OCR Text |
Show CAitarAiiES for the IS all. Subscribers Sub-scribers for tickets to the thanksgiving thanksgiv-ing ball to-morrow night are requested to call at tho office of Messrs. A. S. Gould & Son to-day and secure them; and orders for carriages, stating the hour at which they will bo required, should be left at tho same offico, without fail, to-morrow morning. TIIIHD DISTRICT COURT. McKkaN, C. J., presiding. Tlt-siw, Nov. s, 1871. The entire day was devoted by Mr. Hempstead to the argument on a motion mo-tion to quash the iodictmcnt against William II. Kimball, who, conjointly with William Hickman, t al. is charged with the murder of one Buck. Ilefore statiog the grounds of his motion to quash, the counsel laid down tho general and acknowledged legal principles governing tho drawing of indictments at common law. The offence charged must bo clearly set forth in the allegations, and in the case of murder, especially, the form and manner by which the homocidc was committed. It baa ever been held that all the substantial elements of a crime should be severally set forth in indictments to a technical degree, and iu most of the caEes where Btatutes have superseded the common law practice, prac-tice, this certainty in an indictment is still required. It is always safe to follow these technicalities, by which a defendant comes into court knowing the precUo charge he has to meet. The indictment in this case charges William Hickman and Morris Meach- am, with the murder of liuck, the former shooting said Buck with a pistol and the latter stabbing him with a knife, causing his death. It also charges the other defendants with the murder, without alleging either that rliiMi wni-o iirPnf airliner nnrl nh.-WlInrr orwhether they were accessories before or after the fuct. The counsel then proceeded to argue the following objections: That the indictment purports to charge the crime of murder under the statute of the Territory, yet has designated desig-nated the offense as murder in the first degree. There is no addition, description or definition of the defendants in the in dictment. There is no allegation in the indictment indict-ment that the dcibndants conspired together to-gether to kill the said Buck, with the exception of Hiokman and Meacham. The indictment is vngue, uncertain and indefinite, because it fixes no date to the offense, and does not allege that said Buck was living at the time; that itdoea not appear whether said Buck was killed by Hickman with a pisto', or by Meachaui with a knife. There is no allegation in the indictment indict-ment of malice aforethought on the part of the defendants except Kimball and Mcacham. There is no allegation that the leaden bullets were discharged out of the pistol in tho hands of Hickman, without which it is impossible that said Buck was wounded and killed as sot tbrth. These points were argued at great length by Mr. Hempstead iu support of his motion to quash. He quoted numerous authorities to sustain his position that the indictment was fatally defective and wanting in those allegations allega-tions which arc essential to tho proper indictment of all the defendants save Hickman and Mcacham. No such form of indictment, he held, could be found in the books, and it would net bo sustained by any court. Before Mr. Hempstead had concluded, conclu-ded, tho court took a recess till this morning at 10 o'clock, when he will finish his argument upon the remaining remain-ing ground of objection to the indictment, indict-ment, viz : That tho indictment was found by the grand jury without the testimony of any sworn witness or witnesses, which are endorsed upon it. |