Year: 1870

at the head of Jaco slough, where this en-.
tire family was consigned to watery
grave.


On the morning OF the 18th he is seen
within 2! miles of the fatal slough, MRS.
Haggerty and children no longer With
him) retracing his steps. Were the defend
ant to get up and narrate all the facts in
the case precisely as they occurred, he cod
not tell you any facts that am not able
to tell you from the circumstances that
have been brought to light, all pointing
unerringly to his guilt. Here again you
find from the evidence the remarkable cir.
cumstances of a sleigh track coming down
to the air hole. The council here alluded
in forcible terms to the giant like frame
and herculanean strength Of defendant,
and the fact that for four cold dreary days
and nights he had been travelling about
the country in all directio ms to wear them
out and stnpify them so that they would
sleep upon the very verge Of the grave.


Counsel was here interrupted, and the
court adjourned to dinner.


AT quarter to three p. m. Judge Muir
! dock concluded his exhaustive argument,
giving a full history of all the facts and
circumstances of the case pointing to the
guilt of the defendant, when Mr.. Noble
proceeded to open the defence by saying
that they proposed to argue only the ques-
tions of where the offence was committed,
and the jurisdiction of this court and he
proposed to copfine himself to the latter
proposition conceding for the purpose of
his argument that the offence was commit
ted at Jaco slough, and proceeded to argue
and cite authority that the jurisdiction of
Iowa only extended to the main channel
of the river, and not to the opposite shore
as claimed by the prosecution.


Mr.. Noble here addressed the court
on the part of the defense in substance
as follows:


"As we stated at the onset, We do
not propose to discuss any other feature
of this case than the legal one involving
the single question of jurisdiction. I
shall not stop in my argument to discuss
where the offense was committed, but
for the sake of the argument admit it
was committed on Jacko slough. If the
prisoner is convicted of murder in this
State under the testimony, it will be
but judicial murder.


I come to the question first of bound
ary and jurisdiction.


The prosecution has not attempted to
define the terms boundary and jurisdic-
tion. Take the act of Congress admit
ting Iowa into the Union, and construe
its language literally and it gives Iowa
jurisdiction over the Mississippi from
St. Paul to its mouth, but the proper
construction would be that it gives the
state concurrent jurisdiction over the
river proper, but lot over the sloughs
and bayous of that river. Jacko island
is the east bank of the Mississippi and
the jurisdiction of Iowa can go no fur
ther. Jacko island and slough are in.
Wisconsin, and in order to reach Jacko
slough from Iowa, you have to pass over
a part of the territory of Wisconsin,
Mr. Noble here read from Gilbert VS..
Moline Water Works 19 Iowa report.
The case at bar is exactly parallel
with the one just read by me, for you
have to go over and across a part of
Wisconsin to get to Jacko slough. 1t
is the thread of the river proper that
forms the common boundary. The word
jurisdiction, as applied to states implies
nothing more than the power to govern
by legislation; and until the state has
legislated upon that subject, your honor
has no power to try case arising be-
yond the main thread of the Mississippi
river. The criminal code Of Iowa is all
the law that We have on the subject
That nowhere gives this court authority
to try case like the one at bar
1t gives this court no jurisdiction for
offenses committed, as the testimony
tends to show, upon Jacko slough in
Wisconsin. There is no common law to
hang man in Iowa. That authority
must be specially conferred, and if not
found in our criminal code, it cannot be
exercised. mr. Noble here read from
lst Bishops criminal law, showing that
at common law the jurisdiction of coun-
ties only extend to the water line, while
the jurisdiction of the state over the
territory may extend into the water one
marine league.]


It is not pretended that Jacko slough
is the Mississippi river. We have to
pass over the sovereignty of Wisconsin
to reach it. If crime was committed
on Grant river below where Swift slough
enters into it, the gentleman might with
just as much consistency claim that
Iowa had concurrent jurisdiction of it
as over the offcnse committed upon
Jacko slough. The courts of Iowa
have no jurisdiction even to remove
nuisance erected upon the Mississippi
river near the opposite shore as is fully