Grand Rapids Herald-Review Newspaper, October 21, 1899, Page 1

ined | | f | ~ — | Waisnesora { HISTORICAL ‘ Bate & ‘ SQOIETY- & \ecnganpanminicnanes Vou VIII.—No. 12. Granp Rapips, Irasca County, Miny » SaturDAy, OcToBER 21, 1899. Two Dotiars a YEAR i LECCE CELELLEEELELLILLL abo SRE AEE AE Hea ae a AR AE AE ae ae ay | ath ate ae ae aA ae ae otk ae ae aE AE ae ae ae eae st se EE ea ae Ee Re eae eae ea EE = The Goods are Herez # Come and See Them? The Latest Pattrens in Dress Goods, Golf Capes—the rage, sk Shirt Waist Patterns, . Children’s Coats and Fackels, Ladtes’ Children’s and Misses Fall Hats, Tam O’Shanters, Fine Wool Shawls, Blankets and Quilts, Fleece Lined Undeawear tn all sizes for Children. READ ea ae ee ae ae ae aE te ae a ate ate ae ate ate ae ate ate ate ae AOA EEE EEE TERETE AY SSI EERE EE HET AOR RAE ESE RE EEE AE AE AE REST 7 Ge ae aE Re aR ae NE aie ae ae ae RE Ea Mele Meake aeok He segenes bode she che Aesth eshislachastascdastatoketetatek totcdok dtodd Our Fine Furniture ad me ae = ci Js now in and you will find elle pdb bebabed opened bf ob thee bal Mea ea 2 2 2 Re as an elegant line of Couches, ae Chaimber Sets, Book Shelves, Be Writing Desks, Ete. Be = & 2 ae Be ad ae ae ae kd ae 33 a8 2% ue Re ae ae Be Be ae Be +4 a Be cs ae ae ee aie ae ue 3 is 2 cr ae j i] a Be 2a 55 - es es Spe Ae eee te ae eae a ae eae tee ae ee eat a a gee a eae tee Me a Sea SRA EE A me aE Ee ee ah oe Se ae ae Se a ae a ae te ge TEE aE a Ae aa ea a AE AE EE ASRS eA A AEE And that is not taken as a whe our stock of hardy farm machine sporting goods, ete., is absolut able. Our stock is not as they have down in the Twin C AS GOOD. From the basement to the roof our store is filled with GOOD things. That means letter things than other dealers in the same lines cary. While We Talk a Good Deal More about HIGH QUALITY than about LOW PRIOES, yet we want you to know that our prices are lower than you can get the same grade of goods for anywhere else. ‘ It will be to YOUR advantage as well as ours, to examine our stock and buy what you want frem us. P W. J. & H. D. Powers. $ Speaking of Groceries Prompts us to remark that if you want the VERY BBST you will have to go to thestore of J.D. Powers for it. Others may insist that their stock is larger— and perhaps it is—but itis not as good, and they know it. In staple groceries » he can meet all requirements, while his Teas, Coffees, Butter, Cheese, Pickles, Canned Goods and spices are absolutely the best that can be procurred in town. Powers’ coffees are particularly famous, he having a larger trade in this com- modity than any other grocer in the \ village. His stock of cigars, tobaccos and smokers’ articies is an excellent one and he inyites you to try theni. hac A Full Line of Gent’s Furnishing Goods. J. D. POWERS. Opposite Hotel Pokegama, GRAND RAPIDS. =| M’CARTHY’S OPINIONS Concerning the Action of the Board of Pardons in Fergusson Case. THINKS MEMBERS MISTAKEN Man Who Prosecuted Fergusson Says He Believes They Haye Mistaken Moral Depravity for Mental Irresponsibility. When she news that the sentence of George J. Fergusson had been com- muted: to life imprisonment by the board of pardons reached here Satur- day evening, very few were the people who were not taken completely by surprise. Everyone had taken it for granted that the murderer of Frank Noggles would pay the extreme penalty for hi$ crime after the death warrant was singed by the governor, fixing the day of execution as Oct 27. It was known, of course, that considerable influence wa. being brought to bear on the board of pa dons to have that body commate the death sentence to imprisonment for life, but iu view of the fact that nu extenuating. circustances in the commission of the crime could possi- bly be discovered, it was not thought that the board would interfere with the decree of Judge Holand... The body of ultimate appeal nevertheless did find why Fergus should not’ bang, and sentenced him to Stillwater for lite. Perhaps the most surprised man in the community upon hearing of the Loard’s aciion was Senator C. C. Me- sarthy. At the time of the trial the senator W. retain by the county commissioners to assist County At- torney Donohue iv the prosecution of of Noggles’ slayer, and to bis efforts it largely due that Fergusson | was convicted. The Herald-iteview!call- ed ou Senator McCarthy and asked bis opinion in the matter. He was adverse to ¢ ising the board, but that its action was not entirely to his liking, it was plain tosee,. Be- low will be found the reasons whgthe senator thinks that tbe board made a mistake. Following is the intel view: reasons “What do you think of the action of the mmuting the sentence of Fergusson? “I regard it asasplendid triumph of the attorneys for the défense.” “But what do you thi: the boar “It is a dangerous thing to attempt to criticise the action of the honorable board of pardons. It is created by law and given the very power it has just exercised. By giving the board that ‘power it must have been intended that the board would exercise it. If at does exercise its power to grant pardon ‘or commute sentence it must be in cases where sentence has been pronounced and where in the dis ion of the board it ought to be changed. You andI may think the action of the board wrong, but as citizens of the state we must be careful how we criti- cise such action.” “Why should we be criticism of the board?” “It is absolutely essential to good govern- ment, to the well-being of society, to the best interests of the state and all its people that a healthy respect be entertained for all courts. public officers and public bodies. Especially is this true of public bodies that exercise a discretion in the performance of their duties. The action of the board of pardons is discretionary.” # “Do you think that the sentence of Fer- gusson should have been commuted?” “No, I do not.” “Why?” “Because he is guilty of murder in the first degree and the law makes capital punish- ment the penalty for such murder unless the trial court shall find and certify of record that there are exceptional circumstances in the case which make it one where the death penalty ought not to be inflicted.” “Were there such exceptional stances in this case?” “No, there were not. The trial court was asked to find them and make the punish- ment imprisonment for life, and he refused. It was cold blooded premeditated, planned murder; it was a brutal, cruel, wicked murder. In its execution it was revolting, horrible. fiendish. The murder was done to rob a man of his hard-earned winter's wages.” “Do you think Fergusson insane?” “No, and neither does the board of par- dons because if it did it-would have sent him to un assylum instead of to prison. Noone ever thought of the insanity dodge until three or four days before the hearing at St. Paul. No one ever questioned his sanity be- fore.” “What do you think of Goy. Lind’s state- ment that Fergusson has not mind enough to become insane?” “I think the governor is mistaken. In my opinion a man who can plan a murder several days before it is executed and then proceed to execute it according to his plan, has sufficient mind to become insane, The execution of this murder required. delibera- tion, care, reasoning, and the performance of acts intended, thought out and deter- mined. After planing the murder he never wavered in bis thought, never faltered in < of the action of careful as to our circum- | his purpose.” ‘ “What do you think of the statement of Attorney General Douglass that the fact Fergusson left his lumberman’s sack by the body and a paper trai] to it, and had taken On | i no pains to conceal his crime is evidence that he had no conception of the enormity of the deed?" “The attorney general by his statement, and the board by the statement afterward mide, that ‘there is an utter absence of any effort, design or act? on his part to conceal his connection with the crime, or to remove the evidence of his connection with its com- mission, except his bare denial,’ shows that both the attorney general and the board gave the evidence a very seperficial examin- ation, They are mistaken. The evidence shows conclusively that Fergusson did try to conceal the crime. The attorney general says Fergusson left a paper trail to the body andthe sack. What is the evidence? Fer- Susson stole from »Noggles’ body a letter which.. with two five dollar bills, was ina sealed envelope. He tore the letter into fragments and scattered them so that only three or four small pieces could be found. ‘The fact that Fergusson tore the letter into small pieces is evidence that he was trying to conceal his crime.. Why did he not throw the letter Gown whole? He did not leave a paper trail to the body. Allthat was ever found of the lettér were three or four small pieces picked up by close search. This ata distance of more than a quarter of a mile through the woods. The fact that Fergust son dragged the body sixty feet off from the road into a ravine where he believed it to be out of sight, is evidence that he was trying to conceit! his crime. Why did he not leave the body where he struck it dowa by the road? The fact that he left his lumberman’s sack by the body is the strongest kind of evidence that he was trying to conceal his crime. Why? -He committed the dead in broad day light; he had to get his sack off the road just:as quick as he could and also the sack of Noggles. The position of the acks shows that they were both thrown, one of them going beyond the body to the bottom of the ravine, the other staying by the body, The thing is clear: first Fergusson knocked Noggles down and _ unconscious with his club; he then dropped his club and, grasping Noggles, dragged him into the ravine; then he ran back and grasped the sacks to get them out of the road where they might be seen, and running toward the body, gave the saeks a fling. Then he pulled out his knife, cut the throat Noggles and robbed him. Then he must get back to the road without being seen, and to do it he left his sack. Suppose someone had seen him coming out to the road with his sack. It was necessary for him to get into town with- out attracting atvention, and the best way to do it to leave his sack. Why did he not leave his sack by the side of the road if he was not trying to conceal his ciime? Fergusson had a new pair of shoes in the suck left in the ravine by the body. The same day he committed the murder, after he had forged Noggles’ name to the time cheek’and received the money, he wanted a pairof shoes. Did he goand get the shoes he left by the body? Notat all. He bought x new pair, and when questioned by one who knew of his having the others as to why he gat the last, he said: ‘Some —-————in \cloip stole my Others.” “Why dit hé say that? “Why did he not go and get the shoes he left by the body? Because he was afraid to—he waSafraid of detection. Instead of there being no evidence of attempt to con-" se abounds with evi- dence of such effort. If iss no ‘gument to say that someone else might have done dif- ferent or that what he did do was foolish— he did the best he knew how. The question is not whut someone else might have done; the question is what he did do. If the rea- soning of the attorney general should be applied in all criminal cases there could never be a Couviction except some eye saw ceul the crime, the the crime committed, because no matter how ‘well a man may cover up his tracks, someone else might have done it better. “What do you think of the declaration of the board that others beside Fergusson were connected with the commission of the crime?” “That may be true, and I could not claim it was not true, but there is not a word of evidence to prove it. On the contrary, all the evidence goes to show that Fergusson committed the crime alone.” “What is the evidence on that pomt?”” “Take the very fact that the lumberman’s sack of Fergusson was left by the body. If someone else had committed the murder would Fergusson have consented that they should carry his sack back and leave it be- side the body? Fergusson knew his sack was there, because there is no evidence that he ever looked for it elsewhere or tried to find the shoes and clothes in it which he wanted and needed. Again, the club with which Noggles was knocked dow» was brought by Fergusson from twelve miles back along the road. Again, Fergusson had all the stolen property—money, watch, time check, everything—and no one ever asked him to divide. Fergusson kept all the property taken from the person so far aS known. Again, Fergusson, in his attempt to lay the crime onto others, gave the strongest kind of evidence that he committed the crime himself. In regard to the men he accused he told three or four different stories con- tradicting himself and finally wound up by saying that the men he accused were inflo- cent, Other proofs and evidence showed the men he accused to be innocent. If some one else committed the crime, and he knew it, why should he accuse innocent men? Neither th ttorney general nor the board will dare Say that he did it to shield his friends because that would be admitting Fergusson had a moral judgment. If some- one else did it, Why has not Pergusson told who it was? Again, the position of the body, the condition of the clothing gn the body,. the blood and other facts show that Noggles was murdered where found. His mittens were on his hands, he had a small twig which he had grasped in his'death agony in his left hand; the right hand and arm was under the+ body, showing that he was dragged and vet carried: jue way the shirt and coat collars were pulled up in the back of the neck and the position of the left arm show that Noggles was dragged and not carried, The finding of the pieces of the jetter along the road show that the robbeery took place whére the body lay. It is within the range of possibility that Noggles came ucross the bridge, was beguiled into the place of Watson and knocked down imme- diately upon entering and then carried back and dragged-to where found, but it is exceedingiy improbable,” “What do you think of the statement by the board of pardons that Fergusson is not capuble of forming or exercising a moral | judgment upon the character and conse- quences of hPs acts?” “I disagree with the beard, and not only think Fergusson capable of forming a moral judgment upon the character and conse- quences of his.acts, but the evidence shows that he did form such moral judgment. A judgment, as the word is used by the board, isa mental decision. A moral judgment is a mental decision as to the right or wrong of an act. If one has the ability to decide whether an act is right or wrong, he can form 4 moral judgment. If one has the ubility to decide whether or not his acts will cause another injury, wrong and suffering, he has the ability to form a moral judgment as to the character and consequences of his acts. Did Fergusson know that it was not right to murder and rob Frank Nog gles? Did Fergusson know that his act would be a wrong to Noggles? Isay that the evidence shows conclusively that he did so know. When Fergusson was upon the stand he testified in his direct examination that when he and Noggles got to the claim shanty of Rust, he (Fergusson) weakened, and when asked what he meant by that he said that he thought it was too bad to rob Noggles of his money. Fergusson lied when he said that he and Noggles were in the shanty and that he weakened, but the fact that he could go onto the stand and voluntarily testify that he then thoaght it too bad to rob Noggles, shows that he was capable of forming a moral judgment. Again, upon cross-exam- ination Fergusson said that his conscience began to trouble him a day or so after the murder was done. Again, when at Iron River he could not keep still but showed by his actions and talk that his conscience was troubling him. The evidence of Fergusson himself shows that at Iron River he was making inquiries — feeling around —about the murder, and either it was his conscience orhis fear that made him do it, and no matter which it was, it shows that he had formed a moral judgment of his act and had a lively appreciation of its conse- quences. The fact that he tried to conceal his crime is evidence that he knew he had done wrong. Why did he tear "p the letter? Why did he drag the body intoa rfvine where he thought it would be concealed? Why did he take his lumberman’s sack out of the road #nd throw it where it could not be seen? Why did he walk with Noggles nineteen long miles before he could nerve himself to commit the murder? Why did he cut the throat of Noggles after striking him unconscious? That one thing falone shows conclusively that he knew he was doing a wrong to Noggles. Think of it: he wanted the time check, the money and the watch. He knocks Noggles down with aclub. Why did he not take. what he wanted and go and leave; Noggles? The answer is plain: he knew that hé had wronged Noggles by the robbery; he knew that if Noggles regained consciousness he would certainly resent the injury and make known the crime, so he killed him. The fact that he hurried from the body, leaving his sack and clothes there, is evidence of mental excitement and fear of detection, The fact that he manufactured a defense, which was false in its every par- ticular shows that he knew he had done wrong. In fact, the whotetecord is full of evidence showing that he could and did form a moral judgment.” “What, in yoar opinion, was the effect of Windom’s argument. .upon the board of pardons?” “All I know about it is the newspaper report. From that report he laid ‘down three propositions. First, that if all present had justice done tiem they would be in hell ten years ago; second, that whenever man’s ‘law is contrary to the law of God, the law of man should be set aside, and, third, that the sheriff of Itasca county would resign before he would execute the sentence of the court. As to the first proposition, that if justice were done they would all be in hell ten years ago; Lam uot sufficiently acquainted with the persons present to know, or even guess, anything aboutit. What puzzles me is how Windom fixed the time at ten years ago. However, Windom says that is the case, and I understand the gentleman’s reputation for truth and veracity is good in the com- munity where he resides. As to his second proposition, that a lawyer can determine the laws of God and then demand of a court or board that it set aside and disregard the laws of the land because such lawyer claims they are contrary to the laws of God, isa novel proposition, to say the least. His hird contention is denied by the sheriff. Bat after all, ridiculous as were his premi- sés and his argument, he aud Pratt won out and saved the neck of their client.”” “What do you think of the gener | feeling of the people of Itasca county regarding the action of the board?” “Just at present there is a feeling that Noggles, because of his virtues, is dead; that his murderer, because of his vices, lives. Noggles was a hard-working, industrious, honest young man; self-respecting young man. He worked’steady: he was a good citi- zen; he saved his money. Because of that fact he had to die. His murderer is a worth- less wretch, dishonest, of no value to society or himself; he is heartless and has no regard for the rights of others. In my opinion the board of pardons hus mistaken his brutality, his heartlessness, his want of feeling. his pretended stolidity, his depravity, fot want of moral judgment and have given him life. But that will ali pass away in a short time and it will more and more be felt that the board of pardons has erred on the side of mercy.” ¥ “What do you think of the report of Dr. Tomlinson?” “It is a presumptious thing to do—perhaps egotistical—to attempt a criticism of a sien- tific man’s conclusions and findings, but to me his report is the most nonsensical thing Ihave read for some time.” “Why?” “He first says that he believes Fergusson perfectly capable of appreciating the conse- quences of his acts and then he immediately says that he believes Fergusson is ‘morally incapable of appreciating anything except in relation to his own comfort, pleasure or convenience.’ I cannot uhderstand how a man can be perfectly capable of appreciat- ing the consequences of his acts and be morally incapable of appreciating anything except in relation to his own comfort, pleas- ure or convenience. There is another thing I donot understand and that is.how curva- ture of the spine is any excuse for murder. No one claims that the curvature of Fergus- son’s spine affected his mind. But, after all, it is the duty of every good ‘citizen to find some way to justify the action of the board. Not by stultifying his reason, however, but upon the broad und of amenity mercy and the desire to be on the side of right and not take chances on being wrong.. But few of us believe in capita! punishment—I cer- tainly do not—and L believe the time near at ee a a eee ape er are iene aa hand when it will be abolished in this state.” | LOST.IN. THE WOODS. John Beekfelt Has .An- Experience That Was by No Means Pleasant It’s all very well to Joye our friends when they go out in the woods for a little recreation and become lost, but itisfar from humorous to the un- fortunate one. The sensation is in- describable and instances are not few where the wanderer has become in- sane. When one becomes hopelessly lost his plightis pitible in the extreme. Our townsman John Beckfelt had a twelve-hour seance in the tall timber near the mouth of Rice river oa Mon- day of this week. About noon of that day he. strolled out alone from’ camp where he was. with a Grand Rapids party, in search oz duck shooting. He had an idea that there was a smail ‘blind lake” a short distance from camp that had not yet been visited. Like a will-’o-the-wisp the lake always appeared just alittle ahead and he continued to walk with- out heeding the fleeting hours. Final- ly he gaveup in despair and turmed to retrace his steps. Before night- fall he discovered that he had lost the trail, but he continued in what he supposed to be the right direction., As it grew dark he occasionally dis- charged his gun to attract the atten- tion of his companions, but there came no response. It was raining and cold and dark. A thorough search of every pocket developed not a single matcn in his possession. The only guide as to direction was the wiud blowing and the rain striking his cheek, The wonderer concluded to utilize that guide and continue as nearly. as possible in one direction, on the theory that in time he would find an outlet leading somewhere. In the meantime the boys in camp became alarmed at Mr. Beckfelt’s bonappearance and started out io three searching parties. About twelve o’clock at_ night the lost one heard the discharge of a gun. He answered -and the tiring was con- tinued until the two came together. Mr. Beckfelt came home the next day, but he says his experience will prove of yalue to him in the future and be expects to go back in a few days and tind that. ‘‘blind-lake.”” 2 NAUGHTY NEIGHBORS. . Deer River Friends Allow Angry Passions to Control Their Acts. Like a great many very excellent fa es where harmony is not per- mitted to thrive and yet the several members thereof really love one an- other—so it is with the good people of Deer River. A better lot of citi- zens never composed a community. They are generous even to extravi- gance; kind-hearted to a fault; public spirited in all their efforts, and pro- gressive. But in spite of all these commendable yirtues they appear to be possesed of one most deplorable vice—they will have neighborly quarrels. Sometimes these entangle- ments become so serious that officers of the law are called upon to stop the hair-pulling and the police just- ices are required to ‘split the difference.” - It was one of these dis- agreeable affairs from the junction town that occupied the attention of Justice’ Barnard’s court a few mo- ments this week. A difficulty arose between ’Squire McGuire and Geo. 'T. Robinson and Michael McClosky, I'he latter is said to be village mar- shal. he “marshal went into Mr. Robinson’s saloon and ordered one Adolf Solvoson to cease thumping a piano. This the pianist refused to do, whereupon the limb of the; law proceeded to place the alleged offen- der under arrest for disturbing the peaee. Robinson interfered to pro- tect his orchestra and the ’squire stepped in to aid the officer. Robin- son alleges in a complaint sworn out for the arrest of McGuire that the latter drew a revolver and threatened toshoot. McClosky is arrested on a warrant also sworn out by Mr. Rob- inson wherein it was set forth that the said McClosky was not an officer of the village of Deer River and that the arrest and incarceration of Solvo- son was illegal. Bonds in the sum of $200 were furnished in hoth cases and a hearing set for Wednesday next. One of the causes that led to this affair is said to be the action of Mr, Robinson in placing his building out of line with the others on the street, In the reconstruction of Deer River the business men on the street agreed to place their buildings back from the street eight feet and construct a 16-foot sidewalk. All builders, ex- cept Robiuson did this, and his ac- tion has caused considerable ill feeling. oe Our Harry Oakes arrived in town from his Mud Lake farm yesterday. He is pree paring to do some logging this winter. ;