The Wheeling intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1903-1961, 1914-11-25
photo by sidney Mccoy

to bring in verdict OF not guilty.
He based his motion on the follow.
ing points: That the State had failed
10 prove that arson had been com.
mitted; that the indictment was fauI.
". in as much as the trial was upon
the firing OF building that had not
even been touched with flame; that
the shed or passageway at the War.
wick China Company was not the
building mentioned in the indictment:
further. that the indictment read that
the damage was to a building valued
at $4,000. and that the damage done
was not near equal to 500.
He quoted different authorities. one
OF Uhl VS.. Commonwealth. 6 Grafton,
page 40. Also that the evidence in
the case was insufficient to convict
the man or even to 20 before a Jury
Ior consideration. He said: you
can't convict on the doctrine OF
chances, unless IL demonstrates be
yond a reasonable doubt and moral
certainty. He then reviewed part OF
his opening charge to the Jury, saving
that the man had been bounded: also
was under heavy bond at the time
Ihat part OF the testimony was that
OF harlot. and another witness lived
In adultery with his brothers wife.
And also that the testimony was moth.
ing more or less than mere suspicion.
He quoted a case OF Anderson VS..
commonwealth. SO Virginia, in which
an appeal had been taken to the state
supreme court and ruled insufficient
10 convict. In this case. ne ayerred
the court did not even find a writ of
error In the record, but that the evil
dence was not sufficient to convict. 4"
he reviewed the Anderson case. saw
ing that the man had grudge against
Nh.ar 4.
charged with burning
In reviewing. he brought out the
three points: First only attempt 10
commit arson IL anything at all: sec.
ond. part of building instead OF prop
erty described in the Indictment: and
third. nothing in the case but suspi,
cion.
Fire Marshall Replies.
state Fire Marshall John S. Horan
then replied for the state, saying that
the building burned was part Of the
main building. That the evidence
submitted had proven this. Reading
from 3S6. volume 3. he said: Actual
Ignition. no matter how small. Just so
part OF the fiber is burned. constitutes
crime OF arson. IL is not necessary
10 show that all OF a building was
burned. We have produced witnesses
that there was fire, and see no rea.
son OF elaboration on the various
Nine out of every ten arson ceses
are established by circumstantial eyi.
dence and the courts have ruled thus
~. We have established BY circnm-
stanual evidence that the defendant
was seen In the vicinity of every fire.
IN regard to the character of the wit
nesses. ] have only pity for the woman
VINO has sunk from virtues pathway.
But before Mr.. Boyce proves that this
woman has sunk from virtue he can
not make no allusion TO her character
10 the jury. Her story is mistaken
on that point. Let he who is without
sin, cast the first stone.'"
Mr. BOyce replied by SAYING that he
was not satisfied with the little boy.
Martin Snyder, as he was so suscepti.
PIE 70 the leading Of an attorney that
ne was dangerous TO both the state
and the defense. Mr.. Koran defended
the boys story. and Mr.. Boyce said.
Wen, II he's satisfied. ] am"
Defense Calls First Witness.
The Jury was brought back and the
called. In several instances the de-
PENDANTS Witnesses tended 10 corrOb-
crate ,ha the states contention regarding
Thomas stagnan was the first. on
direct examination by Mr.. Boyce he
said be had lived in the city Of
wheeling for namber Of years
n, O. How long have you known
krnitF
A-For n number Of years.
2. You knew him as police Of
hcer aud later as nreman7
a. Yes. sir
q DID you see George Kraft on
me Cay ~ October Is. 1915?
= Yes. cir
q Now tell tho Jury where YOU
saw linn and under what conditions.
a. My wife and ! we're walking
lcisufcly un Chapllno street and ho
nls7od us between Twcuty-third aud
Twenty second streets. near the John
Watorhouge property This was about
2 20 o'clock. ! think We went on w
the street 20 Twentieth and turned
down Twentieth 90 Market street
heard reports of explosions and
.1Id she didn't know. A. we walked
down the other side of KINGS place
] Jaw tha ere This was near the
bridge I walked ON up the stree.
nnd |u little while saW Kraft talk.
inE to man named Finley
Ih' state did not cross examine fhe
witness.
s. X. Johnson Called.
8. u Johnson. krafi'a former bonds
man. vas The next witners called on
direct examination bv Mr. Hovce he
DO was in The livery business and wac
located on Twonfy.third street De
said Do knew Kraft
@ DID you see him on the day ~
The froa7
A. Yer. cir
q Under what circumstance did
A. We'll. was In the Office when