henwood was in no immediat
danger Of his life, ana therefore tn
plea Of self defense could not stand.