Show IT GOES TO THE JURY The Defendant Spencar Now Awaiting the Verdict ARGUMENTS MADE YESTERDAY 3Ir Brown Takes Thirty Exceptions to the Judges ChargeThe Jury to Report This Morning The Third distirct court room was crowded again yesterday tho space allowed for spectators being jammed to its utmost capacity while the inside of the bar was crowded with members of the bar and friends relatives and acquaintances of the M1n uuu j L RUVLIXS who had been cut off by the judge when the hour for adjournment arrived the previous evening arose to finish his argument which lasted about three hours altogether Mr Hiles he said had stat d that Hick man got a horse and wagon and helped the defendant out of town There is no ovidencs to that effect Mr Hiles tho1s thought necessary I suppose to bolster up his case As to the testimony of Leonard Phillips and Henry Cushing th doubtless attempted to concoct a story that would fit But in this they failed Phillips says Hickman shouted Git < usuiis says that Hickman instead of aid tng the defendant shouted Ill drop him and covered him with his revolver Phillips Phil-lips < Uvlaros positively that there were only uvo soldiers all the other witnesses dtvlaiv tKere l were rive If Hickaian had doup as Phillips says he would have shown 4 ronniPtiun with the man who shot but lit UK other witnesses say he appeared at least to be in pursuit It is apparent from Phillips own stat ment that he testified falsely He makes of himself the leading character When the doctor could not find the bullet according to Phillips he found it for him Why if that testimony was true the ball passed up outside of the ribs and it was the bungling doctor who inflicted the fatal wound while probing for the bullet Hut it is not true tht Phillins did as hi says he simply told you what was untrue He says parties were there when it was shown they were not and his whole story should be thrown out as unworthy un-worthy of belief As to Cushing he said I lie was subpoenaed by the prosecution but his name was not on the subpronas There was one name Boor thus was Cushiug brought in under a mask by the prosecution prosecu-tion to deprive the defendant of the opportunity oppor-tunity to meet his statements He said ason Luce was there but the other witnesses say he was not The prosecution had summoned William and M H Luce but kept them out of the way lest he should get ont of them the fact that Jason Luce was not there They feared that these men would testify that Luce was out on the mail route with the pony express 500 miles from here Cushing says Howard Spencer was with Hickman Luce and Stringam at II a m of the day of the shooting George B Spencer says he was with him from 10 till 12 that day and neither Luce Stringam or Hickman were seen by him I will say we have been able to derive no assistance from our client The prosecution prosecu-tion have not proved that he was the man who fired the fatal shot If he was thereat there-at all he cannot tell of it From the time of his terrible injury by Pike for two or three years his mind is a total blank His memory contains not a trace of the occurrences occur-rences that followed nor of Sergeant Pike Of course Pike said it was Spencer who shot him It was likely that be rfXHlld come to that conclusion from tlit tact that it was Spencer whom he had injured But the evidence the witnesses for the prosecution cause a crave doubt even from their standpoint Apeucer being the man Men who were ocarest to the scene and who knew I Spencer Spen-cer well did not recognize him as the man who fired If these men could not recognize hun in broad daylight do you suppose that Pik who had seen Spencer but once and that about dark wlwn he brained him with hIS mush et would recognize him It is high improbiulc Is it not more likely that insUad of Pike saying that it was Howard Spencer ss ho shot him that he merely expressed a belief to that effect based upon the knowledge that Spencer was tho man ho had wronged The character of the injury inflicted by Pike on Spencer and the consequences on the defendant was then discussed at tajgth by Mr Rawlins who stated that pike had afterwards met with but retributive re-tributive justice for his brutal deed The evidence is clear that at th time Pike was shot if Spencer did it he was not in a state of mind to be responsible for his actions The torture he endured for the months following the terrible scene in March at Rush valley no human tongue can tell Can we wonder that when he saw the brute Pike that he had an impulse to inflict upan him merited punishment Under such circumstances cir-cumstances would not the wound be felt afresh1 And would you say that if a sane man had followed and slain the one who had inflicted such a terrible injury he was not justified What of it if a hundred hun-dred desperadoes aided him to escape f Vas the provocation lessened by that even if it were true It is stated that Pike tried to draw a weapon Is it not probable that when he saw the face of the man whom he he endeavored had so brutally stricken down ored to draw a weapon to protect himself from the retributive justice that was to comet The act of slaying Pike was not that of a coward It was not the act of a sane man to go there to a man in the midst of armed friends and call him out and shoot him Bill Hickman would not have dared to engage in such a plan None but would have attempted an insane individual n n 1non iIl > uiu u uuaiiitAt vvi OMrKawlins began to refer to events in the early history of the territory when the court checked him Mr Rawlins replied that Mr Hiles of the prosecution had been granted considerable latitude this regard The spcl > er however conformed to the ruling of the court and closed his argument by asking the jury to acquit the defendant because that was his just due He declared that there was no excuse or palliation for this prosecution LEGitofn YOUXO followed He said it was a rule oflaw that the prosecution should prove its case The gentlemen engaged for the government had left no stone unturned to do this but had not been able to do so It had been characteristic charac-teristic of some of the witnesses for the prosecution that they were apparently anxious to have indicted upon some one tho penalty of death Mr Young then reviewed the evidence in the case When Cushings testimony was reached it was branded us false For instance in-stance his testimony about Bill Hickmau standing in the rear of Cushings shoe shop and examining his pistols while two men in plain view were watching him was too improbable for belief Hickman desperado desper-ado as he was was not such a fool as that and no one who knew him would ever believe be-lieve anything like that about him Hick man never engaged publicly in a homiicide He never took such risks of being shot as it vms said he did on this occasion by Cush in and Phillips But all the other evidence contradicts the statements of these two witnesses who evidently testilled to all they saw themselves and a great deal that they heard others say they saw but which never actually occurred Mr Young then reviewed the affair a t Rush valley when Spencer properly refused re-fused to obey the orders of Sergeant Pike and the latter struck him with a musket is It had been said that Pike was under arrest b ar-rest But who were his custodians tHis f own underlings He was an armed prisoner pris-oner in the custody of men under his own 1 command What a satire on the law to i S say that he was in the hands of the law I Is it any wonder that the people said justice jus-tice would not be done Would it beg be-g if Spencer was fired by the torture of his wound and in his demented condition retributive tion grew frenzied and brought justice to the boastful sergeant who had committed the cowardly assault Usually I villians have some soft spot but this dog I did not even have that The cowardly t wretch had Spencer thrown nM the damp a chance And then when Pike was brought n he was permitted to go on parade with his subordinates an armed man flaunting in tho face of his victim the position he was in and boastful of what he had done Would not a sane man have become uncontrollable uncon-trollable under such circumstances In those days men carried pistols because the law did not afford them protection Judge JuddStop that Brother Young Keep inside of the evidence Mr YoungI am I was referring to the condition of those times Judge JuddDo you say the revolve was above the law Mr YoungIn those times and under those circumstances yes It Judge Judd Well you can stop That cannot be allowed in court Mr YoungAll right sir then I will have to refrain Mr Young closed and arecass was taken until 130 oclock On reassembling ARTUUR BROWN arose on behalf of the defendant He de titled murder in its various degrees as the law views it and laid particular stress upon the fact that murder must be premeditated premed-itated and malicious The offense of manslaughter man-slaughter was killing upon provocation which must be judged of by the circumstances circum-stances The nature of the nrovocation must be considered in saying what would be the proper time for the cooling down of a reasonable man In this case we see that Pike in violation of the permission granted ly his superior officer to Spencer to stay till morning followed Spencer to the corral cor-ral in Rush Valley and without provocation provoca-tion struck him down Mr Hiles has said that ho was not allowed to prove anything to the contrary His statement is untrue and I am surprised that he should make it He doubtless thought it would have great weight with you but he was mis taken We have it as an undisputed fact that Pikes assault on Spencer was unjustifiable un-justifiable Was that assault provocation enough to take life in return t I say it was and sano or insane you and I would have tilled the man who assaulted us in that vay if we had the opportunity I do not say it was right The law says it is wrong It would be manslaughter If Howard Spencer had been sane and had killed Pike in the manner claimed it would have been manslaughter under the law We should take into consideration the times and circumstances cumstances not as justilication but in explanation planation > of the impulses of human nature But even to make manslaughter of this hey must prove premeditation and sanity The other side has very adroitly ea rcd to prove a conspiracy and they have rung the charges on Bill Hickmans name They try to make something out of the stories they have been told of that notorious character Take the facts of this case there is nothing to connect him with it even if Cushing and Phillips had told the truth which they did not do for they are contradicted con-tradicted by all the other witnesses for both sides If a party to a suit secretes evidence it causes a suspicion The secreting by the prosecution of material facts is a cause for suspicion in this case Their silence for thirty years is suspicious It means that they wanted the witnesses for the defense out of the way Now Mr Hiles says it was because Spencer was absent That we have shown was manifestly untrue But that was no excuse for not finding an indictment ictment which was not done till the thirtieth year after the killing I dont think Hiles believed himself what he said He simply thought his word would have an effect upon you Thirty years have elapsed without prosecution and the question arises as to whether Pike attempted himself to shoot the man who shot him The case has been delayed so that that fact caald not be woven It has been urged that he was in the cus ody of the law The evidence has been shovn that he was in command of his roops or so many as a sergeant can com manu was ne unarmed tie ana on nis belt for carrying his knife and revolver His knife was there one man says his re olver was and another says it was not In all 1 probability he drew his revolver and dropped it when he was shot so that he did not have it on when he was earned upstairs stairs My brother Hiles speaks of the solemnity of Pikes dying declaration I say that Leonard Phillips manufactured that dying statement out of whole cloth He is contradicted by the only two other witnesses nesses present This might have been shown had the trial been held thirty years ago but because there was no case against the defendant he was not prosecuted If Mr Peters should claim that the courts then would not mete out justice ho gives a justification for the killing of Pike The prosecution says that the pica of inanity sanity admits the killing I say it does not Ve put in issue every statement of the indictment in-dictment There is evidence that Spencer killed Pike there is just as strong evidence that he did not If he did it is clearly then the-n that it was while he was insane As to the insanity we proved that beyond a doubt Mr Hiles says the physicians testimony should have little weight That may do for his own witnesses not for ours who are the leading medical men of the city Mr Hiles admitted their long experience exper-ience and competency and what kind of a face has he to state now that what they says say-s of little consequence I say their testimony testi-mony is of great weight and importance They say that a man injured as Spencer was would remain insane for a time or even for life And we know it is a fart that a man thus affected would develop insanity on each occasion of unusual excu iment Its It-s claimed that his running awa VM proof conclusive that he was sane We all know that an insane man is liable to run as a sane man I apprehend that the court will charge you that if you have a reasonable doubt as to the sanity of this defendant you must acquit We have shown you beyond any doubt that he was not in a sound state of mind We have shown you that his entire nature was hanged If he was sane and it was shown that he killed Pike the verdict should only be manslaughter But he was insane and on that we demand a verdict of acquittal We demand of you gentlemen of the Jury that you sustain the majesty of the law There is no excuse for this prosecution It was well known to the public at the time Pike was killed that Spencer was not in a frame of mind to be responsible even if hs did it therefore they did not prosecute him With these facts we ask and expect a ver diet of not guilty u un h THE CLOSIMi AIl U non n-on behalf of the prosecution was made by Mr Peters There had been considerable criticism because the prosecution was instituted in-stituted at so late a day I have no excuse to make If murder was committed thirty years ago and the criminal escaped it is time justice was meted out If he is wrongfully aicused the people should know that he is innocent I eth the history of this territory from 1S47 to 1SS2 is an answer for the delay The prosecution assumed in this case to prove every element of murder mur-der and we believe we have done it It is idle for counsel to claim that we have not proved that the death of Pike was caused by the defendant Spencer They say the defendant was insane I think he made avery a-very sane request at noon when he asked that Mr Brown close the argument for the defense Cl say gentlemen of the jury that we have proved every element in tao case We have shown the death of Sergeant Pike We have shown also I think that he died from injuries received at the hands of thedefend ant We say that it is immaterial whether or not Pike inflicted an injury on Spencer It can not be claimed that because of that injury Spencer had a right to kill him No man has a right to take the law into his own hands No one but an insane man will urge such a proposition in earnest There may be an excuse for my brothers Rawlins and Young I think Rawlins himself was insane at some times in his argument I say I dont care whether Pike was jus titled or not in the affair in Rush valley But it is not unreasonnble to conclude that tho killing of Pike was in revenge for that injury Spencer was full of vengeance and when Pike was brought in to submit to the civil authorities the defendant was on the lookout to gratify his revenge The testimony of Steve Taylor shows that the defendant vas determined to take the law into his own hands i Mr Peters argument was quite lengthy and it was r1n oclock when he closed I THE JCDOES CHARGE was as Ion as the moral law and he read it to the Jury from manuscript It con i i tained nearly five thousand words and occupied nearly one and a half hours m its delivery He closed by informing the jurors that they were not expected to report I re-port to the court before 9 I oclock this morning and informed them further that jf fhpy liapnvprod anyone prowling around the jury room door that they would be justified jus-tified in booting them off the premises Mr Brown on behalf of the defense gave notice of some thirty exceptions to the charge whichwere duly noted |