Kentucky, T, 1883-1990, Undated

There were plenty of witnesses to the kidnaping,
and a lot of glib answers from suspects, but Kentucky
police needed F body in a creek to make it murder

(00 MANY ALIBIS-

HREE MEN brawling in an alley. {t began

as simply as that, yet before the incident

ran its course more than two years later,
people throughout the entire South would be
shocked and revolted by disclosure of the
details of a human tragedy with few parallels
in the annals of crime.

And at the outset, like so many epic crimes,
there was no rhyme or reason about any of
it. An assault in broad daylight upon a grocery-
laden shopper leaving a supermarket? That's
what it looked like, except for one thing. Why
would the assailants kidnap their random
victim and flee with him in a car after their
attack, presumably to rob him? And who was
the victim?

Nearly 24 hours would elapse before police
obtained even a hint as to his possible identity.
Days would pass before anyone could be cer-
tain whether he was alive or dead. - ’

There were at least five eyewitnesses to
the slugfest in the alley next to the big A & P
supermarket on South Fourth Street in Louis-
ville, Kentucky on the late afternoon of Thurs-
day, February 28, 1952. Four of the witnesses
had seen the brawl from. the entrance to the
alley on South Fourth Street. The fifth had
been closer to the action; it happened while
he was taking a smoke on the rear loading
platform of the nearby dairy where he worked.

The witnesses saw a tall, well-dressed,

by DAVID FELDON

middle-aged man walking through. the alley
carrying an armload of groceries in a big
Brown paper sack. They Saw him set upon
without warning by two men armed with short
clubs. The assailants beat him viciously with
their weapons as the man cried out. for help.
The bag of groceries went. flying, - splitting
asunder as it hit the ground and scattering -
its contents of cans and packages in all ai:
rections,

The victim of the assault, taken by Surprise,
tried to fight off. his two attackers, but ap-
parently the first rain of blows had hurt him —
badly and his resistance was ineffective. In a
few moménts he was beaten to his. knees,
then fell over in a crumpled Heap: He seemed
unconscious. —

The two assailants awiftly bent over and,
grabbing the fallen victim by his arms and

feet, rushed the unconscious man to a Car: .
parked nearby, tossed him into the réar seat...

One of the men got in beside him. The other
jumped behind the wheel of the car, started
the engine, and sped away in a whining clash
of grinding gears.

Someone—it was never determined who

had telephoned Louisville police headquarters.

Two patrolmen in a police car, parked. with

* motor idling less than two blocks from the

attack scene, received the urgent call from
the dispatcher: ‘‘A man being beat up, forced

KX | _——
MASTER DETECTIVE MAGAZINE, AUCUST, 19636


“She’s my girl,’ he said.

The reporters reminded him that
he already had a wife and child.

“Sure, I know,” he responded,
adding boastfully. “I’ve got two
kids. Me and Helen have got an
ll-month-old daughter. I’d been
going with her a long time before
I married Margaret.” —

A short while later that day,
Leonard was arraigned on charges
of malicious striking and kidnap-
ing and was held with bail. Soon
after, father and son. who had been
rarely separated, were together
again. Roy Tarrance was arrested
on similar charges.

Prisoners in the Louisville jail
where Leonard Tarrance and his
Dad were held are permitted to
listen to the radio. It was this.cir-
cumstance which unexpectedly
broke the case and brought from
both father and son full confes-
sions.

It was one week after McCor-
mack’s disappearance that Leonard
heard a news broadcast saying the
FBI had entered the case and,
moreover, it was not essential to
find a body to obtain a conviction
and put into effect the death pen-
alty for kidnapers.

Frightened, and hoping to save
his skin, Leonard said he would
talk. Although authorities would
not bargain, and promised him
nothing, he took the gamble.

Leonard began his story with a
bitter condemnation of McCor-
mack.

“That lawyer,” he said, “prom
ised to get me a divorce if I mar-
Margaret. But he lied to me. And
I hate a damned liar.

“Pop and me were riding on
Fourth Street that afternoon and

Car in which lawyer was kidnaped from behind supermarket.

we saw him go in the market,”
Leonard said. “So we pulled up in
the alley and waited.

“When he came out we hit him
with our fists and shoved him into
the car and drove to Harrods
Creek. We stopped and took him
out and walked him across the field
to the fishing cabin. It was just
about getting dark out...

“He didn’t say anything, except
to ask what it was all about. So I
told him and we hit him again and
he fell down.

“Then he said, ‘Do whatever
you’re going to do to me, but get
it over with.’

“We walked him some more,
about 100 yards, down to the bank
of the creek. We made him walk
down the steps to the boat landing.

“T hit him with my fists and my
dad picked up something to hit
him with ... Then we found a
concrete slab and some barbed
wire.

“We put the slab on his stomach
and tied it with the wire. Then we
shoved him off the boat landing
into the creek. I. don’t know
whether he was dead then or
not ..6

“When he didn’t go out far
enough ...I got part of an iron
hand rail and we shoved him 4ut
farther with that.

“Then we went home .. .”

County Coroner, Dr. George
Dwyer examined Francis McCor-
mack’s body after it had been
dredged from the creek. A hole
had been knocked in the back of
his head; there was a three-inch
gash over the left eye; the skull
was fractured in a dozen different
places and three ribs were broken.

Dr. Dwyer said death was caused

- with no

by the fractures and a brain hem- ,
orrhage. It was doubtful, in his
opinion, that McCormack was alive
when he was dumped into the
creek, for there was: very little
moisture in the lungs when he was
examined.

The elder Tarrance went to trié.
first, on April 1st. He swore that
his only part in the murder was
to help his son dispose of the body.

When Leonard took the stand,
he corroborated his father’s story.

The case went to the jury on the
second day of trial. After deliberat-
ing five hours and 45 minutes, the
12 men returned to the tense, pack-
ed courtroom at 5.32 P.M. with
their verdict—

They found the defendant guilty,
recommendation for
mercy, which meant death in the
electric chair.

Roy Tarrance’s wife, from whom
he had never been separated be-
fore his arrest in 26 years, scream-
ed hysterically while her sobbing
husband tried to comfort her.

Three weeks later, Leonard went
to trial. On the first day, he dis-
played an air of indifference, and
read a Bible most of the time. But
his attitude changed when Assis-
tant Commonwealth Attorney Carl
Ousley picked up the 122-pound
concrete block with which Francis
McCormack’s body had _ beer
weighted, and dropped it.

This was something ‘Leonard
couldn’t take . .

Then toward the last hours of
the trial, during the closing argu-
ments, he went to pieces: alto-
gether.

Sobbing uncontrollably he

?

s

_ slumped against his mother, who

(continued on page 64)

Dotted line marks route victim walked to creek bank.


takes, particularly those that ap-
parently led him to kill a stranger
over a woman who never returned
his illicit affections.

EDITOR’S NOTE: The names Marion
Morrison, Andy Jenkins, Arleen
Carter and Andy Skudder, as used
in the foregoing story, are not the
real names of the persons concern-
ed. These persons have been given
fictitious names to. protect their
identities. i
THE END

HORROR

(continued from page 25)

sat beside him, and began sliding
from his chair. Courtroom attaches
rushed to his aid, whereupon he
began struggling and kicking vio-
lently until he was borne bodily
from the courtroom by bailiffs and
deputies assigned to the Tarrance
trial.

Then minutes later he was
brought back, subdued and com-
posed enough to apologize to the
judge. “I’m sorry for all the dis-

turbance I’ve caused the court,”
he said contritely.

Promptly, Leonard’s
Sandy Paniello, informed the jury
that the accused’s behavior was
“the result of a human body under
strain.”

But the prosecutor scoffed. He
called it “a shameful show.”

The jury needed only two-and-
a-half hours to find Leonard guilty

attorney, .

as charged and he, like his dad,

“was sentenced to death.

And so father and son were to-

gether again. When they were |

taken to the Kentucky State Pen-
itentiary at Eddyville, at their
urgent request they were per-
mitted to occupy the same cell.
They were separated, however, in
February, 1954, when work on a
new death house was completed.

During the ensuing two years
after conviction and sentence, At-
torney Paniello won repeated stays
for the slayers of Francis McCor-
mack, while Leonard taught his
theretofore — illiterate father to
read. :
Both of them'spent most of their
time studying the Bible.

At last, when Paniello had ex-
hausted every legal means and
technicality to save his clients,
father and son came to the brink
on March 18th, 1955.

Roy Tarrance was the first to
go. He went to the chair mumbling
the Lord’s Prayer.

A few minutes later, the son
followed.

So today, the inseparable Tar-
rances, father and son, are together
again in death. |
. There are those in Kentucky
who would say their reunion must
have taken place in Hell...

THE END

EDITOR’S NOTE: The names Mar-
garet Welch and Helen Carson are
not the names of the actual persons
involved.

PULLMAN

(———
———

AMBUSH

(continued from page 45)

“Did he say where he got
asked Pate.

‘‘When I asked him, he told n
was none of my business,” rep

. the deputy.

“Okay,” said Pate briskly. “B
him in. Maybe a few hours in
clink will loosen his tongue.

Brought to the Calhoun Co1
Jail in Anniston for questior
Warren Eaves hotly denied
the money he had paid the t
had come from Lloyd Mors

_ wallet.

“You fellas are always jun
to conclusions,” said the fa:
bitterly. “I come by that m
honestly, and you ain’t got no:
to say I didn’t.”

‘“‘Look,. Eaves,’’ said Pate pat)
ly. “This is a murder investiga
A man has been brutally k:
You were up to your neck in
to Morgan. Now he’s dead
you’ve suddenly got a lot of m«
Use your head, man! We’ve g«
choice in the matter. Now, wu
did you get that money?”

It took more than an hour’s
suasion to get the farmer to rx
the source of the money. He
that on the afternoon of the mi
he had driven to Gadsden «
he sold some of his wife’s jev
in order to meet the mortgage
ment which was long overdu
check with the Gadsden p.:
broker revealed that Eaves
telling the truth and he wa:
leased.

A surprising development
curred early the next mor
when William Sowell of the
bama_ toxicologist’s office
nounced that the red ban
handkerchief found at the mt
scene had been cleaned in an
niston laundry.

Hurrying to the laundry, S}
Pate learned that the handker
had belonged to a_ well-k:
Piedmont lawyer.

Questioned at his office a .
while later, the lawyer readil:
mitted that the handkerchief
his, but denied knowing ho
had gotten to Morgan’s farm.

“IT lost it several weeks ago.
explained.

Close questioning revealed
he could have lost it at eithe
of two places; while he was w
ing in the garden behind his h
or somewhere on White. P
Road while he was accompar

“just too clean to be for real” made cops suspicious

A sedan that was

28% pounds of concrete to sink the body of his victim in a creek

into an automobile, screaming for help.
The alley between South Fourth and
Garvin Place, 1100 block.”

It took only seconds for the police
car to race to the entrance to the alley.
But even as it screeched to a stop, Jack
Desante, the dairyman, ran up to the
car and cried excitedly, ‘You're too
late! They’re gone. They took the
poor guy with them. They headed that
way.” He pointed out of the alley to-
ward Garvin Place, a block west.

The patrolman at the wheel im-
mediately radioed the dispatcher and
reported the assailants had fled, taking
their victim with them and giving de-
tails of the direction assertedly taken
by the fleeing car. At headquarters,
the officer in charge of the communica-
tions room ordered the patrolmen to
stay put at the scene and question wit-
nesses, reporting at once any infor-
mation they were able to obtain. Sec-
onds later, the dispatcher’s voice could
be heard ordering other patrol units
into the chase of the kidnaper’s car.

As this was happening, the second
patrolman had been questioning the
dairyman, and one of his first queries
was, “Can you describe the car?”

Jack Desante could, and did. “It
was a medium gray Chevy, 2-door,”
he said. “I got the license number.”
He fumbled in his pocket and produced
a slip of paper on which some figures
were scrawled. ‘374-681,” he read. “It
was a Kentucky plate.”

This information was relayed im-
mediately to the dispatcher, who
promptly rebroadcast it to patrol cars
trying to pick up the trail of the kid-
naper’s car.

When this had been done, the two
patrolmen methodically began to ques-
tion the five witnesses who admitted
they had seen the whole incident. The
versions of all were quite similar, dif-
fering only in minor details. But it
was Jack Desante, the © dairyman,
who proved to have been the most
observant and who was able to pro-
vide the most complete description of
what he had seen.

“T had just stepped out on the load-
ing platform and lighted a cigarette,”
he said. “I noticed this fellow turning
into the alley carrying a sack of gro-
ceries, but I didn’t think anything of it.
Lots of people walk through here com-
ing from the market.

“Then all of a sudden I heard yells
and I looked again. I don’t know where
the hell they came from, but there
were two guys beating the hell out of
this guy with the groceries. The sack
went flying. The guy tried to fight back,
but he didn’t have a chance against
the two guys. They had clubs and they
were belting him on the head with ’em.
He went down, It looked like he was
out cold.

“I thought they’d beat it then, but
no—quick as a flash they’re carrying
him by the arms and feet. They dump
him in the back seat of their car. One
guy gets in with him. The other gets
behind the wheel and they roar out of
here.”

gy
Scaled cick

Rn.

“Can you describe the attackers?”

Desante said one appeared to be a
man around 30, with a husky build.
“The other man was older, but I didn’t
get a real good look at him. He was on
the other side of the car.”

“How were they dressed?”

Here Desante’s powers of recollec-
tion failed him. “I’m not sure about
the clothes,” he said. “I think one of
the guys was wearing khaki chinos. I
can’t remember much else—except one
thing. They were both wearing caps—
brown caps.”

Desante’s memory was better when
asked to describe the victim. “A real
nice looking fellow,” he said. ““Middle-
aged, around 50 or so. Stood better’n
six feet. Well-dressed. He was wear-
ing a coat, light-colored, and a dark
hat.”

Most of this information was cor-
roborated by the other witnesses, who
stood by listening. A couple offered
contradictions about hues of garments
worn by both the victim and the thugs,
but neither was very positive.

The patrolmen reported the results
of their interviews to headquarters,
then proceeded to examine the scene
of the attack and the area around it.
Close by the burst grocery sack they
found a pair of man’s eyeglasses with
tortoiseshell frames. Among the scat-
tered groceries, they spotted a sales
slip from the supermarket. They went
inte the store and queried all the girls
at the checkout counters, but with no
success. It was a busy store, with a
constant line of customers passing
through the cashier’s check-out chutes,
and it would have been a miracle if
one of the girls could have remem-
bered one man among the many cus-
tomers, with nothing to go on but a
fairly general description and a sales
slip.

A dozen patrol cars had honey-
combed the streets of Louisville’s south
side in swift pursuit of the kidnaper’s
car, but somehow it had slipped through
the cordon. Meanwhile, however, the
license number supplied by the dairy-
man was called in to the Motor Ve-
hicle Bureau and officers at headquar-
ters impatiently awaited a report on
the owner's identification, It came at
eight o'clock that night.

A 1940 Chevrolet sedan, owned by
one Roy Tarrence, was the vehicle to
which the plates had been issued, the
bureau reported. Tarrence resided in
Jeffersontown, a small village some 15
miles east of Louisville. Sergeant James
Bibb, of the Louisville Police Depart-
ment Crime Prevention Bureau, drove
out to Jeffersontown, accompanied by
Jefferson County officers.

The Tarrence home was a neatly
kept bungalow. Roy Tarrence was
there, but he was on the verge of leav-
ing for work at a well-known Louis-
ville distillery; he was a fireman on
the night shift. Tarrence was a medium
tall man, stocky, mild-mannered. He
wore steel-rimmed eyeglasses. He
seemed mystified when questioned
about his car’s presence at the scene

of a fight in Louisville that afternoon.
He assured the officers they must be
mistaken.

They had noted his car outside the
house; it fit the description given by
witnesses to the alley fight. They asked
him where he and the car were at
4:20 p.m, that afternoon.

“At 4:20?” Tarrence looked thought-
ful. “Let's see, I left home around three.
That’s about right, ain’t it, Mary?” He
addressed the question to an attractive
lithe-limbed young blonde, whom he

introduced as Mary Bixler, explaining ‘

that she was his son’s “intended” and
spent most of her time with them. She
corroborated the time of his depar-
ture.

Under further questioning by Ser-
geant Bibb, Tarrence said he had been
alone while he was away from the
house. He returned around six, and
Mary also confirmed this time. Where
had he been while he was out?

“I drove up to Eastwood, over in
Oldham County,” Tarrence said. “I
went up to see a friend about going
fishing sometime soon. He wasn’t home,
and I drove around looking for him,
but I couldn't turn him up anywhere,
so I came on home.”

He readily assented to the officers’
request to examine his car and they
all went outside. For a car that was 12

years old, they found it in remarkably
well-preserved condition, It was spot-
less, well-polished, its interior uphol-
stery in spic and span condition. A
strong smell of gasoline in the car
suggested it might recently have been
scrubbed with the volatile fluid, and
Tarrence admitted this was so.

“That old heap is kind of a hobby
with me,” he said. “I work on her
whenever I got a free moment. I was
doing it today, and I cleaned her up
inside ‘cause I’d gotten a few grease
spots on the cushions. I always keep
her nice and clean. Ain’t that right,
Mary?”

“You sure do,” the girl replied. “Any-
time we want to find you when you
ain’t in the house, we know just where
you'll be—out fussin’ over that old
car.”

Tarrence suggested someone must
have made a mistake. Sergeant Bibb
was not convinced, but there was lit-
tle he could do, at the moment. He
and the other officers left, telling Tar-
rence they might want to talk to him
again.

“Any time, gents,” he said affably.

There were no further developments
in the case that night. But on Thurs-
day morning, at ten o'clock, the alley
assault and kidnap suddenly came
alive again. (Continued on page 73)

Roy Tarrence, son Leonard, were accompanied to court by sorrowing Mrs. Tarrence


»

«

dui

52 Ky. 265 SOUTH WESTERN REPORTER, 2d SERIES

apparent that he was not prejudiced by the

omission of the voluntary manslaughter
instruction. Cravens v. Commonwealth,
Ky., 262 S.W.2d 466. There was nothing
to base an involuntary manslaughter in-

struction on.

[45] Improper argument. Ini the clos-
ing argument the Assistant Common-
wealth’s attorney, Mr. Ousley, made sev-
eral improper statements and appeals to
the emotions of the jury. His inconsider-
ate zeal led him astray. However, in the
circumstances of the case, it is inconceiv-
able that any of the statements affected
the verdict. They must, therefore, be re-
garded as not prejudicial.

[46] Coercion of verdict and miscon-
duct of deputy sheriff. The case was
given to the jury at 10:45 P.M. April #
1952, and the verdict was returned that
night at 4:35 A.M. During the night a
deputy sheriff on guard several times asked
the jury, under direction of the court,
whether they preferred to continue their
deliberations or go to a hotel for the night.
They preferred to remain. We gather
from the meager statements in the bill of
exceptions and the court’s opinion in over-
ruling the motion for a new trial that the
deputy sheriff did not enter the room but
spoke to the jury at the open door and
in the presence of the court. The em-
phasis of the appellant’s brief is really
on the overruling of a motion to have the
official stenographer report these conversa-
tions. We see nothing improper in these

proceedings.

[47] However, it strikes us that where

a jury has gone through an all-day trial,
keeping or permitting them to continue
their deliberations practically all night

without interruption might result in an
But it death penalty, and that hence confession

unjust verdict from tired minds.

cused father and son justly and fairly
and jealously regarded their constitutional
rights. They have been condemned to die
by juries of their peers under the sanction
of a sublime law that has come down
through the ages. Perhaps their story that
there was no premeditation and no de-
liberate intention to kill Mr. McCormick
is true. Yet, the events of the moment
constituted murder within the law. Our
responsibility has been to review the rec-
ord to see if the defendant received a
fair trial as measured by the law and the
rules of procedure which have been estab-
lished through many years of experience
as conducive to impartial justice. We
have met the grave responsibility and
found the record to be free of any error of
materiality.

The judgment is affirmed,

TARRENCE v. COMMONWEALTH.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.
Dec. 18, 1953.

Rehearing Denied March 19, 1954.

Defendant was convicted of murder.
The Circuit Court, Criminal Division, Jef-
ferson County, L. R. Curtis, J., rendered
judgment imposing the death sentence, and
defendant appealed. The Court of Ap-
peals, Stanley, C., held that the evidence
established that written confession was
made voluntarily and not under influence of
assurance, which had been made by Com-
monwealth’s attorney, but subsequently
withdrawn or dispelled by intervening cir-
cumstances, that he would not insist on

is manifest from the record that this was was properly admitted in evidence.

the express preference of the jury and

there was no objection.

[48] Conclusion.

From the beginning

to the end, the police, the prosecuting
officers and the trial court treated the ac- other than that indic

Judgment affirmed,

{. Criminal Law €=273

A plea of guilty waives all defenses
tment charges no crime

satineninsshaniemeieniings i

Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

TARRENCE v. COMM
Cite as, Ky., 265 ON WEALTH Ky. 53

STANLEY, Commissioner,

The story of the murder i
of F
2. on Law reais McCormick is told in the ae
F n a case which may be punishable by ""C€ V. Commonwealth, Ky., 265 S.W
cath, the penalty must be fixed by a jury, 24.40. This i the appeal of his son, Leon-
ard Tarrence, from a j : :
sn ; 3 ’ a judgment condemn-
a. €>354 ing him to death also for his ec thchaastog
ant mses Renalts for murder is ei- - the crime. The only error claimed is the
eath or confinement in a sbainti admission of the d 4 ;
for life. KRS 431.130, 435010. eee oe

and authorizes imposition of the penalty
prescribed by law. Cr.Code Prac. § 173.

[1-3] Theo i
4. Criminal Law €>520(1), 522(1) aces and Sede 3 pie
ae PE Gans induced by hope or fear 24 continuance were joint. When dae
ise y promises or threats of the prose- pellant was placed on trial about three
tor or any person having authority over weeks after his father was convict d, h
prisoner at the time is not considered vol- Pleaded guilty. The court was caret I >
perignti but ri ties been made under men- S€¢ that the defendant personally sad ve.
al ess and hence is not competent evi- UNtarily entered the plea and clearly under-
; stood the consequences. Sec. 173, Criminal
m: coosheilins easieen Code of Practice, The effect of a plea of
cms ) guilty is to waive all defenses other than
Pcs ni a confession was voluntarily that the indictment charges no offense and
made a s therefore admissible in evi», © authorize the imposition of the penalt
dence is primarily a question for trial Prescribed by law. Clift v. Commonweal h,
judge, and where the decision rests on an 268 Ky. 573, 105 S.W.2d 557; 2 CJ:
issue of fact, it will not be disturbed on ap- Criminal Law, § 424. The statute des sh
—o- it satisfactorily appears that the that in a case which may be punishable by
eviden ‘supporting the decision was insuf. death a jury shall fix the penalty, which for
; S 422.110. murder is either confinement in a peniten-
iin wees por for life or death. KRS 431.130, 435.-
Evidence adduced at hearing on motion
to suppress written confession and at trial The Commonwealth presented to ncod ooh
on plea of guilty established that con Seieatin substantially the same evidence, except the
was made voluntarily and not under in he threats, introduced in the trial of Roy Tar-
hase of assurance, which had been made a
fe) ; i
bis prin’ peer ed but withdrawn The objection to the admissibility of the
vila placa. circumstances, confession is that it was made under the
ne Ke in life imprison- influence of assurance by the Common-
tha wo : ‘opie and lo- wealth’s attorney that he would recommend
was properly asfonilted. ta sacra: Wee He eth penatty the. jaca
. 7
trial to fix the penalty on plea of uilty Ae crime and Gas ner an hckig ion Tak
; is

‘indictm i
ent charging murder. Cr.Code Prac, assurance related only to the son. Non
. e

173;
§ 173; KRS 422.110, 431.130, 435.010, was ever given the father. He confessed

presi under the same influence, he con-

ended, in order to save his son from

. . . se

Sandy Paniello, Louisville, for appellant. —. oy: eae - The facts and conclusion

ay ie shou e read into the opini i
uckman, Atty. Gen., H. D, Reed, father’s case, for he too chalideed sice =

missibility of the joint confession.

—<_—=<—————

have made a hofchoutch af
and wit!
sumed

warlika.and aegrcssiv

their yumerons itt

ir grievances,
ds baye | as-
attitude, with

headquarters in the County, while the party of

Adains, Snodgrass, Brinkley, |e
arms intown. {iw last passaicg c
last Saturday niynt, A poset, o
that the opposite party werg ip
mile and a nall fram town,
back, They wero about Hfsy in
among thé Other! pood citizens jo
pedition, rumor places . the [cd
‘Kennedy, and oneiof the searmely
Sanderg family, pane that | a
Lincoln County ‘record. itl
that the rurai asgemnbiy was
ing. the’tifty aforesaid rode
in” On the way) they capt Ng
used hia rather roughly wijh' A y
him to foray information 9 ¢
of the rural party. Thie he w

a

€
o

_ing to do, and wads fiually relfaded.

return atter an ubsueccesfull s¢a

c., are under

nh information
force about a

ent] out on harse-

bumber, ‘abd
iugdin the eg-
brated Grove
jess notorivcus
ppears in the
e assumption!
lawful gather
» “take them
a negro, and
ricw to compel
whereabouts
hble or unwill-
Upon their
rch, they were

tired into by a aquad of the rug
afrer a lively time the particslsda

al’ party, and
ered and fled,

‘aris Was on’

others reported ag, being wojfnjle It is due to
the darkness of the nignt anfi thd uncertain aim
of the party bf ambush thalfwe Rave noi a long
list of killed to add tothosd/ bdaluw. This moro-
ing, while we write, there'lis a evident stir,—~
something exciting is about to happen. * Young
inen with double-barreled @hauielns are hurry-
ing along the streets, on fodt and on borseback,
toarepdervyona, An inquiry dévelops the fact
that a peace warrant has been jsstied, and auder
form of law, with the ritTlin atrendance,
‘they go out to give battle td the rural ‘faction.

f
Two of the town parties are ‘ingen to bs anu

val

Prisoners are not’ expedted| to be taken |
unless’ accidentally, if thd @xpressions heard |
upon the street rightly finterpret the |
intention © of the poksa. Waile we!

that some few |
urned, torether |
ov incendiaries.
sen to thus sume |
edses on the !
sjupon the fural |
party, and many of their names dppear upon the,
docket as being daderindictmp dnd for the offense. |
Vhe feslng 14 town is one ofinageurity, foubded |
upon the belief of an integ#ion! on the part of!
the raral party to burn it ddivn. | I desire to call!
the attevtinn of the publica do the fact that the)

ly indicate the;

number of] homicides but’ Rar

virulence of the khang mahi [ he pumber of;
men killed) singe 1S75,.tht ig) In four years, is
only about, nineteen, but the igstances of mali-
clons cutting and shegting, Ghieiy the latter, from
which death has vot resulted, ate about forty-|
six. Had ithe titentions been oes there-j
fore, we should have a list Of .eikty-Avein four;
years. This ig true of the icounjies already rez,
ported in the Ganet/e. The number of attety
to kill bas) been largely in exces:
ber of actual Homicides. | Every

await results, it fs well to state

with the pi

rying pondenien weapons
Asan excise, it Js affirmed that jt has the effect
of digarujing peaceable, law-abiding: citizens,
while the rough and desperate
gard it. Whisky ordinarily @n
vortant factor into the fojmediate cause of
crime, Bhatin tila section, at feast, of Ken
tucky it must bé counted jout.| For years the
Local-Option jaw has beeh care ad here; whiak y
{

is not made or sold ‘in] the county,
and they arg empaticglly sober peo
ple. They are sober men, afflicted

with Kentucky's fearfal |} mania, who do thd
killing, [take occasion to renjeat that such ¢
mania hak ever! jbeer found | ar ang. the socia
conditions of that community in) which.one racq
holds anothe: in eudjection, . "The valpe of hu
man Jife lis ever, estumatkd at) the minimum
Hemorsefal -ieelings uvever | interpose uot visq

the slayer and his-victitn, and auquos ris
to push the modern Magbeths from their s


A STATE OF Wap
A stare oF Waplnyor|

{
~

Roekeastle County, Hy Practiagliy tn That.
Condition=Nineteen Homicides/nud Forty~
Six Malicious Woundings th Pour Years=
One Man Hung, but Be Was 9 iNe :

Correspondench Cinctanat! Gidette. | |

Mr. Vernon, Ky., Aori! 24—From Mt, Ver-
pou, Rockcastle Cousty, Ky your jcorrespond-
eut sends yreeting. Ehould this@etter not be
followed by another within a reasgnable time,
the pablic will understand that t wis last heard
from at this point, ‘I have suddgnty popped
into the very midst of a people ¢@icted with
the killing wania ie its most viralegt torm. An
outbreak is patien ly awaited, if not eagerty ex-
pected at the presenf moment; and, as the kill-
ing when Inauguratett is offen some What promis-
cuous, of course it {4 impossible to predict with
certainty that your correspondent ; will accom-

Diish a safe exit from the locality. You will

understand that my worthy host,'s most ex-

cellent man, has Kingfolx. It may be counted
against him as a misfortune, bug it is not his
fault.—how couid he help baving kinsfolk? He
himscif has never had any Unpleasant relations
with the members of the faciion who were jast
observed about a mile and ahelf trom town
drawo up in battle array and contemplating a
bight attack upon the town. A yearor so ago
ne contempiated bidwing out the brains of sume |
of theirtathers or e@ns, und Was earnestly so-
licited by an eager crowd to take ihe Jead and |
oversee the hanging of divers of ‘them, that it
might be accomplished decently and ef-
fectively, but he refrained, end
somebody elre performed the office. I men-
tion this to show that mine host ip not person-
ally involved. But nis kinsfolk have done some
effective shooting tu se!f-defcore! latterly, and
they five inconvenienfly near. Last night on
going to bed | noticed that he catefuliy closed
all the blinds, and asked nis son if the 1 oren/

barreled was propetty loaded and capped, prep
arations thst gave me assurance of passing
comfortable night. Fverybudy pbout me is
secretly armed and reany to shoot. Soft should
te my pillow thas guarded. ‘the Ietory of the
present unpleasantness is as follows: Some
eix vears aro one Owens killed Heary Langford:
Henry’s brother dames concdiyadd ft to be his
duty to kill Oweng. Lt was tha misfortune of
one Rickens to be dressed like Owens. Both
were in townon the same day, and it was hts
further misfortune to ride ont bf town afrer
daylight upon the road on witch Owens lived.
Jie was found dead near Owens’ house. Not
long since Liberty Langtord, James’. son, was
not permittea to return a pair of boots after
wearing them, that he bad purchased at Jack
Adams’ store. A question involying Langford’s
houor was raised, and he tred to get a ballet
into little Jack, but the finish A¢posit of lead
was made in his own braip., Then dames Bet-
termas, his tmend, was killed by Snodgrass,
and sundry acquaintances, Cunimins. smith,
Gibbs, and King, were a short time since taken
out of jail and berominuly bung. ‘The remain-
ing relatives of the Lansfords, Hf duper etc.,

have made a hofenpetch of their grievances,


1 AS f9 p.m - has returo
witheus po dial aa ‘that!they dtd som@
ineffective shecting attim Merricks, who gavq
them leg) bail and a shower of jbullets. ‘The
also had; the .satisfacrion: Sh
on oD gim Langford. ie
his hombp,. . knocking ‘tne, ‘slivers from th
fence about him as’ he tan, bat tc made bis
cape. There edem to be po political issucs tn
volved fh by trouble. |[t [18 ja family. free:
finely, into @'igeal feud, |
‘Likely to be sacrificed bate
List of killed beginning
of the parties charged with
tee Lugaford, kill a iby

ckenig, kitted es ford.
halen i Ds Williacs
|

by
aiiea
gel [) lgillea bd

on’
ee a
2. 7 ia
} Mo voy
| Pententiary yd fea an ie
| a Dav a amnden, killes by Wil
thréam, btil ibe
1dy  Lhotipsun.)

“Pau wy blued by at
iL.) Lativic ; Kile

trying a needle} |
gtartea fron

‘Wijich| many lives are:

Cunate, | :
mmet Snodgrags


"Williamstown, Ky. Jane-7, 1910-Earl Thompson, 17-year-old negro boy, was
hanged here early f oday by the light of Lanterns and torches, He hanged for
30 minutes before doctors said he was really dead, and the crowd that had
come from far and near dispersed before the body was cut down, because the
weather was so cold. The-scaffold was invented and owned by Ed Faught, of
Covington, Kye, who carries it about from place to fadace, Fourteen men
have already paid the penalty for crimes on this scaffald. The scaffold,
covered with snow, looked like a ghost when the exef@utioners arrived this
mornin to prepare it for the eat gad of the day.

"There have been other unconveional hangings in Grant County, but this was
the first: formal affair of the kind in 50 years. A great throng was expec-
ted to be present and although the law permits only 50 witnesses, it was
feared that even such a solid- thing as a scaffold inclosure would not stand
before a big mob of Kentucky men, expected on an incoming train, anxious to
see the full penalty of the law meted out on the assailant of a woman, For
that reason the boy was put to death before train time. This was. somewhat
of a sporting event. Wagers were made on the boy's gameness, and those who
bet that the boy would die game won, for Thompson was the coolest person

on and around the scaffold. There tas a dance here last night, and that
didn't Break up until 5 o'clock this morning.

"A number of men dancers adjourned from the social to the hanging with the
nonehalance of changing from a waltz to a twosstep,. Two girls came over
there from the dance hall to see the march to the gallows. The deputies vied
with each other for the privilege of helping in the finishing touches on the
condemned boy. One helped him dress in the black suit bought for the ooca-
sion, the best he had ever worn; another helped him tie the new patent lea-
ther "shoes; a third put the white collar on Thompson's neck and arranged the
black fouréin-hand tie, Ranson Roberts, husband of the woman whom Thompson
attacked, came in from the country Thursday, and stayed up all night, wait-
ing for the break of the day that would pring him reyenge, and he stood
close to the gallows. From first to last he said not a word. If the con-
demned negro boy realized the dread @dignificance of the morrow, he didn't
show it during the night. He staid up until 1:30 in the morning, talking
and joking with the guards, Then he went to hed and had to be awakened.
"tT'm ready,' he said and ate breakfast. He athso smoked a cigar and chewed
tobacco. He looked out of the jail window, and.in the Light of the lan-
terns there was silhouetted the scaffold. ‘Awful lot of lumber to hang a
little nigger on,' he remarked and then Sheriff Leary came, told him it was
time to go, and fhe march to death began. The processfon passed the two
girls who had just come from the dance, The boy walked firmly up the steps
and as much of vhs crowd that could get on, followed him to the top of the
scarfold.s 'He's going up like a mule eoing’ to hay,' one of the sightseers
said out loud as Thampson stamped his way up. That! s right; be game, boy,
another man called out. They threw the noose over his head and Sheriff Lea-
ry called out that he wanted 'all the gentlemen to be quiet. ' The gnetle~
men had been most improperly noisy for such an occasion, Earl had prepared
a little speech, and had been rehearsing it over since he was told that he
must die. His teeth rattled in the cold as he repeated it for the last
time, saying that he was glad he was going, and that he had pees a bad poy
indéed, and that while his nature would be bpoken, his XSWXHASIX Rs

soul vould live ONeeeee(unreadable - poor copy - rt Rib. nos )essDemties
were not satisfied with it. He had made no mention of his crime, so one of
them asked him. ‘'“re you gilty of the crime with which you are charged?!
The hoy replied in a whisper: 'No sir.!

"The crowd around the scaffold called 'Louder,' and Thompson repeated: 'No,
sir,' and then there followed between’ the boy Apout to die and the Deputies’
a discussion as to the facts of the crime that scandalized even the hardened

black, 17, hanged at lee nn Kyeg Jan. 7, 1910.


ee een eee en et ee ee

men who had come to see the execution. The boy was still explaining when
Sheriff-Leary.told him.to hold his breath because. that would make dying
easier, Then the trap fell. The boy was choked to death, 'I call this

a successful hanging,' said Ed Faught of Covington,.inventer and owner of
the scaffold on which 14 men have already paid the penalty, Faught has
been building gallows since 1880, and declares that his is the last word in
the scaffold line. He has attended nearly every Manging ih Kentucky in
recent years and prepares the fatal noose besidws, The rope on which
Thompson was hanged was made in Cincinnati. ‘He was as game a condemned
person as I ever say,' said Faught of Thompson. 7

There ape some in this little town who doubt whether the boy deserved

the full penalty. the verdict of guilty and subsequent sentence being
brought in with an angry mob in and around the Courthouse, and one juror
has since said that he was afraid to render any verdict but death. Thomp-
son admitted only an attempted assault, and he stuck to that declaration
to the XXEK finish. His victim has recovered. The parents of the boy re-
fused to bury the body and that duty devolved upoy the State. The State
a. lee a very fancy coffin," KENTUCKY POST, Covington, Kye, Jan. 7,
LS 0 l= * .


F Re ‘ nig . the gpd
' ¥ ¢ - : "
as ~
. ™~ >
a
“ ‘ * . :
>

NAME P cE — cITy ‘OR coante DOE & MEANS

POM & Thenipaer fh his. ey: y ley VO ea ay, |
DOB OR AGE OCCUPATION RESIDENCE ‘ GEN Oe LS LALG <4 a
ons . Sei ht Oo > 4

RECORD

Yea oe i be | -
victing (Mag “49 AGE RACE | MeTHOD :
MMe: ezuciet Lae

MOTIVE

eM ata :

ho G PisatijaT GU adi oe Cpe ad ye Lael tio Attrts ee

Geta LUX 4 one Gt ffs 2s nett ch Beedge I Ow Airtecwk yl bps
L gut lly Haswged iy Law!) BAhbinaine PT See ef Copesed. heey
es Ome [RR ie ” Cb» Lina Mave ch be lI Ip ee Ce tired
ar ry peclge S lune hoprevesceualy DK. lene arcretated , [dedrpass ee
hmao Laften ee. ay ae Pethan Cre
nate Orne Aa ait Oa by SA Sete hie Pec ed aa
Tho, pds tene Lh a tacks. Chee, Necelae heal gecine ot Es Lita the
f2 Se PPUALLE [Ai coats Peewee duels Apict by UE BOVE ocx

bee a AZ SS ae cee de Ao,

TRIAL

EBON y /;
VO

LAST WORDS

* EXECUTION

mae b
Bo iuah ou Neuss ak Ib

PPLY-OOTHAN


Black

THOMPSON, Earl, WAXxkd, hanged at Heh lamstown,. Kyey On January 7, 1910,

7

Ohio and Ind. Sai:
warmer.

and

__ + NUMBER 090,25 “QOVINGTON. KY. FRIDAY, JANUARY 7 AGO

AUT

Negro ‘Lad Was Pipa
P aggein Crowd—' I've Been:
Bad.’* He Saya, i

( } a pene ee ee oe ag (met antne  apn
} ‘3 DANCERS. aphsscap eee et
wipe ag

a. fovington (Ky.) Scaffold,

Builder’ Says ~ Hanging:

+ t

Was. Most. Suceessful.

(Hy Pou Kat Con espondent.)»<-

WILLIAMSTOWN, KY. Jan. -7.-=

2), Karl Thompson, 13-year-old negro |

bay, Wag hanged here early today

» In the dight: of lanterns andi
Ti rorenias: OTE Tene Tee

te hanged torre minutes before
doctors suid | dhe Was really dead.)

pnd the erowd that had come from. |

far and near dixpersed before the j
1 bbdy was cut down, Lecause’ the?
weather. was Ko cold.’ + t

The scaffold wen invented and!
owned by Ed Faught, of Coving-
ton, Ky., who carries it about from +
plage «to place. - Fourteen ae

eas ~Have aireaay: pata the penaity-
Perimes on this scaffold.

The seatfold, covered with snow, |
looked Hike a ghost when the. exs
eentioners arrived thie morning to }
Hrepere it for the ceremonyy of”
the slny.

FIRST IN 50. YEARS tee,

‘There have: heen other uncon.
Veutigual» hangings “in Grant-co..
“put this was the Oral. formal affalr
of the kind in 5% years. A great
throng war expected ta DP presence

-iid_although the Jaw permits only
08 witnesses, [(° waa reared thar
such & solld~sbing as a scaf-
font Jnclosure would not stand be~
fore a. hig nob of Kentucky men,
expected on an. ineoming «train,
oo any ioila to see ‘the fuii penslty uf
the law’ meted. out on: the assall-%
wad ih @ woman. fur that resson
t any Woe pat ° dea eters
arate > vs 2 { we ay
hi This was somewhai, of a spart=|

Ing ovent..-\Wakers wate made on,
. *thé boy's gameness, aud those fe fue ‘ot round for some tence ot here Sooners

Web that the, lad would dio gam
Won, for Thompson wan the sae
ost. person’ >on. and- around \ ie!
seaffold, There was a dance here:
_Jaat wight, and that djda‘t: break :
uP until 4 o'cloek this morning... |
DANCRRS, SER HANGING j |
A number sof wen dancers aie |
juurved fem: the soelal to. the,
hanyving with the nonchslance of)
caang hig from a waltz tu to |
slop. ‘two girls castie over there.
front the dance hall to. pee the:
march tu the gallows. The depu:?
tie~ Sieel With cack athor for the

a Privilege of helhung in the fuinhs
pt Jag tiniches on the comiemned boy
4 * * Wack suit bought for the seen:
pe

Ky. and Tenn.— . me
Va.—Fair, Ee

ore nme

1 : ~ A ‘ook 1s, Home, -

ance-of- locating the owner of this) f°.

M apdereropeianstt oyd Owed
A Only Clueto Slayer’s I dentity; a

mas

- BUPE.- COO

With the Muffler Is the Tron}
‘Shoe + Last; _- Found in4

A cheap hlack muffler, tised by |
the murderer.of-Anna Lloyd to gag |
}the woman, holds the key to Cin-
cinnatt’s baffiing murder mystery. |

‘The policé realize” the” Import- | ™

niuffler, It is the only sure way to}
find the North Fairmount mur-|
derer.
THE BEA a OWNER ae if
HE CK: 'FLEH AND*; th
Eee an HAVE TH ayo the murderer.
“Shortly: after espe iokd. va-|°
throttled an ‘her- way -home from:

TRL CRESS

The black muffler:

; Making every effort to find the.’

Several days Ago one Ba shine:

Taft Begins Battle
(For. -Reconstructive
~ Legislation Policy

< WASHINGTON, Jan.

ee Siap wie nap

at

criminal punishment,

. J (

+t

us,
Since ahek. “the patice: kiante been iron shoe
Toni Ragens- war” itt Maynants|for raey a

1.—The lection dt a. b tarey or the infite |
opening gun In Taft's campaign of} tion af
One helped him dress in ihe leotistructive legislation. wes fired | which
today when his special message | Commarce. Commission,

Sn rcaer Veena, eg pO x the? aN . i . : Y

invot¥es = the tatarsate eral charter_1.s ae

Rae ag

ae

“Interv
a ‘Blow

his ores interview fro
Friday morning, in whic

MUFFLER USED AS GAG

refuton statements ati

by. the
rs subs

for’ several “days.
to—

on the shoe-last.

Tillie Krebs, 14,:i9 ther sii
saw “Dude” Cook come out’ot
{North Falrmonnt . ravine en
night of the murder.

inne Ww the picture was the only; gk sores. the ofa Le

} from - wh me Gai ‘fs
an

barber shop and heard Cook
ifor the shoe last.

y ae ase enigma as

| Yast was discovered in the home
tof “Dude” Cook, Spring Grove-av.,
ei who-has been held

Peet | the newepapers I bent w

lice | Prosecutor Henry T.

ance, entered the center of

at ws ‘Cooke torthe eff

been decoyed to Ci
a waat .no more
Warrtncr. “It
oo Bh t pao 9 as in

who
the
the

ime gorporations tesone of:
ngs:

“iiret=They niust
themselves into thelr. compo
“theta In the different, States,
consequent loss of capital
Lorgauiealtte:
+ “Hecond—-In > Gefiance” of
and under some secret trust,

}must=-attempt: to~-sontinue> thetr

business In violation of the

eral statutes, and thus bring on
an dpgeitarte ae prosecu-

- mephird, ibey ‘must. re-organ

bree | eset Laid not v

resolve | here to-stir up more tro
nent; TURNS ON HUNT :

with Potlowing hia arrest o
and|of receiving stolen go
Charles L. Warriner
law.
they

a preliminary heatiag
is “understood, will ve

by the prosecution.

nd accept in good faith ine Fi Fea. '

Fiyid wale:

pllances,
vimene we «

fihitely

poten. to stay
anne it out a h then:

eet: . rhey haven't # thi

seas

cere 4 wee

_—

binsmishcl

aget Two - Turner and Patterson - Louisville, Kentucky,

"Turner would make no full confession, but seemed fearly that an attempt would be made to
lynch him if it became known that he had been implicated in the deadly assault on Jennie
Bowman, Chief Whallen was himself fearful that the negro would by lynched, so great was
the feeling of indignation in this city and promised to save him, With that end in view,
he had the negro carried secretly to Central Police Station in the basement of the City Hall,
4+here he was confined in a cell and spent the night in fear and trembling, Chief Whallen
held a consultation with several of his principal lieutenants and it was decided safest to
remove Turner surreptiously from the city, At 3 o'clock on Sunday morning a covered patrol
wagon used for secret service purposes was brought up from the 17th St. patrol stable and
Turner, securely handfuffed, was placed in the wagon, which was driven by Central patrol
driver John Duff, Those accompanying the negro were Chief Whallen, First Lt. Ed Bright and
Officer Ben Fow, They determined to take the negro the penitentiary at Frankfort and the wag=
on was rapidly driven out the Shelbyville pike, The party reached Shelbyville at 11 o'clock
Sunday morningnand stopped to rest the horseps for dinner, By the time the start was again
under way, the news was circulated that one of the assailants of Jennie Bowman was then in |
the city and the mutterings were so many and the indignation was so great that if the start
had been delayed a half hour longer the negro would have been taken from the custody of the
officers and then there would have been no necessity for the journey as he would have been
lynched. Just before reaching Frankfort the wagon was stopped and Turner made a full con-
fession, implicating William ‘atterson, the negro who had been arrested on Lafayette St. a few
days before as a suspected felon, Turner said that he had been led into committing the assaul
hy Patterson whom he had met once in Cincinnati and several times in Louisville, On the
morning of the assault the was coming in Brook St, and met Patterson, who was sitting on the
curbstone in front of the Johnson residence, Patterson asked him if he wanted to make a

"piece of mone' and being answered in the affirmative told him that all the people in the
house had gone out and that they could go in and rob the place easily. They went around the
back way, entered the dining room and Patterson went up stairs to search the sleeping rooms
for valuables, Turner remained in the dining room and was searching the drawers of the side
board when Jennie Bowman entered and confronted him. He seized the girl and a desperate
struggle ensued, during which the girl seized a goblet and struck him over the head. The
glass broke and she used the broken stem to cut and gash his face, Then Turner seized the
poker and struck the girl several times over the head until finally she fell senseless and
bleeding to the floor, Patterson came down stairs and seeing the girl on the floor asked if
she were dead, Turner said no, whereupon Patterson seized the iron poker and ealt several :
tremendous blows on the unresisting head, Patterson then proposed to carry the girl upstairs ©
and seized her by the shoulders, Turner lifted her by the feet and they carried her upstairs
‘and placed her on the bed, Patterson then proposed to outrage her but Turner would not per-
mit it, whereupon fatterson became again suddenly angry and struck her again and again over
her bleeding head and body, The officers drover their prisoner into Frankfort and placed |
him safely in jail at that place, Turner was afraid of mob violence and begged that his |
life might be saved until he was condemned to die in a legal manner, The officers took the
train for Louisville, arriving at 7 o'clock that evening, Patterson, half-dressed and badly _
frightened, was led from his cell, Hand-cuffed, he was placed in a wagon, driven tothe depot
ands hour later he was on the train speeding towards his accomplice in Frankfort, He was
sullen and dogged on the hourney but protested his innocence, claiming he had never seen
lurner before and would not know him, Patterson, who said Turner could not identify him, was
placed in a lineup with a number of black waiters from a hotel, some of whom resembled him |
and Turner identified, When he did, Patterson flew into a terrible rage, cursed Turner and |
made a spring at him as though he wanted to get hands on throat, Patterson seized and placed
in another part of jail. Turner told Whellan that if they would examine they would find Blood
from Jennie Bowman's bleeding hands on Pattersons pants and drawers ahd they were found, On
Monday & large mob assembled in front of Frankfot jail at night and threatened lynching but |
were unable to effect entry. Both Patterson and Turner spent knight on knees weeping and
lamenting, They were returned to Louisville and following a mob gathering on Fhurdday night, _
an attempt was made to seize on Friday night and mob approached jail with telephone pole to
use ab battering ram but prevented by policeman who blocked approach to jail and arrested }
leaders of mob, while mob marching towards jail, Patterson tolda janitor at the City Hall
that he was with Turner and hoped that God would forgive, On Saturday morning Governor Buck=
ner ordered out State Militia in Louisville. A crowd of 15,000 gathered that night but were
dissuaded from action, In the meantime, Miss Bowman lay unconscious dnd dying, Would occa-
sionally revive and give details of assault, description of assailants, including descriptions
of their clothing, She died on the evening of May 9,Both Turner and Patterson indicted on May
18 and Turner taken to court where he pleaded guilty, The judge warned him of consequences
but Turner refused to withdraw and in 5 minutes the jury convicted with death penalty, He was
sentenced to hang on July 1 and was executed on that day although he tried hard to pemain a
reprieve, On the scaffold he stated that Patterson was innocent of the Bowman murder

although he told a faitheful story of Patterson's conenection with crime at Patterson's trial.
Patterson pleaded not guilty and trail set for May 18, His defense was one of alibi with
attorneys attempting to prove he was some distance away but their efforts failed, Witnesses
for State placed him in vicinity and Turner's testimony was most damaging, Convicted by a
jury which deliberated for only 11 minutes, Also sentenced to hang on July 1, but execution
flelayed by appeals (5 Southwestern 387, 765), Subsequently received two reprieves.

LOUISVILLE COURIER-JOURNAL, Louisville, Kenticky, 6-22-1888 (Woodcut likenesses of both on
page 6.)


i ei.

) an Turner and William Patterson, continued, page three,
Patterson

"at 6:12 o'clock, hanged, in morning, Protested innocenc until last. Had gone to sleep at
1:30 AM and woke with dawn. Was first sleep he had since morning of 6-20, Six black preach-
ers had remained in corridor of jail throughout night. Their singing and praying, led by Rev,
Richard Hatchett, could be heard all about the square during whole night except while hewas
sleeping. Mounted scaffold with firm step, Walked to front of scaffold, raised Bible in

hand and spoke following words: "Men; I have something to ask you, and I want all of you to
keep quiet. I am going to die this morning, I am not going to die, but to go to sleep, I
want all my foes and my friends to look on me, and whensoever an officer or any man who has

the law look up to the life you are taking up to God this morning that will never return, I
have made my peace with God; I know it and to him you must all go, Whenever you see any men
who go to the jury box to convict a man of something he did not do, will you look at the

Book? You know what God says, "Vengeance is mine, and I will recompense it.' God is going

to hold all of you accountable, I have made my peace with God and I amready to go, There
is not a wave of trouble rolls across my peaceful breast." Rev, Hatchett then led in sénging ©
"Nearer My God to Thee," Rev. Porter then prayed and Patterson then made following prayer:

"I want to make a short prayer, Lord bless my soul, In a few moments I will meet you, Bless
my brother heres; bless Mr, Bender who has been so attentive to me, and my friend that went
last Tuesday to the Governor; he told him he did not think I was ready to die, and asked

him to prolong my days, but the Governor said no, I should not have a pardon, I did get a
pardon, though from Jesus, where Gov, Buckner must go for one finally, Death brings all man
level, the dull, the wise, the reverend and the sinner," The minister then urged him not to
die with a lie on his lips and asked him to confess if guilty, Patterson replied: "Never I
have saw Miss Hennie Bowman, I don't know anything of it, I mmy see her at the bar of
justice, but If I ever saw her, I don't know anything more of it than of Queen Victorious or
Maria Antoinette, who died away over in England or France or some other place, I am as clear
of Jennie Bowman's bloodas a new-born babe,"" Before noose placed over head, spotted Officer
Hickey who had arrested and towards whom he bore grudge and said: "You had better pray; you ha
better pray; vengeance is God's; I love you so, but the time is coming when you will be like
Esau when he was seeking for Jacob but found the Lord, Lord, remember me; take me, Jesus.

Oh, Lamb of God, receive my spiritj" He then stepped back and pulled off his shoes, Arms and
legs bound and black cap placed over face, After noose around neck, spoke last words: "Oh,
Lord, I give myself to Thee; 'tis all that I can do, Farewell, everybody," The noose had,

in some way, not been adjusted properly and when he feel, the knot slipped around under his
jaw bone, Had a comaratively large neck and was a light man, weighing no more than 120 lbs,
His neck not broken and died of stranguaation, His writhings were terrible and his labored
breath was horrible to listen to. When he had been hanging about 3 minutes he gave a gurgle
and sigh combined, which bore no semblance to a word or words, but someone in the rear of the
crowd said: 'What's that he said, 'curse him! This gave rise to beliefe on part of many

that such words had be en sued by hanging man but those near said he said nothing. But

After he was hanging for Fey minutes, he was distinctly heard to say: "Ohi Lord, take me,

take me," At the same time he closed and locked his hands and made a convulsvive effort
drawing hégs legs up until his knees nearly touched his breast. The convulsions then became
weaker and weaker and at 6:22, ten minutes after drop, NMSEEEBEEEEN the heart had almost
ceased to beat and in 25 minutes there was no longer any life in the body, When black cap
removed after body placed in coffin, the features ere horribly distorted. Tongue hung far

out, eyes wide and nearly popping out, LOUISVILLE COURIER-JOURNAL, Louisville, Kye, 6-23-88

Albert Turner hanging: Hanged 6:30 AM on 7m1-1887, Met death without a tremor and neck broken,
Last statement; "I am going to die with an honest heart and bring no one to the gallows. I am
going to die alone, Free the man Patterson, The man was not with me, That is all I have got to
saye 1 am willing to die now," Stood ordeal of being pinioned with air more of unconcern than
of stoicism, After religious prayers concluded, spoke last words before black cap placed over
head: "Friends, all of you, I hope to meet you all in heaven, That is all i have got to saye"
When noose and cap were removed, a large welt was found about neck, flesh being bruised and torn
by his heavy weight. After body cut down, large swarm of people mounted scaffold and rope cut into
tiny pieces for souveniers, Prior to execution, admitted having robbed and beaten a streetcar
driver for which another black man, Stephen Morrill, had been sentenced to penitentary for 6 years.
When he absolved Patterson fromscaffold Miss Bowman's Kéa¥ father, standing neary, exchaimed:
"Bets a liar and he's dying a liar." One woman, standing on building in rear of eng ine house,
witnessed execution, All prisoners of jail watched execution from barred corridors of the jail.
Turner had been born in Louisville on March 11, 1861. People allowed to see him in cell for 5¢
apiece on last day, all of which was contributed to his burial fund, Insisted that the nice
coffin purchased with funds be placed in his sight outside of cell and kept there all night.
LOUISVILLE COURIER-JOURNAL, Louisville, Kye, July 1, 1887, Woodcut likeness, page On€e

5 a Turner (July 1, 1887, and William Patterson (June 22, 1888) hanged at Louisville, Kye

"On the afternoon of Thursday, -22-1887, the greatest excitement was created by the report
that Jennie Bowman, an honest domestic (white), 2hyears-o%f age, employed by Mr. A. Y.
Johnson, Jr,, at 1522 Brook St., had been waylaid while quietly attending to her household
dufiies and fearfihlly beaten by daylight robbers....,eShortly before noon on that day Jennie
Bowman was found brutally beaten, bleeding and insensible across the bed in a little back
room in the second story of the house, Her mouth and neck were bound tightly with a wet
towel, her head was cut to the skull in a number of places and the face so badly and horribly
mutilated as to make recognition barely possible, At the head of the bed, lying on bhe floor,
was found a short, heavy iron poker, covered with hair and human blood, which had been evi-
dently the weapon used upon the defenceless girl, made strong anly by bravery and the strenth
of her heroic character, Down stairs were the evidences of a fearful struggle which had
commenced in the dining room between the girl and her assailants, The carpet was torn up
and disarranged, the furniture was misplaced and chairs were overturned, On the floor was
found the stem of a stout glass goblet of the ordinary pattern which the girl had used in
her desperate struggle for life, Outisde the door of the dining room a large pool of blood
had formed on the floor in the little back hallway, and on either side of the winding stair-
case were blood marks made by the bleeding head and bloody hair of the girl as she had been
carried upstairs, The staircase was narrow and the marks were most plain at the turning of

- the steps, The blood was too low down to permit of the girl having been carried up by one
man and this fact alone first pointed to the suspicion that two men had been implicated in
the assault and after beating the life out of the faithful domestic one had placed himself
at her head and the other at her feet and in thus carrying her up the winding stairs had left
bloody traces of their crime on the calcimined walls on either side.....The Johnson family
were all absent fromthe house at the time the assault was supposed to have been made, some
time between 10 and 11 o'clock and did not return until about noon, when the perpetration of
the crimewas discovered by some of the children who climbed into a back window to gain en-
$bance to the house as all the doors were securely locked, Chief of Police John H, Whallen
soon afterwards arrived and to him is due the creidt of the arrests....Col, Whallen made a
careful personal examination of the premises and into the circumstances evidencing the crime,
and did not entrust the case to subordinates but took it up himself and the next day the girl
became conscious for a few moments, She gave a brief description of her assailants, whom
she declared to be negroes, Chief Whallen assembled every policeman in the city, and detailed
the officers to work in civilian clothes, He was convinced that the marks of a
goblet stem would be found on the girl's assailants, and pairing the men off he instructed
them to search thoroughly from cellar to garret every negro saloon, lodging house and dwell-
ing in the city. Sentries were posted at all the depots and steamboat landings in the city
and the roads and turnpikes leading on every side into the country, each had policemen as
toll-gate keepers, Officers searched Jeffersonville and New Albany and every man on the force
worked hard to aid in discovering the culprits, Policemen in Citizen's clothes searched the
city and more than 100 idle negroes {vagrants) were taken into custody, Officers Daley,
Kenehan, Hickey and Burke were assigned to searching from Preston to Floyd Street when they
met William Patterson standing infront of his house on Lafayette Street, The officers
knew him as a vicious and desperate negro and thought him capable of committing such a
crime, He was arrested on general principles and confined in jail charged with being a
dangerous and suspicious character, On Saturday morning, April 2h, William Patterson was
presented before the bar of the City Court on charge of being a suspected felon, His case
was continued and events were in process which prevented his ever being free again, At 6
o'clock that Saturday afternoon but a dozen policemen in uniform were standing on the streets
of Louisville, Mrs. Mary Brannin, a middlesaged lady, lixjng on Fonrth Street near Chestnut,
approached Officer Henry Strohman, who was standing in uniform at Fourthand Jefferson Sts.
Mrs, Brannin told the officer that she possessed what might be a valuable clue,,.She had read
the papers closely and had noticed that Jennie Bowman had used the broken stem of a glass
in her desperate struggle for life and that when found the marks of that struggle would
likely be found on the negro's face. For several years past Mrs, Brannin had employed a negro

named Albert Turner to take up her carpets and beat them out in the spring of the year,

Wishing to reemploy the man, she went to Tummer's house on Center St. and found him in bed,
He was very nervous and badly frightened and talked in a peculdar manner, With horror, Mrs,
Brannin noticed that fresh scratches and wounds were on the negro's face and that his right E
hand was tied up with a bloody rag, She questionedhim closely, but Turner could only mutter
unintelligible answers and was much confused and embarrassed, Finally, he told her that he
had been splitting wood'in the yard the day before and that a splintered stick had struck him
in the face, Mrs, Brannin had come straight to the officer with her clue, Officer Strohman
went at once to Chi&f Whallen's office in City Hall where the patrolmen's reports were being
received while the detail for the night's search was being made up, As Officer Strohman was
in uniform, Chief Whallen detailed Officer Stockewell to go out and bring in the negro, At
9 o'clock Turner was in the chief's office and half an hour later he had confessed to the
assault, ‘hen Turner was first brought into the office Col, Wha]len examined the wounds on
his face and hands and was satisfied that he was one of the girl s assailants, Inside his
right hand was a three-cornered cut which just fitted the broken stem of the goblet. The
poker, still covered with Jennie Bowman's clotted blood and hair was pushed in Turner's face
but in a dogged manner he persisted in his assertion that he knew nothing of the assault,

"While questioning Turner, a cry of 'murder' was heard proceeding from the direction of 6th
and Green Sts, and“Col, Whallen ran out to learn the cause of alarm, In a fight a negro had
been badly cut and in examinging the wounds the chiefs hands and shirt cuffs became covered
with blood. Rushing back into the office, Chief Whallen held his hands, dripping with human
blood, before Turner's gerror-stricken eyes and said; ‘Turner, the blood of your victim con-
fronts you.' Turner's possession left him at once, Throwing his hands before his face, he
fell to his knees and trembling cried aloud: "Don't torture me, I done it, I done it.'

op)

788 ~—«CKK. 198 SOUTH WESTERN

interrogation of his counsel, is more than
two pages in length and it sets out a rath-
er complete, descriptive outline of the
events of his sojourn at Eddyville, begin-
ning with his arrival and initial shower
bath and continuing on into the subjects of
the: prison’s administration and the food
provided for its inmates. That one lengthy

answer of appellant furnished to the jury’

a much better index of Tunget’s mental
condition, whatever it may have been, then
would have been furnished by the few
brief contlusions of that avowed testimony,
which ‘was excluded by the trial court. It
is an anciently established and well known
legal principle that mere deductions, which
have come from’ the existing facts them-
selves, are not admissible as evidence, the
requirement being that the facts be pro-
duced and that the deductions or conclu-
sions be left to the jury. See Townsend v.
Commonwealth, 5 Ky.Opin. 785; Self v.
Self, 1 Ky.Law Rep. 356; Coker v. Coker,
216 Ky. 669, 288 S.W. 291. And so we now
hold that it was not error to exclude that
particular part of appe'lant’s testimony in
the specific form in which it was offered.
But if, on the other hand, this were a con-
ceded error, we believe that the ultimate
effect of such error was harmless, because
the deficiency was corrected later when
Tunget was permitted to testify at great
length in his answers to other quéstions
and to include in such answers the gencral
subject matter of the testimony previously
excluded.

D. Did all the evidence indicate that
Tunget was insane? ‘The transcript of
this case has recorded the testimony of two
doctors who testified for the Common-
wealth, each to the effect, in substance, that
Tunget was sane. For example, we quote
from the testimony given by Dr. A. M.
Lyon, as follows: “He is not insane. I
know he knows the difference between
right and wrong now, and knew it at the
time he committed this last crime.”

{8] But even if all the expert witnesses
had testified for him, so that all the direct
testimony on the subject had pointed to his
insane condition, yet the jury would have
been justified in finding him sane and
therefore guilty, provided Tunget’s own

REPORTER, 2d SERIES

testimony was such as to indicate to th
jury that he knew what his actions were
and what he was doing at the time of the
offense. Sce the case of White v. Com-
¢monwealth, 197 Ky. 79, 245 S.W. 892.
FAnd so, in reading the testimony of Tun-
get himself, we find that he narrated to the
jury the full details of this tragedy, be-
ginning with the unlocking of his cell door,
continuing with his act of confining the
four guards in his own cell, continuing
further with his encounter with the asso-
ciate warden in the corridor, continuing
still further with his exact conversation
with the associate warden just before the
latter was killed by Tunget. As in the
White case, supra, such testimony of Tun-
get himself would have constituted sufii-
cient support for the verdict of the jury,
which heard him testify as to the details
of this crime and observed his demeanor
on the witness stand.

[9,10] Where one pleads a defense
based upon insanity, the burden rests upon
him to prove by a. preponderance of the
evidence that he was so unbalanced at the
time of the crime that he did not then
know right from wrong and was not then
able to realize what he was doing or what
consequences might result from his act.
And if there was some evidence on the
trial of such a person that tended to show
that he knew what he was doing and knew
that his intended act would be wrong, then
his was a case for the jury’s decision.
Feree v. Commonwealth, 193 Ky. 347, 236
S.W. 246.

[11] We think it was proper for the
jury in the instant case to infer that Tun-
get was sane, that he knew what he was
doing, that he knew it was wrong to kill
the deceased Gumm. Tunget had care-
fully planned this entire stratagem. He
had procured his weapon, had previously
divulged part of his plan to another pris-
oner, had cooly executed a part of his plan
when forced to abandon the remainder of
it because of the faultless fortitude of the
associate warden. This was clearly a jury
case. The verdict was not contrary to the
evidence. We would be totally without
any legal right in this case to undo the ac-
complished efforts of the jury.

REEVES v. ADAM HAT STORES Ky. 789
Cite as 198 S.W.2d 789

As humanitarians, we would gladly give
this young man another chance, although
he has already had more than one chance.
As a judicial body, we are concerned only
with the fairness of his trial. We perceive
that he had the benefit of skilled counsel,
the opportunity to testify in his own be-
half, the right of procurement of his own
witnesses, the right to face his accusers at
the trial, the right to select his own jury
from among his peers, the opportunity to
submit his theory of innocence to that jury
for their decision. So far as we can as-
certain, he has had his full day in court
and he has also had a fair trial, possibly
not entirely free from error, but substan-
tially so and, as we believe, entirely so in
the category of those errors known as pre-
judicial.

This young man has not been a good
steward of that golden gift called life.
This has brought tragedy home to himself,
to his relatives, to the families of those he
killed. It has brought a sense of sadness
to those invested with the duty of enforc-
ing retribution upon him. And so we now
say, as courts customarily and very prop-
erly say in the face of duty’s commanding
necessity, “May God have mercy on his
soul.”

The judgment is affirmed.

w
© § Key NUMBER SYSTEM
T

_ 803 Ky. 633

REEVES et al. v. ADAM HAT STORES,
Inc., et al.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.
Nov. 29, 196.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 7, 1947.

1. Constitutional law €=70(3)

In determining constitutionality of
Statute imposing license tax on retail mer-
chants graduated according to number of
stores operated in state, court would not
question verity of statements contained
in title to act or legislative wisdom or

motives in passing the act. Laws 1940,
c. 174; Const. § 51.

2. Licenses €=7(2)
Statutes C>121(1)

The act imposing license tax on retail
merchants graduated according to number
of stores operated in state is a revenue
measure and not a police regulation, and is
violative of constitutional requirements
that subject of act be expressed in title and
that taxes shall be uniform on all property
of the same class, notwithstanding that
title of act recites that act is a police meas-
ure, where the body of the act only lays a
tax and is silent as to imposing any pro-
hibitions or restrictions on chain stores,
and the revenue raised thereby is greatly
in excess of cost to state of issuing the
license and of enforcing the act. Laws
1940, c. 174; Const. §§ 51, 171.

3. Statutes C=210, 211

The title of an act may be resorted to
as an aid in construing the act, but a pre-
amble is not generally considered as an
essential part of a legislative act and can-
not control or enlarge its powers.

4. Statutes C109 :

The title to an act may be broader
than necessary so long at it relates to onl
one subject, but it must be fairly expressive
of the contents of the act. Const. § 51.

5. Licenses C=7(9)

In a police act, the amount of license
fees charged should in some measure cor-
respond to costs of issuing license and of
enforcing the supervisions or regulations
provided in the act.

—_—_~—___——_

Appeal from Circuit Court, Franklin
County; Wm. B. Ardery, Judge.

Declaratory judgment action by Adam
Hat Stores, Inc., and others, against H.
Clyde Reeves, former Commissioner of
Revenue, and others, involving constitu-
tionality of Laws 1940, c. 174, imposing
license tax on retail merchants graduated
according to number of stores operated
in Kentucky. From the judgment, the de-
fendant appeals.

Affirmed.

iit

hint

A
es,
beet

ate

iii
a

Pektis ej theg CUNT ELAR CALS

g

r
tg
¥

Mie el

5
&

hata Leb eap etal

-
¥

eas

Lie

bre het

eb bia ROi wh hed ol phi SR RATAN |

.
eee
en, eta i:

pane cS ees
Mie ae

ee San

eet FS as
yy =i ri = é 2
a Fee wf maine
2"

g dumped.

siness affairs.
personal diffi-

irist. Advised

dily agreed to

ibited by the
It will be a°

s finding with
‘act that the
ormney.

Heustis sped
It looks like a
vaste,” was his

d tempo.

y sedan began
rick detectives
itigators began
sarching for a

‘he kidnappers
led by without

n editions re-
d be expected.
ninence of the
wept the city.
nuilt up a wide.
as well-known.
aritable entet-

¢ public to be
for some sign

——"

PS eS

that a man’s body had been disposed of, brought a quick ray of
hope .to the police.

Frank Peterson, an employee at an ice-cream plant, came for-
ward with some high velocity information. “I happened to be pass-
ing Fourth and Oak when I saw these men black-jacking another
man. They shoved him into a car. I took down the license num-
ber—here it is.” He extended a piece of paper with the penciled
number 374-681. . ‘

The license number was hurriedly traced to one Roy Tarrence,
a 45-ycar-old employee at a local distillery. ,

A brace of detectives, led by Lieutenant Charles Young, chief
of the homicide squad, sped to the liquor plant. Officials here in-
formed the investigators that Tarrence was a power supervisor on
the night shift, and to the best of their knowledge, was a reliable
and competent employee of long standing. He could probably be
found at his home in suburban Jeffersonville, since he wasn’t due
to punch in until 11 o'clock that night.

The detectives hurried to Jeffersonville, and were soon rapping
on the door’ of a modest bungalow at the edge of the town. A
heavy-set, bespectacled man, dressed in blue trousers and vest and
looking like a pedantic school principal, answered their summons.

“Yes, I’m Roy Tarrence. And that is certainly the license number
of my car. But what is this all about?” he asked.

Promptly enlightened, Tarrence shook his head in bewilderment.

“There must be some mistake. I spent Thursday afternoon in
the county looking for a carpenter who had promised to build me
a shed. I didn’t even go into Louisville.” ‘

. “And you were driving your own car?” asked Young.

“] was, and my wife will verify it,” he asserted. Mrs. Tarrence,
a motherly-looking woman with gold-rimmed spectacles, promptly
corroborated his statement.

“Why, it’s just craziness to think Roy had anything to do with
that awful thing,” she said.

The detectives nevertheless informed Tarrence that the cir-

Left «o right: Leonard Tarrences; Att. F. Stene;

cumstances demanded he be taken to Louisville for further ques-
tioning and possible identification. “Certainly. I have nothing to
fear. I’m glad to accommodate you gentlemen,” he assured. Be-
fore leaving, the detectives took a look at his car. It was a gray
Chevrolet sedan, an early model but spotless in appearance. The
interior was also neat and clean.,

“Nice-looking ‘car you got there,” commented Young as he
ushered the distillery worker into his own vehicle.

“It should be.' That car is my hobby. I spend all my spare time
keeping jt in tip-top shape,” was the prideful rejoinder.

But the officials’ belief that they were making a quick dent in
the mystery through the license number proffered by the ice-cream
plant worker soon began to melt away. y

Mrs. Lasting and Frank Peterson, after viewing Tarrence in a
line-up, failed to identify him as one of the men they had wit-
nessed struggling to push another man into a gray sedan. Further
questioning of the calm-mannered suspect inclined the detectives to
believe that Peterson had erred in taking down the correct num-
ber of the kidnap car. Moreover, a quick probe into Tarrence’s
background revealed that his reputation was unblemished, that he
enjoyed the respect of his neighbors and co-workers, and apparently
had never even spoken to McCormack. He was soon released with
police apologies. ,

As patient detectives waited vainly in and around the McCor-
mack home, the .certainty gréw that the attorney had not been
abducted for money. Not a single telephone call, note or letter
was received from the phantom kidnappers.

“Some kind of vengeance was involved,” decided Chief Heustis.

-“The answer unquestionably lies in his personal or business life.”

‘Police efforts were redoubled to sift-out a clue, no matter how
small, from a microscopic examination of his past. ;

His private life, after an exhaustive raking, appeared exemplary.
His devotion to his family was matched by a thorough and en-
thusiastic interest in civic and church work.

Sheriff Bax; Mrs. Tarrences and Roy Tarrence.


24

Meanwhile, the local bar association, re-
flecting police theory that the daring abduc-
tion stemmed from a lust for vengeance,
posted a reward of $1,000 for a clue to the
culprit. “If need be, this will be tripled and
quadrupled. We want to show that there
is no Open season on attorneys,” was the bit-
terly-voiced explanation of an association
executive. . ;

From underworld sources, detectives soon
picked up a lead that warmed their chilling
hopes. A hoodlum by the name of Deke
Wilton, released two months previously from
Eddyville Penitentiary, had suddenly van-
ished from his. waterfront haunts. More to
the point, Wilton had sought the services of
the missing attorney. prior to his trial on a
charge of felonious assault, stemming from
the pistol-whipping of a 14-year-old boy; but
he had been turned down. The hoodlum had
then angrily threatened to see that none of
his “connections” ever used McCormack’s
services again;

As detectives bent to the task of de-
termining whether any significance could be
read into Wilton’s sudden evaporation and.
a threat voiced over three years ago, other
.investigators continued to comb through the
attorney's. business affairs.

A slew of reports was soon being turned
in, and Lieutenant Young examined them
carefully. Nothing appeared to interest him
until he picked up a listing of notes and
remarks taken from a memo pad on the
desk of McCormack. Two penciled nota-
tions, on separate slips of paper, riveted his
attention: “10 a.m. Gwendolyn called”...
“2. p.m. Gwendolyn telephoned again.”

“Gwendolyn” was soon identified by Mc-
Cormack’s secretary as Mrs: Gwendolyn
Tarrence.

Young, tingling a bit as he’ noted the
similarity in surnames between the woman
and the pedantic-looking distillery worker
who had. been questioned and released,
prémptly dispatched a detective to bring her
in. ;

She turned out to be an attractive, vibrant
brunette in her early twenties. “Yes,” she
confirmed, “Mr. McCormack has been my
lawyer since 1950. I called him twice
Thursday in regard to the divorce action
against my husband. I wanted to tell him
that I wanted a lump sum settlement instead
of monthly payments for my child. But I
never did get to reach Mr. McCormack.” She said her husband’s
name was Leonard Tarrence, and that he resided in Jeffersonville.

“Any relationship to Roy Tarrence?” queried Young.

“Yes, Leonard-is his son.”

“I see,” Young said slowly. He remained thoughtfully silent
a moment, then asked: “Has your husband ever seemed displeased
or angry toward Mr. McCormack about the divorce action?”

The young woman paled and appeared assailed by some inner
emotion. Finally she spoke, her lips trembling: “Yes. It wasn’t
so much the divorce. He wanted to get away from me as badly as
I did from him. He hated me. He hated Mr. McCormack. He
said we were badgering him.”

Determinedly pressing back an outburst of emotion, the pretty
woman poured out the story of a misguided moment that had
mushroomed into an incalulable personal tragedy. She had met
Leonard in late 1949 and had been attracted by his blond man-
liness. They had dated frequently, and she had been’ enthralled
by roseate promises of marriage and a trip to New Orleans.
Later, Leonard had exhibited a studied indifference to his promises
and in April of 1950, she threatened to bring him to court. A

Detectives Wallmeyer and Burch weighing lethal concrete block.

month later he avoided court action by agreeing to marry her.
Almost as soon as the marriage had been performed, he walked
out. Later, when their child was born, McCormack, as.her attor-
ney, had sought to effect some kind of arrangement for its support

and care. But her husband had exhibited an almost vindictive’

determination to disclaim any responsibility. “He called me some
terrible names, and said Mr. McCormack was just as bad,” she
concluded, breaking into tears.

She did not, however, see how Leonard could be involved in the
McCormack kidnapping, since the last ‘she had heard he was in
the guardhouse at Fort Knox for going A. W. O. L.

A telephone call to Fort Knox brought information that made
Young fairly pulsate with the hope that at last they were breaking
through to daylight. Leonard Tarrence, he was told by an officer
in- the provost-marshal’s office, had been A. W. O. L. from the post
since February 12. This was his second unauthorized departure,
following one in August for which he had not been tried.

With their suspicions now spurting like mercury under a blow-
torch, young Tarrence became the recipient of undivided police
attention.

The grey

Quick but
ances served
ality. He w:
garrulously a
“If you kidd
it!” a Fort K

He was al
ments, and :
‘em how mu
favorite advi
ment he wa
blonde who }

Although |
of civilized b
than a sterlir
this was flims
or worse.

Meanwhile,
Wilton, the re
tip to Hazard

. (
ay}

Ne

ws a

ee age

” 5

* "8 e
4
"Pegi:

‘rete block.

to marry her.
ied, he walked
<, a8eher attor-
for its support
nost vindictive
called me some
it as bad,” she

involved in the
sard he was in

tion that made
were breaking
d by an officer
.. from the post
ized departure,
zen tried.

under a blow-
ndivided police

Reed ep

< ak: R >

&,.
a t ! ” —
; k 5
ON pamela onl gaa toe St
"4 Mh oy
f tay rm Ma t Pid
, a Soby.
& wn i :
’ i
ees ‘ -
ss >
y ; 7. :
% Wey ent
fpr 7 por
‘ Fry & ' : 2%
a « Sh i
¢
q ~ é
: > .

; By a a . "

Bey
aks pee ee!
OE Pt, tr sancti
.
Si.
roy
~~
ee
rene
. een eae
—, rT: ¥
%,
* 4.

The grey Chevrolet sedan driven by the killers.

Quick but methodical questioning of his friends and acquaint-
ances served to stroke in the picture of a rather complex person-
ality. He was described as being generous and vain; placid and
garrulously assertive; and quick to become incensed at any slight.
“If you kidded him the wrong way, then, brother, you were in for
it!’ a Fort Knox soldier declared.

He was also fond of boasting about his masculine accomplish-
ments, and apparently didn’t believe in speed limits. “Just tell
‘em how much you love ‘em, then put on full steam,” was his
favorite advice, according to another acquaintance. At the mo-
ment he was supposedly in love with a winsome 19-year-old
blonde who had borne him a daughter, now 11 months old.

Although his flippant approach to the rules and regulations
of civilized behavior immediately stamped him as something less
than a sterling character, the officials were quick to realize that
this was flimsy evidence with which to label a man a kidnapper—
or worse.

Meanwhile, detectives assigned to find out how deeply Deke
Wilton, the resentful ex-convict, figured in the enigma, followed a
tip to Hazard, Kentucky. Here they learned that Wilton owned a

24-karat alibi. At the precise time of the kidnapping he was
reading comic books in a jail cell, awaiting sentencing for public
drunkenness. He was promptly eliminated as a suspect, and the
crestfallen investigators sped back to Louisville.

Their turn of bad luck intensified interest in Leonard Tarrence.
Chief Heustis and Lieutenant Young now huddled with the Jeffer-
son County law heads, Sheriff Bernard Bax and Walter Layman,
chief of the efficient county police. They decided that some direct
questioning of Tarrence might be fruitful.

A call at the Jeffersonville home now found Mrs. Tarrence a
little less than motherly or cooperative. “I don’t know where
Leonard is. And you certainly won't come in here without a
search warrant. So you might as well leave,” she suggested
spiritedly. ;

Gaping in surprise, the officials departed.

But their frustration proved to be only temporary. A photograph
of the soldier was obtained and then shown to Mrs. Lasting and
Frank Peterson. .

Young and his weary aides experienced a surge of elation as
they ‘caught a glint of recognition in the countenances of both
witnesses. “Yes, that looks very much like one of the men!” was
the breathless comment of Mrs. Lasting.

. Peterson agreed with the identification, (Continued on page 62)


. should

62

Amazing Invention

Defrosts Refrigerators
h AUTOMATICULLY

Pays Saiesmen Up To
$210.00 a Week!

Ni our salesmen are
corrieg so rich and happy, with
eager for

refrigerator, food and

You, too, should make to
$210.00 a week on our FREE
TRIAL plan that clinches up to
4 orders out of 5.
Start Spare Time. Yes, just a few hours in an evening

you up to $18.00 PROFIT! Just plug in

D-Frost-O-Matic—~women won’t let you take it out.
Profits Guaranteed. No risk

—if you don’t find this the

most fascinating, best pay.

ing iness you ever heard

Rush name and address on

Pos TODAY for gen-
F TRL \°
D MAATIC 0 3

Dept, 3-2, 173 W. Madison
Chicago

BEYORE

IMMEDIATELY—right before your very
lywood Beauty Facial Deliner you
lor hours

frowns and, BEST of All,
t is safe for the most sensitive skin.

™ WIPE AWAY AGING SKIN!
Simply apply as directed—Watch yourself in the mirror
und see the age lines di » If no d, prompt
refund will be made. Do Not Delay. Send $2.00 in check
or money order or pay postman $2.00 plus delivery
charyes. (3 months’ supply $4.00.) HOLLYWooD co.,
246 Roebling St., Dept. W-917 Brooklyn 411, N.Y.

To a young man
who’s walking on clouds

Yourre a little prouder of her than other
girls you’ve known.

When you've a date with her, you take
a bit more time picking out a tie.

You stand a little taller when she’s
walking with you down the street.

There’s something about her that brings
out the finer feelings in you . . . something
that makes you realize how wonderful
women are.

Why not show her how you feel about
her—by taking her to church this week?

There’s not a girl in the world who
wouldn’t deeply appreciate and treasure
the respect such an invitation implies.

And there isn’t a surer foundation for
a young couple falling in love than going
to church together each week to renew
and enrich their faith.

Let her know how you feel about her.
Take her to church this week.

Take someone to Church

this week... you'll both be
richer for it

some weeks before because she was afraid
of the attentions of an unknown man.
Later Charles Foster told his story. He
said that he had met the two nurses at the
sanitarium where his wife was a patient.
He had accepted the invitation to the
bungalow for a holiday celebration because
he was a stranger in town and lonely. He
said that Misener was there, but that
Misener refused to drink. The women had
kidded him about being a “wet blanket.”
Foster said that he had drunk more
than he should and that he knew he was in
no condition to drive his car. He felt sick
and he went into the bedroom, undressed
and then went to sleep. The next thing he
knew was hearing the horrified screams of
the woman in his ear, and then something
struck him in the back of the head.

He regained consciousness sometime
later, when he was being struck with a
knife. He managed to protect himself
some with the bed clothing, and finally got
to his feet. He then struggled with the
man out of the bedroom, through the hall,
and into the kitchen. It was a desperate,
bloody fight. Finally he got to the door
and ran naked out into the rain to escape
the murderous intent of the man.
Misener continued to deny the triple
crimes and refused to take a lie-detector

test. “Why should 1?" he demanded,

However, he did say that he had known
Maggie Cramer in Portland. There Mise-
ner and his: wife owned and operated a
filling station. He fell in love with Maggie
and induced his wife to sign over to him
her share of the business and a home they
owned. He sold both, telling his wife he
would come to California and then send
for her and their two children.

Instead, Misener said, he sent Maggie
to Orlando, Florida, to visit her mother
there while he came to California. ‘Then
he sent for Maggie, and got her an apart-
ment. After a while he came to realize
that Maggie’s love for him had cooled
considerably.

Slowly, the bitter disappointment burned
within him. And it boiled up into a final
explosion when he returned to the bunga-
low and found her in the bedroom with
another man.

As this is written, Merton Misener is be-
ing tried in the Santa Monica Superior
Court of Los Angeles County for the mur-
der of Margaret Cramer and Anne Syming-
ton and the attempted murder of Charles
Foster. ‘

Epiror’s Note: The name Charles Fos-
ter used in the foregoing story is fictitious.

CORPSE IN DAVEY JONES LOCKER

(Continued from page 25)

and volunteered that the other kidnapper
had been behind one of the car doors
when his attention was first attracted to
the desperate struggle.

A feverish hunt for Leonard Tarrence
got under way. State, county, and city in-
vestigators began to sift a hundred-square
miles of territory for the missing suspect.
Although a kidnapping had been definitely
established and Tarrence was clearly A.
W. O. L. from his army post, technicalities
prevented a stand-by squad of Federal
Bureau of Investigations agents from any
active part in the search. Tarrence had not
yet been declared a deserted by the Army,
and the Federal kidnapping law specifies
that seven days must elapse before a pre-
sumption of a state border violation can
be technically ruled.

As the. hunt proceeded, heralded by
black headlines and spot radio announce-
ments that kept most of Louisville's popu-
lation glued to nearby sets, the elder
Tarrence publicly expressed his dismay.
“Why, it’s nothing but persecution,” he
declared... “My boy is innocent. He was
with me all afternoon Thursday, and
stayed. with me until late that night.”

This, Chief Heustis tersely commented
to Layman shortly after the pronounce-
ment was made on the radio, was doubt-
lessly a grim and emphatic truth. “That's
exactly what L hope to prove. And I hope
he keeps talking.”

On Monday afternoon, five days after
the inception of the perverse riddle of a
man’s vanishment, came the first in a
series of drama-charged incidents. Mrs.

Tarrence tearfully advised the authorities

that her son would surrender as soon as he
could locate the family attorney, R. Davis
McAfee.

At 4:30 p.m. Attorney McAfee ‘tele-
phoned Criminat Court Judge Loraine Mix
and informed the jurist that Leonard Tar-
rence wanted to come to his home to
surrender. “I am not representing him, I
am simply acting as an_ intermediary,”
advised McAfee.

“It doesn’t matter,
to the courthouse.
assured the jurist.

Precisely at 5:30 p.m. Leonard Tar-
rence, altired in blue denims and a khaki
shirt, his not unhandsome face tightly
drawn, his brawny form moving with ram-
rod purposefulness, strolled into the court-
house.

“Your Honor, I am innocent. I don't
know anything about Mr. McCormack's
disappearance,” he calmly declared.

“You will be given every opportunity
to prove your innocence. But I am going
to turn you over to the police,” Judge
Mix informed him.

“Where can Mr. McCormack be? I
hope he returns soon so that I can be
cleared. This is a heck of a load to be
put on anyone,” he comented morosely.

The question of McCormack’s where-

Have the boy come
I shall be waiting,”

abouts plagued the police with equal
intensity.
In a lengthy interrogation, Tarrence

adamantly maintained he did not have the
answer. “I've been caught in a_ terrible
situation. This is a case of mistaken
identity. Those witnesses said the car was
light gray, and my dad's car is a hbattle-

.

ship gray
kidnappe:
their lice:
The m.
arrest bri
formation
Picion thz
McCorma
The wi
three pers
had crossc
a tawny ;
meanderin;
They had
fish and tc
Stream. Tt
and a your
lug a sack
had turned
Enlisting
city and c.
dragging H:
attracted h.
clogging hig!
and lining th
Bitter cold
failed to din
interest of tt
Meanwhile
by the farme
his land.
mitted the |
itritably, “he
and sometin
whole thing j
_ On the thi
in the chill y
the body of
Tarrence was
was impounde
tion of the f
of the uphols
of cleaning flr
to the Federa}
Washington.
No attempt
made to confr
the witnesses y;
interlude at F;
was placed in .
held on Various
kidnapping. Mr
Promptly picked
Patticipants in \
Certain was a de
McCormack gavi
however, showed
fication.
All but exhaust
Ng away for evic
Nine hours later
witnesses who ave
Leonard and his {
fersonville on R;
Louisville, at arou:
vious Thursday, T}
tradiction to the ,
he had remained al
ville home,
Although they bc
this might shake the
were totally
Prisoner's reaction \
him. Tarrence, plun
his thick blond locks
Paced his cell like a
he blurted: “I
can’t stand it! Ever

me, everybody taking


light with a half dozen witnesses
around,’’ he said. ‘‘I think it’s got to be
something more than that. Could we look
over the files of the cases Mr. McCor-
mack has been handling lately?”’

‘The missing man’s partner agreed at
once and asked the secretary to bring in
the files of all of Mr. McCormack’s re-
cent cases. He also told her to go through
them with the sergeant and give him any
information she could.

‘“She’s more familiar with these cases
than I am,’’ he explained to Miller.
**Frank and I didn’t usually discuss our
cases, unless one happened to present
some unusual problem.’’

Most of the cases examined by
Sergeant Miller were run-of-the-mill
affairs concerning domestic relations
adjustments, civil judgments and the
like. He could find nothing in any of
these which he could relate to the violent
assault and kidnaping of Frank McCor-
mack. But when they came to a bulging
dossier marked, “‘O’SHIEL, Mike,”’ the
secretary’s manner changed instantly.

‘‘Now there is an Irishman wild
enough for anything,’’ she said. He’s
threatened everyone connected with this
affair.’’

‘To save time,’’ Sergeant Miller sug-
gested, *‘tell me everything you can re-
member before I start wading through all
this.’’ He gestured toward the stack of
legal documents in the folder. .

The secretary explained that Mrs.
O’Shiel had been seeking separate
maintenance from her husband, Mike—
“*‘He insists the name is Mike, not
Michael,’’ she interjected. Mrs. O’Shiel
based her plea on a long list of allega-

*__ tions of drunkenness, improvidence and’
vicious beatings which her husband in- i

flicted upon her in his alcoholic rages.

‘““He phoned Mr. McCormack one
day,’’ the Secretary went on, ‘‘and
promised to break his neck if Mr.
~ McCormack had him brought into court.
O’Shiel was drunk at the time, of course.
I don’t think Mr. McCormack was wor-
ried by the threat. As far as I could see, it
didn’t bother him at all.’’

With this briefing, Sergeant Miller
was able to skim through the rest of the
file in quick order, jotting down occa-
sional notes. Then he resumed his study
of the rest of the cases. Most could be
dismissed after only a few minutes of
examination, but he suddenly paused
_ when he came to a folder in the T’s.

It was labeled, ‘‘TARRENCE.”’
~The name Tarrence, he recalled, had
figured in this case before. He read the
file with interest. — - Ps

_ A legal action had been brought by a

78 Official Detective

. Young.

girl against Leonard Tarrence of Jeffer-
sontown, Kentucky, and later of the Un-
ited States Army. Sergeant Miller made
a quick phone call, asked a couple of
questions, and a few minutes later he
knew that Leonard Tarrence was the son
of Roy Tarrence, old-car buff.
In April of 1950, a charge of seduction
had been brought against Leonard Tarr-
_€nce, then 20 years of age. This charge
was dropped when he married the girl,
but several months later he had been

hauled into Juvenile Court on her com-
plaint. The upshot of that legal proceed-
ing was that the judge ordered Leonard -

Tarrence to pay his wife$7.50 per week
for the support of his infant son.

The following year, 1951,- Leonard
Tarrence was drafted into the United
States Army, and when this happened,
his wife succeeded in obtaining an allot-
ment from his pay for herself and the
baby. In August of that year, Leonard
went AWOL from the army base at Fort
Knox and remained at large until Janu-
ary, 1952, before he was apprehended
and returned to the Fort Knox stockade
to await a court martial.

In the meantime, however, his allot-

- ment payments to his wife were stopped.

In January, he was charged in a civilian
court in Louisville with child desertion,
and this case was still pending. On
February 12th, the slippery Leonard
Tarrence had gone AWOL again. He
was still at large. vie
“‘His wife finally gave up hopes of
getting him to provide for the little boy,”’
the missing attorney’s secretary told
Sergeant Miller. ‘‘Only last Monday
She had instructed Mr. McCormack
to institute divorce proceedings at
once.”’..: pee Ss
Miller made copious notes about this
case. The rest of the files yielded nothing
of any importance, and he hastened back
to headquarters to report to Lieutenant

Young heard the sergeant out and was
thoughtful for a few moments. Then he
shook his head and looked up.

“One coincidence, maybe,’ he said
then. ‘‘Two coincidences in the same
case, same family—I don’t buy. For my
money, you’ve zeroed in, but let’s not

take anything for granted,or we might

blow the whole deal.

| With the cooperation of detectives
under Jefferson County Police Chief
Walter Layton, the Louisville homicide
detectives went to work. The county
officers were unable either to substanti-
ate or to disprove Roy Tarrence’s claim

_ that divorce so we could malry..? 97

‘do would be to

Sick on the food. That’s why he lit out last

_ Young. Farfetched as it might be, he now 4

that he had been driving around Oldham ~ :
county looking for a fishing companion
at the time Frank McCormack was
assaulted and kidnaped, but they did
learn something from a storekeeper in“
the Floyds Fork region, several miles. {
south of Jeffersontown. 3
This individual, who knew Roy Tarr-
ence by sight, said the distillery worker
had been in his place Thursday after-
noon. He could not remember ‘‘for
the life of me,’’ however he tried,
whether it was early afternoon o
much later in the afternoon.. :
In the meantime, other detectives
picked up. Roy Tarrence and took him in
to the Louisville police headquarters. A
lineup was quickly arranged, and he was
paraded before the five witnesses to the
struggle in the alley beside the big super- .
market. a
None of the witnesses recognized Roy
Tarrence as one of the assailants.
‘“T’m not your man,’’ he: solemnly
assured detectives. ‘‘There was no
reason for me or Leonard to hurt Mr.

McCormack. We never even saw him,
except in court.’’

While Roy Tarrence was at headquar-
ters, Detectives Arthur Wallmeyer and. |
Tom Burch went to the Tarrence home in ag
Jeffersontown to make inquiries about
Leonard Tarrence. ;

.“*Leonard isn’t here,’’ they were told.

‘You mind if we come in and look?”’
Detective Burch asked politely. ej

‘I do unless you got a search warrant. “4
I said he isn’t here. Anyhow, Leonard
had no call to do any harm to that lawyer
fellow.’’ ei, ae

‘‘Mr. McCormack was going to file a
divorce suit against him,’’ the detective
returned. ‘‘That could have been a reason
for Leonard 'to be angry with him.”’

_ “‘No it couldn’t!’’ Mary Bixler re-
torted to this reasoning. ‘“A divorce was
just what Leonard wanted, what we both |
wanted. Leonard and me, well, we’ve
been in love along time. Leonard wanted

“If all this is true,’’ Detective Wall-
meyer said, ‘‘the smartest thing he could
come in and clear him-

Self.”? 2 bwin ey TD Mati pea
- “And go back to that army stockade?’ ,
the girl cried. ‘‘He hates the army. He got

summer. Now they’ll put him in jail.’”s
**There could be worse things,’’ Wall-. ‘
meyer said evenly. ‘‘The electric chair,

lineup gave serious pause to Lieutenant...


\

arrence of Jeffer-
1d later of the Un-
eant Miller made
skew ouple of
mil later he
rence was the son
car buff.

.arge of seduction
ist Leonard Tarr-
age. This charge
married the girl,

ter he had been

yurt on her com-

at legal proceed-
ordered Leonard

2$7.50 per week

afant son.

1951, Leonard
nto the United
| this happened,
‘taining an allot-
herself and the
t year, Leonard
‘my base at Fort
arge until Janu-
as apprehended

that he had been driving around Oldham.
county looking for a fishing companion
at the time Frank McCormack was.
assaulted and kidnaped, but they did’
learn something from a storekeeper in
the Floyds Fork region, several miles ~
south of Jeffersontown. ‘g

This individual, who knew Roy Tarr. |

seh la a a Stn abo et Bee ec

ence by sight, said the distillery worker ‘@
had been in his place Thursday after- 7

noon. He could not remember “*for 4
the life of me,’’ however he tried,-

whether it was early afternoon or #@

much later in the afternoon..

In the meantime, other detectives 3
picked up Roy Tarrence and took him in

to the Louisville police headquarters. A

lineup was quickly arranged, and he was

paraded before the five witnesses to the

struggle in the alley beside the big super- .

market.

None of the witnesses recognized Roy
Tarrence as one of the assailants.

“I’m not your man,’’ he solemnly
assured detectives. ‘‘There was no
reason for me or Leonard to hurt Mr.
McCormack. We never even saw him,

Knox stockade

ever, his allot-
ev itopped.
ced *ivilian
*hila aesertion,

pending. On
»pery Leonard
OL again. He

© up hopes of
the little boy,”’
secretary told
' last Monday
. McCormack
“oceedings at

otes about this
ielded nothing
hastened back
to Lieutenant

at out and was
ents. Then he
d up.
ybe,’” he said

in the same
t buy. For my

but let’s not
,or we might

of datantives

except in court.”’

While Roy Tarrence was at headquar- :

ters, Detectives Arthur Wallmeyer and
Tom Burch went to the Tarrence home in
Jeffersontown to make inquiries about
Leonard Tarrence.

.“‘Leonard isn’t here,’’ they were told.

“*You mind if we come in and look?”’
Detective Burch asked politely.

“I do unless you got a search warrant.
I said he isn’t here. Anyhow, Leonard

had no call to do any harm to that lawyer
fellow.’’ :

‘'Mr. McCormack was going to file a

divorce suit against him,’’ the detective
returned. ‘‘That could have been a reason
for Leonard ‘to be angry with him.”’
_ “‘No it couldn’t!’? Mary Bixler re-
torted to this reasoning. ‘‘A divorce was
Just what Leonard wanted, what we both
wanted. Leonard and me, well, we’ve
been in love a long time. Leonard wanted
that divorce so we could marry.”
“If all this is true,’’ Detective Wall-
meyer said, ‘‘the smartest thing he could
do would be to come in and clear him
self.,.”"° 23
- “‘And go back to that army stockade?”’
the girl cried. ‘‘He hates the army. He got
sick on the food. That’s why he lit out last
summer. Now they’ll put him in jail.’’
‘‘There could be worse things,’’ Wall-

meyer said evenly. ‘The electric chair,

haere i tints stim

7

had to give serious consideration to the
possibility of a double coincidence in the
strange case. Though statistically im-
probable, it could have happened. For the
time being, therefore, he had to explore
the alternatives. a ;
It took some time to run down the only
other suspect in the case, the alcoholic
Mike O’Shiel, but eventually he was
traced to a cheap hotel where detectives
found him sleeping off the effects of one
of his marathon benders. He said he had
begun his binge on Wednesday. When

‘police told him why they had been seek-

ing him, O’Shiel reflectively rubbed the
whiskers of a several days’ growth of
beard and shrugged. ;
“If I did it,’’ he said with disarming
candor, ‘‘I don’t remember a thing about
it.’’ bse Hs SS :
He could offer no alibi, for the simple
reason that he didn’t know where he’d
been or what he’d done since setting out
on his most recent drunken spree. It re-
mained, in the long run, for the Louisvil-
le Police Department to clear him. Detec-

tives checking his back trail through the
city’s liquor emporiums established

beyond all doubt that from three o’clock
in the afternoon until 8:30 on Thursday
evening, February 28th, Mike O’Shiel

' had been boisterously present at the bar

of a tavern on West Chestnut Street. At
eight-thirty, the tavern keeper had had
enough, and he and the bartender threw
O’Sheil out of the place bodily.

_ A renewed effort, in which they had
the help of federal authorities, was now
made to apprehend Leonard Tarrence,
but it wasn’t til the afternoon of Satur-

~ day; March Ist, that they turned up their

first lead on him. A county officer found
a man who said he’d seen Leonard and
his father early that morning at Harrods
Creek, a few miles northeast of Louisvil-
le. He knew the Tarrences and had
paused to chat with them. He said they
were toting a brown paper sack and had
told him it contained garbage which they
intended to dispose of. te
‘.<The county police now obtained a
search warrant and went to the Jefferson-
town home of the Tarrences, but young
Leonard wasn’t there. The foilowing
Monday, through an attorney, he surren-
dered himself. voluntarily to Criminal
Court Judge Loraine Mix. __... igs
“Tm innocent,;’’ Leonard Tarrence
insisted. ‘‘I hope Mr. McCormack will
return so everything will be cleared up. I

\ tensity sensation between sexually normal married coupleset:

200 enlightenin
you can enjoyar
sexual experien:

To SEE is to UNDERSTAND! Explicit Illustrati
Words Can Help Break the Barriers to Sexual

Are you missing out on the maximum joyous sexuz
once hoped for?—failing to provide your marriage
peak of sexual satisfaction?

You may well find the rewarding techniques you ne
bold book that points the way to new thrilling deli
elevate your sex life to the heights of physical ecstas
lifelike pictures show the male and female roles in s
plicit, close-up pictures make instructions easier to
away the veil of secrecy and misunderstanding. Le
man—regardless of past failures—can develop pow
erection and ejaculation to carry on coitus until the f
bodily union has been attained. . .and how you can
more eager sex partner. Here is lavishly illustrated
will give'you courage to try unusual techniques ahd
you are actually highly sexed. Here are chapters tha
routine sexual acts into thrilling adventures of un
pleasure, flood your marriage with exciting new var

This Giant-Size Book Contains 416.
. .200 Authentic, Enlightening Pictures .. 53!
of ILLUSTRATED SEX FACTS... Each a **Book

Pie
the

Gratitying sex techniques which bring complete fulfillment in the
climax in woman, why some fail to attain it—how man can help
plete picture story of woman's sex organseBlunders made by
deprive women of satisfaction and how to avoid theme “Lovers

organs function in intercourseeCommon bridal night mistakes a:
Sexual foreplay—how it helps husband and wife attain mu
areas of woman's organs producing highest sensationseShowi
“sex organseWhy woman takes longer to respond to sex
man—techniques that speed response. The clitoris—key
arousalePicture story of woman's sensation curveeEmotions
climax in men and women comparedeHow masturbation affect
sexual performance and gratificationeSpecial positions for se
when they are recommended for a more satistactory orgas
troleHow sexual urge in woman differs from maneNew discov
Most reliable contraceptives—which permit maximum enjoyme
female body most sensitive to erotic stimulationeCauses and tr
male impotence and female frigidityelllustrating effects on bre
oThe first sex act with a virgin bride—how it affects future sex
couple have sexual intercourse*Erotic dreams and noctural
male's premature climax to prolong sex acteTwo Inserts of Fe

PHOTO 1D aaa

IN FULL COLOR
SEALED IN PLAS’

Good Inall =.
” States and Provit
_\ © CUSTOM-MADE WITH YOUR P

© USE ANYWHERE, ANYTIME
FOR POSITIVE IDENTIFICATION

Fast Service * Moneyback Guers:

SEND $6.00, Name, Address, Se
Height, Weight, Color Hair, Eyes
Birthdate & Small Photo."

86 Ge)

Order with frends’

oe
— =
(me) 4
r’ - Deeeet

=<

»--, =. CARDINAL PUBLISHING, DEPT. 27'
2071 Emerson, Box 5200 * Jacksonville, Florid

PHOTO I

MAN’S WIG

Stretch Wig Completely Covers
<All Your Hair." 4+<

< -hief for one.”” SAVE peat never had any bad feeling toward him.
i a savasiCide The failure to obtain an identification Everything was settled in court with my
€ county of Roy Tarrence by witnesses at the ‘agreement.’ Anyway, I wasn’t near

‘to substanti-

lostan Louisville last Thursday afternoon.”’
rence’s claim

' This claim was swiftly exploded.

lineup gave serious pause to Lieutenant é - Bs
Young. Farfetched as it might be, he now coh egret sane ‘ 7 ree
, Dept. ;


Placed in a lineup, Leonard Tarrence
was positively identified as one of the
assailant-abductors by the five witnesses
to the alley assault. Leonard issisted they
were wrong.

Assuming the witnesses were right,
the motive continued to be a baffling
factor in the case. Investigation con-
firmed Mary Bixler’s story that Leonard
was eager for a divorce so he could mar-
ry her. Why then, would he bear any
rancor toward his wife’s lawyer?

And there still remained a great big
question as to whether the attorney was
alive or dead. Lieutenant Young and all
other detectives on the case were reason-
ably sure he was dead; it would have
been foolish for his kidnapers to keep
him alive and risk being identified by
him when he was released.

O. Tuesday, March 4th, Young en-
listed the aid of the Coast Guard in an
attempt to find McCormack’s body.
Chief Boatswain’s Mate Claude
Albright led a party of sailors in boats up
the Ohio River into Harrods Creek,
where the Tarrences had been seen.
They conducted a dragging operation in
the deep waters of the creek, but brought
up nothing but a lot of junk.

Other searchers combed the farm of a>

Tarrence relative and a pond on the prop-
erty with no better results. ,
Leonard stoutly continued to insist he
couldn’t possibly have had anything to
do with McCormack’s disappearance.
“I was home all that day,’’ he de-
clared. ‘‘I didn’t dare go out. I never
could tell when some guy from Fort
Knox would be nosing around, and I sure
didn’t want to go back there. My back
hurt. I got sick on the army food.And
they were fixin’ to ship me out to Korea.
I sure as hell didn’t want that.’” i
' There was no shaking Leonard from
this story. Authorities had the identifica-
tion from eyewitnesses to the alley
assault, to be sure, but Commonwealth’s
Attorney A. Scott Hamilton wanted con-
siderably more than that before he pro-|
ceeded with charges against the suspect.
~ Most important of all, he wanted the
victim—alive, if possible, although he
was not too hopeful on that score. —
Investigators finally managed to se-

_ cure the opening wedge they needed to

penetrate the defense stories given by the
father and son. They located a Jefferson-

_ town teenager who said he had seen

Leonard and Roy Tarrence driving out of
the village toward Louisville at three’
o’clock on the Thursday afternoon of the
assault. Sgt

80 Official Detective

The youngster had known the Tarr-
ences all his life. He said he could not be
mistaken. ‘

On the basis of this information, Roy
Tarrence was placed under arrest and
formally charged with ‘‘malicious
striking.’’ . .

Again he protested his innocence.
“‘T’m not guilty,’’ he swore. ‘‘Me and
my boy are innocent. God in heaven
knows Mr. McCormack and I never had
any words or falling out with one
another.”’

On Wednesday night, Roy offered to.

take a lie detector test, but he swiftly
changed his mind. Leonard flatly re-
fused to submit himself either to a poly-
graph examination or truth serum. His
father wanted no part of truth serum,
either.

“It almost killed a feller I heard about
who took it,’’ he explained. Ba

By Friday, March 7th, Prosecutor
Hamilton and Lieutenant Young had de-
cided their best hope of breaking the
‘impasse lay in concentrating on the
younger Tarrence. Hamilton had
Leonard brought into his office, with
Young present, and the prosecutor cold-
ly ticked off point after point of the state’s
case.

““Witnesses have identified you as one

of the. kidnapers,’’ he began. ‘‘Not just

one witness, mind you—but five—five
reputable citizens of this community.
Your father’s car was used in the kidnap-
ing of Mr. McCormack. We can prove
this beyond any question. Battie
*“*That is enough, I assure you, to geta
conviction: under the federal kidnaping
law. And the penalty for kidnaping,
under the Lindbergh act, is the electric
chair. We do not have to prove murder,

_Nor do we have to produce a body.”’

Leonard continued to hold out, but it

“was obvious, when the session con-
cluded, that he was badly shaken. On -
_Saturday morning, he asked for permis-
Sion to talk to his father. It was refused.
“Okay, then’’ he said resignedly.

**Call in Judge Mix and Mr. Hamilton. I
want to get this off my mind.”’

- Before he began to talk, however,
Leonard made a valiant effort to strike a
bargain. with the prosecutor’s office; he
begged for a guarantee that he would get

return for his cooperation. - ”

a life sentence instead: of the chair in

-“*No deals,’’ Prosecutor Hamilton told

him flatly. ‘‘Ican guarantee you nothing.

If you confess, you’re putting yourself at

the mercy of God Almighty.””..
Leonard was shaken by an involuntary
shudder. For a few moments, he sat quite

“- still, saying nothing. Then he sighed

. We lit out fast. I was in the back seat with Be

‘vorce for my wife,’’ he said. ‘‘He prom-

ae

deeply, and began to tell his story. «=
It was indeed true, he said, that at three
o’clock on the afternoon of February |
28th, he and his father had driven out of —
Jeffersontown headed for Louisville.
They were going to a junk yard. It was

4 wet

pure chance, he insisted, that they spot- a4

permarket as they were driving up South
Fourth Street. . ae
“We pulled into the alley and waited -
‘for him to come out,’’ Leonard said. “4
‘When he walked up the alley we hit
him and then hauled him away in the car.”

McCormack. I thought sure we were PS
gonna get caught, ’cause we kept running ~
up one dead end street after another. ..%
**Finally we decided to take him upto =
Harrods Creek. We got there about dark. “a
We parked and walked McCormack <4
across the field—he was conscious |
then—toward the fishing cabin. He said, **
‘Do whatever you’re going to do to’ me =
and get it over with.’ ra
“We walked him down the bank to the .
boat landing. I hit him again with my ~)
fists. When I’m in a fight I never use e
anything but my fists. Dad picked up»
something and hit him on the head. » \%
‘“He fell down. We went up near the =
road and found a concrete slab and some RS 4
barbed wire. We put the slab on his sto- a
mach, tied it there with the wire, and yn
shoved him in the creek.’ oe
Leonard later guided a group of offic-
ers and Coast Guardsmen to Harrods 4
Creek and showed them the exact spot |
where he and his father had disposed of = %
the attorney’s body. It was recovered =
shortly afterward from 15 feet of water

b
‘a
p

A search of the slain man’s clothing
disclosed that his wallet, watch and per-
sonal papers were still in his pockets.
The autopsy surgeon later reported that |.
Mr. McCormack’s skull had been frac- *
tured, apparently by some heavy instru-
ment. asad s ERO EMEC S ASE
Leonard told Lieutenant Young that
both he and his father were sober at the
time of the crime. ‘‘Neither of us
drink,’’ the young man added vir-
tuously. vy OI OR the ete
- Still a question mark, so far as the
investigators were concerned, was the
motive for the murder. Leonard ex-
plained it for them, and it proved to be a
reason with tragically ironic overtones.
’ “I was after McCormack to get a di-

ised he would do it, but then he didn’t. I
hate a damned liar!”? 0),
Had he waited but a few days more,

ly, and began to tell his story.

Be ee i ne

was indeed true, he said, that at three ——

ck on the afternoon of Febru

. he 2"4 his father had driven out of |

rs n headed for Louisville.
Wee guing to a junk yard. It was

chance, he insisted, that they spot- ;

rancis McCormack entering the su-
arket as they were driving up South
h Street.

Ve pulled into the alley and waited

‘m to come out,’’ Leonard said. qi

Vhen he walked up the alley we hit
nd then hauled him away in the car.
‘ out fast. I was in the back seat with
4rmack. I thought sure we were
‘ get caught, ’cause we kept running
e dead end street after another.
inally we decided to take him up to
ds Creek. We got there about dark.
arked and walked McCormack
s the field—he was conscious
-toward the fishing cabin. He said,
hatever you're going to do to me
2t it Over with.’
e walked him down the bank to the
anding. I hit him again with my
When I’m in a fight I never use
ng but my fists. Dad picked up
ting and hit him on the head.
2 fell down. We went up near the
1d“ =“ acconcrete slab and some
iW /e put the slab on his sto-
ticu it there with the wire, and
| him in the creek.” —
aard later guided a group of offic-
d Coast Guardsmen to Harrods
and showed them the exact spot
he and his father had disposed of
ormey’s body. It was recovered
afterward from 15 feet of water.

arch of the slain man’s clothing
‘d that his wallet, watch and per-
apers were still in his pockets.
opsy surgeon later reported that '
Cormack’s skull had been frac-
pparently by some heavy instru-

ird told Lieutenant Young that
and his father were sober at the
the crime. ‘‘Neither of us
_ the young man added vir-
a question mark, so far as the
ators were concerned, was the
for the murder. Leonard ex-
it for them, and it proved to be a
vith tr-~ically ironic overtones.
sa 4cCormack to get a di-
‘My wue,’’ he said. ‘‘He prom-
vould do it, but then he didn’t. I

amned liar!’”? > : j
€ waited but a few days more, |

i

gt Re ht

si

ee ary EA Ti a ltl dis este 2

ba edhe lc aime dni

+ Stintnnlietaehbied

ecuted together.

Leonard would have learned that the
lawyer had not reneged on his promise,
for at the very time he was murdered,
Frank McCormack had already begun
preparing papers to file for the divorce
young Tarrence wanted so desperately.
A Jefferson County grand jury re-
turned first-degree murder indictments
against the father and son on March
12th. The Commonwealth’s Attorney
announced he would seek the death
penalty for both defendants. Not guilty
pleas were entered for_both Tarrences at
their arraignment in Criminal Court be-
fore Judge L.R. Curtis, but even as these
pleas were being recorded, Roy Tarr-
ence sobbed, ‘I’m guilty! I’m guilty!’’
The two were tried separetely, the
father first. On April 2nd, Roy Tarrence
was found guilty of first-degree murder.
He was sentenced to die in the electric
chair. Soon afterward, Leonard Tarr-
ence went to trial, was found guilty, and
also sentenced to death.
The unique case, involving capital
sentences of a father and son for murder,
continued to provoke widespread public
interest for nearly two more years, dur-
ing which a succession of legal appeals
were made through various courts to win
clemency for the convicted slayers.
But the higher courts were not
swayed. Neither was the preponderant
majority of public opinion among the
citizens of the Blue Grass State. This
opinion was reflected in editorials in
many newspapers throughout the state
which held that the paternal-filial rela-
tionship of the murderers only made
their crime the more heinous instead of
meriting mercy. 2
On March 17, 1954, the last appeal on
behalf of Roy and Leonard Tarrence was
denied. Roy, then 49, was led into the

death chamber of the Kentucky State

Prison at Eddyville a few minutes after
midnight on March 18th, 1954. He was

secured in the electric chair, the switch

was thrown, and he was pronounded
dead at 12:13 am. =) 6%: te
The father’s body was removed and
Leonard Tarrence took its place in the
death chair. Leonard was then 26 years
old. At 12:27, he was pronounced dead:
It was the first time in Kentucky his-.

tory that a father and son had been ex-
etek

BONUS! Pocket!

MARKET PLACE

MONEY MAKING OPPORTUNITIES
GUARANTEED WEEKLY INCOME Mailing our circu-

lars. Free supplies. Bond X1147 Melbourne, FLA 32901.

OF INTEREST TO ALL

* FOR LOVERS: A most intimate book of Poems for those

in Love and those alone. For your copy send $10.00

piss $1.50 handling to Vanstead, Dept..M, Box 382,
reehold, NJ 07728.

CHILDREN’S COMPLETE 110 CAMERA KIT. Complete De-
tails. Sanford Barney of Detroit, 16651 Lahser 317, Detroit,
MI 48219. $24.95.

MAKE MONEY FAST. For details send $3.50 with S.A.S.E.:
Ellen, Oakhill Trailer, Williston, VT 05495.

TAX PROBLEMS SOLVED Free $3.00 details. Informed
Women, P.O. Box 39162, Washington, D.C. 20016.

HUNDRED LETTERHEADS/ENVELOPES Printed $7.50.
Beacon, Box 1750, Seattle 98111-1750.

SALESMEN WANTED

re en ee OE
EARN BIG COMMISSIONS SOLICITING delinquent ac-
counts. No collecting or investment. Metropolitan Fi-
nance, 1129 West 4lst, Kansas City, MO.

HYPNOTISM—SLEEP LEARNING

owe Rt Ae Yt 1 et}
HYPNOTISM REVEALED! Free Illustrated Details. Hyp-
notist, 12015-S Sherman Road, North Hollywood, CA o16bs.

SLEEP-LEARNING—HYPNOTISMI aaeage Catalog free!
Autosuggestion, Box 24-MX, Olympia, Washington.
EDUCATION—HOME STUDY
* DETECTIVE TRAINING COURSE. American Detective
Institute, Box 418-D, Fairfield, AL 35064.
PERSONAL/MISCELLANEOUS

MEN! $500 weekly possible. Start a Dating/Escort Service
for Ladies. Details $2.00. Together, Box 210-CL, Fort
Lauderdale, FLA 33302.
CLASSIFIED ADVERTISERS

* GET BIG MAIL for “Your Offer” from millions of pros-

pects. Your choice of 31 leading National Magazines.
Classified ad-discount coupons worth up to $100.00 in-
cluded FREE with detailed folder. Write: L. Echevarria,
Classified, Inc. M2, 676 St. Clair, Chicago, IL 60611.

MADE

saree Ase Teacher

New Short Cut Math Skills in Only Weeks
-10 minutes a day ...for Higher Pay Jobs.

“Math-Wizard”

Get the Right Answers in a
Flash Without Paper or Pencil!
Instant answers convert
fractions into decimals,
percentages and reverse.
Plus other tough math pro-
blems solved in a jiffy!

One volume contains all
subjects—arithmetic, alge-
bra, geometry, trigonometry
through calculus. Tackle
any math problem even if
you never finished high
school. Basic and advanced
math taught in terms of

and illustrated. Learn theory
§ and practice from “scratch”,
“brush-up", or reference.
Summary makes review
easy. Track your progress.
Catch errors instantly. Pass
civil service and job tests. A
must for all office, sales, in-
dustrial jobs, home finances.
L Send $9.95 plus 95¢ ‘for
everyday experience. Clear- shipping. 30 day Money
ly presented step-by-step Back Guarantee. iypr

VALCOs* Dept. 431 Box 2012, New Rochelle, N.Y.10802

Hundreds of attractive young Mexican girls
offer friendship, love and marriage to men

of all ages. Personal service! Photos, de-
scriptions, full details FREE. Cae oe

OLATINS  —

Box 1716 —RG Chula Vista, CA 92012

$cc
DIRE

‘With our |
made cc

Rugged, genuin«
brass pocket fluic
lighter—encasec
in an original
7.62 calibre
mirror-polished
cartridge. Come:
handsomely
gift-boxed.
$19.95 plus $2.50
postage and
handling.

Brass key chain-—
made from an
original 9mm
pistol cartridge.
High quality
craftsmanship—
with sturdy clasp.
$6.95 plus $4.50
postage and
handling.

Our complete line of
are all finely crafted

TO ORDER, send nam
or money order to:
EJH ENTERPRIS
t. 331-DG1
2554 Lincoln Bid
Marina del Rey, ¢

California residents

~

CARD STYLES

| ALL STATES ID@STU
IDENTIFICATION @U

MB Your own personal sta
G use anywhere, anytin
sealed in heavy plastic

& SEND $6.00, c
name, address, birthd:
g of hair, eyes, sex, rac
| weight, ial Sect
occupation, school,
grade level, 1 photo pe

gi will cut photo to fit 1.D. (F

no larger than postage
CLEARLY!

a PRIN
[2 OR MORE PHOTO 1D

24 hour service—satis
guaranteed or money

More details & catalog
BASCCO PRODUC
P.O. BOX 3461 e P

FREE

30 NIGHT SUPPLY
OF “BIG RED”
PILLS & “METHODS”
FOR YOU TQ

=

FUNCTION”. ,

our office (
heip you. ..So for this FR

(Only one per household)

~ REVIVE “YOUR” SEXU,

If you have no sex desires - no pep at ni-
-incompatibility, then our “Methods to F
definitely for you —FREE OF CHARGE

*-A71 year old man (J.D., of Charlotte, |
Sains a full erection while making lov
: each Sex act.
2 One woman (H.T., of Spokane, Wash.)

“, out 9 years of marriage that I've h
3 * because of
AND HERE IS A LITTLE EXTRA INSURANCE WHEN YOU MAKE LOVE... Scient:
lacking in certain kinds of nutrients can destroy your sex life. Our special formu!
contains an abundance of vitamins and minerals you may be lacking to give you “!

We're so sure our methods will work that we give you this $8.00 value FREE for
only ask that you please send $2.00 to help cover postage & handling expense. If yc
609) 468-4472. oF want to discuss a personal problem, cail my house (

E offer just send your name and address and $2.00’ tc

MEN — WO!

Our wonderful methods.’

Mr. Bold Co., P.O. Box


038 KENTUCKY REPORTS. [Vol. 196.

titled to retain none of the fees from litigants of the
county and no commissions for the collection of county
taxes, because having already been paid all that he can
legally receive as his salary he is obviously entitled to
collect and receive nothing from the county. Moreover
if it be conceded that the salaries of the sheriff and his
deputies should be paid by the state and county in pro-
portion to the respective services rendered and that the
state 1s entitled to recover its ratable share of anv excess
of compensation illegally retained by the sheriff. stil]
the payments made to the sheriff by the state for the
years In controversy are proper subjects of inquiry in
this proceeding and must be considered in determining
what, if any, amount is recoverable by the county on ac.

count of commissions on county taxes and fees collected
from litigants.

On these special demurrers it is not necessarv to de-
termine whether the excessive commissions paid the
sheriff by the state, if any there are, belong to the state
or to the county and we do not decide that question. But
regardless of how that question may eventually be de-
cided, if the county, or in this case appellant suing for
the county, can recover from the sheriff and the mem-
bers of the fiscal court any of the funds alleged in the
petition to belong to the county, the special demurrers
should not have been sustained; and this we hold ean be
done as to commissions for the collection of county taxes
and fees received from litigants to the extent that they
in the aggregate exceed what the sheriff is entitled to
retain as salaries. |

It follows from these considerations that the Fav-
ette circuit court had jurisdiction of the subject matter
of the action. that the plaintiff, suing for himself and
Fayette county, possessed legal capacity to institute and
prosecute this suit, and there was not a defect of parties
plaintiff by reason of the fact that he alone instituted
the proceedings for and on behalf of the other taxpay-
ers of the county and the county jtself. The special de-
murrers do not go to the question of the right of the
plaintiff to recover as against the surety company.
Were that question presented it could not be determined
since the petition does not show whether the commis-
sions and fees, alleged to be illegally held by appellee
were merely retained by him from funds in his hands or

ea paid to him on his making the settlements required
oy law.

a F .
Thomas v. Commonwealth. 539

The judgment in each case is reversed and the causes
are remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent
with this opimion.

Thomas v. Commonwealth.
(Decided November 21, 1922.)

Appeal from Jefferson Circuit Court

1. Criminal Law—Continuance—Affidavits.—The court did not abuse
its discretion in overruling a motion for a continuance, made
alone upon the ground of the absence of a witness, for whom a
subpoena was not issued until three days before the trial, and
had not been summoned, and the Commonwealth’s attorney
agreed that the affidavit could be read as the deposition of the
witness, and the court admonished the jury, that it must receive
the statements of the affidavit, as the testimony of the wiiness, as
if the witness was present in person and made the statements
before the jury.

2. Criminal Law—Argument of Counsel.—If a defendant does not
object to an improper argument made by the Commonwealth’s
attorney, at the time, it is made, he can not be heard to object
after verdict. ;

3. Criminal Law—Drunkenness or Temporary Insanity as Excuse
for Crime.—Voluntary drunkenness or temporary insanity caused
by voluntary drunkenness does not excuse crime nor mitigate it.

4. Criminal Law—Insanity as Excuse for Crime.—To excuse crime
upon the ground of insanity, it must appear, that the accused, at
the time, the deed was committed was of such unsound mind,
that he was unable to discriminate between right and wrong, or
if he could do so, that from mental unsoundness he had not will
power sufficient to control his actions, and was not able to resist
the insane impulse to commit the crime.

Criminal Law—New Trial.—A new trial will not be granted upon

the ground of newly discovered evidence, where it is merely cum-

ulative, unless it is material and it is of such a decisive charactr
and preponderating effect, that it can be reasonably calculated,
that its hearing upon another trial would cause a different result.

6. Witnesses—Non-Experts—Opinion as to Sanity of Another.—It is
competent for a non-expert witness to give an opinion as to the
sanity of another, if his opinion is based upon facts of which he
has had personal observation, and will depose to such facts be-
fore the jury, that it may know, what weight to give to the opin-
ion.

ol

H. M. DENTON for appelJant.

CHAS. I. DAWSON, Attorney General, and THOS. B. McGREGOR,
Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

261 XKEBK *6 Lew uo (Aqunog uoszegzzer) Ayonquey peqnooazoete ST) feqtuH ‘yUerZ “SYHOHL


540 KENTUCKY REPORTS. [Vol. 196.

_ The appellant, Frank Thomas, w
crime of wilful murder, committed
shooting and thereby killing Lee J. A
day of November, 1921. He was tried and found euilt
a the jury and the penalty for the crime fixed at ieath,
rem oon to set aside the verdict and grant a new
‘rial being ov erruled, a judgment was rendered in con-
sormity to the verdict, and adjudging that he suffer the
penalty, as by law provided in such cases. He has ap-
pealed. The ground upon which a reversal is urged is
that the trial court committed three errors, each of ‘which
was prejudicial to his substantial rights as follows:
(1) Overruling a motion for a continuance (2) miscon-
duct of the Commonwealth’s attorney in closing argu-
ment to the Jury, (3) denying him a new trial upon the
ground of newly discovered evidence. These eround
will be considered in their order. _—

as indicted for the
as was alleged, by
rbegust, on the 26th

(a) The crime for which Thomas was cony
committed by him in Jefferson
which he had resided for many years, and where he was
well acquainted with the citizenship and it was well ac
quainted with him, and at a place near the cor orate
ae of the city of Louisville, wherein he was tried The
me of the commission of the crime, as was stated, was
on Nov ember 26, 1921. The indictment was returned b
the grand jury on December 7th thereafter. and on es
so) One day the accused was arraigned and a plea of
me em tS oo? counsel assigned for his defense;
Ss iacipe naictment set for trial on January 23, 1922.
"01 ty-six days thus intervened from the time of the as-
signment of the prosecution for trial until the day of
the trial. Upon the calling of the action, for trial on
January 23rd, and the Commonwealth havine an-
nounced ready to proceed, the accused moved for a con-
tinuance of the cause, which motion was overruled, and
this is the denial of a continuance of which complaint is

made. The accused, in support of his motion for a con-
tinuance, filed an affidavit which set out but one reason
for the continuance, and that was the absence of oné
Witness, who, the affidavit stated, resided in Jefferson
county, at Valley View. Although there was no inti-
mation in the affidavit that the witness had not been
sooner known or that what the witness would testify had

\ icted was
county in a community in

See ie eae a

io Ne tt Sle ae
M

a iki sh
ry i hs Fey 4

aes
ay

eY
¥

Scant ir nes

Wk OS

Pn

ap oF

ieee Ae Pe one faps Pipe dyson y Bighs |
AAR ing OMe e.

Sin ateee ga ite

is NEOUS Neti

« a

Thomas v. Commonwealth. 541

not been sooner learned, a subpoena had not been issued
for him until the 19th day of January, requiring his
attendance on the 23rd, and the sheriff had. returned
‘hat he had not been able to find the witness, presumably
from the want of time. Although this apparent want of
diligence in obtaining the presence of a witness, the
court, before overruling a motion for a continuance, re-
quired the Commonwealth’s attorney to agree that the
affidavit might be read as the deposition of the witness,
and the affidavit was read to the jury as the deposition
of the witness, under the admonition that the jury
should accept and consider the statement in the evl-
dence as the testimony of the witness, as though the wit-
ness was before it in person, and made such statements
under oath. In the light of section 189 of the Code, and
the various decisions of this court construing this sec-
tion, it is impossible to see wherein the court abused its
discretion in overruling the motion for a continuance,
as well as considering the facts which the witness would
testify to, and the further fact that there were more
than twenty witnesses from the same vicinity present in
court. (b) The misconduct attributed to the Common-
wealth’s attorney was that in his closing argument to
the jury, among other things, said, ‘‘It is argued that
the family is seeking vengeance, that is as fallacious as
the rest of his argument, for if the family were not here
listening to the trial, it would have been argued by as-
tute counsel, as I have heard before, that the family is
not interested and would rather that the jury bring in
a life sentence than a death sentence, and so lawyers
are used to that character and class of argument. He
addressed himself principally against the death penalty,
as to the justice of the death penalty, even where the
law and evidence justify it. Such arguments should
have been made to the legislature long ago. You have
sworn to try this case on the law and evidence, and as to
the death penalty you were carefully questioned, each of
you, in regard to your views on that subject even as to
the age of the defendant as bearing on that question.
One of the jurors which had been accepted, you will re-
member, when someone suggested the age of the defend-
ant stated to the court openly in the presence of the jury,
that he wished to be excused on account of the age of
the defendant, that he did not believe in the death pen-
alty, where the defendant was an elderly man.’’ To this
statement the attorney for the accused objected, stating


) > )
: f i t] 7 + It b] 7 _ “4 ‘

ner in which he did it, to the statement by a juror of his

dows fi mene ae ae
ee on reeeeesti - a punishment,
was cous, : it we cured by the ruling of the
court thereon, it was not prejudicial sinc pa
ferred to asked to be excused. bec: ie he; is ‘t believe
: xeus becau 7
men punishment, when splints es quod hee
& aa 2 AR rn hd ; = :
joe sont e'tschange’ Recent, ak tht th
fect he thoueht such gia lement inc “and | ree tent
oct | ou; atem ad, a ne ;
saa for him all that it was eke Te otes
angrage oa use ey the Commonwealth’s storney:
S Named OF, was not objected to by ¢] C-
cused at the time, and ‘after a verdict it j » late te
make an objection, With (haematite een ees i
a party sits silent and takes his chances with the jury
does not call the attention of the court to the jm.
a Piection erent he es not be allowed to make the
ob, afterwards. If improper argument is not ob-
ee at the time, it is made, it is considered that one
Toh woe etd case. O’Brien v. Common-
alth, 89 Ivy. 354, 1as, also, be -equently
uit if the attention of the court is called a Pape re
oe the jury is admonished in regard to it a
a ig of the judgment will not be had unless it a )-
_ see arcuate prejudicial under the an.
yy ces OF the ‘case that the admonition of the cour
Saree Fhe Tilton v. Commonwealth, 13 R. 138;
: - Commonwealth, 13 R. 305; Clark v. Common.
ieee 111 Ky, 443. Neither will a judgment be reversed
on re aes of an unproper argument by the Common-
aith’s attorney, if the trial is in other respects ¢o1
ducted fairly and impartially, and no other verdict cot id
have been rendered by the jury, than was rend ‘ed
Ilourigan y, Commonwealth, 94 Ky. 520; Ray v ron
monwealth, 19 R. 1217. The improper. are scat. hich
? ; per. argument, which
as not objected to at the time, but is now complained of
was directed by the Commonwealth’s attorney to the
weight to be given to the testimony of the absent wit-

ie ET, Bs

ot

Be an ae 2 feb ie Sesh TE pein hinds

: i Ne ili nk ae oR ail Hit poi

Thomas v. Commonwealth. 543

ness, which was embraced in the affidavit for a continu-
ance, and which was referred to by him substantially as
merely an affidavit made by the accused as to what a wit-
ness would depose, who was not before the jury, and
thereby intimating that if the witness was present he
would not make the statement which the affidavit averred

would be made by him. If such construction can be

justly placed upon the language of the Commonwealth’s
attorney, it was a highly improper argument, because
the motion for a continuance on account of the absence
of the witness was overruled upon the agreement of the
Commonwealth’s attorney that the witness would de-
pose, if present, to the truth of the facts, therein stated,
and further, because the court had directed the jury to
receive the affidavit as the evidence of the witness as
though made by the witness before it, and it is not nec-
essary to say that an argument to a jury contrary to the
instruction or admonition of the court to it, is always
improper. -\lthough, the argument was not objected to
by the accused, the court doubtless realizing the impro-
priety of the argument, again admonished the jury that
it should consider the facts stated in the affidavit, which,
it was said the witness would make, as if made by the
witness in person before it. This, we think, was suffi-
cient to cure any prejudice created by the argument, even
if it had been objected to, and besides the facts of the
homicide show it to have been so premeditated and in-
defensible, and the evidence supporting unsoundness of
mind, on the part of the accused, so negligible, that the
jury would not have been warranted in making any
other verdict, than it did, and hence the argument was
in no wise prejudicial. |
(c) The contention that the trial court erred to the
prejudice of the aceused in denying him a new trial, upon
ihe ground that new evidence had been discovered in
his behalf after the trial, makes proper and necessary
a recitation of facts relating to the homicide and the
parties connected with it. The accused resided within
less than a mile of Lammer’s grocery, and deceased re-
sided within one and one-fourth miles of the same place.
Each of them had so resided in that community for a
number of years. Louis Demarsh, also, resided in the
same neighborhood upon the Hunters Trace road, and
about three-quarters of a mile from accused. Demarsh
and aceused were friends, the former having been a po-
liceeman, while the latter was chief of the county police,

IkENTUCKY REPORTS. [Vol. 196.
no excuse was offered by the accused for the commis-
B1On of the crime, nor was any of the foregoing evidence
which tended to support the facts above stated contra-
dicted in any way. The evidence offered for the accused
was in the attempt to prove that he was intoxicated at
the time of the killing and was of unsound mind to such
an extent as not to be able to discriminate between richt
and wrong, or was actuated by an insane impulse. “Tn
the endeavor to establish such fact witnesses for the
prosecution were cross-examined upon a wide range
and the result of the evidence produced conduced “to
show that the accused was a high-tempered, turbulent
man and of a domineering disposition, and that he
would not quictly submit to any opposition to his de-
sires. It was, also, shown by this same evidence that he
was addicted to some extent to the use of intoxicatine
liquors, and had been for many years but not to any
excessive degree, and that only occasionally he was ob-
served to be under the influence of intoxieants. and
never to such an extent that he was unable to transact
any kind of business which he desired to transact. There
was an entire absence of any evidence from either the
witnesses for the Commonwealth, or the witnesses of-
fered for the accused, except as heresfter stated. tending
to prove that he was of unsound mind, or was unable to
discriminate right from wrong, or that he had ever been
actuated by an insane impulse of any character to com-
mit murder, although the proof developed that he had
previously to the slaying of Arbeeust, killed two other
men, one of whom was the chief of police of the county
The only evidence tending to show that he was of un-
sound mind was the affidavit which was read as the dep-
osition of the absent witness, who stated that he had
been acquainted with him since bovhocd, and that when
about fifteen years of age he fell from a swing striking
his head upon a stone, and the blow rendered him un.
conscious for three hours, and that since that time he
has never been of a normal mind but has been irrespon-
sible and of unsound mind, and, further, that he had
been intoxicated from the use of liquors which produced
intoxication for at least six months previous to the hom-
icide. This testimony was contradicted as to the sanity
of the aceused, by every witness who deposed ag to his
mental condition and by every circumstance proved
im the trinl, and the statement as to his continuous in-
toxicaticn previous to the homicide was contradicted by

Fa ee SN cee means

ig
me

KAR Liars: Ob Site

nal nt that

as
ane

MarR,

Pere

¢ —\
og .

Thomas v. Commonwealth. 547

every witness upon the trial, who deposed concer ning it
and by every circumstance of his actions and conduct at
the time.

The evidence which the accused relied upon as new
and as having been discovered after the verdict and upon
which he urges that he should have a new trial, is con-
tained in the affidavits of eight persons, seven of whom
have been acquainted with accused, some for a greater
and others for a less number of years. The other affidavit
is by an expert in the diagnosis of mental diseases. The
seven acquaintances state that each will depose that in
his or her opinion the accused was of unsound mind, be-
cause he had been addicted to the use of intoxicating li-
quors during many years, and that when under its influ-
ence he was sullen, ill natured and threatening, his tem-
per became hasty and he would quarrel with his friends,
and would threaten to do violence upon slight provoca-
tion, or no apparent provocation, and that he often be-
came involved in personal difficulties when intoxicated,
and several add the further reason as the ground of their
opinion that he had committed two homicides previous
to that of killing Arbegust, and that he slew him without
provocation. It is to be noted that these witnesses do not
attribute to the accused any act which in their opinions
is evidence of insanity, except such acts as were irra-
tional, in their opinion at times when hewas under the
influence of intoxicating liquors, and there is not a sin-
ele act or word of the accused which in their opinions
was irrational which tended to prove any unsoundness
of mind, upon his part except when hewas intoxicated.
It is, further, evident that many of the supposed facts
upon which these newly found witnesses base their opin-
ions are mere hearsay with them, and not facts which
eame under their observation, and not being experts
their opinions so far as they are based upon facts of
which they have not personal knowledge, would not be
competent evidence upon a trial. To such extent they
invade the province of expert witnesses. The opinion of
a witness, not an expert, is competent as to the sanity
of another when the opinion is formed from facts with-
in the personal knowledge of the witness, and deposed
to by him before the jury, that it may know what weight
{o attach to the opinion. Abbott v. Commonwealth, 107
Ky. 624; Phelps v. Commonwealth, 17 K. L. R. 706;
Massie v. Commonwealth, 15 K. L. R. 562; Wright v.
Commonwealth, 24 K. L. R. 1838; Buchanan vy. Com-

_ Qolif, with the other in reserve in case of ac-

‘ik ROPE FOR THE HANGING
ordered from °A. Vonderhelde, of
inuati, and arrived soine days ago, be-

og twenty-two fuet long, with a noose at
ither end, the intention being to use one-

cident, The whole cord was well oiled, and
since its receipt bas been lubricated to keep
up its phiabitity and sifpping qualities,
The scaffold used was the same on which
Isnac Turner was hangedon the 28th of
July, last year, for the murder of Abe Ray,
another colored man, near Athens, in tbis
county, and was put up yes:erday for the
execution of to-day, and texted Lo give axsur-
ance that it would do its wotul work surely
nd expeditiously,
Z Tina borin slopt nearly all of yesterday af-
ternoou, At four o'clock he was visited b
Elders James Turner, tl. W. White and W.
H. Tuomas, colorod preachers, who prayed
witb him. Then be was moved to a separate
coil in which he and Jobo Bush, charged
witb the morder of Miss Vanmeter, slept
together quietly during the night, This
morning b@ wag again visited by the same
ministers who were with him yesterday,
along with |Elders Evans and J. H. Abell,
and they rerhained with hima to the end, and
to them he Be ‘assurance of having made

his peace with God, :

T PRECISELY 11:45
he was led! from the cell, accompanied by
the oflicersand ministers. The scaffold stood
in the center of the smel]i jail yard, the

Yi

| round and wanting to know whet

guilty or not. My last words I hav
is Iam not guilty, though a report

round through be town. It is at
thing on me. I want you all to rer
am not guilty of the charge. 8
& man bas to die. - I have got to die.
got to givean account, and 1 say

guilty of the charge, I am not ¢

am not guilty.’’

This speech was dMivered {n low te
his last repetition sank into a whis
then subniitted very Quietly to the
of his lezs with a strap, the Ploion:
artos with a sinall rope, the alippir
noose round bis neck and the corer
face with the black cap. These ¢
ranged, the Sheriff uickly step;
rity drew the lever. Witbha elank
fell,

A DARK BODY DISAFPRARE!
through the opening and swun,
twisted round several timer, ther
gently toand fro. The neck must |
broken, as the victim died with »%
struggle. After ten minutes the }
cian pronounced life extinct; eigh
later the rope was cut and the boy
to the jail office, where 'Squire (i
Muir held an inquest, tbe jury retu
usual legal verdict. The buty, pln
coffin, was removed in an express w
interment.

TIMBERLAKE’S REFERENCH
'on the scaffold to ‘‘a made-up thing
meant a bogus confession printed at
the streets this Morning, gotten up
Bohemians pos ssing more enter;

white-washei walls of which sharply
reflected tbe bright mid-day sun, pouring
its rays on the crowd admitted. The engine
of death was simple in construction. Two
uprigots supported a single tross ‘mal
aroun: the middle of which the rope woun

several times and strongly fastened, the
noo-e hangibg over the trap and swaying
sligotly in @ light breeze. Under the plat-
form, on which was a single bark- bottomed
chuir, was '@ spring o erated by a lever
worked by an iron bande protruding above
the planking

oe walked easily to and up the
steps and upon the platform whicn was tue

last reating-jwace of unis fee . He was dread
vedtly Pg k and carridd a red bankiana
baudkerchief prouinently in bis bands before
hm. He jwds given the soe! carr;
then a bymnh, gtven but by! kider
Avell, was lined and sunz, an jluer
vans offered up an 9 agg prayer.
‘Timverlake owhbile sat gine dang-
ling rope, at ich be now and then glanced - |
ubvasily. g the praypr bis lips moved
and uem aod ve applied bis bandker-

cbief several
On being |

|

times to bis ve abate eyelids,
! ; |

|
|

|
|

| rious falsehood.

regard for the fitness of opportunit
display. Timberlake bas claimed tt
the deed with the ct:ilid's consent, ar
based his belief of bin innocence of t
for which be was Convicted, Bu
just before being led out, he declar
not know who did it.

THE CONFESSION DENIED.

Tho following paper was prepare
dictation by oOue of the ministers:

Whereas, certain extras have been
bearing the titles of *Tiinberlake's Co!
the said circular stating that Dan. T
confesses the crime, and that bis peop!
ing tothe devil; be did not Know what
come of thein; that they were going tn
The circular further states that he vals!
ored people go to the church to do. th
ment. The following named minister
vestigated the false and base rumor,
Timberlake demes the assertion ay beir
the core; that henever made any su:

ion. The author of the Cirvular, whoer
be, is guilty of a falsehoud—a falue

casts a@ stain on all moral and uprig
people. We bave our opinion of any
| would hatch up such a concocted ec

/ condemned man, simply to mike m:
| We, the writers of this

Circular, having
full statement of Dan Thauberlake, are
pared to refute the fabricated and

statement. We siinply publisu thiain
the truth anda Devple outraged by piu
We In conclusion an
pared to say that every word of 4}

| claiming to be Timberlake's contessh

and untrue. Respectfully,
Kev. FF, Evane
Writer of thi
Rev. Jawra Tt
Rev. J. WL Wy
Kev. J. H. An
Rev. Wo Trex
tev. Mr Here
Rev. WL. HE
Kev. RK, Quari
Rev. JL R Da
H iohe N, ALEX,
THE REASON OF THE PROTKE

of the colored ministers a'tending
luke was such as the following intl
confession printed and sold this

““My race are going to the dogs
know what is to Geogr of them: t
church to do their devilment, The
the devilment done among the color
is at church, and again, thousands
who belong to the church have don
have done, but they never were cat


TOM, Slave, black, hanged Clark Co., December 27, 1850.

Tom, a slave of Frederick B. Nicholas, was hanged for the murder of his owner.-Sun,
Baltimore, MD, 12/21/1850; Clark County Circuit Court Order Book, Special Term, 12/5/1850,
page 228; Annual Report of the Kentucky State Auditor, 1850-1851, notes payment of $600 in
compensation.

THE LEXINGTON EVENT.

TRE NEGRO DAN TIMBERLAKE, THE RAVISHER
OF THE LITTLE COLORED GIRL MARGARET
LAWSON, DECLARES HIS INNOCENCE AND
DIES AT THE END OF THE ROPE,

[Special to the Courier-Journal.}

LEXINGTON, July 20.—Dan Timberlake, J
negro, was hanged here this morning. The
crime which he expiated with his life was
that of rape on a little colored girl, Margaret
Lawson, the child of a family living in a
suburb of this city called Yellmantown. The
little one, meeting Timberlake on the even-
ing of the 10th of May, asked him for a
nickel he had promised her for bringing bim
bis pipe on a former day. He said he would
give her the money if she walked up the road
with him, and she accompanied him along
the Georgetown pike toward the country.
As darkness was approaching he took the
child into a belt of woods

AND THERE OUTRAGED HER,

threatening to kill her if she cried out. He
then gave her the five cents and sent her
horge, again enjoining silence upon ber. For
soveral days her real condition was not
kndwn to her mother and sisters, who treated
her| for simple chafing, but at the instance of
a neighbor she was led to tell what had been
done to her. By this time Timberlake had
cleared out; but Deputy Sheriffs Lloyd and
Kagers bearing that be bad gone to work on
the Kentucky Central railroad extension,
wentto Paris, executed the warrant for his
arrest on Qunday, May 20, and brougnt
him back to this city. On the 22d the Grand
Jury, then in session, indicted him; on the
20th he was tried and convicted, principally
on the evidence of his victim, and on June
13 be was sentenced to be hanged, to-day
baing fixed for bis execution. Ho appeared

: SO STOLID AND INDIFFERENT
ta his position and concerning the circum-
stances surrounding bim that doubts began
ta be entertained of his sanity and moral re-
sponsibility. About the end of June he was
eyamined by several physicians, who ex-

aged doaihtm me ta hia mantal canndnaca

Louis ianz

L Ovpabantés Crwr

PIMBERLAKE, DaVid, hanged, Ky.(lexington) July 20, 1883

to be entertained of bis sanity and moral re-
sponsibility. About the end of June he was
ezamined by several physicians, who ex-
pressod doubts as to his mental soundness,
The certificates of tbese doctors wero sent to
Gov. Blackburn as an argumentfor a com-
mutation of the prisoner’s sentence from
death to life imprisonment, but the Gov-
ernor refused to interfere. A _ petition for
executive clemency was talked of, but never
gotten up.

Timberlake at his trial and conviction, and
again on being sentenced, appeared utterly
unmoved; and this indifference continued
while he lay in jRil, till about ten days ago,
when he began acting in a most excitable,
and even violent, manner. Foracouple of
bours the jail officials were kept busy
trying to restrain his antics. By and by he
calmed down again, and afterwards ox-

‘’ plained that he wasonly ‘‘getting through,”’

a phrase used by colored people of the more
ignorant class to express the last stage of
experiencing religion preceding comfort in
believing in their eternal salvation, and dur-
ing which they are to all intents and pur-
poses actually crazy. He then becaine as
quiet as ever, but more rational and
thoughtful in the contemplation of his doom,

' but never grew despoudent, and maintained

a wonderfully keen appetite for oa man
knowlug he bad to die soou.
HISTORY.OF THE CRIMINAL,
Timberlake, who was forty-four years of -

age, was born the praperty of David Coleman,

of Fayette county,and was afterwards owned
by Mrs. Lawson, who is now Mrs. D. Chinn.
He was married to a colored woman who
belonged to and was raised by Mr. Jobn
Yellman, and who now lives in Yellman-
town, going! by tne name of Martha Yell-
man. Sho separated from Timberlake for
tho reason that he attempted to outrage ber
daugbter by a former marriage. After his
emancipation, Timberlake worked around
this part of the country as a common la-
borer, when not having money enough to
bang round Yellmantown groceries, In ap-
pearance he was a short, heavy-set man,
squab in figure, with vory black skin, re-
treating forehead, heavy jaws, very thick,
protruding lips, and bull neck—a veritable
mixture of the human and the brute, sug-
gesting Darwin’s ‘‘missing link.’’

-

MWOULS LANASeOr

upriar. / 20

( arhicle arccompthe

(383

rd

254 Racial Violence in Kentucky, 1865-1940

dence to convict Yantis of attempted rape, the prosecutor urged the
court, and it agreed, to sentence him to seven years in state prison for
burglary. Less than twenty-four hours after his arrest, Yantis was on
his way to prison. The outcome of a speedy trail proved to be much
worse for another black. A fight in the eastern Kentucky community
of Lynch resulted in the death of the white man involved and the ar-
rest of Leonard Griffin. Determined to end the matter quickly, Lynch
officials immediately tried Griffin for murder. Only at the start of the
trial did Griffin confer with an attorney. Not surprisingly, the all-
white jury found him guilty of murder and handed down the maxi-
mum sentence. With a tip from the authorities, or more likely with
its own knowledge of how the legal system worked against blacks, the
local newspaper printed stories about Griffin’s guilty verdict and death
sentence within minutes after the trial ended. The NAACP, believing
that an obvious injustice had occurred, intervened on behalf of the
doomed man. Members of the organization obtained an audience with
the governor and gave what they thought was strong evidence that
Griffin had acted in self-defense and that, in any event, a fair trial
would have been impossible in Lynch because of intense racial ha-
tred. “It is believed that if his trial had taken place after a reasonable
period of time had elapsed between the crime and the conviction, the
penalty would not have been so severe,” stated the NAACP’s memo-
randum. Although promising a thorough review of the case, Governor
William J. Fields refused to commute the sentence, and on March 20,
1925, only three months after his day in court, Griffin died in the
electric chair.*

That Griffin lived several months after being sentenced to death
was partly a result of a law passed after the execution of Mathias. The
1906 law mandated a thirty-day “cooling off” period between sentenc-
ing a person to death and carrying out the execution. On November 3,
1909, a white woman was allegedly raped in the small town of Dry
Ridge. Seventeen-year-old Earl Thompson was arrested, charged with
the rape, and taken to Lexington for safekeeping. On December 6, a
special grand jury returned an indictment against him for rape, and a
jury was empaneled to hear the case. Meanwhile, a mob gathered at

3. Maysville Bulletin, April 1, 1920; Louisville Leader, December 13, 1924. In the
NAACP Papers, see “Memoranda In the Case of Leonard Griffin,” prepared by Edward E.

Underwood, of the Frankfort NAACP, December 1, 1924, and NAACP press release,
December 5, 1924.

Color-Coded Justice 255

: i hing, the
the train depot awaiting geeenaty : oe, aati oe ai
pene ee . ee oad guilty and sentenced to -.
een is0 sail the mob that Thompson would not go bac.
a pas . t would remain in jail in Williamstown until the sen
pone be carried out. The word of the circuit judge—his om
ya heb k teenager would die on the gallows—satisfied the on
aha af ded not guilty, which meant that the charade of a tri
baa aad The length of the trial, almost five hours, ar
ponies f ees ectators. At one point, a man holding a ge ay ef
ie pee sae saying, “Damn him, I will cut his ae - pn
pies ting for less than an hour, the jury sentenced the blac et

aa ath The announcement of the verdict to the — 3
ace oo who had not been permitted to attend the tria .
ik any a to remain outdoors, resulted in a prolonged shout =
a CAL ie of the men inside the courtroom became wild wit ;
a : e determined to hang him immediately. Thomapeor Pr
one { a window and carried back to jail, which was oar
seni edb the mob. Once again the circuit judge pleaded wi - e
ooh ew ecnpess would die in exactly thirty days, on " os
ao ary 7. Thompson's court-appointed attorney, a pal an ne

i i ot appeal the conviction. *©

community, Si tee” would be done. As caereape ener
nate comin took place on January 7, the very first day allow
ize re hangings, just like speedy trials, satisfied aan, =

= 1s oul ses be coddled by the state. The activities t _ see o
pani age t of nineteenth-century executions—the large, —

ak he vendors selling hot dogs, cotton candy, and —— . .
so rters writing about every trivial step taken by the c

Se ae remained a part of public executions 1 the new i

sayy eee a number of citizens urged the aeegreee : a

pai |-like atmosphere, claiming that it made light 0 oa sokeet
proergiobe functions performed by the state. In 1910, a bi

- Owensboro In-
Louisville Courier-Journal, December 8, 1909, January 8, 1910; ae geet
aap o. When commenting on the promise of the circ Lpoakepe
paneer Ly ‘ould be executed, the Boston Guardian, December a si pind
a cetat this would result in the black youth’s case being review’
press

court.

2


A

a

LES,
© Kentucky, and his brutal murder
‘were the direct results of his fair-

elec. Ky. SP (Jefferson) [5/18/1952

minded devotion to his job. Un-

DIAMOND-LADEN BLONDE
| 1a “ (May, 1952) 5 0) bos

Law enforcement officials had been

‘Whos 9 oh
= aay |

likeness of; the, youthful maraud-
er. As.‘a result, he “was quickly ~
picked up.. He was’ identified as
Thomas* F,* Schwartz,’; After a_
bench trial before Judge Rudolph

v

.sesort in Chicago Criminal Court,
‘Schwartz was sentenced to 75 years
‘for attacking Mrs, Mason, and re- -
' evived additional sentences, to run
concurrently, of 10 to 20 years for
“robbery, 10 to 14 years for assault
with intent to kill, and 10 years to
life for burglary,’ 4 % . a “

Bit sea" ae NG

_» HORROR AT HARRODS

~ "S CREEK *. as
“ (Suly, 1952) 1,

Francis McCormack was a divorce |

lawyer. As such, he rarely came in

contact with criminals, or criminal

~ law. But McCormack’s daring kid-

"Doggone it, Louie! You got all the blankets again?!"

| fortunately, Roy Tarrance and his re
, son, Leonard, hadn’t seen it that watching Abram Winnik from the J
| | way, and on April 2nd, Roy was’ if .. time he bought $250,000 in dia-.
| found guilty of first-degree mur- |” -monds in Brussels, Belgium, until ;
} der for slaying Francis McCor- he transferred them to Mrs. Adele. i
_ mack, and Leonard -was found _ Meppen in Montreal. When Mrs.
equally guilty on the same charge eppen arrived at the Canadian- f
on April 24th. They may become American border at Rouses Point,
‘ . formed, we will bring you in each the first father -and-son ,combina- New York, she was stopped, taken
ga ticie ok tion to die in Kentucky’s electric to a hotel, and searched. The dia-
ey erage chair, monds could” not. be. found, but
x av sia ded. were eggs hide when they ok sed
we " - up the plumbing in the ladies :
RHE OCKED FATAL MIDNIGHT TRYST ‘room several hours after Mrs. .
; ane i at is (August, 1952) Meppen had been en apa ae ee
Ek c.; AeA ebruary A952). thocta, | and Winnik were quickly arreste Yt 3
Foie 9: OSPR BRM Oe Hebe Mats Ola dos - Gentle Mary Campbell loved noth- and brought to trial before Fed- _ rte
* Joseph Ireland, who boasts that he ‘ ing better than to wander in the eral Judge Stephen W. Brennan alt
“is “the best; burglar in. North woods near her Oregon home and in Syracuse, New York. On April Bi
_ America,’’.. just ;about. proved his pick wildflowers. And it was in 25th, Winnik was sentenced. to ; a,
point the day that he stole $65,000 the woods that the search party serve two concurrent terms of two -
in jewels*from:a showcase in the found her, shot in the back but years each, for smuggling and con-
busy lobby of New York’s Waldorf. , still clutching a bouquet of tril- spiring to smuggle diamonds into
‘Astoria’ hotel. That’ liums. The counterweight of guilt the United States. Mrs. Meppen,
balanced overwhelmingly in the who turned state’s evidence, . was.
direction of young Elmer Belcher, : : put on probation for five years.
and ~ Aull seth, . cpr County BY ;
jury found him guilty of first-de- ;
gree murder, but recommended __ >. LUST TO KILL
mercy. On May 23rd, Circuit «© * | (July, 1952)
Court Judge C. F. Skipworth minal A * When Lloyd Gomez, in Sacramen-
re tenced him to a mandatory term ‘to County Jail for vagrancy, ‘con-
|. of life PE PrAsOMMenNt.* :: fessed 11 murders, he was greeted
: . sity with skepticism. But Gomez’
THE MAN WHO LIVED . Knowledge) of at Eben of each
slaying convinced officials not on-
WITH DEATH. | ree Nw ly A he''was guilty of the 11
(August, 1952). killings, but ‘probably responsible
. for at least’ two more. On. June
Harold Markham, who confessed 2nd, Gomez” familiarity ‘with one
to the murder of his wife, Mary— =; ‘“slaying—that of Warren Hood
roe Spl 0 body he had lived Cunningham —also Shar times’ a
, ca tices \ or eight days, trying to summon | acramento jury, who found him f
con piel a aaa ale ey ia “courage for suicide—was : found guilty of first-degree murder and ;
‘eelving stolen property; i bce not guilty of murder by a jury of Sentenced him to death, As .re- ‘
VEAL fis ai teat Bat Lee Cet Ht vy.“ eight women-and four men in quired by California law, Gomez
5 Be he oe Gweks we 4 «| Chicago Criminal Court. The jury ' was next tried on his plea of not
sigs 7 ges ip Baaasletia’ ach found Markham insane at the guilty by reason of insanity, “On
EN -TE ' RORIZED © Lie iyy ‘time of the killing, but that he June 6th, he was found to have
i Maune ieee MI TY toads now was sane and should be re- been’ sane at the time he shot and.
eet SL MetGhe SAE BOK tect eek. atiien leased. Judge Charles S. Dough- killed Cunningham.’ Thedeath
For months, the:-women of Chi- _ erty then ordered Markham dis- penalty is automatically appealed
cago’s “northwest? side ‘lived in’)..) | charged, SNS spar to the state supreme court, :
dread \ of», the: rapists But while»... , f Se ke o Blasters + tt
‘Mrs. Mary; Mason was falling prey jne""" be
to the desecrator, she maintained * “ada Cos Ve i |
sufficient ‘presence of mind to ob." Be: BS Sa bs ' |
tain an accurate description of the re ; ;
young man. -Based on her descrip- i , "|
tion, Detective Adolph Valanis, of & Fes ¢ 1 - \ a
the Chicago” Crime »'Laboratory, © | F
- drew what’ was to prove a startling ~“ a <

naping off ‘a street in Louisville,

¢

septen

er, 1952, «!

TRUE DELECTIVE,


«

N THE
955)

; of November
Massachusetts,
vas. lét, out of
y schoolmates
1 spending the
found: the fol-
rage near her
assaulted and

no were ques-
‘2: Though
ring grown
Neighbors
vucld Peter’s
y, but under
iown and ad-
had become
when Gerry
doy. As she
vay home, he
came in, he
bed and as-

an. all-male
o- hours and
ulty verdict,
e death sen-

immediately
nprisonment.
vill be eligi-
o had been
,. wept when

ters that he
ut he added
1.”

OS

the “Thrill-
enberg, 15,
in Mittman,
ore brought
of Willard
burlap bag
dren. After
on August
in the East

‘and Mitt-
first-degree
° imprison-
parole.
an in-
ion, the
issed when
itness. And

Lieberman won a directed verdict of ac-
quittal.

Examined: by staff psychiatrists at the
Elmira Reception Center, Jack Koslow
was found to be insane and on February
24th he was transferred to the Danne-
mora State Hospital.

HORROR AT
~.. HARROD'S CREEK

(TD July, 1952)

Five witnesses saw two men set upon
a third, club him and drag him into a
sedan, which sped away. The scene was
an alley in downtown Louisville, Ken-
tucky. The time was midafternoon, Feb-
ruary 28th, 1952. A pair of spectacles
found at the scene was identified by
Mrs. F. J. McCormack as those of her
husband, a prominent Louisville attor-
ney. The alley, she said, was a short
cut to their home. She knew of no
reason for the attack and abduction.

The gray sedan was presently identi-
fied as belonging to Roy Tarrence, 49,
who lived in Jeffersontown, 10 miles
southeast ‘of the city. Both Roy and his
son, Leonard, 26, offered alibis, but the
five witnesses identified Leonard as one

of the abductors. The second man had .

not been clearly seen by any of them.
It was learned that Leonard had a
grudge against the attorney, who had
represented his wife in a divorce action
against him.

Both men confessed the crime. They
had driven their victim to . Harrod’s
Creek, they said. It was dark when
they got there and McCormack was
conscious. They made him walk across
the fields to the boat landing, then
killed him with a blow on the head,
bound a concrete slab to his body and
pushed him into the creek. They guided
officers to the spot and the body was
recovered.

Roy and Leonard Tarrence were found
guilty of first-degree murder and sen-
tenced to the chair. Both were executed
on March 18th, 1954, in the state prison
at Eddyville, Kentucky. It was the first
time in Kentucky history that a father
and son had died for the same crime.

MURDER TRAIL OF
THE BLACK SHEEP

(TD April, 1955)

On December 5th, 1954, Gilbert S.
“Buzzy” Mead, 47, of Stamford, Con-
necticut, invaded the Hollywood, Florida,
bungalow of Dominick Albonizio, 50-
year-old racehorse owner. He beat Al-
bonizio to death with the butt of his
gun. Then he shot to death his own
wife, Evelyn Mead, 40, who with her
son by a former marriage was visiting
Albonizio. The boy, awakened by the
shots, fled the house in his pajamas, told
neighbors, who notified the police,

Mead was arrested on December 10th
while attempting to make a deal for a
car at a rental agency near Fort Lau-
derdale, Florida. Brilliant scion of a
fine old Stamford family, Buzzy Mead
had followed a career of crime for 23
years, punctuated by frequent prison
sentences, Inventor, at 23, of a safety
device for submarines, which he pre-
sented to the United States Navy in 1930,

he was arrested in 1931 as the “Phantom.
Burglar” who robbed wealthy homes in
Stamford, Darien “and South Norwalk,
while the owners dined. “For this he got
a mild sentence. In1940 he got 5 to
10 years for burglary ahd forgery. In
1941, as a trusty, he escaped, stole a

ate

car at gun point, but was soon rear-
rested and given 15 to 30 years. Re-
leased in 1954, he marriéd Evelyn Camp-
bell, a divorcee, and made a home for
her and her son in Stamford. His wife

soon left him, going to Florida to visit’

Albonizio. Tine Mee EST Raa re
Financing himself with loot ‘stolen
from the home of a couple honeymooning

in Europe, Mead went in search of his

wife. It erided in double murder.

On March 26th a.12-man jury found
him guilty of the murders, recommended
mercy in the case. of: the slaying of
Albonizio. For this Judge Otis Farring-
ton sentenced Mead. to life: imprison-
ment. But for the murder of his ‘wife,
Evelyn, the sentence was death in the
electric chair, as required by law. _

es

DESPINE WAS TOO BEAUTIFUL.
TOGIVEUP..

(TD January, 1955) -

In 1944, when she was 19, Despine
married James Michael Merkouris,
Seven months later: she divorced him,
terrified by his brutality. Later. she
married «, Special ~ Policeman \ Robert
Forbes and they ran -a ceramics shop
in Hollywood, ‘They had a little daugh-
ter and life would have been happy, had
they not been. hounded: by -Merkouris.

‘On September 20th, 1954, Despine and

Robert Forbes were shot to death nb Torn

their shop. Sgt. Colin Forbes, Holly-
wood homicide ace and younger broth-
er of Robert, traced a car seen in the
vicinity to Merkouris in Detroit, Mich.
On September 25th. Merkouris was ar-
rested in Hot Springs, Arkansas;

Tried only for the murder of his ex-
wife, Merkouris was found guilty on

March 9th, 1955, by a jury of 4 men and _

8 women. Rejecting a motion for a new
trial, Superior Judge Charles W. Fricke,
on April 11th, sentenced Merkouris to
die in the gas chamber.

Y.

Despine Forbes

-NO SUCH THING AS
. ABAD BOY?

(TD January, 1955)

Mrs. Grace Bauer, Indiana probation
officer, held there was no such thing as
a bad boy. She gave her time, money
and efforts to help all who came to her.

On September 17th, 1954, Mrs. Bauer’s
body was found on the porch of her
home. She had been stabbed in the
back. Detectives, checking juvenile
records, came to one for James Robert
Mullins, 20. Mrs. Bauer had given him
money to go to California. Mullins con-
fessed he had returned, demanded more
money. Refused, he stabbed her.

Five days later a grand jury indicted
Mullins for first-degree murder. And

on February 25th he was sentenced to
life in the Indiana State Prison.

Ann Yarrow

THE FRIGHTENED COED

(TD June, 1955)

Wanting to be alone to work out a
personal problem, Ann Yarrow left the
apartment she shared with two young
friends in Brooklyn, to spend a couple
of weeks in the Greenwich Village flat
of a friend who was away on a visit.

Some time during the night of Feb-
ruary 5th, 1955, 4 murderer invaded the
flat. The body of the 23-year-old girl
was discovered the next morning. She
had been strangled and stabbed 37 times
and sexually assaulted.

Two suspects were questioned and
soon cleared. On March list a young
woman was assaulted in her home on
East Third Street, one block from the
scene of the Yarrow murder. For this
crime William Patrick Farrell, 25, a
furniture painter, was arrested. He
subsequently confessed the murder of
Ann Yarrow, then retracted his con-
féssion, but was indicted for the murder.

On the basis of a Bellevue Hospital
psychiatric report submitted to General
Sessions Judge Louis Capozzoli, Farrell
was judged to be insane. After a for-
mal psychiatric examination, confirm-
ing this report, he will be committed to
-the Matteawan State Hospital for the
Criminal Insane at Beacon, New York.

T
D

* Seem ar

co EERIE Nemec


m2

The suspect (center) led judge Mix (left) ane Sherif Bax to cee where fee alleged is hove are the body.

DAN TT
PAGE DETECT

se ede

-


6

CRIMELIGHT PERSONALITI

. THE CANDID

BEAUTY DEAD IN MYSTERY. When Dorothy Preston’s
body was found sprawled in her car at Santa Monica, Calif.,
on March 28,-1952, two fresh marks on her right arm told
police she had been subjected to poorly administered hypo-
dermic injections. In her purse were found a parking-lot
ticket, a broken string of beads and a lipstick. At a room in
the hotel adjoining the parking lot, police located matching
lipstick stains on cigaret butts, scattered beads and three hypo-
dermic syringes. A man of 58, and his friend, who had been
named by the dead woman’s husband as corespondent, lived
there. Both men came to headquarters and said that Dorothy
had injected herself with a fatal dosage while they were out.
“About 12:30 a.m., Mrs. Preston became ill,” said one. “I
started to drive her to a hospital, but we ran out of gas.” Then
they abandoned woman and car. Police are investigating.

TRAGEDY FOLLOWS PARTY. Grief-stricken Mrs. Betty
Blythe, 20, prays as the body of her sister’s husband, John
Wilson, 29, lies on the front lawn, fatally shot. According
to what Mrs. Blythe told the police, she had returned home
after attending a birthday party held in honor of her mother,
to find her ex-husband, Stanley Blythe, 25, waiting for her.
“He met me at the door and pulled a gun,” Mrs. Blythe stated.
“He had been drinking heavily and had a bottle beside him.
He fired a shot into the ground.” Mrs. Blythe then said that
for two hours, until the rest of the family returned, he kept
her covered with the gun. Blythe left, and Betty told her
family what had transpired. In a few minutes her ex-husband
returned, asking for his bottle of whisky. It was then that her
brother-in-law, John Wilson, remonstrated with Blythe. The
latter struck Wilson, then shot him. Blythe is being held.

REPORTER

ATTORNEY’S WATERY GRAVE. Two days after he
vanished, the body of Attorney Francis J. McCormack, 54
was hauled ashore by sheriff’s deputies. Leonard Tarrence,
22, was arrested on March 9, 1952, after witnesses told of
seeing the attorney enter the youth’s car. According to
the sheriff, Tarrence told him: “My dad and I were driving,
when we saw Mr. McCormack go into a grocery store.
We waited. As he came out, we hit him and pushed him
into the car. On arrival at Harrod’s Creek, I hit him with
my fists and my dad hit him with a stick. He asked me
what it was all about and I told him that he had lied to
me.” A 200-pound concrete slab was wired to the attorney
and his body dropped from a boat landing. McCormack had
represented yqung Tarrence’s wife in a divorce suit against
him. Tarrence and his father have been sentenced to death.

,


thers went through Lee’s right arm. If
the firing was done inside the car, where
are the holes from these shots?”

The answer to this important question
remained to be determined. The officers
now questioned the son of Harry Lee’s
landlady, Ray Mooney, a Hamilton con-
stable. Mrs. Mooney had told them Lee
talked to her son before calling her in
Cayuga. What had he said to Constable
Mooney?

Ray Mooney explained that he had
called his mother’s home about 8:45
Saturday night. Lee answered and told
him his mother was out. “But I heard a
woman’s voice in the background. She
said, ‘Harry! Harry!’ I asked Lee if he
was sure my mother was away. He said
yes, and then he asked if I had an un-
registered pistol that could not be traced.
I told him I did not,” Mooney continued.

He said he then called his mother in
Cayuga and told her about his call to
her home. She suggested he go out to
the house and see what was going on.

“I did that, and I talked with Lee in
the kitchen,” Mooney told Inspector
Wannell and Sergeant Clark. “I remem-
ber seeing a bag of groceries on the
bench ahd a bouquet of sweet peas on
the sink. I saw a piece of twine dangling

from Lee’s pocket. I suggested he tuck
it back in the pocket. .

“I asked him why he wanted a pistol.
He said, ‘There’s somebody giving me a
runaround, and if I catch up with them,
someone’s going to get a backside full of
lead.’

“I knew Harry had been taking seda-
tives for his arthritis and I figured he
was probably a little dopey from the
pills,’ Mooney said. He recalled seeing
a woman’s blue handbag in the kitchen.
He said he did not go into any other
room in the house. He said Harry Lee
finally said he didn’t care whether or
not he got a pistol. He was handling a
box of .22 shells at the time, but the
young constable assumed they were for
Lee’s rifle, which he knew Lee carried in
his car all the time and frequently used
for target practice.

The inspector talked again with Mrs.
Mooney. She told Inspector Wannell she
had never known Lee to keep company
with any woman in Hamilton. But over
a two-year period, she recalled he had
received several telephone calls from a
woman. She also mentioned that dur-
ing occasional illnesses, Harry received
get-well cards signed, “Mary.”

After discussing this information, In-

We.

‘= sth mith

,'

Aw

“You understand the job is temporary—as soon as
my wife sees you—you're out.”

spector Wannell and Sergeant Clark de-
veloped a theory that seemed to make
sense. As they now saw it, Harry Lee
and Mary Rosenblatt had met a couple
of years before and had been seeing
each other occasionally since then, with-
out the woman’s husband or Lee’s land-
lady knowing of it.

It was the officers’ theory that Lee’s
remark about getting “a runaround”
resulted from Mary Rosenblatt’s de-
cision to break off their relationship and
Lee’s resentment of that decision.

Obviously, Lee had contrived to get
his landlady out of the house. Then he
apparently induced Mary to meet him
there to discuss her proposed termina-
tion of their friendship. The twine, and
the burns on her wrists, suggested he
had forced her to remain there Satur-
day night and all day Sunday. Then,
after she telephoned to her husband
from Galt Sunday night, Lee shot and
killed her.

From such evidence as they had, that
was how it added up. Further investiga-
tion produced additional evidence which
bolstered the theory still further.

Going back to question Mrs. Rosen-
blatt’s coworkers, the officers learned
that when she left the synagogue she
was wearing a corsage of sweet peas
which she had taken from one of the
tables. She also was carrying in a paper
sack two oranges for her children. A
sack, containing two oranges, had been
found in the kitchen of Harry Lee’s
rooming house, close to where the bou-
quet of sweet peas was found.

Police also located the Hamilton taxi
driver who had driven Mrs. Rosenblatt
from the synagogue to Lee’s rooming
house Saturday afternoon.

Confronted with this evidence the in-
vestigators had built against him, Har-
ry Lee denied everything. Though he
could not substantiate his own story of
his movements on Saturday—the tale of
driving four friends to Goderich, stay-
ing overnight and returning home alone
when he picked up Mrs. Rosenblatt
hitchhiking—he continued to insist the
shooting had occurred exactly as he said
it had.

A formal charge of murder was filed
against Harry Lee and he was held for
trial.

The question of whether Lee had at-
tempted suicide which failed, or wheth-
er he had inflicted the wounds on him-
self in an effort to delude the police was
never resolved. The accused man, other
than protesting his innocence, would
say nothing. After he was charged with
the murder of Mary Rosenbiatt, Lee
went on a hunger strike which lasted
several days.

On September 29, 1952, Lee’s jury
trial began in the Supreme Court of On-
tario, It lasted five days, and the jury’s
unanimous verdict was that Harry Lee
was guilty of the murder of Mary Ros-
enblatt. The judge sentenced him to the
gallows.

Lee’s attorneys filed an appeal of the
verdict and sentence, but it was re-
jected. On February 3, 1953, Harry Lee
kept his date with the Crown hangman
in Hamilton, Ontario and paid with his
life for the murder of Mary Rosen-
blatt. oo¢

Eprror’s NOTE:

The names, Frank and Mary Peters,
Mrs. Angela Mooney and Ray
Mooney, as used in the foregoing
story, are not the real names of the
persons concerned. These persons
have been given fictitious names to
protect their identities.

Too Many Alibis

(Continued from page 57)

At that time, a woman living on Garvin
Place called headquarters to report that
her husband, Francis J. McCormack,
54, was unexplainably missing. McCor-
mack, an attorney, disappeared some
time after four o’clock Thursday after-
noon while he was on his way home
from his law office.

He had called his wife at four to tell
her he was leaving. He planned to stop
at a market to pick up a few staples for
the family larder.

The scene of the alley attack was but
a block from McCormack’s home. The
alley was a shortcut from the A & P on
South Fourth Street and the lawyer
often took this route home.

The man’s wife was shown the tor-
toise-rimmed eyeglasses found near the
scene of the assault. She said they were
similar to her husband’s, and gave the
name of his optometrist for a more ac-
curate check. The optometrist examined
the glasses, checked his records, and
positively identified them as a pair he
had made for McCormack.

No one in the missing man’s family
could suggest a motive for the attack
on him. They were sure he had no ene-
mies, nor did they know of any trou-
ble he may have had with a client. He
was said to carry only modest sums of
cash on him. His only jewelry was a
thin silver Elgin watch. McCormack
was described as a stalwart man, six
feet one inch tall, and weighing about
170 pounds. On Thursday he had been
wearing a slate gray suit, a pearl gray
topcoat and a dark gray hat.

The case was quickly given to Lieu-
tenant Charles Young, of Homicide.
Young ordered Sergeant A. J. Miller to
alert all Louisville pawnbrokers to be
on the lookout for the thin silver Elgin
watch. Young and his aides then be-
gan an intensive investigation into the
missing attorney’s background, seeking
some clue that might lead them to his
assailant-kidnapers.

At his law office, none of McCor-
mack’s associates knew of any pro-
fessional problems that might be
connected with the incident. He had
been out of the office most of the pre-
vious day. When his wife called one
of the associates to express her concern
the night before when Mr. McCormack
failed to arrive home, he told her not
to worry, that McCormack was prob-
ably tied up with a client. When he
learned the lawyer was still missing
that morning, he had advised her to
call the police. Sergeant Miller dis-
counted the associate’s suggestion that
McCormack had been the victim of
stickup men.

“It’s hard to believe a couple of ordi-
nary thugs would pull a job like this in
broad. daylight, with a bunch of wit-
nesses around, and then go to the trou-
ble of kidnaping their victim,” Miller
said. He asked to look over the files on
cases McCormack had been handling in
recent months.

Upon examination, most of these
proved to be fairly routine cases, cases
involving civil law, domestic wrangles,
real estate transactions and the like. An
office clerk drew the sergeant’s atten-
tion to a folder marked “McTainer.”
She said that “Jerry McTainer is a wild
man, He’s threatened everyone con-
nected with this case and I wouldn’t
put anything past him.”

Sergeant Miller’s questions elicited

.

the information that McTainer was a
belligerent alcoholic wife-beater, and
the case involved Mrs. McTainer’s suit
for separate maintenance. In one
drunken rage he had threatened to
break McCormack’s neck if he brought
his wife’s suit to court.

Another name now struck the ser-
geant as he came upon a folder marked
“Tarrence.” The documents showed
that a Leonard Tarrence of Jefferson-
town, later of the U.S. Army, had been
sued by his wife for money to support
his baby son. The court had ordered
him to pay $7.50 per week. When Tar-
rence was drafted by the Army in 1951,
his wife sought and obtained an allot-
ment for the support of herself and her
baby. In August 1951, Leonard Tar-
rence went AWOL from Fort Knox.
They caught him in January 1952 and
he was put in the stockade pending
court-martial.

But in the meantime, the allotments
had stopped. His wife charged him in
Louisville civil court with desertion,
and the case was pending. Tarrence
went AWOL again on February 12th,
and he was still at large.

“His wife finally gave up hope of
getting him to provide for the baby,”
Sergeant Miller was told, “and only last
Monday she instructed Mr. McCormack
to begin a divorce action at once.”

Sergeant Miller jotted down notes
about Tarrence because he seemed like
the type of character who might be-
come involved in violence. But Miller
at this time had not seen the report of
Sergeant Bibb about Roy Tarrence and
the gray Chevy. The connection of the
two names to McCormack’s disappear-
ance came a little later.

This happened when Miller reported
to Lieutenant Young. As soon as Young
heard the name Tarrence, he said,
“Hold it a minute.” He thumbed
through the papers on his desk, found
what he was looking for, and _ said,
“Here it is.” He handed Miller Sergeant
Bibb’s report on Roy Tarrence and the
gray Chevrolet sedan.

Young assigned detectives to run a
painstaking check on Roy Tarrence’s
alibi for Thursday afternoon. Tarrence
was brought to headquarters, but he
solemnly protested, “I’m not your man.
There wasn’t any reason for me or
Leonard to hurt Mr. McCormack. We
never even saw him, except in court.”

“McCormack was going to sue for a
divorce for your son’s wife,” Lieuten-
ant Young said. “That could have been
——— for your son to be angry with

im.”

“No, it couldn’t,” Roy Tarrence re-
plied. Mary Bixler, who also had come
to headquarters, interrupted.

“A divorce was just what Leonard—
what we both wanted,” she said. “Leon-
ard and me, we’ve been in love a long
time. He wanted that divorce so he
could marry me.”

The lieutenant suggested that if this
was true, the smartest thing Leonard
could do would be to come in and clear
himself. Mary explained he’d never do
that, for fear of being sent back to the
Army stockade. “He hates the Army,”
she cried, “he got sick on the food.
That’s why he lit out last summer. Now
they’ll put him in jail.”

“There could be worse things,”
Young said. “The electric chair, for in-
stance.”

Detectives sent to search the Tarrence
home were denied permission, unless
they had a search warrant.

Roy Tarrence was put in a lineup to
be viewed by the five witnesses to the
alley assault. None could identify him
positively.

Stop wasting time in a
dead-end job! Enjoy the
big rewards offered the
Law-trained man in business

STUDY

IN YOUR
SPARE
TIME

as a way to
increased
earnings

HATEVER your present position—

whatever your previous schooling —
you can multiply your opportunities for
rapid promotion, big income and prestige
through LaSalle Law Training at home.

A knowledge of Law is regarded today as
indi ble equip t in every activity of
business. The greatly increased role of gov-
ernment in business, the many new problems
of Law involving taxes, insurance, contracts,
liability, employment, and much more—all
require the legally-trained executive who can
make day-to-day decisions effectively. That
is why leading corporations seek out such
men for key positions and reward them with
top salaries.

You can master Law easily and enjoyably
at home—at remarkably low cost—under the
supervision of LaSalle’s distinguished Law
faculty. You work with actual legal cases,
acquiring real experience. Upon completion
of your training, you are awarded a Bachelor
of Laws degree if qualified. The famed
Law LaSalle Library of 14 volumes is given
to you as part of your course.

For more than half a $end for this
century LaSalle hasbeen Free Booklet
an acknowledged leader :
in business training, with
more than 1,000,000 stu- i AW

TRAINING FOR
LEADERSHIP

dents. Mail coupon today
for free illustrated book-
let “Law Training for
Leadership” and see how
LaSalle can help you
move up rapidly in your
career. Address 417 S.
Dearborn, Chicago 5, Ill.

om cove in an in ~------4

LA SALLE EXTENSION UNIVERSITY
A Correspondence Institution
417 S. Dearborn St., Dept. 20-044, Chicago 5. til.
Please send me your free illustrated booklet
“Law Training for Leadership”

seccccrcccccpoces ASCeece

Adres$..ccccccesccescccccsccccresccecoscess

City &

ONE secccceccesarsesesvesseseseeesessessree

‘ )
- i

I
1

t

Name...sccccceees

I !
u i
' i
|
| 1

COUMY. .cercecevececcces ceccccccce StatO. ce
223

Mee enn aun wn San ean tem am cakes oman cine

73

Though it would have been stretch-
ing coincidence unconscionably far,
Lieutenant Young realized that the pos-
sibility—however remote—did exist
that the dairyman might have made a
mistake in jotting down the numbers of
the gray Chevrolet sedan. As for the
suspicious aroma of gasoline in the sus-
pect’s car, investigation confirmed that
Roy Tarrence was indeed a “bug about
his car—always workin’ and fussin’
over it.’ So his explanation might well
be true. So was his claim that “Nobody
touches that car except me.” He in-
sisted he would never—had never
loaned it to anyone else to drive.

It took some time to run down the
only other suspect in the case, the al-
coholic Jerry McTainer, but eventually
he was traced to a cheap hotel where
detectives found him sleeping off the
effects of one of his monumental bend-
ers. He said he had begun his binge on
Wednesday. When told why police had
been seeking him, McTainer reflectively
rubbed the whiskers of a several days’
growth of beard, then shrugged.

“If I did it,” he said with disarming
eandor, “I don’t remember nothing
about it.”

He could offer no alibi, for the simple
reason that he didn’t know where he
had been, or what he had done. It re-
mained for the Louisville Police De-
partment to clear him. Detectives
checking his back trail through the
city’s liquor emporiums established be-
yond all doubt that from three o’clock
until eight-thirty on the Thursday
afternoon of February 28th, McTainer
had been boisterously present at the
bar of a tavern on West Chestnut
Street. At eight-thirty, he had been
thrown out of the place.

A concerted effort was made by both
Louisville and Jefferson County police
to apprehend Leonard Tarrence, but it
was not until the afternoon of Satur-
day, March Ist, that they turned up
their first lead on him. A county officer
found a man who said he had seen
Leonard and his father early that
morning at Harrods Creek, a few miles
northeast of Louisville. He knew the
Tarrences and had paused to chat with
them. He said they were toting a brown
paper sack, and told him it contained
garbage which they intended to dis-
pose of and then go fishing.

"Tie county police now obtained a
search warrant and went to the Jeffer-
sontown home of the Tarrences, but
Leonard was not there. On Monday,
through an attorney, he surrendered
himself voluntarily to Criminal Court
Judge Loraine Mix.

“I'm innocent,” Leonard Tarrence in-
sisted. “I hope Mr. McCormack will re-
turn so everything will be cleared up.
I never had any bad feeling toward
him. Everything was settled in court
with my agreement. Anyway, I wasn’t
near Louisville last Thursday after-
noon.”

This claim was __ swiftly blasted.
Placed in a lineup, Leonard Tarrence
was positively identified as one of the
assailant-abductors of Francis McCor-
mack by the five witnesses to the as-
sault. He insisted they were wrong.

The motive continued to be a baffling
factor in the case, assuming the wit-
nesses were right and Leonard was in-
deed one of the attackers. Investigation
had substantiated Mary Bixler’s story
that Leonard greatly desired a divorce
so he could marry her. Why then, would

™ he bear any rancor toward his wife’s

8 attorney?
And there still remained a great big
ton ns te whether the lawver was

still alive. Lieutenant Young and all
other officers on the case were reason-
ably certain McCormack was dead. It
would have been foolhardy for his kid-
napers to keep him alive and risk being
identified by him when he was released.

On Tuesday, March 4th, Young en-
listed the aid of the Coast Guard in an
attempt to find McCormack’s_ body.
Chief Boatswain’s Mate Claude Al-
bright led a party of sailors in boats up
the Ohio River into Harrods Creek,
where the Tarrences had been seen.
They conducted a dragging operation
in the deep waters of the creek, but
brought up nothing but a conglomera-
tion of debris and junk.

Other searchers combed the farm of
a Tarrence relative and a pond on the
property with no better results. Detec-
tives also interviewed everyone they
could find who had even a passing ac-
quaintance with the suspects.

Leonard continued to insist that he
could not possibly have had anything
to do with McCormack’s disappearance.
“I was home all that day,” he protested.
“I didn’t dare go out. I never could tell
when some guy from Fort Knox would
be nosing around, and I sure didn’t
want to go back there. My back hurt.
I got sick on the army food. And they
were figurin’ to ship me out to Korea.
I sure as hell didn’t want that.”

There was no shaking Leonard from
his story. True, authorities had the
identification of him by eyewitnesses to
the attack, but Commonwealth’s At-
torney A. Scott Hamilton wanted con-
siderably more than that before he
proceeded with charges against the sus-
pect. Most important of all, he wanted
the victim, alive, if possible, although
the prosecutor was not too hopeful on
that score.

Detectives finally managed to secure
the opening wedge they needed to
penetrate the defense stories given by
the father and son. They found a Jef-
fersontown teenager who said he had
seen Leonard and Roy Tarrence driving
out of the village toward Louisville at
three p.m. on Thursday, the day of the
assault, The youngster had known the
Tarrences all his life; he said he could
not be mistaken.

On the basis of this information, Roy
Tarrence was placed under arrest and
formally charged with “malicious strik-
ing.” Again he protested his innocence.
“I'm not guilty,” he declared. “Me and
my boy are innocent. God in heaven
knows Mr. McCormack and I never had
any words or falling out with one an-
other.”

On Wednesday night, Roy offered to
take a lie detector test, but he swiftly
changed his mind. Leonard flatly re-
fused to submit himself either to a
polygraph examination or truth serum.
His father wanted no part of truth
serum, either. “It almost killed a feller
I heard about who took it,’ he ex-
plained.

By Friday, March 7th, Prosecutor
Hamilton and Lieutenant Young had
decided their best hope of a break-
through in the impasse lay in con-
centrating on the younger Tarrence.
Hamilton had Leonard brought to his
office, with Young present, and the
prosecutor coldly ticked off point after
point in the State’s case.

“Witnesses have identified you as one
of the kidnapers,” he began. “Not just
one witness, mind you, but five—five
reputable citizens of this community.
Your father’s car was used in the kid-
naping of Mr. McCormack. We can
prove this.

“That is enough, I assure you, to get

a conviction under the federal kidnap-
ing law. And the penalty for kidnaping.
under the Lindbergh Act, is the electric
chair. We do not have to prove mur-
der, nor produce a body.”

Leonard Tarrence continued to hold
out, but it was obvious, when the ses-
sion concluded, that he was badly
shaken. On Saturday morning, he asked
for permission to talk to his father; it
was refused.

“Okay, then,” he said resignedly,
“Call in Judge Mix and Mr. Hamilton.
I want to get this off my mind.”

Before he began to talk, however,
Leonard made a valiant effort to strike
a bargain with the prosecutor; he begged
for a guarantee that he would get a life
sentence instead of the chair in return
for his cooperation in giving a full ac-
count of the crime.

«

N. deals,” Prosecutor Hamilton told
him coldly. “I can guarantee you noth-
ing. If you confess, you're putting your-
self at the mercy of God Almighty.” |

Leonard shuddered. For a few min-
utes he said nothing. Then he sighed
deeply and began to tell his story.

It was true, he said, that at three p.m.

It was pure chance, he contended, that
they spotted Francis McCormack enter-
ing the supermarket as they were driv-
ing up South Fourth Street. ‘

“We pulled into the alley and waited
for him to come out,” Leonard said.
“When he walked up the alley we hit
him and then hauled him away in the
car. We lit out fast. I was in the back
seat with McCormack. I thought sure
we were gonna get caught, "cause we
kept running up one dead end street
after another.

“Finally we decided to take him up to
Harrods Creek. We got there about dark.
We parked and walked McCormack
across the field—he was conscious then
—toward the fishing cabin. He said, ‘Do
whatever you’re going to do to me and
get it over with.’ We walked him down
the bank to the boat landing. I hit him
again with my fists. When I'm in a fight
I never use anything but my fists. Dad
picked up something and hit him on the
head.

“He fell down. We went up near the
road and found a_concrete slab and
some barbed wire. We put the slab on
his stomach, tied it there with the wire,
and shoved him in the creck.”

Leonard Tarrence guided a group of
officers and Coast Guardsmen to Har-
rods Creek and showed them the exact
spot where they had disposed of the
lawyer’s body. It was recovered from 15
feet of water.

McCormack’s wallet, watch and per-
sonal papers were still in his pockets.
The autopsy surgeon reported his skull
had been fractured, apparently by some
heavy instrument.

Leonard told Lieutenant Young both
he and his father were sober at the
time of the crime. “Neither of us drink,”
Leonard said righteously.

Roy Tarrence was stunned at the
news of his son’s confession and the sub-
sequent recovery of the body. He made
no formal statement, but in a confronta-
tion with Leonard, he said in a quaver-
ing voice, “Son, we made a mistake—
about as big a mistake as we could have
made. I don’t know why we ever did
a thing like that.”

Still a question mark was the motive
behind the murder. Leonard explained
it, and it proved to be a reason with
ironically tragic overtones. “I was after
McCormack to get a divorce for my

wife,” he said. “He promised he would
= it, but then he didn’t. I hate a damned
iar.”

Had he waited but a few days more,
Leonard would have learned that the
attorney had not reneged on his prom-
ise, for at the very time he was mur-
dered, McCormack had already begun
preparing papers to file for the divorce
young Tarrence wanted so badly.

A Jefferson County grand jury re-
turned first-degree murder indictments
against the father and son on March
12th. The Commonwealth's Attorney an-
nounced he would seek the death pen-
alty for both defendants. Not guilty
pleas were entered for both Tarrences
at their arraignment in Criminal Court
before Judge L.R. Curtis, but even as
these pleas were being recorded, Roy
Tarrence sobbed, “I’m guilty, I’m guilty!”

The two were tried separately, the
father first. On April 2nd, Roy Tarrence
was found guilty of first degree murder.
He was sentenced to die in the electric
chair. Soon afterwards, Leonard Tar-
rence went to trial, was found guilty
and also sentenced to death.

The unique case, involving capital
sentences of a father and son for mur-
der, _continued to provoke widespread
public interest for nearly two more
years, during which a_ succession of
legal appeals were made in efforts to

win clemency for the convicted slayers.

But the higher courts were not
swayed. Neither was a large segment of
public opinion which held that the
paternal-filial relationship of the killers
only made their crime the more heinous
instead of meriting mercy.

On March 17, 1954, the last appeal on
behalf of Roy and Leonard Tarrence
was denied. Roy, then 49, was led into
the death chamber of the Kentucky State
Prison at Eddyville a few minutes after
midnight on March 18th. He was se-
cured in the electric chair, the switch
was thrown, and he was pronounced
dead at 12:13 a.m.

The father’s body was removed, and
Leonard Tarrence took its place in the
death chair. Leonard was then 26 years
old. At 12:27, he too was pronounced
dead. It was the first time in Kentucky
history that a father and son had been
executed. eve

i Epitor’s Norte:

The names, Jack Desante, Mary
Bixler and Jerry McTainer, as used
in the foregoing story, are not the

| real names of the persons concerned. |
These persons have been given fic-
titious names to protect their iden-
tities. 1

2000 Miles
To Burial

(Continued from page 35)

and rechecking would determine.

: While the identity of the body found
in the footlocker was being sought in
Florida, and while Harold Leroy Brown
was being convicted of car theft in New
Mexico, FBI officers were running down
leads in a bank robbery which had oc-
curred in Arizona, during which two
persons had been kidnaped and not yet
located.

Richard Kellogg, special agent in the
West Palm Beach FBI office, recalled the
FBI reports he’d read on the New Mexico
and Arizona cases. The FBI officers in
New Mexico had a stolen car, and credit
cards bearing the name and address of
its possible owner, in their possession.
The Arizona FBI officers had bank rob-
bers and kidnaped men yet to trace. The
Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Department
had yet to identify a nude, unidentified
male corpse without either teeth or
dentures.

Thus, working on the theory that the

unidentified body might be that of one
of the kidnapees from the Arizona rob-
bery, that it might also be the owner of
the credit cards taken from Brown, and
even the owner of the stolen Pontiac in
New Mexico, Agent Kellogg and Agent
Douglass Wendel, also of the West Palm
Beach FBI office, studied the FBI re-
port on the missing Albin Gilroy Thoren,
55, of Harlingen, Texas. Thoren had been
fingerprinted June 23, 1938, so there was
detail to study.
. When this was finished, Special Agent
Kellogg called the sheriff's department
in West Palm Beach and asked if ar-
terial transplants had been found in the
leg of the unidentified corpse. The an-
swer was yes.

That checked out. According to the
FBI report, Albin Gilroy Thoren had
undergone delicate heart surgery in

Houston, Texas, which had necessitated
such a transplant.

Next, Agent Kellogg contacted the
FBI office in Albuquerque and asked
about dentures. A set of dentures had
been found in the stolen car.

“That gave us something to work on,”
Chief Detective Pickren said later. “We
were on the right road. We had an un-
identified body. The FBI had a convicted
thief and a stolen auto, but didn’t know
whom it was stolen from.”

From this point on, FBI agents and
sheriff’s and police departments worked
as one huge, finely-geared unit. Special
Agent Wendel, of the West Palm Beach
FBI office and Palm Beach County Medi-
eal Examiner Dr. Hugh Dortch, com-
municated with the surgeon in Houston,
Texas, who had performed heart sur-
gery on the missing Albin Thoren.

The Texas surgeon identified the ar-
terial transplants—which Dr. Dortch
described as he had found them on the
body—as his own work on Thoren. This
surgical identification came through
comparison of scars and features of the
operation, along with Thoren’s medical
reports, which were filed in Houston.

To sheriff’s men and to FBI officers,
the slowly shaping identification was
pointing toward Harold Leroy Brown,
convicted of the theft of the Pontiac now
known to have belonged to Thoren, as
a possible murder suspect.

There was still the Arizona bank rob-
bery angle to consider, however. And
there was no proof the man in the foot-
locker had been murdered. They still
had no established cause of death.

Another report from West Palm Beach
indicated the autopsy had revealed that
the unidentified man had died of natu-
ral causes. But District Attorney Pat
Hanagan of New Mexico told reporters
he understood this report came not from
the autopsy, but from a visual examina-
tion of the body when it was found.

If death really had been from natural
causes, law enforcement officers could
not charge Brown or anyone else with
murder. Furthermore, identification of

the body as Albin Thoren from the sur-
gical evidence was only indicative, not

at last a complete, modern guide to lasting
mutual sexual bappines for all couples

Illustrated
SEX FACTS

BY OR. A. WILLY,

Available
Je this
unt
for he
first time

ig THIS GIANT
SIZE BOOK CONTAINS
HUNDREDS OF AUTHENTIC,
ENLIGHTENING ILLUSTRATIONS
—many in life-like color.

organs of both male and female. Many troubled men and
women have found « new,-happy married sex life and new con-
fidence in themselves by reading “The Ilustrated Encyclo-
pedia of Sex.” Sells for $5.00 — but it is rs for the amazing
low friend-winning price of only $2.98. is offer good for
limited time only. Mail coupon NOW!

Partial List of 61 Big Chapters. Each 2 “Book” in Itself.

© Techniques that bring * Natural birth control
complete gratification to the » New discoveries in birth
sex act for male and female contro!

© What causes climax in * Woman's fertile deys
women * Causes of sex drive in women

© Blunders made by men in sex * Female frigidity, its causes
act. How to avoid them and cures

* Technique of first vex act on * Causes and cures for sexual
bridal night impotence in men

© Why women fails to attain * Abnormal sex organs and
climax what can be done

© Husband and wife attaining * How to correct male's
mutual climax premature climax

© How male organs function * Delaying sex life's finish
in intercourse © Male changes of life and its

® How female sex organs efiect
function in intercourse * Causes and trestment of

© How sexual urge in woman male and female sterility

© Feminine self-satisfaction

© Woman's perfect complete * Causes of sexual urge in mes
sexual satisfaction * How sex activity effects

© How to derive perfection in weight of male and female
sexual ect * How to use preparatory love

© Reactions of man and woman’ toward ter satisfaction
during sexual relations tai
Pa eysie ses Just » few of hundreds

aa) im of frank,
at improve sexual powers —ijiustrated instructions!

—_ List of IMestrations with Authentic Color Pictures!
* Mole Sex Organs * Cross i iymen
© Showing Aono of male in each sci 3
* Cross Section Showing
of Women's sexual ills
* Picture Story of norms!
Sexuslity in male

30x orgen

© Illustrating effects on breasts
after pregnancy

© Showing areas of woman's
organs producing highest "
sensstions * Picture Story of Woman's

© Watch step-by-step growth Sensstion Curve
of child in pregnancy * Picture Story of most

e pe plete Color Picture important cause of impotence
ety Women’s Sex * Two Inverts of Female

© Pi m lies showing how
eee = of Woman's pregnancy takes plece

* Picture Story of Cause of
Sterility in women

(ee et
$ "

END NO MONEY! FREE 10 DAY TRIAL COUPO!
} CADILLAC PUBLISHING, Dept. G-408
220 Fifth Avenue, New York 1, New York
Send me “The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Sex” in plain
ked “personal.” I will psy postman $2.98,
plus postage on delivery (sells for $5.00). If not com-

1 pletely delighted within 10 days, I can return book end
i my money will be refunded. I am over 23

NAME
Fy ADDRESS

ph ZONE — STATE

Check here if you with to save iy oe 5

i only $2.98. Same Money-Back r beso

L, ‘Canadian and Foreign Orders $3.50. No 0.0
= oe ow ow ae oe oe eee oe ae oe oe oe

é

re
L.

positive.

75

by Joseph Crane

SINISTER
‘| SECRET OF a eeoee a
| THE SHOTGUN WEDDING

They sought everywhere for the missing attorney until they
finally found him in Harrod’s Creek, under a concrete slab

*HONVEUVE

-s

* AS HE PICKED UP THE phone in the Louisville,
Kentucky, precinct house, the sergeant flinched at the
torrent of words that cascaded over the line. ;

“I want the cops,” the caller yelled. “They're beating’
a guy to death in an alley. They’re really working him
over. You'd better pet here fast!”

“Where are you?” demanded Sergeant A. J. Miller.
“In the alley off South Fourth Street—the 100 block-
next to the A & P.” 2
Miller hung up and spoke into the radio transmiitter.
A prowl car, cruising only a block away, heard the mes-,
sage and sped through the late afternoon traffic with
screaming siren. It swerved into the alley and squealed to
a stop. A sergeant and a patrolman jumped out.
They saw no one. The alley was completely deserted.
They ran into an areaway between the A. & P. and a ,
dairy firm. Still no one.
At that moment, an elderly man came running out ot’
the dairy. He peered along the alley, then seeing the offi-

To ‘seqtym ‘fey pue p.reuoey

Detectives weigh the concrete block used
to keep the body submerged in the creek.

Leonard and Roy Tarrance (left to right)
were among those quizzed in the mystery.

fe Fe
DETECTIVE CASES if § DETECTIVE CASES

JUNE, 1%.

*SS6T-gT-t Mi ae
(Aqunep woszesser) *AY peqnoo.rz499


Attorney Francis J. McCormack who disappeared.

Leonard Tarrance (back to camera) talks with officials.
Jigiese

cers, ran over to them.

“You're too late,” he gasped. “They’re gone.”

“Who's gone?” the sergeant demanded. “What’s all this
about and who are you?”

“I’m Henry Parsons.” The old man was gasping for
breath. “I work at the dairy. I came to the door for a smoke
a few minutes ago. There was a car parked in the alley, a
gray Chevrolet that was old but in good condition. Two
men were beating up another man alongside of it, slugging
the daylights out of him and trying to push him into the
back seat of the car. Blood trom his mouth was dripping

10

all over him. I ran to the phone in the dairy, but it’s at the
far end of the building and it took me a little while. I
just got back now.”

The officers looked atound the alley. They saw no evi-
dence of a fight. Questioning Parsons further, they smelled
liquor on his breath.

“Are you sure you didn’t invent all this?” the sergeant

_ demanded.

“I swear I didn’t. It happened right before my eyes!”

“What did the men look ike?” . pies
_ “The two from the car were both big, husky men, dressed
in khaki work clothes. One looked about 30 while the other

was older, maybe 50. The man they were beating up was '

wearing a business suit. He was carrying a bag of groceries,
but he dropped it when they started slugging him.”

“Where did he drop the groceries?”

“Right there.” Parsons pginted to a place in the alley.

The sergeant leaned over and picked up’ a short strip of .

~ adding machine tape. It bore the stamp of the A. & P. and
that day’s date—Thursday, February 28th. The strip listed
four items which totaled $1.43. :
The two officers questioned nearby merchants. A shoe
store owner who said he had been standing in his doorway

had seen no gray sedan and hadn’t noticed a business man ‘

with a bag of groceries.

“Lots of people who shop at the A. & P. use that alley
as a shortcut,” he said.

The officers visited the A. & P., but the cashiers could
not remember the sales slip.

They talked with Parsons’ employer at the dairy. He was
skeptical of the old man’s story. “We hire him to keep the
machinery clean,” he said. “He drinks a lot and goes
around in a fog half the time. Once he called the fire de-
partment here. He said he smelled smoke, but the firemen
couldn’t find anything wrong.”

Returning to the station, the officers talked with Sergeant
James Bibb of the Louisville Crime Prevention Bureau.

“Sounds to me like the delusions of an alcoholic,” Bibb
said. “Perhaps we should have him sent for psychiatric
examination.”

“Still, there was that sales slip in the alley,” the sergeant
reminded him, “though I suppose anyone could have drop-
ped it.” \

“Well, if we’re going to believe Parsons’ story at all,
then the business man must have been abducted in that
car,” Bibb said. “If he was, the chances are that someone
will report him missing. There’s not much we can do until
that happens.”

As a matter of routine, the case was turned over to De-
tective Lieutenant Charles Young, who talked with Parsons
but could get no further information out of him. Young
was inclined to believe the old man’s story, however.

HE next morning, a call came in from Mrs. Mary Mc-

Cormack. She reported that her husband, Francis J. Mc-
Cormack, 54, had not returnéd home the previous evening
and she had no idea where,he was.

McCormack, a Louisville attorney, lived on Garvin Place,
less than two blocks from the A. & P. In view of this, the
call was turned over to Lieutenant Young. The detective
asked for a description of the missing man.

He was about six feet one, well built and quite a hand-
some man, the wife said. He had been wearing a conserva-
tive gray business suit. He never stayed away overnight
without letting his wife know.

Questioning revealed that occasionally the lawyer had
stopped off at the A. & P. to do some shopping. As a matter
of fact, he had been supposed to stop off there the day
before, on his way home.

He had a list of purchases which he had promised to
make at the store. The list included Postum, a can of pears,
bread, and milk.

As Young reconstructed it, the attorney had apparently
been forced into a car near the store. What had happened
to him since could only be a matter of conjecture. His ab-
sence was disquieting. ; “ee

The officer asked some more questions about enemies in
the lawyer’s life. Seemingly, he had received no threats re-

DETECTIVE CASES

Tete,

Ca ule

CD ge ot regaled

TREES TE

-

cently, and hadn't been carrying more than a few dollars
on him.

He had been wearing a rather valuable watch, though, a
new, thin silver Elgin. This, if it had been stolen could
possibly be traced.

Young notified pawnshops to be on the lookout for the
watch. Then he and Sergeant Miller went to the A. & P.
and priced the four items Mrs. McCormack had mentioned.
They found that the prices were identical with those printed
on the sales slip.

Young was now convinced that the dairy worker had
been telling the truth and that McCormack had been the

DETECTIVE CASES

victim of foul play. He sent out a statewide alarm alerting ©

police to watch for him and his captors in an old gray -

sedan.

On the theory that the lawyer had been kidnaped and
was being held for ransom, he alsg notified the FBI.

Then he and Miller visited McCormack’s office and spoke
with his law partner.

“McCormack is pretty well fixed financially,” the man told
them. His wife has money, too. I think there’s a good
chance he was kidnaped and we'll be hearing from the
kidnapers.”

“How about revenge?” Young asked. “Has he made any
enemies lately in the course of his profession?”

The lawyer hesitated. “In a way, a lawyer always makes an

enemy if he loses a case for a client. But most of Mac’s
cases were divorce actions and petty civil suits. I can’t think
of anybody who'd want to beat him up, but let’s take a
look in his files.” He turned to a filing cabinet.

“Those two men may have been hired by someone else,”
Young suggested.

The lawyer leafed through the file folders, opening some
of them to read McCormack’s briefs and memoranda. After
consideration, he withdrew two folders.

“Might be something in one of these cases,” he said.
“Last month Mac defended a local dentist in a Suit against
August Meyer, a wealthy man, though a notorious miser.
Meyer was riding with the dentist in his car when the car
was struck by a truck. Meyer sued the dentist for $50,000,
claiming permanent back injuries. He was broyght into court
in a wheel chair.

“Mac handled the case so well that the dentist was ab-
solved of all responsibility. Meyer was so furious that when
he saw Mac in the corridor after the trial he jumped out
of his wheel chair and started to sail into him with both
fists. His own lawyer had all he could do to get him back
into that chair.”

Lieutenant Young jotted down August Meyer's address,
while the lawyer looked at the other folder. “This second
case,” he said, “involves a shotgun marriage.”

About two years ago, the parents of a 16-year-old high
school girl who had just given birth to a baby brought a
charge of seduction against (Continued on page 61)

1

”

T
')

74

Horror at
Harrods Creek

(Continued from page 27)

it was not until January that he was re-
turned to the army stockade to await a
court-martial.

In the meantime, his allotments
had ceased. In January, he was charged
in a civilian court in Louisville with child
desertion, and this case was pending. On
Mebruary 12th, Tarrence had again gone
AWOL, and he was still at large.

“His wife finally gave up hope of get-
ting him to provide for the little boy,”
McCormack’s secretary said. “Only last
Monday, she instructed Mr. McCormack to
begin divorce proceedings at once.”

The coincidence of Roy Tarrence’s license
number having been reported on the au-
tomobile in which Francis McCormack was
forcibly kidnaped, and a direct connection
between the Tarrence family and the miss-
ing lawyer was almost enough, Lieutenant
Young felt, to warrant an arrest.

“But we’d better make sure,” he said.
“Check the father’s alibi for Thursday aft-
ernoon. And, above all, find the son, or
(ind out where he’s been since he skipped
from Fort Knox a couple of weeks ago.”

With the cooperation of detectives under
Jefferson County Police Chief Walter
Layton, the Louisville homicide men went
to work. Although the county officers
could not substantiate or break down Roy
‘Tarrence’s claim that he had been driving
around Oldham County looking for a fish-
ing companion at the time of McCormack’s
abduction, they did learn from a_ store-
keeper in the Floyds Fork region, several
miles south of Jeffersontown, that the dis-
(iMery worker had been there on Thursday
ufternoon. However, the merchant could
not remember the exact time.

Roy Tarrence himself was picked up
and brought to headquarters in Louisville.
‘here he was paraded in a police line-up
before the five witnesses to the struggle in
the alley. None recognized Roy Tarrence
us one of the kidnapers,

“I’m not your man,” he solemnly as-
sured the police. “There wasn’t any rea-
son for me or Leonard to hurt Mr. McCor-
mack. We never even saw him, except in
court.”

Detectives Arthur Wallmeyer and Tom
Burch called again at the Tarrence home
in Jeffersontown, asking about Leonard.

“Leonard isn’t here,” his mother said.

“You mind if we come in and look?”
Burch asked.

“I do, unless you got a search warrant.
I said he isn’t here. Anyhow, Leonard had
no call to harm that lawyer.”

“McCormack was going to sue for a
divorce,” the detective said, ‘That could
have been a reason for your son to be angry
with him.”

“No, it couldn’t.”. Mary Bixler spoke
up firmly, “A divorce was just what Leon-
urd--what we both--wanted, Leonard and
me, well, we’ve been in love a long time.
Even before he—he had to marry that
yirl, T.conard’s the daddy of my little
baby girl. Don't you see, he wanted that
divorce, so he could marry me.”

“Tf all this is true,” Wallmeyer said,
“the smartest thing he could do would be
to come in and clear himself.”

“And go back to the army stockade?” the
girl cried. “He hates the army. He got
sick on the food. That’s why he lit out
last summer. Now they’ll put him in
jail.”

“There could be worse things,” Wall-

meyer said. ‘The electric chair, for one.”

Lieutenant Young was puzzled by his
detectives’ reports. It was possible, he
had to grant, that in excitedly scanning the
license plate on the kidnaper’s sedan, Carl
Seeders had misread the 6-digit number.
However, it was stretching coincidence
to believe that Seeders accidentally had
hit upon a number ‘issued to a man whose
family had a direct—and perhaps unpleas-
ant—connection with the vicitm.

Still, witnesses had been unable to
identify Roy Tarrence as one of the two
kidnapers. An alibi of sorts had been
established for both Roy and his son. And
the most plausible motive for Leonard's
seeking to harm McCormack was elimi-
nated, if Mary Bixler’s contention that
Leonard wanted a divorce were truce. Young
believed that it was. Obviously Leonard
Tarrence had not been happy with his
wife, and just as obviously he was in love
with Mary.

There were other baffling contradic-
tions in the case. The suspicious odor of
gasoline on the upholstery of the Tarrence
sedan seemed less important when ac-
quaintances of Roy backed up his wife’s
statement that the distillery worker was
almost continually working on and clean-
ing the old automobile.

Moreover, if Roy Tarrence himself had
not been driving the car--and his clearance
in the line-up indicated that he had not
been at the scene of the attack—it was
unlikely that his machine was involved,
for the father said he did not permit Leon-
ard to use the sedan, When it was sug-
vested to Tarrence that he had loaned the
cur to someone outside the family, he re-
torted hotly, “Not on your life! That old
buggy’s just like a friend to me. Nobody
touches her except me.”

“How about the other angles to this case?”
Young wanted to know of Sergeant Miller.

VOLUNTARY DEMOTION

It is not unusual for any man to
seek a promotion, but it is unusual
for one to request a demotion.

Such is the case with a Knoxville,
Tennessee, traffic sergeant. He told
the Safety Director, "My reason for
wanting the demotion is that | feel
the itetinas in pay, 17 cents per day,
is insufficient compensation for the re-
sponsibilities that a sergeant must
assume.”

—Dennis Martell

“Maybe this Tarrence lead has blinded us
to them.”

“Nothing from the pawnshops yet on
McCormack's) watch,” the sergeant an-
swered. “And Mike O'Shiel, well, he’s ap-
parently off on a bat somewhere. He hasn’t
been home since Tuesday. Incidentally, I
suppose you know that McCormack was
fairly prominent in Catholic activities. Any
chance he crossed up someone in the Ku
Klux Klan?”

Miller’s question was not too far-fetched,
us Lieutenant Young well knew. In re-
vent months, all over the South, the Klan
had become a resurgent force, recruited
largely from an unwholesome element in
each community, and had embarked upon
a campaign of terror to enforce its own
concept of order by brutalities. In North
Carolina, the FBI had been brought in to
crack down on one group of Klansmen for
kidnapings and floggings.

“We'll keep that in mind,” Young said.
“Hunt down this Mike O’Shiel. And Ill
put out an alarm on Leonard Tarrence. If
the latter has enough sense to pour water
out of a boot without reading the instruc-

tions on the heel, he’ll come in with his
story when he knows we want to see him.”

By Saturday, with no message received
from the attorney’s abductors, the police
were certain that McCormack had not been
kidnaped for ransom. They were equally
certain now that he had been slain by the
two men who had carried him off in a
gray Chevrolet sedan two days earlier.

“There’d be no reason for his being held
alive this long,” Young said.

On Saturday afternoon the police got
a lead on Leonard Tarrence. He and his
father had shown up early that morning
ut Harrods Creck, a few miles northeast
of Louisville.

A resident along the creek had_ seen
them. He knew the Tarrences because
they frequently visited the spot on fish-
ing trips.

When he saw them they were carrying
a brown paper bag which they said held
garbage they meant to dispose of. After-
ward, they added, they were going fishing.
Leonard and his dad remained in the
vicinity for more than two hours, then
drove away.

“Young Tarrence knows by now, sure
enough, that we want to talk with him,”
Sergeant Miller said. “I guess maybe we'd
better fetch him in, if he won't come of his
own accord,”

County Detectives Robert Francis and
Charles Peyton went to Jeffersontown, this
time with a search warrant, but Leonard
was not at home. He had shown up very
early Saturday morning, had gone up to
Harrods Creek with his dad, then had gone
nway again after the return to Jefferson-
town,

City, county and state police searched
for the young man over the week end. He
was reported to have been seen in sev-
eral places, but was not found.

On Monday, through an attorney who had
handled other matters for the Tarrence
family, Leonard surrendered himself to
Criminal Court Judge Loraine Mix,

“I’m innocent,” the husky young man
said earnestly. “I hope Mr. McCormack
will return, so everything will be cleared

up. I never had any bad feeling toward
him. Everything was settled in court
with my agreement. Anyway, I wasn't

near Louisville last Thursday afternoon.”

But when he was placed in the police
lne-up, all five witnesses to the slugging
and abduction of McCormack said he
strongly resembled one of the lawyer's
assailants,

“It has to be a case of mistaken identity,”
Leonard Tarrence protested. “Why would
I do it? Why?”

The motive, if Leonard was guilty, was
puzzling. Both Lieutenant Young and
Commonwealth’s Attorney A. Scott Hamil-
ton admitted as much. However, they
had to respect the identification of the wit-
nesses.

Young Tarrence was held on a temporary
charge of malicious striking and kidnap-
ing, while the city and county detectives
pressed their investigation.

Mike O’Shiel, the flery Irishman who
once had threatened to break McCormack's
neck, was found in a cheap hotel at the
end of a whopping Jag. Within an hour
the cops had learned that when McCor-
mack was pummeled and abducted, O’Shiel
was roaring with Irish patriotism in a West
Chestnut Street tavern,

On Tuesday, with Leonard Tarrence still
insistent that he knew nothing of Mc-
Cormack’s fate, searching parties began
to hunt for the missing attorney's body.

Coast Guardmen under Chief Boats-
wain’s Mate Claude Albright took boats
up the Ohio River into Harrods Creek, near
where the Tarrences had appeared on
Saturday. They dragged the creek, in
which there were numerous holes as deep

as 30 feet, but they

Meanwhile, other se
farm of Leonard's unc
below Jeffersontown.
the 32-acre property
pond on an = adjoini:
efforts were fruitless

The police continues
rences, and to canva:
area for witnesses w
alibis set up by the fa

Leonard maintained
all day on February :
to go out anywhere,
could tell when some
would be nosing aro
to go back there.
sick on the food on
figuring on shipping
didn’t want that.”

The first crack in
by father and son cz
boy in Jeffersontown.
that at about 3 o’clo
of February 28th he
Leonard drive out o
direction of Louisvill

The boy was posit
tities of the two me:
rolet sedan, having k
his life.

On the strength
Roy Tarrence was a
with malicious strikin

“I'm not guilty,” th
“Me and my boy ar
Heaven knows that
I never had any wor
one another.”

This was on Wedne:
rence at first offered,
tuke a lie detector tes
agree to submit to eit
to a truth serum te
balked at the truth ser
one fellow I heard at

On Friday, with bot
xtanding questioning,
ease, They are permi
the Lindbergh Act, 7
duction, whether or n
dence of an interstat:

That night Prosec
Lieutenant Young 1
rence with some forr

“Witnesses have ic
of the kidnapers,” Ha
man, “Your father's
on the car in which
bly taken away. = 1
conviction under the 1
especially since we'v
wide open. And the}
under the Lindbergh
chair. We don't hav
We don’t have to pro

On Saturday morn
broke down, “Let 1
beyged Sheriff Berna
me talk to him, I'll gi
Bax shook his hea
one before,” he said.
“Okay, then,” Leo
Judge Mix and Mr. }
get this off my mind.’
Young Tarrence tr
the prosecutor for a
of the chair, in retu:
of the crime.

“I can guarantee yc
answered. “If you c«
yourself at the mercy

Leonard blinked, :
began his story.

On the Thursday a
28th, he related, he
into Louisville to vi
they drove up Fou:
McCormack enter a

“We pulled into the
him to come out,”


40 Ky.
performed and in which the license for the
marriage was issued; d further that,
since the Simpson CjrCuit Court has juris-
diction of the,Subject matter, service
through a fing order attorney is suffi-
cient.

e think the opinion in the case ‘éf Gayle
v. Gayle, 301 Ky. 613, 192 S.W.2d
controlling here. In that case t
ment action was instituted b

a nonresident.
constructive s

Ction, nor had he entered his appearance
in the action. Mrs. Prothro was before the
California court. The question she raised
in her annulment proceeding in
County could have been raised
fornia court.

Judgment reversed h directions to set
it aside, and for she entry of a judgment
consistent withhis opinion.

TARRENCE v. COMMONWEALTH.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.
Dec. 18, 1953.

Rehearing Denied March 19, 1954.

Defendant was convicted of murder.
The Circuit Court, Criminal Division, Jef-
ferson County, L. R. Curtis, J., rendered
judgment imposing the death sentence, and
defendant appealed. The Court of Appeals,
Stanley, C., held that the record was free
of any material error and disclosed that
defendant had received a fair trial.

Judgment affirmed.
See also 265 S.W.2d 52,

265 SOUTH WESTERN REPORTER, 2d SERIES

{. Indictment and Information €>146

A demurrer to the indictment reaches
only a defect appearing on the face of in-
dictment.

2. Indictment and Information €>10

Regularity in proceedings of grand
jury resulting in an indictment is to be pre-
sumed.

3. Indictment and Information €=147

Indictment was not demurrable on
ground that when it was returned, grand
jury had been in session for nine days
without an order of court ‘extending the

_ period beyond six days as required by stat-

ute, since record did not show that grand
jury had been in session continuously every
day during first week after being impaneled
nor that no order had been made extending
the period. KRS 29.240.

4 Criminal Law €>137

A motion for change of venue must
be determined on facts of the particular
case.

5. Criminal Law €>121, 1150

A motion for change of venue is ad-
dressed to the sound judicial discretion of
trial judge and on review it must be shown
that such discretion was not justly and
properly exercised under the circumstances.

6. Criminal Law €=1166(7)

Denial of motion for change of venue
will not authorize a reversal of conviction
where it appears from the record as a
whole that a fair and impartial trial was
given defendant by the jury chosen.

7. Criminal Law @>126(2)

Where county in which homicide was
committed had a population of approxi-
mately 500,000 and a large reservoir of
qualified jurors, denial of motion for
change of venue was not abuse of discre-
tion, despite newspaper and radio publicity
concerning homicide and subsequent events.

boxes

a

TARRENCE v. COMMONWEALTH Ky. 41
Cite as, Ky., 265 8.W.2d 40

8. Criminal Law @€=577

An accused person and his attorney
should have full opportunity to prepare
adequately for trial and defense attorneys
who contribute their services without com-
pensation under appointment of the court
are often entitled to greater consideration.

9. Criminal Law €=917(1)

Where it appears during course of trial
that denial of a continuance was unjust or
had prejudicial results, the error should be
corrected by granting a new trial,

10. Criminal Law 1 166(7)

Denial of a continuance in prosecution
for murder was not prejudicial error,
though trial began only nine days after ad-
verse rulings on demurrer to indictment
and motion for change of venue, in ab-
sence of showing that defendant was de-
prived of testimony of any material witness,
that other evidence in his behalf might have
been available, or that defense attorneys ap-
pointed by court-could have made a better
defense had further time been granted.

{1. Criminal Law @=1166!(5)

A substantial deviation from the pro-
cedural steps prescribed by statute for
drawing jury panel constitutes prejudicial
error, KRS 29.080, 29.130, 29.140, 29.180.

12. Criminal Law 1 166!/(5)

That judge, in process of drawing
names from wheel for jury panel, permits
a deputy clerk to take down the names
drawn is not prejudicial to defendant, pro-
vided such names are not otherwise di-
vulged, particularly in the Jefferson Cir-
cuit Court, in which the statute places the
duty upon a clerk or official stenographer
under direction of the court to prepare a
record of the drawing of jury panel with
a provision for secrecy. KRS 29.130(3),
29.140(2) (b).

13. Criminal Law @>1142

Statement put into record by trial
court in prosecution for murder to the ef-
fect that the jurors had been selected ac-

265 S.W.2d—3%

cording to statutory directions, supported
by presumption of regularity, must be
accepted as revealing the facts on appeal
from conviction. KRS 29.080, 29.130, 29.-
140, 29.180.

14. Jury €=70(8)

Statutory requirement that list of

Ej

names drawn for jury panel be put in a *

sealed envelope does not apply to a special-

ly drawn panel. KRS 29.080, 29.130, 29.- m
140, 29.180. —

15. Jury €-70(8)

¥
i

Statutory requirement that members @

must be selected from jury panel by lot to O

fill jury box for examination relates only
to a regular panel and does not apply to

selection of a special venire. KRS 29.- Q,
bd

250, 29.260, 29.280,

16. Jury €>79(2) I

*

Where record on appeal from convic- 4
tion of murder in Jefferson Circuit Court ©
contained statement of trial court to effect © sea

that jurors had been selected according to

statutory directions and testimony of deputy ©
clerk that in selecting members from regu- Pe
lar panel to fill jury box for examination, @

names had been drawn by lot, overruling ®
challenge to jury panel was not error,

though order in which members of specialeg

panel were called to jury box was not de- ®
termined by lot. KRS 29.080, 29.130, 29.- vy
140, 29.180, 29.250, 29.260, 29.280.

17. Jury €=126 ti
: ty

Exemption from jury service is not a ©
cause for challenge to prospective juror en- Hy

titled to such exemption. Cr.Code Prac. @
§ 211. i‘
18. Jury €72(3), 131(2) s

Trial court has a large measure of dis- Q

cretion in exercising its power to examincO

and to exclude talesmen in a criminal case.°

19. Jury €=75(5) lo a

Trial court may properly advise per-,!

sons exempt from jury service of theirgo

right to be excused if they desire.

*SS6T-

Pe vere ey pee a

’

. 42 Ky.

20. Jury €>131(10)

In prosecution for murder, trial court,
during voir dire examination of prospective
jurors, properly advised the several women
that they were exempt from jury service.
KRS 29.030(1)(m).

21. Jury €>108

Prospective jurors, whose voir dire
examination disclosed such a conscientious
attitude as would have influenced their con-
sideration of the evidence in prosecution
for murder or precluded a verdict of death
in any case, were properly excused upon
challenge for cause. Cr.Code Prac. § 210,
subd. 7.

22. Jury €=85

Trial court has a broad discretion in
determining the qualification of a juror
from his entire voir dire examination.

23. Jury €131(4)

Where record disclosed that a liberal
examination of prospective jurors on voir
dire was permitted, trial court was not un-
fair in not allowing defense counsel to
question prospective jurors more thorough-

ly.
24. Homicide €>167(8)

In prosecution for homicide, the Com-
monwealth may show that defendant had
in his possession at time of the killing a
weapon which could have caused the death
and it is not necessary to prove that the in-
struments introduced in evidence were in
fact used,

25. Criminal Law €>404(4)

A weapon or tool found at a time and
place furnishing reasonable ground to con-
nect it in some way with homicide is ad-
missible in evidence without positive proof
of the connection, provided an inference as
to such connection may reasonably be
drawn from its nearness in time and place
or other circumstances.

26. Criminal Law ¢=404(4)

A tire tool and wire cutters found in
defendant’s automobile, in which victim of

265 SOUTH WESTERN REPORTER, 2d SERIES

homicide, who had been struck several times
on the head with a blunt instrument and
tied up with wire, had admittedly been
transported after assault, were admissible in
evidence in prosecution for murder,

27. Homicide €>158(1)

Testimony that three or fotir weeks be-
fore homicide defendant had told witness,
without mentioning victim’s name, that
some one should knock him in the head and
throw him in creek was admissible in prose-
cution for murder as showing motive and
malice.

28. Criminal Law €=824(8)

Right to admonition in prosecution for
murder that testimony as to threat allegedly
made by defendant several weeks before
homicide was admitted only to show motive
or intent and was not of itself sufficient to
establish guilt was waived by failure to re-
quest such admonition.

29. Witnesses €=269(7), 277(4)

Cross-examination of defendant and
his son in prosecution for murder for
the purpose of showing deliberate prepara-
tion for cruel treatment and killing of
victim was proper, where such questioning
was based on admissions and confessions of
the witnesses, which they had denied on
direct examination, since development of
the details sought would have been res
gestae and competent.

30. Criminal Law €=338(7)

In prosecution for murder, admitting
testimony concerning the finding and
raising of victim’s body from creek was not
error, where such testimony was kept well
within trial court’s admonition to avoid de-
tails which might be of a gruesome nature.

31. Criminal Law >1166!/2(12)

Remark by trial court in prosecution
for murder that defendant’s statement that
his son, a soldier, had just returned from
Korea to attend trial had nothing to do
with the case did not constitute prejudicial
error, though victim’s widow had been per-
mitted to testify without objection concern-

qq

TARRENCE v. COMMONWEALTH Ky. 43
Cite as, Ky., 265 S.W.2d 40

ing victim’s family, including fact that a
son was in the air corps and confined to a
hospital.

32. Criminal Law €=683(!)

Where defendant and son testified in
prosecution for murder that defendant did
not participate in first assault on victim,
testimony describing violent character of
assault and showing that it was cimnmitted
by both men was competent in rebuttal,
though it was more detailed than testimony
originally introduced and might well have
been presented as direct proof.

33. False imprisonment €=43

Abduction in the broad sense of carry-
ing a person away wrongfully is the most
aggravated species of “false imprisonment”
included within the statute making it a fel-
ony to arrest or imprison another otherwise
than according to law, but under circum-
stances not constituting kidnaping and hold-
ing for ramsom. KRS 435.150.

See publication Words and Phrases,
for other judicial constructions and defi-
nitions of “False Imprisonment”,

34. Homicide @=29, 146

Where a homicide is committed while
committing or attempting to commit some
other felony, malice may be implied or in-
ferred, though accused in fact had no in-
tention to kill, and all who participated in
such other felony are equally guilty of the
homicide, though the killing was actually
done by only one.

35. Homicide €>289

Where prosecution for murder is predi-
cated on a homicide committed while com-
mitting or attempting to commit some other
felony, instruction defining the law ap-
plicable to such a state of facts may proper-
ly define and explain the other offense in-
volved.

36. Homicide €=340(3)

Instructing jury in prosecution for
murder that if defendant alone or jointly
with his son was engaged in committing
felony of false arrest or false imprison-

ment of victim at time of assault, such cir-
cumstance would constitute malice and then
defining false arrest or false imprisonment,
was more favorable to defendant than au-
thorized instruction that if accused, in com-
mitting or attempting to commit another
felony, kills a person, he should be found

guilty of murder, and was not prejudicial to
defendant.

37. Homicide €>43

To reduce homicide to voluntary man-
slaughter on ground that it was committed
in heat of passion, such passion must have
been engendered by such provocation as
would naturally overcome and suspend the
self-control of a person of fair, ordinary
and average disposition or will power or
cause such a person to act rashly or without
due deliberation or reflection.

38. Homicide €=>282

The adequacy or reasonableness of the
provocation to reduce a homicide to vol-
untary manslaughter is usually a question
for jury, but whether certain undisputed
facts constitute legal provocation is a mat-
ter of law for trial judge.

39. Homicide @=45

To reduce homicide to voluntary man-
slaughter, the “provocation” must be sub-
stantial in nature and not merely slight, and
while extremely harsh, abusive or grossly
insulting language may constitute lawful
Provocation, mere words of reproach or
gestures, though insulting, or threats when
unaccompanied by assault, are inadequate
to reduce murder to manslaughter.

See publication Words and Phrases,
for other judicial constructions and defi-
nitions of “Provocation”,

40. Homicide @>45

Threats by attorney to send defendant’s
son, who was absent from the army without
leave and had failed to comply with order
of court for support of minor child, to the
penitentiary or to Korea did not constitute
substantial “provocation” sufficient to re-
duce homicide of attorney to voluntary
manslaughter.

coin with his
it to see him.”
sage received
rs, the police
had not been
were equally
1 slain by the
him off in a
ays earlier,

mis being held

ie police got

He and his
that morning
iles northeast

wk had seen
‘nees because
spot on fish-

were carrying
hey said held
ose of. After-
going fishing.
ained in’ the
o hours, then

by now, sure
dk with him,”
ss maybe we'd
vt come of his

Francis and
‘rsontown, this
. but Leonard
shown up very
id gone up to
then had gone
1 to Jefferson-

olice searched
week end, He
1 seen in sev-
und.

orney who had
the Tarrence
ed himself to
ne Mix.

cy young man
Ir. McCormack
will be cleared
feeling toward
ttled in = court
way, I wasn't
lay afternoon.”
i in the police
to the slugging
mack said he
{ the lawyer's

taken identity,”
i, “Why would

vas guilty, was

t Young and
A. Scott Hamil-
However, they

tion of the wit-

on a temporary
ig and kidnap-
sunty detectives

Irishman who
ik McCormack’s
ap hotel at the
Within an hour
t when McCor-
oducted, O'Shiel
iotism in a West

cd Tarrence still
1othing of Me-

parties began
attorney’s body.
r Chief Boats-
ight took boats
rods Creek, near
d appeared on

the creek, in
if holes ar deep

as 30 feet, but they brought up nothing.

Meanwhile, other searchers went to the
farm of Leonard’s uncle, a couple of miles
below Jeffersontown, They tramped over
the $2-ncre property und dragged a deep
pond on an adjoining farm, but their
efforts were fruitless.

The police continued to question the Tar-
reneces, and to canvass the Jeffersontown
area for witnesses who might refute the
alibis set up by the father and son.

Leonard maintained that he was at home
all day on February 28th, "TP didn’t want
to wo out anywhere,” he sald. “lo never
could tell when some guy from Fort Knox

would be nosing around. I didn’t want
to yo back there, My back hurt. 1 yot
sick on the food once. And they were

figuring on shipping me out to Korea. I
didn’t want that.”

The first crack in the defenses set up
by father and son came from a teen-age
boy in Jeffersontown. He told the police
that at about 3 o’clock on the afternoon
of February 28th he had seen Roy and
Leonurd drive out of the village in the
direction of Louisville.

The boy was positive about the iden-
tities of the two men in the gray Chev-
rolet sedan, having known them both all
his life.

On the strength of this
Roy Tarrence was arrested
with malicious striking.

“I’m not guilty,” the older man vowed.
“Me and my boy are innocent. God in
Heaven knows that Mr. McCormack and
I never had any words or falling out with
one another.”

This was on Wednesday night. Roy Tar-
rence at first offered, and then refused, to
tuke a ie detector test. Leonard would not
agree to submit to either a lie detector or
to a truth serum test. The father also
balked at the truth serum. “It almost killed
one fellow I heard about,” he said.

On Friday, with both suspects still with-
standing questioning, the FBI entered the
case. They are permitted to do this, under
the Lindbergh Act, 7 days after any ab-
duction, whether or not there is direct evi-

information,
and charged

dence of an interstate violation.

That night Prosecutor Hamilton and
Lieutenant Young faced Leonard Tar-
rence with some formidable facts.

“Witnesses have identified you as one

of the kidnapers,” Hamilton told the young
man, “Your father’s license number was
on the car in which McCormack was forci-
bly taken away. That’s enough for a
conviction under the federal kidnaping law,
especially since we’ve blasted your alibi
wide open. And the penalty for kidnaping,
under the Lindbergh Act, is the electric
chair. We don’t have to prove murder,
We don’t have to produce a body.”

On Saturday morning, the young man
broke down. “Let me see my dad,” he
begged Sheriff Bernard Bax. “If you let
me talk to him, I'll give you a confession.”

Bax shook his head. “I’ve heard that
one before,” he said.

“Okay, then,” Leonard said.
Judge Mix and Mr. Hamilton.
get this off my mind.”

Young Tarrence tried to bargain with
the prosecutor for a life sentence, instead
of the chair, in return for a full account
of the crime.

“I can guarantee you nothing,” Hamilton
answered. “If you confess, you're putting
yourself at the mercy of God Almighty.”

Leonard blinked, swallowed hard, and
began his story.

On the Thursday afternoon of February
28th, he related, he rode with his father
into Louisville to visit a junk yard. As
they drove up Fourth Street they saw
McCormack enter a grocery.

“We pulled into the alley and waited for
sound, Clee wensereet oteverty sedel

“Call in
I want to

ys en

: sy Beng \J

1 USED in hospitals for Athe
* lete’s Foot. ‘TING has only

snonthn, you...

Be A A wl |
Fe ie 5
y / we
ot Ee i AS

3 IN LAB TESTS sensational
* TING has proved effective

on. 60 second contact!

Copr. 1961, Pharma Craft Corp.

Why more and more people

“TING for FOOT ITC

The amazing story of a new “dry” treatment
for itchy, peeling toes or Athlete’s Foot!

2 TODAY THOUSANDS USE
© TING! Guaranteed TING

heen released nationally a few muat satisfy you in one week—
or monyy back! It's groaseloss,
stainless!

4 APPLIED REGULARLY, TING
> I *helps relieve itching and
in killing specific types of fungi burning of cracked, peelin
toes, aids healing amazingly

- Even if other products have failed, try TING today! Easily applied as
a cream, TING dries in seconds fo a fine powder, Fungicidal. Germ-
icidal. A real treatment for Foot Itch or Athlete's Foot! All druggists.

ONLY 60¢

LARGE ECONOMY SIZE $1.00

“When he walked up the alley, we hit him
with our fists and shoved him into the
car.

“Then we started driving.
back seat with McCormack. We came to
one dead-end street after another. I
thought the police were yoing to catch
us sure before we got out of there.

“Finally we decided to take him up to
Harrods Creek. We got there about dark,
We parked and = walked McCormack
through a field—he was conscious then—
toward the fishing cabin.

“He said, ‘Do whatever you’re going to do
with me and get it over with. We walked
him down the bank to the boat landing.
I hit him again with my fists. When I’m in
a fight I never use anything but my fists.
Dad picked up something and hit him on
the head.

“He fell down. We went up near the road
and found a concrete slab and some barbed
wire. We put the slab on his stomach,
tied it there with the wire, and shoved
him into the creek.”

Young Tarrence guided a party of officers
and Coast Guardmen to the creek and
pointed out the exact spot where he said
he and his father had disposed of the body.
And in a short time it was fished up out of
15 feet of water.

The lawyer’s billfold, watch and papers
were in his pockets. An autopsy showed
that his skull had been fractured from
blows with a heavy instrument,

Both suspects were sober when they
slugged McCormack and dumped him into
Harrods Creek, the son said. “Neither one
of us drink,” he told Lieutenant Young.

The son’s confession took Roy Tarrence
by surprise. He made no forma) state-
ment himself about the crime, but when he
was brought face to face with Leonard he
said, “Son, we made a mistake—about as
big a idelakhe ae we could have made, 1

I was in the

don’t know why we did a thing like that.”

It was Leonard who supplied the motive
for the killing.

“I was after McCormack to get a divorce
for my wife,” he said. “He promised he
would do it, but then he didn’t. I hate
a damned liar.” He went on to relate that
McCormack had represented his wife at the
time she charged him with seduction. The
attorney had promised him, he said, that
a divorce action would be started after
he went through with the marriage.

It was bitter irony, young Tarrence
learned, that he and his father set upon
McCormack when they did. Within a few
days, Leonard would have learned that
McCormack was, indeed, going ahead with
the divorce action, which would have left
him free to wed Mary Bixler, his child-
hood sweetheart.

Sheritr Bax filed murder affidavits against
the father and son. On Wednesday, March
12th, the grand jury voted indictments
against the pair, charging first-degree mur-
der. Prosecutor Hamilton announced that
he would seek the death penalty for both
men.

Although pleas of not guilty were en-
tered for Leonard and Roy Tarrence when
they were arraigned before Criminal Court
Judge L. R. Curtis, the father sobbed quiet-
ly, “I’m guilty! I’m guilty!”

On April 2nd Roy Tarrence was convicted
of first-degree murder and sentenced to die
in the electric chair. Leonard Tarrence will
stand trial later.

Epiror’s Nore:

The names Mary Bixler and Mike
O’Shiel, as used in the foregoing story,
are not the real names of the persons
concerned. These persons have been
given fictitious names in order to pro-
tect their identities,


KENTUCKY REPORTS. [Vol. 196.
monwealth, 86 Ky. 110; Brown v. Commonwealth, 14
Bush 398. The new witnesses concur in deposing that
they will state that they have often seen the accused un-
der the influence of intoxicating liquors, but some of
them depose that they have been acquainted with him
for as long as forty years, and to see one intoxicated,
even many times, during such a period, would not be
any evidence that he had from such cause become in-
sane. All authorities are agreed that voluntary drunk-
enness or a temporary insanity produced by voluntary
drunkenness is not an excuse for crime, nor under our
system a mitigation of it, for otherwise it would be with-
in the power of every criminal to make himself immune
from punishment by becoming drunk when he intends
to commit a crime. The existence of drunkenness when
a homicide is committed is competent evidence to be
heard by the jury to determine whether the act was or
was not malicious, but it does not mitigate the crime, ex-
cept to the extent that it may mitigate the punishment
by showing that the crime was committed without ma-
licious intent. Tyra v. Commonwealth, 2 Met. 1; Shan-
nahan v. Commonwealth, 8 Bush 463; Montgomery v.
Com’Ith, 88 Ky. 509. Neither of these new witnesses
was present or pretends to know the condition of mind
of the accused when the homicide was committed. Tf
the accused was permanently insane from the use of
intoxicants, it would demonstrate itself by his acts and
conduct and appearance, as well when sober as when
drunk. The expert witness whose affidavit was filed,
examined the aceused about three months after the
homicide, and deposes that in his opinion he was then of
unsound mind, from a form of insanity known as senile
dementia, and from the effects of which the accused
would regard the commission of a heinous crime as jus-
tifiable, beeause of a faulty imagination. He does not
however, state, that such was the condition of mind of
the accused at the time of the homicide, nor does he
State any fact from which it may be inferred that his
opinion was that he was unable to discriminate between
right and wrong, or that his will power was insuliicient
to control his actions at the time of the homicide. The
Commonwealth in rebuttal of the affidavits filed by ac-
cused, filed the affidavits of several witnesses, including
the family physician of accused, who deposed that they
had known and been associated with him for many years
and that they had never observed that he was addicted

ee
Br i a
2
ise
ee
:
hie

3
¢

ee } iets Beak NGS ae ee ie ee Prey ntl

fe

enh enka TAGE

. a ays

Thomas v. Commonwealth. 549

to the use of intoxicating liquors, and several of them
depose that they never saw him at any time under the
influence of such hquors, from which it may be inferred,
at least, that his habit of intoxication was not contin-
uous, but was indulged only upon occasions. As herore
stated, the testimony of all those Who were present
at the time of the homicide, or saw the accused im-
mediately before or after it, depose that he was not
drunk nor under the influence of intoxicants to any ap-
preciable extent. It must be borne in mind that to ex-
euse a homicide on the ground of insanity, the evidence
must be such as to establish the fact that the accused was
without sufficient reason at the time to know what he
was doing, or to know right from wrong, or that as a
result of mental disease he did not, at the time of the
homicide, have sufficient power of will to control his
tions, and was moved by an insane impulse vi hich 1e
could not resist. Graham v. Commonwealth, 16 B. M.
587; Shannahan v. Commonwealth, supra; | arris  V.
Commonwealth, § K. L. R. 417; Montgomery v. Comi-
monwealth, supra; Seott v. Commonwealth, 4 Met. .227;
Babey v. Commonwealth, 169 Ky. 745. The real question
in a trial where the defense is insanity is not whether
the mind is unsound, but whether it is unsound to the
extent of being unable to determine right from wrong,
or whether if able so to do, accused was unable to re-
sist the impulse to commit the act. If such was not
the test, with the many opinions which may be indulged
with regard to the soundness or unsoundness of ase:
the punishment of criminals would be rendered almos

an impossibility. Usually in a case where there is no
other hope of escape from the enormity of a erime, in-
sanity is put forward as a forlorn hope, and many per-
sons indulge the conclusion, that because a crime is com-
mitted from a motive, which they may regard as insuf-
ficient to justify such an action, the action of the
party arises from mental disease. Insanity 1s not,
however, proved by evidence that the slayer entertained
no il] will, that was known of by others, or by the enor-
mity of the crime, or by the barbarous manner in which
it was committed, or by the fact that there was no ap-
parent provocation. Turner vy. State, 119 Tenn. 663;
Singleton v. State, 71 Miss. 782. Testimony that one is
of a violent, overbearing and quarrelsome disposition,
when drunk, can not be said to be evidence of such un-
soundness of mind, as will excuse crime. The newly

226 SOUTHWESTERN REPORTER, Vot. 20. (Ky.

John D. Ellis and Reiley & Reiley, for
appellaots. J. M. Hill, for appellees.

Lewis, J. According to opinion of this
court upon the former appeal of this case,
the simple and only question is one of fact
as to the true location of the Carrington
and Beall division line, which is the pres-
ent division line between the lands of ap-
pellant and appellee. 13 S. W. Rep. 359,
918. Thelower court fairly and properly
submitted thut issue of fact to the jury,
and as the verdict in favor of the defend-
ant isnot by any means palpably against,
but is fully supported by, the evidence,
we are not authorized to disturb it. The
refusal of the court to permit the title pa-
pers offered by the plaintiff to go to the
jury for any other purpose than as evi-
dence of boundary did not prejudice him,
because there is no question of title in-
volved, both parties claiming under the
same patent and the subsequent deed of
partition between Beall and Carrington.

Judgment aftirmed.

THOMAS V. COMMONWEALTH.
(Court of Appeals of Kentucky. Sept. 24, 1892.)

Mourver — EvIDENCE —ADMISSIBILITY AND SUFFI-
CIENCY — PREVIOUS QUARRELS—VARIANCE — In-
STRUCTIONS.

1. On a trial for murder, evidence that a
week before the homicide the accused and de-
cedent quarreled, is competent to show malice,
and that the accused had a motive for killing
her.

2.There is no material variance between
an allegation that the accused strangled and
choked decedent wth his hands, and evidence that
the strangling was effected by placing a scarf
around her neck.

3. There was evidence that the accused, at
an early hour on the morning of the homicide,
went to the house of decedent, with whom he had
recently quarreled, while she was alone, and
that, after looking around as if to see whether
he was observed, he took hold of her, and jerked
her into the house, from where she was standing
in the door. No one saw him leave the house.
Shortly afterwards decedent was found strangled
to death. The accused proved an alibi by his
father, mother, brother, and others. He assisted
in preparin decedent ’ for burial, and went to
inform her husband of her death. Held, that a
conviction of murder would not be disturbed.

4, Instructions as to involuntary manslaugh-
ter were properly re as they were inap-
plicable to the evidence,

Appeal from circuit court, Jefferson
county.

“Not to be officially reported.”

Grant Thomas was convicted of mur-
der, and he appeals. Affirmed

Chas. G. Richie and A. Lincoln Dembitz,
for appellant. W. J. Hendrick, for the
Common wealth.

Pryor, J. The appellant has been con-
victed of the murder of Birdie Coleman,
upon circumstantial testimony alone, and
his punishment fixed at death. The wo-
man killed and her husband lived on Orms-
by avenue, between Ninth and Tenth
streets, in the city of Louisville. Mollie
Durrett, a witness, and her husband, lived
on the same atreet, directly opposite the
house of the deceased. On the 9th of
February—the morning of the day on

which the murder took place—this witness
saw the deceased, about half past 7
o'clock, enter the woman’s dwelling. The
husband of the deceased had, as the proof
shows, left his house at 50’clock, and gone
to his work in another part of the city,
They had no children, and froin all the tes-
timony there was no one in Birdie’s house
from the time her husband left until she
was found dead, but the accused. The
evidence conduces to show that the de.
ceased and the accused had some trouble
about a week previous, in which angry
words passed, but nothing more. The
witness stutes that the accused entered
the door without knocking. That he re-
turned to the door, and looked up and
down the railroad; then went around
the house, returned, and pushed the door
open. He came again to the door, and
clused it, and again looked out. His con-
duct attracted the attention of the wit-
ness, but she left her house shortly after,
and when she returned ascertained that
Birdie was dead. Philip Durrett, the hus-
band of this witnesss, saw the deceased
and the aecused standing in the door.
The accused took hold of the deceased,
and jerked her back, and slammed the
door. This was about halfpast7. Neither
of these witnesses saw the accused leave
the house, and no one seems to have seen
him about the premises until after 10
o'clock, and after the woman was found
murdered. She was bruised on the head,
evidently such a blow as would make her
insensible, and then strangled, either with
a scarf, that was found about her neck,
or with the hands of the murderer. The
condition of the bedclothing gave evi-
dence of an assault and resistance by the
one party or the other when this crime
was being perpetrated.

The appellant proves an alibi by his
mother, brother, father, and _ others,
and, if their testimony is to be believed,
he is innocent of the charge made against
him. After hearing of the death of the
woman, he assisted in the preparations
for theburial, and went to inform the hus-
band of his wife’s death. These circum-
stances conduced to show innocence, and
ut the same time might well be regarded
as a means resorted to by the accused to
prevent being suspected of having com-
mitted the atrocious crime. There can be
but little doubt as to the accused being in
the room of the deceased that morning.
The testimony of Dobbins, an intelligent
witness, corroborates the statements of
Durrett and wife. He says that he saw
the accused enter the house of Coleman
that morning, and it was his recognition
of the accused that caused hisarrest. The
accused denies being with the deceased
that morning, or in her house; but we
think the testimony conclusively shows
that he was in the house of the deceased,
and his conduct conduces strongly to fas
ten the crime upon him. It was the prov-
ince of the jury tu pass on the facts, and
after acareful reading of the testimony
we are not prepared to say that the ver
dict is not sustained by the testimony.
The legal questions raised by counsel ia
an argument well presented and impre®

sive do not authorize a reversal. The

smi ee kN,

Ky.)

coroner, who testified at the examining
court, was dead when this trial was had.
His statements, or the substance of them,
were proven by others, who recollected
his testimony. The accused was present
at the examining trial, and represented by
counsel. They only conduced to show
that the deceased came to her death by
violence, and in no manner prejudiced the
accused. The court gave the whole law of
the case. No instruction for involuntary
manslaughter should have been given, as
there was not a single fact upon which
such a conclusion could have been reached.
We perceive no variance between the in-
dictment and the proof. The charge of
strangling and choking with hands, and
facts in testimony that it was effected by
placing a scarf around the neck, consti-
tute no material variance. In either case
the offenseis made out asit issubstantially
alleged. The quarrel between the accused
and the deceased a week before the murder
was competent to show malice, and that
the accused had a motive for taking the
life of the deceased. The accused has had
& fair trial; has certainly been well and
ably defended; and wearesatisfied,both on
the law and the facts, the accused should
not escape punishment for his cruel act in
taking the life of the deceased.
Judgment affirmed.

(93 Ky. 315)
EASTERLING V. THOMAS et al.
(Court of Appeals of Kentucky. Sept. 24, 1892.)

JUDGMENT oF INFERIOR CourT—LIEN oN LaND—

Firing Transcript— APPEAL— DISMISSAL.

1, Civil Code, § 723, allowing a transcript
of a judgment from a justice or quarterly court
to be filed in the circuit upon a return of “No
property,” and declaring the same remedies there-
on as if the judgment had been rendered in that
court, does not create a lien upon land in an ac-
tion merely for goods sold and delivered, where
the claim is for an amount less than the jurisdic-
tion given to such court.

_ 2, Although a judgment be void for want of
jurisdiction, an appeal therefrom must be dis-
missed, under Code, § 763, where no motion was
made in the court below to set the same aside.

Appeal
county.

“To be officially reported.”

Action by Chiles, Thomas & Co. against
W. C. Easterling. Judgmentior plaintiffs.
Defendant appeals. Dismissed.

John T. Hazelrigg, for appellant. John
P. Salvers, for appellees.

from circuit court, Morgan

Pryor, J. The action below was on an
account for goods sold and delivered,
amounting to $46, and was instituted in
the circuit court with a view of obtaining
4n attachment that was levied on the
debtur’s land, he owning no other estate.
We are aware of no statute conferring
upon the circuit courts such ajurisdiction,
but, on the contrary, the jurisdiction is
confined by statute to the courts of jus-
tices of the peace and to quarterly courts.
By the provisions of an act passed in the
year 1880, the real estate of debtors who
are nonresidents, and who have no per-
Sonal estate sufficient to pay the debt,
may be subjected by a proceeding in the
circuit court in the same manner as in

FAULKNER ov. DUFF, 227

cases where such jurisdiction is expressly
conferred on circuit courts. It is there
suggested that the creditor hasno remedy
by which he may make his debt out of the
realty, or avail himself of a provisional
remedy for that purpose, where his claim
is for less than the jurisdiction given to
the circuit court. The mode of acquiring
a lien on the land by attachment, or sub-
jecting it in such a case, is found insection
728, Civil Code, where it is provided that
upon a return of “No property” on an ex-
ecution from a justice’s or quarterly
court the plaintiff may have a copy of tha
judgment, execution, and return, and,
when filed in the clerk’s office of the cir-
cuit court, he becomes entitled to the
Same remedies as if the judgment had been
rendered in the circuit court. It is ar-
gued that a lien created by resorting to
a provisional remedy should confer the ju-
risdiction upon the circuit court to en-
force the lien upon land, for the same rea-
son that liens are permitted to beenforced
when created by deed or by contract. As
between the vendor and the vendee, where
the purchase price is less than $50, neither
the court of a justice of the peace nor the
quarterly court has the power to enforce
the contract orsubject the land to the lien
created by the contract. The jurisdiction
in such cases is expressly excluded from the
inferior tribunals, and the circuit court
has origiual jurisdiction of all matters in
law and equity of which jurisdiction is
not by law exclusively delegated to some
other tribunal. The circuit court is given
the jurisdiction, and the inferiorcourts ex-
cluded from exercising it. The cause of ac-
tion is for goods sold and delivered, and
is for less than $50, and, the provisional
remedy obtained being merely in aid of
the judgment when rendered, the court had
no jurisdiction to render a judgment for
the debt. In a case of lien created on
land by contract, the right to enforce it is
a part of the contract. It is as much a
part of the cause of action as the sum to
be paid, and, the inferior court having no
jurisdiction, it is necessarily conferred ou
the circuit court by the very terms of the
act regulating the jurisdiction of circuit
courts. Although the judgment is void
for want of jurisdiction, the appeal must
be dismissed, because there was no mo-
tion madein thecourt below to set the
judgment aside, as required by Code, § 763.
The appeal is dismissed.

FAULKNER v. DuFF.

(Court of Appeals of Kentucky. Sept. 10, 1892.}

EasEMENT—RIGHT OF Way—ABANDONMENT.
: The closing of a gate by one who is en-
titled to a pass-way over another’s land, and the
opening of a way several hundred yards to one
side, is not an abandonment of the way as orig:
inally laid, although the change may not be in-
sisted on without the owner’s consent.

Appeal from court of common pleas,
Montgomery county.

“Not to be officially reported.”

Action by S. A. Duff against A. D. Faulk-
ner to compel the opening of a certain
pDass-way over defendant’s land, to which
plaintiff claimed he was entitled, and for

JT pesuey *6T *HOeTQ *QueIN *SYWOHL

TAsTnNo

*C6QT~6-cT S*hy *OTT


KENTUCKY REPORTS.

discovered evidence being merely cumulative of evi-
dence offered upon the trial, as appears from a recita-
tion of the evidence heretofore made and concerning a
matter, which was necessarily of common knowlecge in
the neighborhood a new trial will not be granted, unless
the new evidence is of such preponderating and decisive
character that it could be reasonably calculated, that if
heard upon another trial that the result would be a
different verdict from that rendered. It is appar-
ent that the new evidence is not of the character de-
scribed, and if heard upon another trial would not be
reasonably calculated to result in a different verdict, as
if all the evidence contained in the affidavits of the newly
found witnesses was before the jury, the mental un-
soundness of accused, at the time of the homicide, would
not be proven. Louisville Ins. Co. v. Hoffman, 70 S.
W. 403; L. & N. R. R. Co. v. Wade, 11 K. L. R. 953; Fin-
ley v. Tyler, 3 T. B. M. 400; Fleen v. Hollenkamp, 13 B.
M. 219; Allen v. Perry, 6 Bush 85; Shely v. Shely, 20
ik. L. R. 1021; Monarch v. Cowherd, 114 S. W. 276;
Sizemore v. Nants, 149 Ky. 819; 8S. C. & C. Ry. Co. v.
Lee, 153 Ky. 621; Maynard v. Boram, 180 Ky. 392;
Jiome Ins. Co. v. C., N. O. & T. P. Ry. Co., 182 Ky. 778.

The accused seems to have had a fair trial, and his
complaint that the community in which the homicide
was committed was very antagonistic to him, is not a
reason from which it can be inferred that he has been
dealt with unjustly. No prejudicial error appearing
upon the record, the judgment, although applying the
severest punishment known to the law, must be affirmed.

Payne, Admr., etc. v. Woolfolk’s Admrx.

(Decided November 21, 1922.
Appeal from Daviess Circuit Court.

1. Executors and Administrators—Exceptions—Principal and Agent
—Evidence.—Evidence on exceptions to an administrator’s settle
ment examined and held insufficient to show that he was the
agent of the intestate so as to make him liable for profits which
accrued from certain land which he held.

Landlord and Tenant—Extension or Renewal by Holding Over.—
Where the lease was for seven years and expired on a certain day,
tenants who held over for a period of ninety days after the
lease expired acquired the right to hold the premises until the

to

[Vol. 196.

ek at ed COme Tee ae aaa Wa cee eo Co aS Ce

Payne, Admr. v. Woolfolk’s Admrx. 5d1

expiration of the year and so on from year to year until they
abandoned the premises, were turned out of possession, or made
a new contract.

8. Executors and Administrators—Exceptions—Receipt—Mental In-

capacity—Finding of Mental Capacity is Sustained by Evidence—
Exceptions to Administrator’s Settlement.—Evidence examined
and held to sustain the court’s finding that the intestate, when
he signed a receipt for rents was fully capable of understanding
and appreciating its nature and effect.

W. BE. AUD, J. R. HIGDON and T. F. BIRKHEAD for appellant.

E. B. ANDERSON for appellee.

Oprxtonx or THE Court sy Jupce Cray—Affirming.

Mrs. M. B Woolfolk owned a farm and some personal
property which had been devised to her by her husband,
Win. C. Woolfolk, to manage for the best interests of
herself and his children. On January 1, 1896, she leased
the farm to her son, J. A. Woolfolk, and J. H. Ixemper,
who agreed to pay her rent at the rate of six hundred
dollars per year, to put certain improvements on the
premises, to keep the premises in repair, and to pay all
taxes on the farm. The lessees took possession of the
farm and held over several years atter the original
term expired. On July 17, 1914, Mas. M. B. Woolfolk
died intestate, a resident of Owensboro. She left sur-
vivine her four daughters, two sons and a grandson as
her only heirs at law. By agrecment of the heirs, J. A.
Woolfolk was appointed and qualified as his mother’s
administrator. On May 3, 1919, J. A. Woolfolk filed a
settlement with the county judge of Daviess county.
Ten davs later he dicd from injuries received in an acci-
dent and his wife, Amelia B. Woolfolk, qualified as his
aduinistratrix and fil€d his final settlement as admuinis-
trator of his mother. Exceptions were filed thereto by
Mrs. Sale, a daughter of Mrs. M, B. Woolfolk, and
others, and the appointmentof an administrator de
bonis non was asked. The grounds relied on were (a)
that J. A. Woolfolk owed his mother $19,000.00 for
rents and profits which he had collected as her agent
during the vears 1900-1914, in the management of her
farm; (b) that the sum of $150.00 set aside for the
maintenance of Mrs. Woolfolk’s grave was not a proper
credit and should be paid to the administrator de bonis
non; (ce) that J. A. Woolfolk was not entitled to any
commission for his services as administrator, because he


NAME PLACE — CITY OR COUNTY

Louisville, Kentucky

RESIDENCE

Louisville

DOE & MEANS

H, 12-9=1892

GEN

Grant Thomas

DOB OR AGE
19

RACE

Black

OCCUPATION

Laborer

RECORD

CRIME

Murder

VICTIM

_____ Birdie Coleman

MOTIVE

DATE OTHER

2-9-1892

AGE RACE

Black

METHOD

Strangled, sash

SYNOPSIS

"On. the. varearse of robs 95 1892, Birdie SOL GmNs a bers milatto, was a dead in her room, A

LY DOU = Ky SroOWwed i iS 5G OK ECU

wife of yn Coleman, a driver for Ane De peerer a Coal and Tron bet me They Lived on Ornsty Avenue

ee ee ee Ne ee or ee OT eer ye 9
J J ww

an stigubnent between them but, Thomas aREW was "Taviie with a peas woman and hha bird SLlegitinste
2 or en 8 oie 2k ma d Js = aerpanery eseege nomas on nuedc @ ~ Ne g

He was often seen - the Keak, About 11 o'clock on the morning of Feb, 9, a Y near called;

No one answered a knock and the visitor threw open the door, Birdie Coleman lay upon the bed,

She was on her back and one leg lay over the edge, Bruises were on her head and a sash was tied

around her neck, showing that death had beencaused by strangulation, A large crowd soon gathered

about the house and an hour LaterGrant Thomas and James Coleman went into the room where the body

lay. Coleman had been told of his wife's murder by Thomas, who went to his place of business to
~—inform him.— sé wa a

mysterious murder. People began to talk about what Basen 4 = ore ae the morning sage Soe

oe
Op iste Wa she 9s : Suggs ry V * = Our eri hes warae

- ae Dobbins, a pouievidis A Rasbrilis car Shin ecton said he saw ‘Thomas enter the Coleman

pinta tie same morning. He dasa in the ters and talked to the woman, They seen to be quarrel-
d ide, closing the door, An hour later, she says, Thomas opened the door,
looked up and down the street, and then walked hurriedly away, The mother of the mrdered girl
said ghe went to her daughter's house but the door was locked. She peeped through the keyhole
and say Bifdie Coleman lying on the bed, A man was sitting on the bed by her, His face could not
be seen but the woman said he wore dark trousers and gaitor shoes, Officer Thornton noticed when
eS made ne a es na omas wore ark rousers and 2 0 Snoeé ‘ biislers DL Oo : De0n
raenepe to have seen a shomee: about the gp on the rete of February 90 sae gag en

~ r) = ae ry yt Heo 4 ¥) 5 =
ot g SG =o 43 J

erates who had seen ag at and near ye testified, ‘He claimed he eeuld prove an alibi cat Ma

® nN eye ness Nn 9 Owed ® AS fy as being ncomoeten aid he had ar) O ad 2 ne
grain elevator for work but was not needed that day, From there = said he returned to home of
woman with whom he was living and sat there for several hours playing cards, leaving about 11:30
and starting down railroad track when he heard of mrder and went to tell Coleman, Convicted and
sentenced to die by jury which deliberated but short while, Motive believed to have been jealousy,
' When verdict read, his face emotionless, When returned to jail he said he had not been given a
fair trial oat ee ne. "thought too much of Birflie to eee a single hair of her tag Robert

eaJVeaYrsed0 Lo @ OLNea Bap 5 O waS dap ea Ww °

LOUISVILLE COURTER-JOURNAL, 129-1892 (Woodcuts of both he and Birdie Coleman on Sige 2)

TRIAL

APPEALS

LAST WORDS

EXECUTION

SOURCE

FRANK NEWTON OFFICE SUPPLY—-DOTHAN


784.‘ Tex. 198 SOUTH WESTERN

en; nor was it proven nor did the appel-
jants offer to prove that any church prop-
erty existed.

Points 3 and 4 are therefore overruled.

[5] Under Point 5, the appellants as-

sign error to the refusal of the trial court .

to appoint a moderator and to direct him to
hold an election of officers in this Church.

Point 5 is overruled. We are not satis-
fied that the subject matter of this Point
of Error is involved on this appeal. Ac-
cording to the order appealed from, said
order was made upon a hearing under ap-
pellants’ application for temporary injunc-
tion and appellees’ plea in abatement. The
order also recites that at the conclusion
of the hearing the trial court made the fol-
lowing ruling and the appellants took their
exception to that ruling, namely: “All re-
straining orders, temporary injunctions, and
orders now in effect relating to and calling
for an election are canceled and annulled.
The temporary injunction is denied.” We
know nothing about any orders of any
kind which may have been made before
the hearing of June 18, 1946. None are
before us, nor any application therefor.
Appellees’ motion to dismiss refers to some
restraining orders made before June 18,
1946, but that motion was not presented.
The only part of the ruling which is covered
by the record is the denial of a temporary
injunction; but from the very nature of
the hearing we must assume that orders

REPORTER, 2d SERIES

made prior to June 18, 1946, did not finally
dispose of appellants’ prayer for an elec-
tjon, that being the essence of the suit.
The record is confusing, but we infer that
appellants’ prayer for an election is still
pending.

[6] Further, there is nothing to show
that if and when the majority of the church
wants an election of officers, this election
will be denied; and still further, we have
not found any authority—on the facts be-
fore us, no property right being exhibited
on the hearing—for the trial court’s as-
suming control of the affairs of this church
and ordering an election therein, or con-
trolling the conduct of such an election.

[7] Under Point 6, appellants assign
error to the trial court’s failure to deter-
mine appellee’s plea in abatement, and un-
der Point 7, to the trial court’s refusal to
hear appellants’ evidence respecting the
subject matter of this plea.

Points 6 and 7 are overruled. If the trial
court failed to decide the plea in abate-
ment, that is matter for complaint on this
appeal by appellees, if by any one, and ap-
pellees say nothing. As we have pointed
out above, the trial court would not have
been justified in dismissing the suit on the
proof before him relevant to appellees’
plea.

This disposes of appellants’ Points of
Error. No reversible error appearing, the
judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

TUNGET v. COMMONWEALTH

Cite as 198 S.W.2d 785

303 Ky. 834
TUNGET v. COMMONWEALTH.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.
Dee. 17, 1946.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 7, 1947.

1. Criminal law €=637

Generally, practice of keeping defend-
ant in handcuffs during trial should not
be followed, but in exceptional cases if
good grounds exist for believing defendant
might attempt to do violence or to ¢scape
during trial, trial court, in exercise of
sound discretion, may permit defendant to
be shackled.

2. Criminal law ©=637

Keeping defendant shackled during
murder trial was not abuse of discretion,
where defendant was a man of demon-
strated desperateness and had been con-
victed of murder and had been given life
sentence and had killed assistant warden
and had shot at other guards while at-
tempting to escape.

3. Criminal law €=655(8), 1166/2(12)

The trial court’s request to attorneys
in jury’s hearing to agree to separation of
jury during trial of capital offense is re-
versible error. Cr.Code Prac. §§ 244, 244-
2, amended by Laws 1940, c. 61.

4. Criminal law C>1174(4)

Separation of jury during trial of
capital offense was not reversible error
where trial court’s request that attorneys
agreed to a separation was not made in
hearing of jury. Cr.Code Prac. §§ 244,
244-2, amended by Laws 1940, c. 61.

5. Criminal law €=448(1)

Mere deductions which have come
from existing facts themselves are not ad-
missible as evidence, the requirement be-
ing that facts be produced and that deduc-
tions or conclusions be left to jury.

6. Criminal law ©=448(10)

In prosecution for murder allegedly
committed while attempting to escape from
penitentiary, refusal to permit defendant
to state how he had been treated and how
he came to be in penitentiary to which he
had been committed under life sentence for
previous murder, was not error as not

198 S.W.2d—30

permitting defendant to testify concerning
his mental condition, especially as mental
condition related to insane delusions and
irresistible impulses at time of second mur-
der since proposed question did not touch
on subject of insane delusions or irresistible
impulses.

7. Criminal law €=1170(4)

The refusal to permit defendant ac-
cused of murder to answer question, if er-
roneous as not permitting defendant to tes-
tify concerning his mental condition, e¢s-
pecially as it related to insane delusions
and irresistible impulses at time of murder,
was harmless, where defendant was later
permitted to include in his answers to
other questions the general subject matter
of the testimony previously excluded.

8. Criminal law (2237

A finding of sanity of defendant ac-
cused of murder is justified even though
all direct testimony points to insanity,
where defendant’s own testimony indicates
to jury that defendant knew what his ac-
tions were and what he was doing at time
of murder.

9. Criminal law C331

The burden rests on defendant plead-
ing insanity to prove by preponderance of
evidence that he was so unbalanced at time
of crime that he did not then know right
from wrong and was not then able to
realize what he was doing or what conse-
quences might result from his acts.

10. Criminal law @=740

The sanity of defendant is question
for jury where there is some evidence on
the trial tending to show that defendant
knew what he was doing and knew that his
intended acts would be wrong.

11. Homicide €=237 :
Evidence sustained conviction of mur-
der as against defense of insanity.

——_—_—_——--——

Appeal from Circuit Court, Lyon Coun-
ty; Ira D. Smith, Judge.

Earl Tunget was convicted of murder,
and he appeals.

Affirmed.

-*216T-Ti-2 (uokT) **£y *oeTe Saqtum S*T Tueq Sag

Wins

td)
a

pat iteote }s

1?"
yee

oe +
4

£
ae

ee-§

Lea &
hha bes

SAO Sa

saint rat

Wininnoee es

ae

a

Eee


MR sedans agri

veasin
esse:

1110. Ky. 114 SOUTH WESTERN REPORTER, 2d SERIES

action, as he ran when the first shot was scious of wh i i
fired. The only other witness introduced 258 Ky. 744, a1 ie aad ka —
by the Commonwealth was Jesse Holbrook. 258 Ky. 685, 80 S.W2d 817; Vance x.
He reached the scene of the killing about Com. 254 Ky. 667, 72 S.W2d 43: Shorter
thirty minutes after it occurred, and found v. Com., 252 Ky. 472, 67 S W.2d 695;
the mule lying in the road and Dolphy Hall Thomas v. Com., 196 Ky 539, 245 s w
on the bank by the side of the road, dead. 164. The evidence in the present case t-
He described the conditions he found as terly fails to show intoxication of sich
follows: “The embankment was about that degree as to warrant mitigation of adi
high above the road (indicating) and ment. On the contrary, it shows en eg
looked as if he was hunkered down just pellant was in full possession of his r 4
like this, about in that position, (indicat- soning faculties when the crime was ‘sour
ing) and he was shot through the head mitted, and that the murder was a sae
and through into the arm, the arm was less one, committed with premeditation and
still under his head and there was five deliberation. The fact that the jury fixed
more shots down in his back, as if he the appellant’s punishment at Meath Sater
was shot right down that way.” than life imprisonment does not authorize
The appellant testified in his own behalf, 2" inference of passion or prejudice on
and attempted to make out a case of self- their part. Lane v. Com.) 256 Ky. 78, 75
defense, although he had entered a plea of S.W.2d 739; Bryant v. Com., 202 Ky. 427
“guilty,” which was never withdrawn. His 259 S.W. 1038.
story, in substance, was that Dolphy Hall
attacked him with a knife, cut him three
or four times, twice on the shoulder, and
that he shot in his necessary self-defense.

[7] After the appellant testified in his
own behalf, the Commonwealth introduced
six witnesses in rebuttal. It is argued that
the testimony of these witnesses was sub-

[2-6] The argument that the verdict is Stantive evidence, admissible only in chief

excessive is based on the claim that the and that the court erred in permitting its
evidence shows appellant had been drink- introduction after the appellant had _tes-
ing intoxicating liquor on the day the tified. The appellant had testified that he
homicide occurred. It is argued that this heard John Henry Addington make a cer-
fact is sufficient to mitigate the punish- tain statement to Dolphy Hall just before
ment, and that a penalty of life imprison- the killing. Addington was introduced in
ment only should have been imposed. One Tebuttal, and denied making the statement.
difficulty with this argument is that ap- His testimony on this point was purely
pellant did not claim he was drunk or febutting and admissible. Furthermore
under the influence of liquor when the 10 objection to the question or answer was
homicide was committed. On direct ex- made. Addington was then asked if ap-
amination, he related conversations that Pellant’s testimony that the deceased
took place just before the shooting and Walked around the mule and gave appel-
described the actions of the various par- lant some liquor just before the shooting
ties present in minute detail, indicating Was true, and he answered: “No sir, he
that he was then in full possession of all drove Dolphy Hall’ down the road ‘like
his faculties. On cross-examination, he tiving a hog and made him set down
was asked if he had been drinking, and his there and went to shooting at us.” The
answer was that he “had a drink or two.” appellant objected to the answer, and the
Intoxication is not an excuse for crime, Court said: “Just answer the question.”
and, in a prosecution for homicide, proof The answer was not wholly responsive to
of intoxication is admissible only for the the question and was not excluded from
purpose of determining whether the ac- the jury, but no exception was taken.-
cused was capable of entertaining the in- Paul Akeman and Jesse Holbrook testified
tent or malice which is an indispensable in rebuttal, but their testimony was not
ingredient of certain grades of the offense. material. Sara Vanover and her brother

The accused may introduce evidence show- Arlie Vanover, lived near the scene of
ing that he was intoxicated at the time the tragedy. They testified that appel-

the crime was committed, but, in order to lant came to their home just after the

be available as a defense, or to mitigate shooting. He was in his shirt sleeves, was

the punishment, the intoxication must be wearing a white shirt, and there was no

of such degree as to deprive him of the blood on it as claimed by him in his testi-

powers of reason and make him uncon- mony. He remained in their house about

SPRADLIN v. WIMAN Ky. 1111
114 S.W.2d

five minutes, but did not tell them he had
been cut with a knife. W. H. Caudill,
sheriff of Letcher county, examined Dol-
phy Hall’s body shortly after he was shot,
and he testified that the bullets entered his
back. Appellant had testified that Hall
was facing him when the shots were fired.
The testimony of all these witnesses was
purely rebutting, and it follows that ap-
pellant’s second contention is wholly with-
out merit.

[8] The duty of determining the degree

" of punishment to be inflicted, life imprison-

ment or death, rested upon the jury. After
hearing the evidence, they saw proper to
inflict the extreme penalty, and we find
no reason to disturb their verdict.

The judgment is affirmed.

The whole court sitting.

272 Ky. 724
SPRADLIN et al. v. WIMAN et al.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.
Feb. 15, 1938.
Rehearing Denied April 19, 1938.

1. Descent and distribution €~90(1)
Wills €=849

If devise of realty to church was in-
valid under statute limiting the right of a
church to hold realty, then realty passed to
testator’s heirs as undevised estate, - and
heirs could sue and recover the realty. Ky.
St. § 319.

2. Wills €=440, 441

The Court of Appeals, in construing a
will, must arrive at testator’s intention by
what he said, construed in the light of the
circumstances, and not by what it thought
he might or should have said.

3. Charities €=20(1)

A devise of realty to a church in trust
for a particular charitable purpose is val-
id under statute limiting the right of a
church to hold realty. Ky.St. § 319.

4. Religious societies G?16

A devise of realty is not invalid under
statute limiting the right of a church to
hold realty, where testator directs that real-
ty be sold and proceeds, or balance of pro-

ceeds after payment of debts and other be-
quests, be given to church. Ky.St. § 319.

5. Appeal and error ©=909(4)

In view of allegation that estate had
been fully administered under provisions of
will, and fact that church took and sold
realty devised to it by testator, Court of
Appeals, in determining validity of devise
under statute limiting the right of a church
to hold property, was required to assume
that testator’s other property was sufficient
to pay debts, funeral expenses, costs of ad-
ministering estate, and all specific bequests.
Ky.St. § 319.

6. Religious societies C>16

A devise to church of realty, which was
taken by church as realty and not personal-
ty, and which was not used by church for
“purpose of erecting thereon houses of pub-
lie worship, public instruction, parsonage or
grayeyard,” but which was sold, fell within
the inhibition of statute limiting right of
church to:hold realty, so that testator’s
heirs were entitled to recover realty. Ky.St.
§ 319.

——_~+—__— -

Appeal from Circuit Court, Hickman
County.

Action by Zula Spradlin and others,
heirs at law of E. T. Lucas, deceased,
against Vaughan L. Wiman and others, as
trustees of the First Christian Church of
Mayfield, Ky., to recover realty, which had
been devised by E. T. Lucas to the First
Christian Church, and to require the trus-
tees to account for income and revenues
derived from the realty. From a judgment
in favor of the defendants, the plaintiffs
appeal.

Judgment reversed and cause remanded
for proceedings not inconsistent with opin-
ion.

J. C. Speight, of Mayfield, and Charles
R. Bell, of Bowling Green, for appellants.

Webb & Webb, of Mayfield, for appel-
lees.

CLAY, Justice.

E. T. Lucas died testate, a resident of
Hickman county, in the year 1931. After
providing for the payment of his debts
and funeral expenses, and making certain
bequests aggregating about $3,600, his will
contains the following provision: “After
paying what I have named in this will I
give the rest to the First Christian Church

®

Seite hee erates LEM ae)

hie AeA AE EARALS | SAME A CRS SSRIS PA STE 04

BIO Pek CORRE PML RDS

Teer 7

Leer errs APC TEES 2)

b+ ie

Pager es Deis + #5 beds a) 698 Renate de

ont

Lanta are, ? 4A,

ie

786 ~—sO&KYy.. 198 SOUTH WESTERN

Robert W. Zollinger, of Louisville, for
appellant.

Eldon S. Dummit, Atty. Gen., and bk.
Hughett, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

SILER, Justice.

Earl Tunget was given a death sentence
for murder. He now appeals from that
judgment.

As grounds for reversal, Tunget con-
tends that the following errors, each com-
mitted to, the prejudice of his substantial
rights, occutred on his trial, to wit: (A)
handcuffs were kept on him; (B) the jury
was permitted to separate; (C) he was not
permitted to testify about the state of his
own mental condition upon the occasion in
controversy; (D) the judgment and verdict
were rendered against him, even though
all evidence proved he was insane at the
time of this homicide.

Tunget, age 23, had, prior to his present
implication, been committed to the Eddy-
ville Penitentiary from Jefferson County
on April 14, 1945, under a life sentence
for murder. After he had been in the
penitentiary a little more than 8 months,
the associate warden, L. R. Gumm, directed,
on December 17, 1945, around 7 a. m., the
captain of the guards t6 go with other
guards to Tunget’s cell to make a search for
a pistol, then reported to have been in Tun-
get’s possession. The captain of the guards
and the three other guards with him opened
Tunget’s cell and ordered him to come out.
He came out with his hands bchind him,
flashed a pistol on the four guards, who
were armed only with canes or billets,
forced all of them to enter his own cell,
locked them inside, proceeded down the cor-
ridor with his pistol, encountered Gumm
some distance from his cell, called on
Gumm to surrender his club and to take him
outside, then shot and killed Gumm on the
latter’s refusal to comply. Before he was
overpowered and subdued, Tunget managed
to shoot and slightly wound one of the other
guards and to shoot through the coat of
another,

{1,2] A. Was it reversible error to
keep appellant in handcuffs during the
trial? As a general rule, we would con-
demn such a practice. A court would hard-

REPORTER, 2d SERIES

ly be justified in permitting this to be done
in one murder case. out of an average
hundred coming to trial. However, we
have heretofore announced the rule to be
phat of permitting shackles on defendants
Auring trials in exceptional cases, in cases
where the trial courts appeared to have
encountered some good grounds for be-

-lieving such defendants might attempt to

do violence or to escape during their trials.
See the cases of Marion v. Commonwealth,
269 Ky. 729, 108 S.W.2d 721; Blair_v.
Commonwealth, 171 Ky. 319, 188 S.W. 390.
It appears to be the generally prevailing
rule in many jurisdictions of this country
that trial courts will be upheld in their ex-
ercise of thoroughly sound and reasonable
discretion in the matter of keeping certain
defendants in shackles during their trials.
See 14 Am.Jur. 855. And now applying this
rule of sound discretion, exercisable in ex-
ceptional cases, to our trial now under con-
sideration, we perceive that Tunget was a
man of demonstrated desperation. He had
already been convicted of murder and had
been given a life sentence. Before he had
served a year of the time necessary to qual-
ify him for parole, he had procured a gun
from the outside and in nerveless fashion
had herded four stalwart guards into his
own ‘cell, Thereafter, he had shot and
killed the associate warden and had then
shot at or through two other guards in pur-
suing his raging, reckless intent to escape,
regardless of the resulting consequences.
Confinement had not curbed him, courtroom
solemnity had not cowed him, armed guards
had neither daunted nor discouraged him.
Therefore, this appears to have been an
exceptional case and we are not prepared
to say that the trial court abused sound
discretion in keeping handcuffs on Tunget
during the trial. If this was not an excep-
tional case, then we would hardly know
how to recognize one. But again we say
that ordinarily this practice should not be
followed and usually it would be condemn-
ed by this court.

[3,4] B. Should the jury have been per-
mitted to separate during this trial? Our
Kentucky Criminal Code of Practice, Sec.
244, provides that juries trying capital of-
fenses, stich as the one of the present case,
must be kept together and in charge of an

ee

‘
'

TUNGET y. COMMONWEALTH Ky. 797
Cite as 198 S.W.2d 785

officer throughout the trial. But Subsection
2, Sec. 244, Ky. Criminal Code, reenacted in
1940, provides that such juries “may be
permitted to separate by agreement of the
attorney for the Commonwealth and the at-
torney for the defendant, with the approval
of the trial judge, which shall be in open
court and entered of record.” We have
held it to be a reversible error for the trial
court to request the attorneys in the pres-
ence of the jury for an agreement for a
separation of such jury during the trial of
a capital offense. We consider such a re-
quest, made in the jury’s hearing, as an in-
stance of taking an unfair advantage of the
defendant and his attorney. See the case
of Anderson v. Commonwealth, 302 Ky.
275, 194 S.W.2d 530. And now looking at
the transpiration of events on this trial,
we find in appellant’s brief the admission
that counsel for both sides “were called to
the judge’s bench and requested to agrce
to the separation of the jury.” This clearly
indicates that the separation request was
not made in the hearing of the jury. Both
the bill of exceptions of this case and the
court order on the subject are consistent
with the admission in appcllant’s brief to
the effect that the separation request was
made at the judge’s bench, not in the hear-
ing of the jury. Appellant’s attorney made
no objection to the proposed separation,
although he could very well have done so in
confidential communication to the trial
judge, when the subject was raised at the
bench. Besides, there is neither a conten-
tion by the appellant nor even a slight in-
dication by the record that any member of
the jury was, during its separation, con-
tacted by any one for the purpose of in-
fluencing the outcome of the trial. Since
both the appellant’s brief and the record
indicate that the separation request was
made outside the hearing of the jury, we
are unable to say that there was a rever-
sible error in this particular instance of
jury separation, which seems to have been
accomplished in general accord with code
provisions and not in a prejudicial manner.

C. Should Tunget have been permitted
to testify concerning his own mental con-
dition, especially as it related to insane de-
lusions and irresistible impulses, at the time
of this offense? Now Tunget appears to

have made the issue of this case, that is to.
say his defense, one of insanity. To sup-
port his theory of insanity, he introduced:
two well qualified doctors, one from Madi-
son, Tennessee, and one from Louisville,
Kentucky. They testified at length con-
cerning Tunget’s mental and physical con-
dition and also concerning their expert
conclusions as to his insanity. Tunget was.
asked, for the purpose of supporting the
testimony of his doctors, the following
question:

“Q. Tell the jury in your opinion how
you have been treated and how you came
to be in Eddyville?”

Objection to the foregoing question hav-
ing been sustained, Tunget avowed that
his answer to the question would have
been: “That he had been falsely charged
with murder and had not been given a fair
trial; that he had used every effort that
was legitimate in order to get out of the
penitentiary but had been blocked at every
turn by the unfairness of the Courts and
that his lawyers had always sold him out;
that he would never have been in Eddy-
ville if he had been given a fair trial and
had had the legal counsel that he wanted.”

[5-7] It will be observed that the ques-
tion did not deal directly with the subject:
of insane delusions and that the answer,
made by avowal, contained practically
nothing except Tunget’s own conclusions to.
the general effect that he had been “rail-
roaded” into the penitentiary. Probably
more than half the inmates of penal insti-
tutions would readily answer a similar
question in a similar manner. We do not
believe the propounded question touched
on the subject of insane delusions or on.
that of irresistible impulses. Nor do we
believe that the avowed answer would have
even tended to establish such delusions.
or such impulses on the part of Tunget, if,
the complete contents of such answer had
been admitted and accepted at their full
face value. In actuality, this record shows
that Tunget was permitted to outline in.
great detail his own interpretation, as we
have read it in other parts of his complete
testimony, as to his treatment at. the Eddy-
ville penitentiary and as to his confinement
therein. One of his answers, responding to.

i

ae

ae

iat Reali

cases

Jeplateiads aay

ph cltiw en PA bk

+

oat
‘

Sibel F255 AEG te EG

ie bam

“4
i


M
000
iy
31,
con
phe
=
A
I
E
J
f

co.
| PO}

|

to
{Ja
a

ie

a few days in which to attempt
again to prove he is insane.
announced. Zollinger pleaded, “It is prac-

ould
e

puty Warden L. R,

on eae

—(Friday)—Earl Tunget, 23, Louis-

at

clemency hearing, but merely

re-
It is my

in Anglo-
interfere.”

Saxon justice to try a person who

"With him in ‘his geath cell for is unable to understand what is
as insane.”

.

enile delin-

stretched from juv

Tunget w
the law shal] take

He begged Willis to |-—
“A&A Governor and a judge w

°

“save Kentucky from the dis-
grace of this execution.”

bility to society
ets career of crime

sponsi

Zollinger ‘told Governor Willis

Commenting that Tunget was
. “very cunning and very shrewd”
in his numerous jail breaks prior

requested

to going to Eddyville, the Gov-
Tung

‘ernor said po court in his opinion

quency to murder.

e

Thomas, Lyon Circuit Judge Ira
D. Smith and Lyon County Judge | of

day had said, “No,’ to Tunget’s | tu
“Zellinger Pieads Half Hour.

Frankfort by one of Tunget's at-
clemency appeal

_torneys, Robert Zollinger, Louis-

Soma to the Governor at] w.
ville. The Governor on Wednes-
that Appellate Judge

- Zollinger pleaded—not for

tically unheard of

- I Bhall Net Interfere.’

judgment that

going on.”
officials said he ate its course. J shall not

‘Jemex A. “Vinson yesterday had

declined to intervene

&

7, 1945.
ens, “would find

75 “Tunget shot.the official with a
“gmuggied pistol in a futile @cape

d see
T still
npt was z.ade
‘under 2 gene
tely ar-
prison bei
at
MacPeak, another con-
: gen-
- forAhe-
night

in

recently bap-

e

‘morning in the electric chair at Eddy- |-

men. He

Tuggle

and legs. ae

.
Xion ah:

last

Chartes Tunget,

hours
T
who

oh

one-fourth like to save everybody.” sa!

‘more than
three other

for fatally shooting
to. amuggle
Spears, both

2

‘was entering :.

July 11
Ido plead self- -

fried chici
corn, a bow] of potatoes,

3

-.%

4 Ps . a> .
J "Bate Last “Beal:

slaying in Louls-~

» Tunget

for
ed two

the

<

*Giimiy ear ‘the
Guy
‘te Tunget Wednes-

it

this

Xd

two packages of ciga-

ts, gravy,

butter, a cherry pie, two Willis, “but é@an’t escape

last
jee cream, an angel food

He added, “You can look es

~

attempt. He was serving 2

~»

tened my life

+ >
Bie Peniten
I Ee tae ee

“*“gaid - ‘that ~ Goumm “Ohad ©

Ea

e, died at 12

- Warde: ‘Tugsle last night re-

additional detailg

 S epuggle ‘eaid
AL before Tunget

Pires . ‘ fs oa . . S| gg ;
yy ee cals < $ ee . , . ¢ ii ee i Px Pe aes my: a 4
Se a aa ng UO Gy Ta OO Cee Atte SE ek pe at ie nied
aT ers Fa Se ES RES ee Oa Let $ |
<a, " 4 . SUE fe es art |

4 Py are, ea
Sethe acetn hye

ff] Hast | ;

Me ete he fade da

; j na ‘ {ye a ee iit { ti Hi)
‘ h ghd Rye Wy be. rt ry a4 cba ei blvd, A Adbi

‘ ie Sa ft f
id ate Teabeee te ba ve aes Fes }
4 ese | Hadi 4.445 pig Mb {

These men literally took the law

into heir own hands, and theirs

were the bloody hands of murder
By ABBOT BANKS

HE most destructive force since time began is a simple thing.
It’s called hate. With equal intensity hate wreaks mass

tragedy or smothers a sparrow with its shadow. Since any-.

thing in the mass dulls comprehension, we can understand
its awesome fury better when the sparrow dies.

Thus, when the fate of a pleasant, modest man became known
on the afternoon of March 8, 1952, a city of a half-million souls
shivered with the realization that hate can destroy with a
measureless frenzy. . .

Francis J. McCormack wasn’t. a sparrow—either in looks or
temperament. He was tall and distinguished-looking, with a pre-
cise legal mind that had won the complete respect of his fellow
attorneys in Louisville, Kentucky. He was invariably pleasant-
tempered and easily approached. Yet the shadow of hate fell over
him and he died brutally and needlessly.

His death became a thing of horror in Louisville. For nine
drama-packed days his mysterious fate drove war, flood, and
pestilence from the front pages of the city’s newspapers and cast
a pall over every rooftop. ;

It began, appropriately enough, in a furious little outburst of
violence that seemed to have no immediate explanation.

At precisely 4:30 p.m. on February 28, Mrs. Olga Lasting
chanced to glance out of the big bay window of her home on
Oak Street. She was startled to see two men methodically club-
bing another, and endeavoring to drag him to a nearby parked
sedan. The victim made no outcry, but appeared desperately
intent on warding off the vicious blows and escaping from the
grasp of his assailants. .

On spacious, sedaté Oak Street: scenes like this aren’t common.
Mrs. Lasting sprang to a telephone. “You better hurry,” she
told the police dispatcher. “They're beating him something awful.”

When a police cruiser screeched to a halt minutes later, the
street was empty of.any signs of a disturbance. Not even so much
as a drop of blood smeared .the walk. The fighting men and the
sedan had vanished.

Somewhat baffled, the officers asked for more: information.
Did she notice the license number on the car? Could she describe
the men or the vehicle?

“No, I didn’t notice the license number. I guess I was too sur-
prised to think of-it. But the car was light gray, and it was very
shiny, as if it had just been polished,” Mrs. Lasting asserted.
“And all of those men were tall, but the one they were hitting
was thinner than the other two.” .

Corroborating evidence that the woman wasn’t giving life to an
imaginative figment came as ‘the officers dutifully scouted the
general area. At the mouth of an alley leading into Oak Street
they found a pair of spectacles and a scattered bag of groceries.
And a woman, residing in a second-story apartment, asserted she,
too, had noticed the fight, watched it for several moments, then
hurried to tell her neighbor about it.

“When I got back they were gone. I told my friend that it was
probably a private squabble and the men would be shaking hands
ten minutes afterwards,” she said. “I couldn’t believe that any-
thing worse than that was taking place in broad daylight.”

After further questioning in the neighborhood, the officers were
inclined to agree that no serious connotations could be réad into
the incident. They carried the spectacles and the groceries to
headquarters and filed a. routine report. "3

Five hours later Mrs.:Mary McCormack telephoned police head-
quarters and voiced concern over her missing husband, Francis.
“He telephoned me at 4 p.m. from his office and said he was on
the way -home. He hasn’t shown up, and I’m quite worried
about it.”. : ,

Ordinarily the woman would have been reminded that it was
now only 10 P.M. and that such a short interval of time did not
justify such apprehension. But an alert desk officer, aware of the

ZI

ieated, his
ned. AE
ty he could

- around the -:

was entering
1. the
ySpi hat
levelopments.
de the target
‘ible people,”

with a thou-
them...

ym optimistic
hat day also
fice, slumped
| through re-

pacing, look-
g. His phone
the Criminal

ered.

the criminal
meekly with
méther. He
. rather large
aggerated by

iy to the ar-

'
?

ht-lipped. He
know he was
1e day before,
rain this morn-
fam‘! deciding
Bt called
dge

newspaperman >

Military Police
f up on Satur-
beaten by the

ged with mali-
and placed in
estioning didn’t
» all day Thurs-
1d would back

wondered if she
1 \the matter; it
1ild by Leonard.
taken identity,”
WicCormack re-
his is a heck of
a

case as swiftly
press a murder

recovered the

and a length of
to the FBI lab
ions of Harrods

Wells, lakes,
e Tarrence home

ae ae ‘air, was
ha 1 to the

But his father.
it was just cir-;

nore than that . :

“a

sheen hag

On Thursday, March 6, Roy Tarrence was
arrested. Young ordered the move after he

got a number of reports that the father and
son were seen driving near Jeffersontown an
hour after the attack in the alley.

Roy was placed in a cell on the opposite
side of the jail from his son. His presence
had an effect on Leonard. He looked glum
and tired, as if weary of trying to keep up
a false front.

Saturday morning, * stipe appearing in a
lineup where he was again identified; Leonard
looked at his guards with eves that were soft
and almost pleading. “Let me see my father,”
he said, “and I’ll give you a confession.”

The request was refused. He thought a
moment, then suggested a deal. A full confes-
sion for a guarantee of a life term.

“I can guarantee you nothing,” answered a
prosecutor who had been called to the jail.
Judge Mix, also there, told him the same
thing.

But Leonard wanted to talk. He had to
get it out. He and his father killed the at-
torney and dumped him in Harrods Creek.

“Why ?” he was asked.

“Because I don’t like a damned liar,” he
said. “He told me he could get us a divorce—
and he didn’t do it.” He wouldn’t explain
any further.

The crime was not planned. He and his
father happened to be driving by when they
saw McCormack. They waited for him to
come out of the grocery, then attacked him.

McCormack was still alive when they got
to the creek. They knocked him uncon-
scious,

“We went up near the road and found
a concrete slab and some barbed wire. We
put the concrete on his stomach and tied
it with the wire . . . we shoved him into
the creek. I don’t know if he was dead then
or not... .”

Leonard was taken to the creek, indicat-
ing a spot near the highway bridge. With
arms crossed over his chest, he stood next
to Judge Mix and calmly viewed the drag-
ging operation. No trace of emotion showed
on his imperturbable features.

But suddenly when one lifeless arm broke
through the murky water he turned his head.
“TI don’t want to see the body,” he said. His
voice broke.

The coroner, after viewing McCormack’s
remains, said he died of numerous skull frac-
tures.

Leonard was taken back to the county
jail. Officials prepared to file affidavits
charging the two men with murder. And
hundreds of cars swarmed over Highway 42,
carrying men, women and children to the
creek where the body was found. Some
eager-eyed women with babies in their arms
pushed their way right down to the bank of
the muddy water. Though most of them
knew the stream as well as the back of their
hands, it now held special significance for

them. McCormack’s blood had blended with~-

the murky stream.

Roy Tarrence still made no formal state-
ment, but when he was allowed to meet with
his son that night, he sobbed, “Son, we made a
big mistake—about as big a mistake as we could
have made. I don’t knew why we did it... .”

“Now, Swami, just tell the jury where you’re going to be
the night of July 21, 1952.”

——e
——<———
————

You're too young to settle for a saggin,
So wear a Bracer. You'll look trimmer—{
work better, coo. Bracer’s cool, elastic

gives you firm support where you nee
Comfortable fly-front pouch. Tube-weaye
can’t curl or bind. Get your Bracer Sup;
today. $3.95 and up at most drug, de
and surgical supply stores. Write for fre

LAW,

STUDY AT HOME (eee tice meee
and public life. Greater opportunities now than
Mere ene More Prestige: More Money *

our * Training for
and ‘‘Evidence’’ books FREE WwW :
LASALLE EXTENSION UNIVERSITY.417 pea ey
Aa Oept. 648L

obligation. Simply address

Cartoonists: Bway
Dept. 56D

SHORTHANI

Famous Speedwriting ShortHand System.
No symbols; ne machines. Uses ABC's.
Easy to learn, write, transcribe. Low cost.
100.000 taught by mail. Also typing. 29th
Year. Write for FREE booklet to:

Be a DETECTI

A Challenge From Washington, D. C.
Help Stop Crime! Train at home. Earn big
money. Amazing training course from the
NATION'S CAPITAL (center of law en-
forcement) by former U. 8. GOVT. AGENT
and NAVAL INTELLIGENCE Officer ex-
poses actual methods used by —
Write for FREE BOOK.

State
agiTERBATIONAL BETECTIVE “FRaimine
7Oi Monroe St., +» Dept. 276, Washingtc

MEN! 20Yu5s

Pains in Lower Back, Hips and Leg
Vitality, Nervousness,. Irritability,
Rising, Bladder Trouble, Forgetfulness
lessness; Weak, ‘‘Worn-Out'’ Feeling
General Decline in Health? If so, th
for our Free ‘“‘facts’’ booklet con
much information of value to you. /
is mailed together with Questic
Blank in plain wrapper. Don't Dela
for your copy Now! NO OBLIGA

-——-MAIL THIS COUPON

MILFORD SANITARIUM, Box H
MILFORD, KANSAS

Gentlemen: Please send me your Free
Booklet.

NAME... .cccccccccsccses eeceeees AGE
ADDRESS, ...-.sccccesecoees deeccececoe
CITY and STATE......cccceeee gececses



=:

22

Officials dragging the creek where a tarmer recalled seeing “a sack of garbage” being dumped...

reported incident of three men fighting at Oak and Fourth Streets,
less than a block from the woman’s address, began adding
things up.

Not only did time and proximity figure, but Mrs. McCormack,
upon being questioned over the telephone, confirmed the fact that
her husband intended stopping by a grocery store on the way home.
“Did you specify any particular items for him to purchase?” she
was asked.

“Yes, a can of Postum and a head of lettuce,” came ‘the reply.
These items had been among thase picked up by the puzzled radio
car patrolmen.

Two detectives, Elmer Kessinger and Paul Finley, promptly
sped to the home of McCormack, one of the city’s leading attor-
neys. Mrs. McCormack, a gracious-mannered woman, greeted

them with a look of taut expectancy. “Why did the police ask me

about those groceries?” she burst out.

Unwilling to alarm the woman with his own vaulting sus-
picions that something grave had happened to the missing man,
Kessinger admitted some groceries had been found. How about
spectacles—what kind did he have?

Mrs. McCormack advised them that he wore a pair of horn-
rimmed spectacles prescribed three years previously by an
optometrist on South Fourth Street.

Although she exhibited an awareness that the mere interest of
the detectives hinted that his disappearance wasn’t regarded lightly,
Mrs. McCormack held her emotions in check. She provided a
complete description of her husband—S5 feet, 11 inches in height,
170 pounds, dark hair graying at the temples.. He had been wear-
ing a slate-gray suit, a gray topcoat, black shoes, a blue tie with
a red ship’s wheel design, and a white shirt that would carry the
laundry mark, MOR-S53.

Routine questioning failed to disclose whether McCormack had
been laboring under.any undue fears of late. When he. telephoned,
his voice had sounded normal. He had volunteered no recent

comment of anything unusual or off-key in his business affairs.

‘Nor was the anxious wife aware of any threats or personal diffi-
. culties. The detectives finally thanked her and left.

They. next proceeded to the home of the optometrist. Advised
of the serious nature of their mission, the doctor readily agreed to
return to his office and check the spectacles exhibited by the

detectives. “I treated Mr. McCormack at one time. It will be a‘

simple matter to say whether they are his or not.”

By testing the lens power and then comparing his finding with
the attorney’s record, the doctor verified the fact that the
spectacles were those prescribed for the missing attorney.

Apprised of this, Chief of ‘Louisville Police Carl Heustis sped
back to police headquarters in the dead of night. “It looks like a
bona-fide kidnapping. We don't have any time to waste,” was his
grim comment.

Police machinery began to grind at a quickened tempo.

A description of McCormack and the ‘shiny gray sedan began
to clatter from the radio room. Teams of night-trick detectives
began scouring through the city. Other skilled investigators began
a methodical check of the attorney’s office files, searching for a
clue to a motive behind the baffling abduction.

If ransom was the key to the weird affair, then the kidnappers
were certainly in no hurry to collect. The hours rolled by without
so much as a telephone call to the distraught wife.

Black streamer headlines in the early afternoon editions re-
flected the certainty of the police that the worst could be expected.
The boldness of the daylight abduction and the prominence of the
victim -intensified the wave of shock that now swept the city.
McCormack, a military hero of World War I, had built up a wide

legal practice throughout the state, and his name was well-known.

He had also engaged in numerous civic and charitable enter-
prises, E
Meanwhile, a grim plea from Chief Heustis to the public to be

- on the lookout for clues to his disappearance ‘or for some sign

that a
hope .to
Frank
ward wit
ing Four
man. Tt
ber—her
number
The lic
a 45-year
A brac
of the hc
formed t!
the night
and com;
found at
to punch
’ The de
on the dc
heavy-set,
looking li
“Yes, lr
of my car
Prompt
“There
the county
a shed. I
“And yc
“T was,
a mother
corroborat
“Why, i
that awful
The det

Left to


va

te also destroyed Long’s contention

that he had not only failed to visit the.

hobo camp that night but he had also not
even seen Chris Roney. Meanwhile,
Long failed to keep his appointment to
take a polygraph test. When Detective
Brubaker traveled to Portola to find him

_ he visited a former employer of the’

- young man. :

‘Frankly, I think Long is going to be ©

hard to talk to,’’ the man, who owned a
__ garbage processing plant, said. ‘‘I heard
through the grapevine he died in Reno
last night.’’ AS

. Detective Brubaker obtained the name
of a young man, who worked ‘in a Portola
automobile parts house, who had passed
the news along to Long’s former em-
_ ployer. When the investigator ques-

tioned the person in the Auto parts

house, he was told the information was

correct. Sie, 7 te

“I heard Bill Long died in Reno last

night,’’ he was told again.

' The investigator returned to the sher-
iff’s department headquarters in Quincy
and promptly contacted the Washoe
County Coroner’s Office in Reno. He
was told by an employe there, that no

_ record of Long’s death was available.
_“‘Would you check your hospitals
_ there?’’ Detective Brubaker asked. ‘‘I
would like to be sure. I’ve heard from
two sources that the man is dead and he is
wanted for questioning in a murder in-
vestigation.’’ ret CF op
The coroner’s deputies in Washoe
County agreed to make the check, and
about three hours later Detective Bru-
baker received their call. He was told
that Bill Long had died. A tumor on the
_ brain had killed him. The young man had
told the detective he had been sick.
Long’s death had not been recorded as a
coroner’s case because, at the time he
died, Dr. Ritzlin, the same pathologist
who had performed the autopsy on Hay-
ward, had been in the operating room
and had automatically recorded the
cause of death.
“*He told me he was sick. He just
_ didn’t say how sick,” Detective Brubak-
er reflected later. ark
| The investigator promptly asked the
Washoe County deputy coroners to send
him samples of Long’s blood. He was
told the body had already been shipped
to Santa Rosa, California, by family
request. Detective Brubaker then con-
tacted the hospital where Long had died
and asked for what ever blood samples
had been taken. He was told that when
the young man died the blood samples
had been destroyed.
When Detective Brubaker contacted

74 Official Detective

>

Santa Rosa authorities, he discovered
Bill Long had already been buried. He
then procured a search warrant, traveled
to Santa Rosa, where he met Criminalist

_ Jim Weigand of the Redding Department

of Justice Laboratory, and had the body
exhumed. Deep tissue samples were then
taken from Long’s body and forwarded to
the Redding laboratory, where techni-
Cians reported they matched samples
found on the dead youth’s clothes.

At the same time, Detective Brubaker
was told a large quantity of blood had
been found on Long’s clothing and that it
tmatched blood samples taken from Pel-
leas Hayward, the murder victim.

The investigator then prepared a photo
linup containing Roney’s picture and
took it to Roseburg, Oregon. There the
three people who had seen the men at
Hayward’s campsite all selected Roney
as one of them. The youth and his mother
also both remembered the jersey with the

et

tess

; ; Mee uae Ve <2 Rep.
number 32 on the front. Their hos
said she had not seen it, or at least ha
been aware of it,‘ : te Baars
Detective Brubaker took his
to District Attorney Flanagan

be

der. After his arrest, a young

had been a friend of the accused man and

didn’t want to get him in trouble. Later,
he said, the knowledge hurt his conscien-
ce and he felt compelled to tell someone _

what he knew. | -

Late in April of 1983, Chris Roney, 9
then 23, was found guilty of first-degree 7
murder. The same jury which decreed his. eo
guilt declared he was legally sane. He has - ‘a

_ been sentenced to spend from 25 years to. | |
life in the California prison system.’ |

When they had finished interrogating
all the witnesses they could find, the
officers began a ground search of the area
where the assault had occurred. Near the
spilled groceries, one of the officers spot-

_ ted a pair of eyeglasses with light-colored

shell rims. Among the scattered contents
of the burst grocery bag the other patrol-
man found a sales slip from the supermar-

ket, which fronts on South Fourth Street. _

Fully aware he was playing an extreme
longshot, the officer hastily jotted downa
list of the scattered groceries, then went
inside to question checkout girls at the
busy store, hoping one of them mjght.
remember the customer who had purch-
ased the items and help to identify him.

He got an unexpected assist from the
Store manager, an assist which elimin-
ated the necessity of questioning all of the
cashiers. The manager took one look at
the sales slip and said: . f

‘This came from Number Six register.

It was this girl right over here.”’

He brought the patrolman over to the
cashier, but she only shook her head and.
shrugged. ‘‘I’m sorry, Officer,”’ she
said, ‘‘but my Own mother could have
come through here ten minutes ago and J
wouldn’t have known it unless she spoke
to me. We’re so busy here, we don’t look
at the people—unless they pay by check.
We just look at the’stuff they bought and
hit the register keys as fast as we can.”’

An alert had been broadcast by the

Horror of Harrods Creek (from page 43)

| police dispatcher as soon as he had re- te
ceived the initial report from the Officerat ~*~
the alley attack scene, but none of the — 1 No

patrols throughout the city had spotted
the old gray Chevrolet sedan on that
gloomy Thursday afternoon of February

28, 1952. The identity of the victim of the 2 ey
it was,

assault-kidnaping, if that’s what
remained a mystery. . Re ME:

There was some hope among officials -

at headquarters that someone would
soon call in a missing person report on a
missing man, but this might not happen
for hours, perhaps even a day or so be-
fore his kin became sufficiently alarm-
ed to notify the police. :

In the meantime, they had one clue, ”

and they worked on that. The license

plate number of the old gray Chevrolet.

Now ordinarily, a ‘‘make’’ on a license
plate can be provided by the state Motor
Vehicle Bureau very rapidly, sometimes
within minutes, rarely in more than an
hour. On this occasion, however, a delay
was caused by one of those coincidences

that might be described as a 1,000 to 1

shot. n
It just happened that the files at the
Motor Vehicle Bureau were in the pro-
cess of a reorganization, and the batch of
records containing the number of the old

Chevrolet were among a set which was

in transit from old to new files.

Because of this, it required nearly four |

hours to find a name to match the gray

evidence
and Chris ~
Roney was arrested for first-degree mur-
man came —
forward and told the investigator that __
Roney had described the murder in detail
to him. The youth said he had not told 2
‘ about the confession earlier because he ©


around six, I’d say. That about right?’’

_ He looked questioningly at the small
woman. © « :
Again she nodded affirmatively.

» “You were alone all this time. That

right?’’ Sergeant Bibb inquired.

_. ““Fraid so, all by myself,’ Tarrence

~ Said. Sige

‘‘Any objections if we look over your
car?’’ the sergeant asked. rs

' Tarrence shrugged. ‘‘Go right ahead.

‘It’s out there in the driveway.’’
He accompanied the investigators as
_ they trooped outside to where the car was
parked. For a car that was 12 years old,
they found it in a remarkably well-
_ preserved condition. It was spotless.
» Although its paint was somewhat faded,
the finish showed signs of recent
polishing, and the upholstery inside the
car was in spic and span condition.
_ Sergeant Bibb, after poking his head
into the interior, drew back, sniffing.
_“*There’s a strong smell of gasoline in
there, like someone was using it to clean
_ the upholstery.’’ He looked questioning-
ly at the car’s owner. Woke
'. The latter shrugged and said, ‘‘That’s
possible, I guess. I drive the car so much
I guess I’m used to it and never notice the
smell.’’ He went on to explain, ‘‘This
old heap is kind of a hobby with me. I
work on her whenever I get a free mo-
- ment. I was doing it today; I cleaned
' her up inside ‘cause I’d gotten a few
grease spots on the cushions. I always.
keep her nice and clean. Ain’t that so,
Mary?’’. — ; eae
_ He addressed the latter question to an
attractive, lithe-limbed blonde teenager
who had just walked up the driveway.

‘You sure do,’’ the girl replied,
eyeing the plainclothes officers curious-
ly. ‘‘Anytime we want to find you when
you ain’t in the house, we know just
where you’ll be—out here fussin’ over
that old car.’’ She paused briefly, her big
blue eyes roving speculatively over the
strangers, and then she asked, ‘‘What’s
goin’ on? Don’t tell me you’re fixin’ to
sell your old pride and joy—not after all
‘the work you done on her.”’

*‘No, I wouldn’t do that,’’ Tarrence
said. “‘I’ll explain to you later. Whyn’t
you go on in the house for now?’’

As the girl tripped off, he explained to
the officers that she was Mary Bixler.
“‘She’s my son’s intended,’’ Tarrence
added. ‘‘She spends most of: her time
over here with us.”’

Sergeant Bibb faced a curious sort of
dilemma now. On the one hand, the re-
port he had stated that a witness had spot-
ted an old gray Chevrolet sedan being
driven away from the assault scene in

16 Official Detective

~ eight.

Louisville carrying a victim who had just
been assaulted by two men. The witness
had written down the license number of
the car, and it checked out to Tarrence as
the owner. In a general way, Roy Tarr-
ence fit the description of the older of the
two assailants. ert :

On the other hand, from the descrip-
tion, he had expected to find a car that

__Was more in the beatup jalopy category,

not a gleaming one like this, even if the

* paint job was slightly faded. Also, Tarr-

ence’s alibi for the critical time period
was at least partly supported by a wit-

_ hess, even if that witness was a member

of his own household. More to the point,

_ however, Roy Tarrence certainly did not

look like the type of man who might have
decided to take up mugging strangers in
broad daylight. A doa rata

The license plate factor could have
been due to a mistake and a coincidence,
Bibb realized—wrong number, right car
type. People, especially under stress dur-
ing a moment of excitement, often make
mistakes in reading numbers of license
plates. Threes are often read as eights,
and vice versa. Sixes and nines are trans-
posed in the viewers’ minds. And the
number reported contained three of those
often confused digits, three, six and

Was it a coincidence that the car the

reported number had led the police to

was an old Chevrolet sedan like the one
seen by witnesses?
Roy Tarrence suggested that someone

‘must have made a mistake. Sergeant
Bibb and the county detectives were not

completely convinced, but in the abs-

ence of more tangible evidence, there

was little more they could do. |: |
“‘We might want to talk to you again,
Mr. Tarrence,”’’ the sergeant said as they
took their departure. aN
~ “Any time, gents,’’ he said affably.
“I been living right here for years and
got no plans to go anywhere. You know
where to find me.”’
The sergeant drove back to police
headquarters in Louisville, hoping

- something might have happened during

his absence which would shed more light

on the mysterious assault-kidnaping in

the Louisville alley. He found that no-

thing further had occurred. No one had :

called in to report a missing person who
might be connected with the alley abduc-
tion. No more witnesses had been unco-
vered. The supermarket, its hordes of
shoppers long since returned. to their
homes, had closed for the night.

up for the lawyer.

There was nothing further he could ~s

think of to check into that night; so
Sergeant Bibb went home himself.

‘‘Maybe we’ll get a break in this thing

tomorrow,’’ he said to an associate.

_ His words were prophetic, for at 10 |

o’clock the next morning, Friday, /

February 29th, the alley assault and kid-

a
an

nap case suddenly came alive again.

A call was received at headquarters — i
from a worried woman who reported that _ ;
her husband, an attorney who had prac- 3
ticed in Louisville for all of his. profes-
sional career, was unaccountably mis- ||
sing. Their home, it turned out, was on “
Garvin Place, not far from the supermar- “4 |

ket where the daylight assault had occur- ‘
red the previous afternoon. ~ ©.» -!.7+*

home from his downtown law office

, Sometime after four o’clock Thursday he

afternoon. ~“ Ba aaa,
‘It was exactly four o’clock, his wife

said, when he telephoned to advise her so
he was’ leaving for home. He usually By

rode a bus out to Oak and Fourth Streets
and walked the two blocks to his house.
That Thursday afternoon he had said he
planned to stop at one of the groceries on

' Fourth, near Oak, to pick up a few

things. His wife reminded him that they

“were out of Postum, his favorite after- |
- dinner beverage. isaee t

_ “Pll pick up a can,”” Mr McCormack
had said. Nein

aM

a

ie
Fart

Francis J. McCormack, the 54-year- : 4
old lawyer who was missing, had Aa
apparently disappeared while on his way <4

a

4. ve
258
Ry

yey
fig Whi
Ce?

f

3.

4s
“al
|

|

+ eegl
gt

AP a

ne

oH

‘>

i

Checking the list of staples from the : 4

burst bag which the patrol car officer had

made the day before when he was trying * 4 |

to find a cashier who might remember

the victim, Sergeant Bibb immediately — 2

noted that one of the items was a can of “a

Postum. : iS Wey
He noted also that the scene of the
assault was only about a block from the

missing man’s residence, and that the _
alley in which it occurred could have -*

been utilized as a short cut from the

Fourth Street shopping district to the |

lawyer’s house. A quick telephone call

established the fact that Mr. McCormack.” a

frequently used this short cut.
Detectives went to the attorney’s
home and displayed the eyeglasses with

the light-colored shell rims. They were
identical to Mr. McCormack’s glasses. “3

The possibility that this might be a ~
coincidence was ruled out less than an

-hour later when the probers took them to

Attorney McCormack’s Louisville ©

optometrist. nM ese
He positively identified the spectacles
as a pair he had prescribed and had made

~~.
i

“ff


am > wig: ‘
formation finally came in to police head- Try this Carey pipe

2d a mystery.

1
| us where it was at twenty minutes past
© was some hope among officials i

TALENT. | Sohal.

‘Wes
four this afternoon?”’ < to Do

17 Longwood Rd. Quincy, Ma. 02169 (OD)

aber 32 on the front. Their hostes: } Chevy’s plate number. When the in-
| she had not seen it, or at least had n ie |
. 4 ; :
: : eet Of it, ma quarters, it was learned that the Chevy co
% ec Brubaker took his evidence a had been registered to one Roy Tarrence, | | 6G 55 4
sit _ttorney Flanagan and Chris who resided in Jeffersontown, a small or ays j
“ tae arrested for first-degree mur- 3 village in the rolling uplands some 10 < me % rae
ter his arrest, a young ‘man came 3 miles southeast of Louisville. ee 4 THE MAGIC
ae and told the investigator that J Without further delay, Sergeant and we'll even — ence
ey x described the murder in detail * James Bibb, of the Louisville Police De- give you the eS ANG :
'm. The youth said he had not told r partment Crime Prevention Bureau, tob FREE!
it the ane earlier because he |i drove out to Jeffersontown after first obacco es
deen a fri a , : ’ Be
‘suet ns - the accused man and eB making arrangements for County inves- Smokes like no pipe you've ever Re
yy ain to get him in trouble. Later, | | tigators to meet him there. known! Be delighted or smash itwitha — HOW THE “MAGIC INC
id, the knowledge hurt his conscien- Be They found the Tarrence home to be a hammer and the trial will cost you nothing. ‘.
‘a he felt compelled to tell someone # neatly kept bungalow. Roy Tarrence was i's anew concept in pipe smoking, Top grade Meciter
Ng ape pu Be at home, but he was just about to leave | | ““hamnessesNataecouniane Co oevde age ncn
33, Was found eeen Gttis Roney, “Gf for his job, a well-known Louisville | |  ¢nootest coolest most sang smoke of youre
25, was found guilty of first-degree oa distillery when the officers arrived; he remo tas pure smoking satisfaction you've never we
. : : a : nown i iia
hn ri Same jury which decreed his 4 told them he was a fireman there, and. Whether you're a pipe Smoker or merely wishtocut . Cool Air a5 Co
Saha oF was legally sane. He has worked the night shift. ig ‘|| trsunusualofer Ater20 days youdont agreetrat reset eMers,._: Go
seitenced to spend from 25 years to Roy Tarrence, the detectives noted, || [2ne.ppe gvesyouine uh aroma, deep down, nes wih smoke mo
€ California prison system. was a medium tall man stockily built can give. smash it with a hammer. The trial has cost you cooling and “+ abs
: ? ; : nothing. Even the half-pound humidor of tobacco 1s condensing it. °. the
tok mild-mannered. He spoke in the soft seme Saaeee Wee tes nis ! ;
‘ : f I nd select le pepo ees 3 a
J Southern draw! of the region. He|| qeiedlursmunriorevsmemetne gies FEA (AE
greeted the officers courteously and with Metered wit aiencgy BLE 199 Acadenn Ome:
[pou ros wountie ater || FORFASTINORMATION I cisemm te
rom page’43) poutely Curious abou eir V1 ! pi bs & pipe to smoke for 30 day
| . home, but his curiousity changed to Call Free! 1 800-323-1717. | ai oe
s : | apparent mystification when his visitors (In Illinois: sala “Address “het
Dicer her ce questioned him about his car’s presence Ask for Operator 67.) © cay! siete
: ispatcher as soon as he had re- at the scene of a fight in Louisville that | | EACAREY INC | State
the I report from the officer at afternoon. 639 Academy Drive Northbrook IL 60062 ; My Telephone is ( )
| oh - Scene, but none of the **A fight? My car?’’ he echoed. ‘‘You valle Loo seesc se
- Tougnout the city had spotted | must be mistaken. I—I’m afraid I don’t SONGWRITERS ‘'B 2a TA)
gray Chevrolet sedan on that understand.”’ LYRICS, POEMS NEEDED FOR e a
/ Thursday afternoon of February | '_ “*You drive a gray Chevy,’’ Sergeant MUSICAL SETTING AND RECORDING |
abies sanond ofthe victimofthe J Bibb said to him. ‘‘We saw it outside icc acca S LearnB
-Kidnaping, if that’ i { ;  S
ping at's what it was, when we drove up. Would you like to tell RESULTS GUARANTEED ECR Seat NEFER = No Need to

lquarters that someone would

; oats . i Mr. Tarrence blinked owlishly behind a Start making extr
'l in a missing person report on a i his spectacles. he looked thoughtful for a _ | borhood business
man, but this might not happen ' few moments, then said: ‘‘Twenty past | M134 mJ (eal Be fell] Sar \-1 7 dior tarmeoed
Ss, perhaps even a day or so be- | - four? Let’s see, I left home around three. WANT MEN OF ALL AGES FOR 1 ove andy wae St
kin became sufficiently alarm- That’s about right, ain’t it?’’ he said over DATES. Ceo wp
"ify the police. | | his shoulder. oe a WRITE FOR FREE DETAILS: JULIET BOX 18 ig Sreeday lanaugs:
’ meantime, they had one ‘clue, © The small, solemn-eyed woman DEPT: 100 Electronic Des
/ worked on that. The license : hovering in the background looked FORT GARLAND. CO. 81133 Calculator includ
mber of the old gray Chevrolet. j from Tarrence to the officers and = po

linarily, a ‘‘make’’ on a license nodded affirmatively.

i Provided by the state Motor ‘I was down at Floyd’s Fork'a spell,”’ : —. y

é - #00 FRENCH CACHETTES oo a
"ureau very rapidly, sometimes Tarrence continued. ‘‘Then I drove up to for a bare minimum cover Many Poticspen
unutes, rarely In more than an Eastwood—over in Oldham County—to » with the maximum support offices in their own

Great for sunbathing or

x . : time.jobs, but ha
see a friend about going fishing some- vider jodie: & twlirwnas

| this occasion, however, a delay hooks for 62a en

ed by one of those coincidences

time soon.’”’ Designed to give you the nesses in their spa

i ° ; : ‘ ultimate in appeal and They make extra ir

it be described as a 1,000 to 1 *‘Did you actually meet this friend? support. Set of three in home in addition to
: Sergeant Bibb asked.’’ Can he corrobo- Block, White & Nude. ular jobs.

No Previous Experience
Graduation from this
not insure that you will g
find out how our graduate-
send for our job placen
And be sure to check the ¢
to see how many job offe

happened that the files at the : rate your story? “
shicle Bureau were in the pro- _ **Well, no,’’ Tarrence replied, ex- MBs
‘or~-~ ation, and the batch of

hibiting the first indication of unease.

ynta the number of the old : **You see, he wasn’t home. Wasn’t no- | . IN BRIEF iC) > Sind newsbape: Care
" Were among a set which was | body there. I drove around looking for THREE FOR $10.99 £2 | eee
from old to new files. .. him, but I couldn’t turn him up any- Add $1.00 for mailing. y | push tree tects. Show me
¢ of this, it required nearly four where i 2 Sh Sitan Des . pa

~ < . mame
ind a name to match the gray ‘Then I drove back here. Got here ee eee ee peoeess ee

Hollywood, Calif. 90028

*


There was nothing further he could
nk of to check into that night, ’s
rgeant Bibb went home himself.
“M we'll get a break in this thing |
non__, ’ he said to an associate.” ‘
His words were prophetic, for at 10
clock the next morning, Friday,” ;
bruary 29th, the alley assault and kid- =
9 case suddenly came alive again. *
A call was received at headquarters |
m a worried woman who reported that ~
‘husband, an attorney who had prac-
2d in Louisville for all of his profes-.
4 Career, was unaccountably mis-
g. Their home, it turned out, was on
rvin Place, not far from the supermar- *7 :
where the daylight assault had occur- 7
the previous afternoon. a
‘rancis J. McCormack, the 54- year
| lawyer who was missing, had §
»arently disappeared while on his way @
ne from his downtown law office
netime after four o’clock Thursday 7
smnoon. s
t was exactly four o’clock, his wife ~
1, when he telephoned to advise her |
was leaving for home. He usually 4
e a bus out to Oak and Fourth Streets 7
. walked the two blocks to his house. 7
it Thursday afternoon he had said he 4
ine“ *~ ~top at one of the grocerieson |
irth iw Oak, to pick up a few
8S. ...0 Wife reminded him that they 4
e out of Postum, his favorite after-  “
ler beverage. 4
‘T'll pick up acan,’” Mr McCormack
said.
‘hecking the list of staples from the
st bag which the patrol car officer had
le the day before when he was trying
ind a cashier who might remember
victim, Sergeant Bibb immediately
'd that one of the items was 3a can of
‘um. :
ie noted also that the scene of the |
ult was only about a block from the — ’
sing man’s residence, and that the 4
¥ in which it occurred could have
1 utilized as a short cut from the
rth Street shopping district to the
ver’s house. A quick telephone call
dlished the fact that Mr. McCormack |
uently used this short cut.
etectives went to the attorney’s
e and displayed the eyeglasses with
ight-colored shell rims. They were
tical to Mr. McCormack’s glasses.
possibility that this might be a
zidence was ruled out less than an

A ER a rt manne a ti er ao Pecan hilt Miter st ices mp AOR DOM Ati etl tnt Ate pines bie FI i

1 tn narnia taille end nnadecinnielinatinist ae

late en the probers took them to
rmée_  [cCormack’s Louisville
metrist. f

> positively identified the spectacles
yair he had prescribed and had made
or the lawyer.

The next couple of hours were busily
spent by detectives assigned to interro-
gate Francis McCormack’s family and
‘nends in an effort to discover a motive
for the assault-kidnaping. These efforts
were disappointingly unfruitful.

No one who knew the respected
lawyer could even suggest a motive for
the violence which had befallen him.
From the initial surface indications, he
had experienced no trouble with any of
his clients, certainly none of a type
which might have prompted violent re-
prisal. He rarely carried anything more
than very nominal sums of cash on his
person, nor did he wear expensive jewel-
ry. The only item in the latter category he
carried with him was-a thin silver Elgin
watch.

Mr. McCormack was desceibed as a
large man, standing six feet one inch tall
and weighing about 175 or 180 pounds.
On the day he disappeared, he was wear-
ing a Slate gray business suit, a pearl gray
topcoat and a dark-colored hat in a
medium charcoal shade.

When the foregoing facts had been
established, the case was turned. over
without further delay to Lieutenant
Charles Young, of the Homicide Squad.
As soon as he had studied the reports,
Lieutenant Young instructed his aide,
Sergeant A.J. Miller, to issue an alert to
Louisville pawn-brokers regarding the
thin silver Elgin watch the missing man
had been carrying, with orders that the
police should be notified at once if any-
one tried to pawn such a timepiece.

The lieutenant then launched a two-
pronged investigation which he hoped
would unravel the mystery of what had
happened to the missing attorney.

Sergeant Miller was assigned to inter-
view Mr. McCormack’s law partner to
see if he could cast any light on the puz-
zling incident. He could not; he said he
knew of no professional difficulties
which might have prompted violence of
any sort. He said that his partner’s wife
had telephoned her the night before when
Frank McCormack failed to arrive home,
and that was the first intimation he’d had
that something might be amiss.

“*I knew he had been out of the office
much of the day,’ ’the partner said, ‘‘but I
thought he was. probably working on
some case, so I advised her not to worry.
But when I learned this morning that
Frank hadn’t come home all night, I in-
structed her to call the police.

‘*What do you guys make of it? Do
you think it’s just a mugging, or what?’’

Sergeant Miller shook his head. ‘‘It’s
hard to believe a couple of ordinary thugs

Study at Home, No Classrooms, Set
Your Own Pace, Wide Choice of
Subjects to Fit your Interests, Credit
for Subjects Finished Earlier, Low
Cost, Easy Payments, No Salesman

will call ~

Way back in 1897, our school’ was
founded to help men and women. finish
high school as they worked or. raised
families. Since then, more than 2,000,000
men and women have enrolled in our
school. We are probably the world’s
largest high school—and without a single
classroom.

In a recent survey, 70% of our graduates
told us that they chose American School
because their responsibilities prevented
them from attending resident school; 45%
because they could learn at their own
pace, and 20% did not want to return toa
resident school because of their age. (Adds
to more than 100% as many gave several
answers.)

Whatever your reason, and even if you had

trouble with regular high school, | am sure

American School can help you to succeed,
-at home, at your own pace.

American School is different. There are no
classroom pressures. You work at your
own pace as a “class of one’’—and our

MAIL COUPON TODAY

IF YOU MISSED OUT ON:
SCHOOL—here’s a seco.

instructors really c

_get personal note

computer print-ov
Nearly 100 subjec
are interested in

art, typing, home

can tailor your pri
Of course, we gi
completed earlier

Do mail the coup
you of our Accr:
special home stu
tion; or telephone

ACT NOW! GE
YOUR HIGH

Phone Free
- AMERI

~—€s'
Dept. 10206 850 E.

AMERICAN SCHO
850 E. 58th, Chic

Please send me FREE
home-method, accredit:

Name
Address
City

Last Grade of High
Schoo! Completed:

would pull a job like this in broad day-

-

NO PREVIOUS SKNLS REQUIRED
Bo a DETECTIVE
INTRIGUING! REWARDING! BIG DEMAND!
learn modern detection methods from
former Federal Agant fer pennies
per dey. Easy monthly peyments.

Send $1 for, Book & Sample Lesson >»
INTERNATIONAL DETECTIVE EF 3
TRAINING SCHOOL op Ber. 1998
P.O. Box 5352, Washington DC 20912

my method of DYNAMIC-TENSION :

starts giving results you can A

feel and your friends will hal

notice. Big, useful muscles. (=

Gain weight, if needed. Lose by

“pot belly.’’ Send your name and

address for 32-page book—FREE.

CHARLES ATLAS, 49 West 23rd St.,

New York, N.Y. 10010 Dept. 91B

Join our successful authors in a
complete and reliable publishing
R program: publicity, advertising,
handsome books. Speedy, efficient
i , service. Send for FREE manuscript
report & copy of Publish Your Book.
BOO CARLTON PRESS pept. DMB
84 Fifth Ave., New York 11, N. Y.
RUPTURE seeriavces
FOR COMFORT! PR
When you slip into a gen-
uine BROOKS Appliance Sy
you can enjoy heavenly —
comfort night and day at
work or at play! Thirteen
million sold, since 1880. You buy direct from the
factory - never sold in stores - beware of imitations.
Only the highest quality materials and workman-
ship. (Especially for older people who wish to avoid
unnecessary operations for reducible rupture). Send
for our FREE illustrated booklet with no obligation.
BROOKS APPLIANCE COMPANY (Medicare
Dept. 370, Marshall, Mich. 49068 Pays 80%)

Mail coupon for FREE *
CAREER KIT”, Draftin
Test. Graduation fromt
does not insure that you
get a job. To find out ho
graduates have done, s
for survey showing t!
employment success.

ps
1 NORTH AMERICAN SCHO'
i 4400 Campus Dr., Dept.
' Rush “DRAFTING CA
I Aptitude Test & Drafti


3°

L Morning Circulanea

Gf fxd ny % KenPucky Ne e's pu per

Fat “Ee CENTS. ON THALNS AND HET ONY

re # * % * F % co.

S Held Unconstitutiona

myPlane TWOONTRIAL 3 MURDERERS
unt Martin WITHLANGLEY ARE BAPTIZED
~PLEADGUILTY ZV DEATH CEL

i pet Sia amr neta a ener

Huth and Carey wall Sen- “| DIE IN CHAIR “wit e and Son of Aged Louis~
: tence cf Court On ~ ville Man Arrive Shortly
Whisky Charge. ee Before Execution.

‘BANK DEPOSITS SHOWN.

ae Sete eC

Letters re cian pa
to Mortimer Show Closes f
riendship.

TRIPLE SLAYER DIES FIRST,

tus fee pourt Justices
Refuse to Aid Oldest Man
Sent to Death.

By RUSSELL BRINE.

i
{
H
H
}

| By. HOWARD HENDERSON,

Sat Corresp ow i ( mrdeiietal staff Cocrespandent oof Phe Gautier Joumiad

Covington a8. 0° May 8 —Livents| | Eddyville, By, May {=
es eee eA ‘Three men in forty-five mit
Etna al oe tale abil (Wo ati | pee 5 : :
Papisnniniy ee Wen ‘utes forfeited their lives this
jeurned Distr t Attorney Sinwyer ‘morning i Eddyville Prison‘s

Sinith indicate? the tanverninent wis

electric chair. Each was
“ready to go.” Each walked
with firm tread from his ee]
to his doom. tach died with.
out a murmur of complaint,
Frank Thomas, 7l-year-oit

EUV Sich ers CS ar emer ag Gres Bt, cr reat
The entire <i.v was tiled with im
portant developments, which borderad

it times. On tle sensatic ot

To begin with is seayias court con
Vened this me:ning two oof the de

Zz

fendants, Moor Huth and Walter Bb.

‘arey, Chane: thea pleas from. “not
ee gray-bearded slayer of three
UO eth eee Wee pelea Sct, :
‘ ee pending seit oon bend, men in Jefferson County, waa
gs scribes Flight of) cus schwarz yf, Attunne City, one the first to be executed, Ta
Aissing Flagship In of the alleged conspirators, added) his

was strappedein the chair af.
to .00: 6 lock,

Driving torm. story to that of Elias HH. Mortimer
and Thomas J. Finn, confessed con

gh a a ; spiraturs, and Soin Collins, State Pro 6 ” :
Ne Sa oe ee bea alee ; hibition Director of Kentucky. “Goodby, Clem,’ he- aaid, Kgs ria
a heaier Viele nea diates a 4 hs S : 5 Sb ie
Ly coli Samiviome Semspaver, MANE Vetueuell to Cee ote ashe saw his attorney, Clem:
Ae a a4 POSS -U Xe ‘ : 2
eaten, May Ss Orders were} stury, retotd gind amplified, has been WwW, Huggins, among the thire =
! Geday by the commiandane the most interesting gf the tha, ¢ 6
Cristi Gugrd ordering the divi The Government piled up additional ty: nine spectators. Good«
Poovittier at Seattle to dispatch | evidence of Che presence in eae Hie by, Frank,” Mr, Huggins ree.:
: Pear ote Chignik, Adaska.dand Lexington of Mr. Langley ane ‘ S 3 ton sag
oroV a.cphine did air service | others of the aileped ae ae a plied. A little later, just be
oe ono the search for May. | the reeords of “Phe Seelboch and ie | : ‘
Moitn, dostiavader af the} ditional eXemiragen of the Phoenix fore the black mask was.
vil tlight: satwdron, Hotel, DeStngter. registers. dropped over his face, he ade
soe odd ob rusinmdiat have deen Reverse foc United States
Sf me San Coaitencns to seattle, |g eee Ph ke woke dressed Mr. Huggins again?’
ae eer ca | pte Teo Thre we Ee re oo i Se c | ‘ t
: Meet inleeon st! Gail ee a ee wate Lestineny Be Se 5 ee aC lem, I'm going home.’”:
° fee tte es foawieteetes ond Warhit ce rene { e “T be lieve it, Frank. :
ee ee hie oor Ar, ane! :
ee a rs Vee oa i es LBC RNID TILOXENS, ;
é “ a ; ee oe : ey Aw es ae hcl Aner san mh. I. OW—GE iG i WEICK, “f am not a bit afraid, .
fae 0 in ee 5 gs thank God.”
ae ee ae ha eee . ae — 7a pn) wre eect a . ig: < Italians Thomas Declared Dead.
; aS seer ee ee Pas li leo al tia s A | | ae ‘ ’ di yO
ee a penunt Test The first shock, followed tn ~
Oe peg Fens Re Te AON deposits Oe te eit ly by a 1other was
Oe eel le ee te Petey Pig he bruary to | re) e an eS en secon | : ne Stake
ey on Oo pe applied at 12:29 o’clocs.

Kes Welt ;
CPLR na" watt Tar sete an Ty ge - h
2 ieee oul th , + Sig m é '
Lasik fis. = \
MmSgu xy late ,
Peat id aad | : ~ f 4 ay. ¥ 3 >
. ste Piyoe nin | i (ee a Me
ee _ wy Inge ve
5 es we . / ae
S a ;
ine . , } z i
fad me vei A ie ie 03 a9 2
4 i yay wt senowonds i
1 Lomas Tos
of FRAY, 1a eg 7
- i ae am ABOVE RAUNT THOMAS,
it

. aie y.
Spies Av ‘
mul Gal

“ pildits, of .Mr.
February ty

along slatenpent
vould show ‘Mr,
~ 9,400 three
y Wa ut | §7,-
qvan would: not
his cBaracter.
vermitted, Hey:
$3 mude by *
‘responding to
made to. Mr.

rds of the: Nu-
of Washington
show that Mr.
Oo on Septem:
day Mortimer
*, Langley that

ven thac $4,700
by Mr. Uang-
i. 1923, tue the
been deposited
aangley ont Mr.

» Length.

re) proceedings
frequent > and

counsel for Mr.

» keep out of
t of the testl-

ith and Carey,

or the apectu
sibly the other
2en agreed on

on gach. side
it was to hap
ever, served to
ihroughout the
e stress on the
1or Carey.
aminatign waa
acted a4 One
» situation, Llis
conducted oy
Newport.
uestions
vity. for Mocit-
i! hig stury of
gain and again
ship which ie
r. Langley and

only

stters and tein

i, Column 3.)

7 TLOWSGEU AGE WEICK,

on ae ee. me orga + - ne ee ey eee

sey Italians.

To Be Hanged
AtNoonT oday

Louisiana Execution at Noon
Today; 6 to Be Hung
In Pairs.

ba Se ee

Amiute, bas May s ()—Six men in
the Tangipanou Purish jail were pre:
paring tonigbt to Ate on the sallows
tomorrow just three years and one
day after Dallas Calmes, a citizen ot
Independenve, wus shot and killed at
that plaice when he frustrated an at
tempt to rob the Merchants
Planters Bank. :

Bocehio conferred yesterday with
relatives of Culines. All were: im.
pressed with the truthfulness of his
story that when the sextette arrived
In Independence in an automobile
from New Orleans he cdiid not leave the
eur and was net within two blacks of
the bank and the Calmes home svaen

add

py Leona shot Caimes. soechio,
without a relative in this country,
with and No money, guid

ye friends
he had desired to tell the story of the
affair from the beginning but: at
Leona Insisted on silence, declaring if
them stuck together ail would be re-
leuséd. Silence Was maintained by all
untl aaa weeks ago when Leona
confessed d adniutted be was the
man whe Ki led Calmes.

Sheriff Dowden announce ed today
the men woujd be executed in ' Parts
in alphahetical order. The frat ty
die will be Broechivu and Natale Del
minore. Thev will be  fullowed = by
Joseph Glglio und Andrew Lensaintia,
Leona and Josepa Rint. The sheriff
added that the plan would be changed
oniv- if dmy of the men should ‘break

down and become violent. bm that
event the violent ones weuld be
hanged first. .

The prisoners confess@d ound ore

ceived communion at tba hands of two
priests today and will receive tite last
SoouuMunion tomorrow forenoon a few
hours before the executions. .

Rate Certification to
Vithdrawn By Ship Board

gard to Section 28 of marine Act
‘eversed By Party Vote.

(P)—~—The. Ship.
wight to with
is, {tw certifica-

Commerca Com.,;,

tipping facilities
of the preferen-
of the Merchant

the: beard r

sitiun in: refer-
the Merchant
®™ party ihues
(Conamissioners
d Benson, the
ibers, cast the

steticd.
the: board had

sGectied 23 efleclive within a Ceason:

latie ume: . if
oe The repinios vaselkzet. ied. at
Y gamitined ae Seen L Tata BET

ing the territorial and commodity |*
runges lo wirich the ele rates
would be appited.

Mr. Thompasdn, tn a st: atement after j¢
the final vote, declared withdrawal of
ithe appication by a majority: of the
‘deard “ingy stop forever the enthu-
wiasm fbr cutablishmepe of American
flag preference, and for that! reason
{es to be rewrettedt deepiy.” '

The board. alter {tx second (session
ag which the vesulugiun to withdiaw
ite declaration regarding Section 28
was udonied, isued a statement de-
claring: ft was its intentium tn can
juncnon with other Jepartments of
the Government interested, und ahi
the commercial Interests affected,
continue tae intensive atudy! of . the
aubject with the purpose of making

benipanualoeiiagy ate ty es
ae Sy

yt

i ty-nine
wby, Frank,”
plied.

W. Hugyins, among the ths
spectators. “Goode s
Mr. Huggias ;
A little later, just ba.”
.fore the black mask | wsg'
Ldropped over his face, he ide.
‘dressed Mr. Huggins agains
| “Clem, I'm going home’. %
“f believe it, Frank.” - sae
“f am not »#! bit afraid,
thank God.”
Thomas Declared Dead: : f
The first shock; followed in. *.
ten seconds by another, wad Be
applied at 12:29 o'clock &
Thomas was declared dead ©
by Prison enymean Travis aie
12:39 o’clock.: | i
George Weick: 51, another ~
Jefferson County killer, died:
without saying a word, . The
first shock of 2,000 volts wag
applied at 12:45; o’clock, thie
lowed by another in ten secs
onds. Dr. Travis and othe
physicians who examined *hs —
man were not convinced >a.
was dead, and a third sacex
was applied at, k2:54 o’slos%
Weick was pronounced dead
at 12:58. fy
Charles Miller, negro,
killer of two! white men, ai:

~—

was subjected to tizs>
shocks, beginning at L:°5
o'clock. He was pronounce,

dead at 1:15 ‘o'clock. “=
only display of! emotion 22 /
been some unintelligibie mu ie
tering while! he wag straps. ste:

in the chair; pe

First Triple Elestroeuzicn. i

This was, the first trvols
electrocytion ever stayed wate
Kentucky. It was witnesse-i oes
by the largest crowd cic: ee
Fever saw an: electrocution .: eS
the ‘State. Thirty-nine s#r- x
sons, including) ChieZ &a:-- ee
neer C. E. Callier, who the.

the switch for each ence - are
tion, saw the three men uo.
Eight of those pres@nt
newspapermen.

Just before each man vo

Hanberry offered) a Sriek Sag :
Lprayer, committing the souk.
of each to God. With Ma
Hanberry'’s “Amen,” Warden-
J. B. Chilton would raise aa
hand, and Mr, Collier, water~
ing through a window from »-
rvom next to the death. chame*

(Continued on Peee 4, Colamnn 24

3

LWHAS |

Progrnnyes on The ¢ ,aciss!
dournat aad) |ouléviite Siena
bruadcaating stnttirs te pitar -

{Ds aod Baturdag. dg «eet

é, +e yorougheut

ro
sate.

toner i nenebintnes
}: States lo Mt. os et: =
ltd ian eee pee see


. ne. oe * ~e
mee : ly
eee 4
wae.

PE OAT Be BD teeter

: 7 Pathe Pee 4 otitis

<i ,
ih ie ee ee ee ee a OD
8
. . nee i ee ee “
Pa) - i i a | ‘ See at ag
a ee ee . eg em
ww ~* * id ;
=m 9 ooo a ee ae |
¢ > 7 hem,
_ Se . « ese . -* en Ne ah T
ees _ ae . i a een ages ag
2! : ellis in ee.’ aan aii |
ae ea oe a ~ SR Mee am ime
od *
. i keh ie ie i ie” ft) THESE ARO
: aN siueun wwe | ORO - Ae eet «ke
: 46 MEA ee ee ow per tam fs
o ‘@ .@s tte
ve +e gs . “« ‘ae
‘ i Mi . _
“
Fi¥l WIVES GRANTED
“7

OECHEES OF OIWOATE,

SFe Cehbihy 64 ame ita

. : os
at eee Tee [Re eeR ate OF PR ek
SmENes «v0. 4 7d teQpoet 4290 gpamted Meotfr ia
ae we Oe weer f  Mleeeet dane fe oih
i Le Loe SC hesteg © deer 5 Semerbe et il fete hile
Nertae Kabews Ratt ie ug swage SYERGE do Vette ew te
ink a <7 Ser BAe Ae mdb fog nae
. cee 3m Re af rond f Riatonnead
=e os us
COT a eee — “ng
- lee ~ " ae Me
*. = i ~ al rg whew foem iuford Meek rp
ae wud wttt sei th ame awarded ime -uatady
s Ned Gad NARA temanee al Fi sep
+ wren ene of ie — : *
nies aye aabing dimnte +. Mite cewn frien Paul a
eat ecw balm Lg | OF Stes en, weetts and aimmntuamett,
sity wid we ens ane SOR PM FwI th Aer heiten Hamp
ot ire rte,
chen Ge wade <1 Serr A mendece from ddward Oar
oa dos 82: ore APA NGO eT ane ee
Lage: sediewe es ian BRO Le ee Meblian name of Aine
+ wma
? or Marvey if { Mar gears Sutedios fro Orea Hiunke
anus wine lee ep eey the we sremored in hee
+e gene tie Hae ? Wedem name 6 ee :
NMA. ROS. OW ‘ ‘: wea oe,
ciate RACING 1S ELIMINATED,

ae AM evestrger « f

+4 4 a che
_ { The Times tpewtet teevies

to and ten ff! MOrgemAeias XY May 14 —The ane
ad te ait an. | wel Tore ehow will be melt in chee
ree «> 4. ML 4g PHD ER PORE Of bbe courthouse on May
they ciemr, Bheen SE TE atMfere but litle from the pro-~
tit attest e ote. sramme «f ‘ast year sacept that rag.
Punctay prgar at | S48 Ras heen sitrmunated
“es bere’. | ees

+ of Masons wili!
“GOd degree st 18:

mee Mucaataik
( Paspar Hoppen
wilasapela iA at
akermw ooOMVeNtiCn
ornewmer and Mika:
a sity, “th were,
o cleme tnat grad...
raae Academy ‘ast |
pected ome = i:)-

‘vey fteovle «a av. i
he tsAday ald Lak H

They can't get at you if
you let DOW screen your

mi
if Conneity anu
tending (Re state!

stlan «hurcnre ati

Mob. will mont! domicile :
alge i .
em Knignt isda) Because DOW PLY \
enfertogn tina lee!

—— bese SCAZENS are **tailor=

ne

e8eue of Detauwl
Rpiaeapel ehurcn
te ot the omuren |b
anue Of the Mem. ;
*ou will graduate ;

{ g ve
. * s
Better “citherphone™ us to~ .
day (749) aad get your dy

mo Mehool com. weuables off your mind.
ate Miesee Mather: . “
wnbcarger Marth
(atten and Myrti. | DOW WIRE ® :
TRON WORKS
toeth Wolfe. T7r3
i Prederice WIth. & , Remewerwens: .
“treet, were mar - Weick tebe Yn ge Soe '
‘
Woaat Main street, j ~uanmnaueaeneneemnenen! »
ruteee, the result paer en : /
a waann bog hel > . ‘$s . ,
at State and Maz-{.. 7
Ramen! te QTIEF 2 SomORRS |
——_ - 6 . - c *s
acer |(GOWLING. AND BILLIARDS
leu. 18:3 sae * :
i — “Tene exch se pen weLiF™
pad teem. 6 68 smi oe ee Heager
esta 5h ment
LueecE, .
woe me where
Rewten . 12 14 206
nae, 2 14 28
2@ tS ese
._ * te iso

Per homoge sie OTE ime on 8 far tee
tas) Sine oh heated 19 Ter wetter we

aals @aTRR ikon ane wiher soam
20UND

$1.75 2" $4.75,
CINCINNATI

SOMDAYW, MAW 21

: BALTIMORE & On10

Bail Same “aut
lasvre

aevremh-stvest Hattoa

Charies C. Peper.

Paneral” geryices foc Charles C.
Peper, former Louiaviile man, whose
death occurred at St. Louis April 6,
will be held at 3 o clock this afternoon
at the undertaking establishment of
John Maas, Floyd street and HKroad-
way, the Rev. Dr. TT. M. Hawes offi-
eating. Gurtal will be in Cave Hl
cemetery.

Mr. Peper moved to st. Louis in
1914 and at the tline of nis death was
vice president and treasurer of the
Mhrtiatian-Peper Tubacco Company,
which was founded by his father. He
jeft a fortune estimated at $300,000.
In 1900 he married Miss Carrie Helen
Miller, of Louisville, who survives him.

D. 3. Holt.

The bendy of D. 8. Holt. 81, who dled
atthe City Hospital at 7:30 o'clock last
might, will be sent to Shuais. Ind., for
Durial Wednesday morning. Holt, who
raided at 214 South Sixteenth street,
was a retired broker of Shoals. He ia
wurvived by two sons. James Holt. of
pee 7 ct ee are

a a

i

in your heart, a
frown or a smile
upon your face, de-

upon your

iver.

Get i
Pes

“eastiere Pavcd Ay
‘= v“ere is Gele Sepaaug

Seuss.

& M CELAAD

3a aed Jeemece Sta
@. Pea, Misa.

KHEKKHTHE RTE RLESE REEDED

Heilanvilie, Ind.
Lasuiaville.

and Sherman tuit, of

Mre Vincenatia Rizzuto.

Mre Vincentia Miegute. 40. wife of
Josep Hisautu. a fruit dealer, of 224
ast Walnut street, died at 12.30
o'clock thie morning at Sta Mary and
Elisabeth Hospital, where a week ago,
ahe underwent a surgical operation
for gail mones. She was a native of
Italy, coming here len years ago. He-
side her husband sne leaves three
daughters. Josephine, Vineentia and
Marie Riszuto. and two sistera The
funeral will be conducted from the
fesidence at. 8:30 a'siock Thursday
morning, and at 9 o'clock from Ht.
Boniface’@ chadrch. Burtal will be in
at. Lout® cemetery.

FELLOW-OFFICER

(Continued Fron First Page.)

Lewis
of the

o'clock Thursday afternoon,
Lodge of Masuns having charge
sal Vices,

Thomas Resigns Captaincy.

Thomas is 55 years old. He served
as county patrolman during the time
that Judge Charles A. Wilson was
County Judge, He was made captain
of the county force by County Judge
Samuel W. Greene, but six months azo
resigned as head of the department,
retaining his position as patroiman.
He ts married and has a son. His home
is at Rockford Station.

County Judge Green said this morn-
ing, when told of the killing, that
‘Thomas voluntarily resigned the post
of captain of county patroimen for thea
season that his home was not so sit-
uated that he could conveniently dis-
charge the duties of the office.

Judge (weene said both Thomas and
Poweil had the reputation of being
sober, peace-loving men, and that he
had never heard of trouble between
the two previous to the killing. He
suid that so far as he knew Capt.
Powell never taok a drink of liquer in
his life.

Thomas was arraigned before County
Judge Samuel W-. Greene this morning
charged with murder and the case was
continued until 2 o'clock Monday aft-
ernoon. Attorneys for the defendant
sought to obtain bail. but Judge Greene
remanded Thomas to jail without bond.

NEGAO PORTER SEVERS
ARTERY IN LEFT ARM.
ee

James Haynes, a negro. 23. employ -
ed as a porter at Al Stebler’s saloon,
317 West Green street, accidentally
several a large artery in bis left arm
while sharpening a knife at It o clack
this morning. He waa taken to the
City Hospital and js tn @ serious con
dition from loss of blood.

General Passenger Agest

Lat ested record Of deeciige
eee ae et er Ua vere be
tuttme 1S fo mes
tae gota.
betsee al ead ony saan af Oe -chtoomed
oom fb POM teem pasta. pete ua .t

ie

Alasia @ vemitabie woaderiand
POUR ie eevee Deed gine an yet cc-
mramve can be reecthed witS s s@ort cad
Seigetfai steamer trig trom Pager

Send coupoa teday and recei
deocriptive beokiots.

Salo:

Saffer
a Mur
the hom
Kincaid,
mnville.
tied one
Mr. «ox
at his hq
mot recey
improved
able t» q
ago Dum
Mr. (Cox
his da uci
go chanel
cal cond
he starte
he sank
hts reun
became <q
ly amd re
Geach.

Mr C
wre on zs
sears vid
Boyle cou
Nene +
she with
Kincaid.
beady will
eTmoet
frem ihe
Waineodal

Char

Pammens
com Utne tg
Charteste
Che sam iw
Katie jas!
retrreail «7

afrke Ih
aAvartmmen

MUTT AND JEFF

MAKS WUTT THINK YM A
HERO, Te. SNEAK NER To
THHT OLD ADOBE nur ANO

TRE ENEMY Fiting
Ar ME

TNE GOT ANOTNER SCHEME To

LIGHT THIS CONCH OF Fine CRACKERS,
BESIDE Mr, ILL SOUND UK


vi ket ain 2 PE arta carte i gilda ag pines pists sii yaa | B ai rey
he seo wine « wy sh TAR Waost ree ys sire t)
‘ . ni ~ neds hi be ue e renee ad oe faiwge Oneal ven?
tail “ ns ” . fe beet tapas cg the eft adper  cormmer | ence Vo
ss « el ae - on tamggorncing 8 ota thaw ew found ab ite weunita | te For
. e+ 0 ~ : " ware womder t that thet
Pm) ae 4 a ewe of: eli teomde urnet, ahowing tha t
7; ‘ — ‘ ‘ ox Se! en i seansesahe: a ‘thar sole were Coed al ie Tene i Southern
ary wt wees ba) San Sane ust ee * at Leremmea of ine eshmooting as toi Dy
. - “sss a OT mitessin sige Oe ctd by we whee axe ere wiinessiog the tragedy tifter ae
em ees em een Oe. ae need ven 4a a feet) Peterman | Neve 6 apap gaan Sarstoga “prinas :
oe . a ayeege oO rr he, ire we ia ‘uri am disermet Temas and lodged « unification wl tne Ne
aa eee ae eee ley tre ag army | herew of murder ageing him, 19-4@Y] Cnuren and tre Me
he ‘ab nape ae sae { 7 o wets Chlamasd TR rou msl and | «ave the following accmmutt. Chureh. South was
. cog eB et ote ad a Ment Mating Thomas and ft jeff the city @t) Unanimousiy &) cna
Mg: ow Smee amd cp tng | eS Ae fo San. ionm te attend the opening at Conference to-day
. . amp nates sane echo ih topee fee fof ripe teat far | Maidan e place Thomas end Capt adupted the repact af
se wis See wee tee Rm ae es wees gastieon and} Mosel were perfectly sober, Thomas Unifieation. enien pr
sash meet ce ag TO MMe nie ab Nee wilt he Rai aut (agen more than a drink or negotiations with thd
_ « Neiig. ae Saw SS Ae fae cuefA Diol ett ae semen ee TT | paving the way Gor
. er ee ee Cd ote oe General Conference
. , Mt aS a church on i908 and
toe Tomece Ane ’ tate ei eee Tin Sith & churen a (i®aeret ior
een Ore Somers 8 ba! Naa Nor et if ve cw ey Vad tee i eare «On
annekens ” 28 . on egies eT ter ve} Neal
jenna =. 3 ve Mee el ong s Behe bahar cacti) alte 3
e868 =. we Pee veges) api rieret wiovraed s host (he iuterhei
tiae me ee twee ed tay HE tee Of reat ee asad LoMtgpanies
<4, a® sii “ wergnam | foal acme ca Leen improved ta thee «
oe es age eel Pee | MO (obtements of leapona iearted in —_——
Ne ee mee s The offictad fore
‘ aaenenbone -“ =. five pre tthe aa aleniaas and vicanity for the
10s) lee En am ike gue The compan) unites will no longer be four hoars preweds
se ge a tenme ficce being | aewrtons, Sut eel working uaita uf morrow night: “Fa:
ig wes be tgmi lent wth | SNE Ce thigds wee siteagth, Au in- i
ewe “— fatty company will te 190 men ta ouol to-night and
in war @ ir of o@y-
+ ste Gee tes and em | POOe ond 1h0 big
joe wnsee I v ime and Lid
sie: cee: a 5 3 8
aay ait aves aR ak ih, wm
aetv serreeds Ine ogers The offers’ reserve corpe and tRe Lt iM eure a
1 Mee pin reserve of@eere iruning corpse tare : ‘eal
Mine rhegpe 2G aiad wi 4 ae
wee pages! a 130 American | Met sd0gled «a written in both rt CAPT. B 1?eBow nL,
4 timed Gilke They provide for the edu- ‘ee hha ba

bt '-@ st heng!t hened
te Mememeif fies Ubregen Le-
met ed tiwst heme t rages t ond
etememt Bike Mesiten Wat
9 ‘thi ANOM we wad rot
a ike of wmpresming ine
wars ab an acaument ia
e:thdeymwal, Yui merety aa an
6 48 pl

hetacte enciituntered by the
-(#eere at 2) Mae wee (ha
of convene neg (len. itwegun
pedittcs after Ville was not
ben stag The al@e and com-
foie force ~@arouyeml «lagi
ean oOfffiiiais, and it wae
trem ceoott that |t wae
tem) Ce prem 1 purMUit of
ao wit® detd guna and
actitiery

cm Finaily Coavinced.

covcan offieeres Anaily auc.
petsuading (he ‘War Minia-
shat "Se U'ntted tates
Rat nae intenttan other
ene) puarteome fo ila.
capture (he fandita and ond
Sed cenitiviens along Une bur:
interstanding ag to what
hi be taken by Oot milllary
re filowed

plan for controlling of the
ws =«6>@en recommended by
ston ie proposed a corps
‘gat motareyclea, thirty tan-
eranteen aingie machines.
Haker auld to-day he would
approve the plan. Gea.
will make Kl Pago the base
me for the motorcycle aronata,
otarcycles would anable the
» cover much more quéckly
fen a longer eseation of
theularty in tmotaged dja-
algo enable officers tu re-
la more expeditiously from
poate odtwtant from head-

.

t

wboote

to

ver

oe

erening reported (Rat Julio
1a of Villae aides, Was killed
¢ enaaaement at Cro Arules,

af Maretta returned \vee-
Tampica from Tuxpan.
commander  owmvade an tire
of reported anti-American
He waivised the Navy De-
venditions there were quiet.

"BOTS NO TROUBLE

%

Ambaseador to Japan, Re
¢ to Post, Discusses War
lity. .

Wand May 16.--Col. M. Peres
exican Ambassador to Japan,
@ tu-day with his family and
< Bis official staff, en route to
> Toaw. The party will omil
cient un May 18 from Van-
‘

mpiy on my way back to Ja-
ny family aod with members
Y. after viaiting my home in
cr = few montha* said Col
‘T bave no other malsaion in
eo ane Uplomatic reprementa-
Oovernment. It was char ged
at there @ pear ame Unat | bad
oy Cartansa to enlist Sapan-

a'nat the Unit Staten That
aver @ year acw, and
not Deen any trouble with

‘:@ nut Want war with the
tem bul if war ls foresd upon
will be a uAlted people, a
are now trained Sghtera, to
Catted Saten War would
tuin of Mexico and would
ina of (heusands of tiveg of
soldiers and the expenititure
t from tne Treasiry of tne
tam «hur Aras act om @ daecia-
rar woud Ve the burning and
a of a ch welle,

’

cation, setaetion and training of civil-
jane in Une of jyamee for ihe duties of
at{Rewee (8h time of war, uBd-to « great
eqtent (mep will obviate (Ne hasty are
lection of Ufttrted and unknown persons
fot coremissions om the outbreak of
wae

“The Natlonail
greater

Quard with have
inducementa to tmprove and
orcgreme than wae hoped for before
thie year and it will be on trial dur-
tng ihe next few years to prove that
thte claims made hy tus representa-
tives were correct an dthat (t was only
held back from becoming @ real aa-
eet incur tational defense by forces
aver which it had no control. These
obstacies* it ja hoped have heen re-
moved in the new Hill, and time alone
ran teil whether or not the National
tiuard will take ita place aa an im-
portant factor in the army.”

ENGLAND MAKING
FEFORTS 10 el
DELAY ON MALLS

But She Won’t Abandon Policy
of Preventing Passage. of
Goods to Enemy.

.
—_—_——
Washington. May 18 -The. British
Ambassador, Sic Cecil Spring- Rice,

told Secretary Lansing (o-day that his
Government was atriving to eliminate
the delays and interferences tu
t which the Unitel States is
abowt to make protest. but that Gre
Britain couki net rehnquieh its claim
to the right to prevent the use of the
mails for transmiseion of gouds or in-
formation by its enemies.

The United States is about to make
a renewed demand that the interfer-
ences with mails, particularly those of
neutrals. be immediately abandoned.

mails
again

POST-OFFICE AT WALTON
ROBBED: STAMPS TAKEN.

The Times Special Service.

Covington, Ky., May 16.—Four men
who marked thetr departure § from
‘Walton, Boone county, in an automoe-
bile at midnight by firtng revolver
shots are believed by post-office § in-
spectors to be implicated In the rob-
hery of the post-office at that placc.
When Postmaster A. K. Johnaon, of
Walton. \isited the post-office this
morning he found that the combina-
tion on the safe had been worked and
$200 in stampe removed. He learncd
that a quartet of men ita an auto-
mobile acted suspiciously when they
entered the town, and several hours
later they fred shots while driving in
the direction of Cincinnati.

CAR BARNS DESTROYED.

The Times Spretal Service.

Cincinnat!. May 18.—Fire destroyed
the Cincinnati, Lawrenceburg & Au-
rora Traction Company's barne at
North itend, O. to-day. Six cars
were destroyed, The loan auceada $25,-
f2%.. Cac aervica, perv

{wo of béer. | have never jenown Capt.
Powell to drink anything. There had
been no ill feeling between the men, so
far aa‘! knew.

‘| was sanding about fifteen
from Poweil and Thomas when I
heard the latter exclaim: ‘I am get-
ting tired of watching down in John
Sanderw district while he ts out at the
race track making 83 a day.” Poweil
answered: ‘Whom are you talking to”
‘lL am talking to you,’ said Thomas.

Knocked Thomas Down.

“Powell then knocked Thomas
down, and while on his back Thomas
drew his revolver and fred three
shots. f fan to them. Thomas was
in a sitting position when [| grabbed
hie pistol «and placed him under ar-
reat.”

Elmer Pillard, 1052 South Eight-
eenth street. a special county patrol-
man, who usualy accompanied Capt.
Powell at night and on Sunday, tells
a different story.

“Capt. Powell and I were sitting on
a railing when Frank Thomas came up
and swore about John Sanders coming
{nto his district,” he said. “Capt. Pow-

feet

ell sought to laugh the matter off.
aaving, ‘You fellows help each other
out. Work together. One going into

the other's dietrict does not make any
difference. Thomaa said that if John
Sanders came into his district again he
would Knock his head off, to which
Capt. Powell replied, ‘Oh, LT would not
talk that way."

“Thomas then grew angry at Poweil
and raid, ‘Mil taik to you that way
even if vou are captain.” He then
struck Powell in the face. Powell
grabbed Thomar and heing a larger
man pushed him down. Powell was
stitnding over Thomas, cndeavoring to
lift him to his feet when Thomas drew
his pistol and fired three shots.

“The onls words Capt. Powell spoke
were, ‘(ier ‘em Elmer, they got me.’ I
did not know he was fatally shot and
ran to the telephone and summongd an
ambulance.

Claims Self-Defense.

Thomas claims self-defense. He
raid, “Ll complained to Powell about my
being required to look after Juhn San-
ders’ district in acditlom to my own,
while Sandera went to the racetrack
anc received $3 a day extra from (‘apt
Jim Jacobs for helping police the track.
Powell struck me on the jaw, knocking

m: down. He was on top of me trying
to draw his revolver, when [ beat him
ty it Powell was a large man, weigh-

ing 230 pounds, wrtle I am smail and
weigh only 140 pounds. There had been
nu ill feeling between Powell and my-
seit. | resigned as captain of the coun-
ty force voluntarily, and I did every-
thing in my power to assist Powell.”
Immediately following the shooting
Dr. W. G. Shacklette, who lives In the
vicinity where the killing occurred,
was sugimoned., but Capt. Powell was
dead when the physician arrived. Dr
EMMs Duncan, (Coroner. was then noti-
fled, the body remaining in the road
where Capt. Powell breathed his last,
unt the official arrived and viewed It.
The body was removed to Schoppen-
hurst's undertaking establishment and
Prepared for burial, atter which it was
taken to the family residence
The victim was 36 years old. a native
of Louisville and a son of the late Wii-
} Powel), a mail carrier. He made
his me with his mother, Mrs. Annie
E.. Powell. He alino leaves two sisters,
Mrs. Anuie B. Pollard and Miss Effie
Powell. He was a member of Har-
mony Camp, Modern Woodmen of
America. and was captain of thr drill
team. He also was a member of Lewis
Lodge of Masons. Judge Samuel W.
Greene appointed him a probation of-
ficer several years ago, and six montns
ago made him a county patroimah and
plaged him in command of the force.
The funeral will be couducted from

Sak om Blevana- fags) |

the residence, 2931 Mank street, at 2:36

tinue low tenight.

ter get out an ext

‘The maximum ¢
ago to-day was &F
mum was 54.
with only a trace
ing the twemty-four
imum wind ‘Vebocit
five mintites Was Ubi
from the wrest. :

The heusly tem
follow:

a ee er ee Bed

te ee

ACTION DEFERRi
FACTO!

—_o
Action te the tial
has been deferred &
of Trade well be fer
reach an Agreement
sion, but made me

the propose £1 voa,|
ernoen when «nem
of the divectors of 1
The «directers. at
o'clwh seserdasy 4
Commiasrion, heacdest
hard, met preeeting
_—>

THREE JURORS }
IN ORPET

——«

Cheage Mex 4
veniremen om gine tr
Wisconsin © nie cow

4
with the mur’

Lake Forest ttex!
ruary, WAS com fue
kexan, Three ouen
accepted as fu
day of the mrt.

TO ATTEND

The Times *peisi *
Marion, WK be
Terry Martin an .
resenting tae 8h.
sociation, wrir
ville, N. «
Baptist Cenven'
Wednesday
OO

rors

he


dle

‘ip

‘illkie
litical
rmine
d de-
blican
1 1944
terday
greup
tepub-
Presi-
ome in
iday.
ere H.
‘y., his
arrison,
Charles
tublican
nmmittee
18, Lex-
Wallace,

mes C.
i Sam

majority
igOrously
political

loned.

on, Sam
» all told

‘Ntuckians
‘tunity to
residential
ails of his

work at

:ntioned at
gh,” Sam
tement was
and Harri-
irugged off
he meeting
significance

tussion con-
his impres-
‘chill, Chiang
others,” Mid-

dent Brings
~arges

~. reckless,
nd drive
*s license

adie Welch,

wsrrUdils said (OnIgNt ne would set a date tomorrow for a
hearing to determine the division of a. $3,000 reward for
information leading to the arrest and conviction of the
slayers of Marion Miley and her mother, Mrs. Elsa Ego Miley,

The reward, donated by the
Lexington Country Club, scene of
the crime; private citizens and
governmental agencies, has been
placed in the registry of the Fay-
ette court.

Three men, Robert H. Ander-
son, Tom Penney and Raymond
Baxter, were electrocuted at
Eddyville: Penitentiary shortly

‘after 1 a.m. yesterday for the

slayings.

There are eight claimants to
the reward: Detectives T. E.
Brooks and Ed Smith, who ar-
rested ,Penney in Fort Worth,
Texas; Hugh J. Cramer, Lexing-
ton Herald - Leader carrier boy,
who identified Anderson's auto-
mobile as one he saw near the
scene of the crime on September
28, 1941; Jack Reeves, Anna Carl-
berg, Thomas Lunsford, W. B.
Tomlinson and Henry “Ike”
Stevens, Lexington residents.

Releases Statement.

While he was strapped in the
electric chair at Eddyville: Peni-
tentiary, Penney had released a
statement reiterating that Ander-
son was one of his partners in
the crime,

Anderson had been executed a
few minutes earlier and Baxter
was electrocuted immediately
Penney was pronounced dead.

A fourth man, Ernest Trent,
26, Perry County, Kentucky,
miner, was electrocuted also.
Trent was convicted of the slay-~
ing of Hiram Smith, Jackson po-
lice officer, there in January,
1942. Almost tragically, Trent
played “Lord, I’m Coming Home
to You" on a harmonica and Bax-
ter chanted the words of the song
as the latter moved to the electric
chair. Both the voice and the
mournful music wavered re-
peatedly,

Says Both Fired Shots.

Penney’s statement, released
by Penitentiary Warden Jesse
Buchanan, said that both he and
Anderson shot at the Mileys dur-
ing the $130 holdup-killings on
September 28, 1941, but that he
didn’t know which one fired the
shots that killed the noted golfer
and her mother, Mrs. Elsie Ego
Miley, mana of the club.

Penney’s tement was given
on January 28, just five days be-

fore the three mien were taken to |

Lexington for a hearing on An-
derson’s new trial plea, which
was based on Penney's new stery
that the late Buford T. Stewart,
Louisvilie bartender, and not An-
derson, was the third man in the
crime, the warden said.

Thursday afternoon, eight

Lenten baw e thea awaniitian An.

‘at Lexington,’

and participated in the robbery
and murder.”

Anderson Knocked Dewn, '

Saying Penney went into de
tails of the crime, Buchanan
continued:

“Penney told me that Bob
fired a shot and about that time
somebody (apparently Marion
but not definitely established be-
cause of darkness, the warden
said) clipped him on the chim
and he went down, and when he
got up that he (Penney) began ~
shooting. He said he didn’t know.

whether he or Robert Anderson. .

fired the shots that killed the’
women.” la

Penney said, "I told the truth
referring to the~)
original trials, Buchanan said,;~

Buchanan said he asked Pene .
ne

“Penney told me,” the warden
continued, “it was while they
were in the Lexington jail.” —

Baxter’s Part Told.

Lady interposed that Penney | _

told him that “Anderson knew

Buford Stewart was dead then.” -

Stewart died February 2, 1942.

Buchanan said Penney went on ~~

to say Baxter was not in the chib,
but had driven away. ~

_ After the executions, Dr. Par-
rish showed newsmen a single

razor blade he said Andersen —-

gave him in death row. Dr, Par- .
rish said Anderson told him he

planned originally to slash his
wrists with the blade, but ted |

been dissuaded. ane

Dr. Parrish said Anderson teld
him he received the razor blede
while at Lexington last moftth
and that he smuggled it {fo
death row by attaching it to the
bottom of his foot with adhesive
at Dr. Parrish said Anderson
told him he received the-blade
in a box of aspirin‘ he Nad or-
dered at Lexington.

The body of Anderson was re-
turned to Louisville by a Louis-
ville undertaker for burial in
Resthaven Cemetery there. Bodies
of Penney and Baxter were taken
to Lexington and Trent’s to Haz~
ard for burial.

State’s Jobless Fund
Most Solvent In U. 8S.

Frankfort, Ky., BPeb. 26 (#~
The Federal Social Security
Board has declared Kentucky's
unemployment compensation re-
serve fund, now $54,895,377.21,
the “most solvent” of any of the
states and territories, V. E.

when he and Anderson “tee.
cided—plotted to make the states -,
ment involving Buford Stewart,’ _


ie et

=

AV gas Sey Mave

‘ber 1 ot “1854, 008 nme.

nas a

Ve gh to

terday was the first day since
then that sales had been less than
2,000,000 pounds. For tobacco
sold at Lexington yesterday
growers were paid $590,975.50.
Other markets down sharply
were Bloomfield, off $2.86; Glas-

gow, off $2.76; Hopkinsville,
$1.10; Horse Cave, $2.93; Louis-
ville, $1.84; Shelbyville, 1.04;

Covington, $3.36; Danville, $2.03;
Mount Sterling $1.98, and Spring-
field, $1.50.

pits =e z10 634.33 S|
~ 207,416 27, 4
Horse Cave —..-375, 78, 38.
on ....-. 335,1 03,174.46 28.
8 Ming 308 Bid 75 433.88 Prt

. Ste abot A y , h
Owensboro ...-387 94,101.81 37.73
Paris _.......--341,963 78,707.06 233.84
Richmond  ..—.197,864 87,821.10 39.07
Bhelbyville ....635,634 194,616.51 30.3
Springfield ... 335,044 63,206.38 28.01
One Sucker,
Franklin ~~... 444,420 63,338.44 1403
Green River. ‘
Henderson -...315,474 37,000.04 13.57
Madisonville -..171,115 33,031.18 13,466
Owensboro ....339,540 38,620.47 ST
Western Fire Cured.
Mayfield ~-...106,518 11,387.58 10.76
Murray -....-... 75, ' 8,043.88 10.73
Paducah ...-.. 17, ‘410 1,788.04 10.23

an Being

Questioned

Kills J hoon Ofticer

Jackson, Ky., Jan. 14 (AP)—Opening fire in a darkened
room late today, a man being questioned by two police offi-
cers killed one of them, wounded the other and then fled.

Constable Hiram Smith, 45, was shot in the heart and

neck and died instantly. Police Chief J. E. Rice, 44, was
wounded in the shoulder. His injury is not considered seri-

ous.

Police began a search for the
killer.

Rice said he and Smith, looking
for a man wanted by Perry Coun-
ty officers for questioning in an
automobile theft, encountered a

“stranger” in a restaurant. He
gave his name as “Car] Johnson,”
the chief said, and offered to
identify himself further if the
officers would accompany him to
his room in a rooming house, ad-
joining the City Hall.

The chief said the man was
searched for weapons before they
went to his second-floor room.

Smith went into the darkened

room with the man while Rice
said he stood outside the door.
The man fumbled briefly with
some clothing lying on a bed,
suddenly drew a .33 caliber pls
tol and began shooting. He fired
three times and ther fled through

a window and slid down a pipe
at the rear of the building. ith
fired three times as he fell and
the chief said he diew his pistol
but did not fire.

The constable is survived by his
widow and severa) children.

Deaths and Funerals

3OQN F. LYNCH, 63, of 314 W

pertintendent af construction tor =

Pontevilie Water: company died at
Wednesday Deacon

Me is survived by his wife, Mrs.
T. Lynch,

t. Louis Ber-

SACHARBY D. BASLEB, 67, of 213 8.

at ifts “Igler Parkway,
, a
eexives by two Mrs
rian and Mrs. A
rvices bys’ be 3 at a: pm,
Brownsbore ed

LEONARD BUNDLEY.. Panera com. |

in | dren

Journ tram gj Moe

died at eee

the

Burial will be in Cave Hill

MRS, EMMA x.


i.

‘ _ v8 66 SOUTHWESTERN REPORTER. (Ky. | TRABUE ¥. COMMONWEAL
} 6
that, if Anna Abagail survived Ellen Louisa } ee) motion for a new trial was ov. 19
cnledet er-
nd Judgment rendered on the verdict. ae pe ‘y a8 standing there In the dark:
! ’ ,

Appeal from circuit court, Jefferson coun-
} ty, law and equity divisi and any brothers or sisters she might have,
“Not to be officially

An appeal has b «
een taken to this court, and | that she rempidites oes brought you here?’
sent for me. What

: although she pr her brothers or sisters may
& reversal of the judgment asked by the ap- | fs th
@ matter with him?”
that Gertie an-

ue, it should go to John R.

i Action between 0. Rothenburger and EB. | have left pt regen
| Peugnet. From judgment, Rothenburger Jr. To so construe the third and } several grounds: First,

| appeals. lauses would be to say that the gran- pe Fay failure of the trial court to pty oe Swered, “Ed never sent for you;”

intended by the third clause that John y an instruction based upon th e | walked through the dark >” that she

| David vy, for ag M. A. D. | » rhompson, Jr., should take no interest that the killing was in sudden heat por the steps opened, to the I hted 7 ~e oe

\ A&I Sachs, for appellee if Ellen Louisa left issue; and in the fourth pe and without malice; second, heteuee« of pr Saw Ed Evans and Ardinia po co

clause to say that, although she left Issue, i oneous rulings of the court in excludin ng on the side of the bed, kissin se at

YNTER, J. On the 18th of John R. Thompson, Jr., should take the prop- important testimony material to her defens “ad gee that she did not cross the a na on

erty, and the issue thus left by Ellen should PP testimony of Gertrude Evans, a sister —_ Ed, come on and go home "ant ioe

e deceased, and the chief witness for refused to do so; that Gertie ‘Evans =e

1851, Benjamin F. Cawthon and K
thon conveyed to John R. Thompéon a cer~ take no interest in it. Such an intgrpreta-
the commonwealth, is to the effect that she

at the cor- | tion would lead to an absurdity. a
ider all of upied two rooms upstairs in a double ten- | her down, and th
. a

4 tain lot in Louisville, Ky., situa
ner of Third and Campbell streets, in = _ a _ it is egereg “hes cn ement hou t
\ as follows: “(i) In trus{“for the use & ts provisions. ‘o do e must rea - se at the corner of Thirt t, when
benefit and behoof of stfna Abagail Thomp- | the conclusion that th ord “heirs,” as ne streets, In the city of Loulevile = Ardinia Garnett struck oo Paced ote
son for and durin er natural life. (2) | used in the fourth clefise of the will, was i a ry friend of hers (Ardinia Garnett) had dr & water bucket; that Gertie E _
ot only the children of pent the day with her; that about 3 o'clock | if sh @ Knife and said, “I will kill the biteh
Comes to my hous

in the af oy
ternoon her brother, Kdwin Evans, | ed, “I do not want tro ~ that she respond-
nu

, the benefit, and behoof | intended to embra
came to h
er room, and remained there with | to know what Ed ane with you. I want

hompson, daughter of said the issue of Ellen Louisa

=
ae
i>
od
=
By
we
Cy
S&S
ts
feo
so
i
CG
Oo
3
<
Fee
OQ
ct
Fee
Oo
Ha}
s
O
4
®
ri
_ a”
ie)
Qs
e

of Ellen Louis
Anna AbagaW® and such other heirs of the | and the issye’of any other children which oe ee
body of ‘said Anna Abagail as may be be- Anna Abggfil might leave. It follows from ra er visitor until he was stabb ts with ”
gotten pf the party of the second part, and we that the deed tendered to appel- pe appellant, at about 7 o’clock in the oe = they were fighting, Ed Poway 28 that,
to © heirs forever. (8) Should the sald ll vest him with a good title to the ; 8. She says that she heard appellant com- | h em and almost immediately cried out thas
Ell Louisa and the other heirs (if any) be- perty. — up the stairs, and that she walked out of 7 Biri hurt; that she did not know whites
gétten as aforesaid of the said Anna Abagall/” The judgment is affirmed. re lighted room where they were, to the Ton his sister cut him. “gy
\ die without issue, then in trust for the — of the steps, to meet her; that she did | str ad the trial the court gave the usual |
: benefit, and behoof of John R. Tho “as se appellant, and asked her if it | of % ons in such cases, with the excepti A
Jr. and to his heirs, forever. (4) S TRABUE v. COMMONWEALTH.* Bas Julla or Ollle; that appellant did not | killin easlaughter Instruction, based wey a
said Anna Abagail survive the said Ellen | (Qourt of Appeals of Kentucky. Feb. 19, ‘osu = she got in front of the door | out : —— heat and passion and with.
i Louisa and the heirs (if any) ofher the said 1902.) bees g into the lighted room, where her | an b evious malice, but in leu thereof cave
| Abagail begotten as aforesgif, then the par- | HOMICIDE—DEGREE OF OFFENSE-SELY-DE- Juli er was; she then answered, “It is | the nstruction based upon the theory en
ty of the second part hold the prop- FENSB AND Tat ela hi a,” and, addressing her brother, said to | th Stabbing was an accident. In vie
{ erty herein conveyed trust for John R. . it th i m, “Come on;” that he responded, “I € proof in the case, and the con w of
4. Under an indictment for murder, if there { coming just as * am | testimony as t flict in the
Thompson, Jr., ang“for his heirs, forever. | jg any evidence tending to show the homicide | she a soon as George comes;” that | conclud 8 to how the trouble began and
(5) Should the ‘4 Anna Abagail, survive | is of the degree of manslaughter, the accused ° nswered, with an oath, “Come on now,” uded, and as to the manner i
the sald John # Thompson, Jr., and his heirs is entitled to an instruction on that hypothesis. } walked up to him, drew a knife fro »” | the deceased was stabbed, we thi eo
a b ¢ her body begotten as afore- 2. Where defendant in an indictment for mur- her cloak, and stabbed m under | court erred, to th » ink the tria)
and the hej6 of her body Sego der testified that, in a fight with the sister of and started him in the breast, | lant’s subst € prejudice of the appel-
said, thex’ the estate herein conveyed shall | deceased, either she or his sister accidentally and to do so again, when she ran up tantial rights, in failing to instru
at her/Geath vest in the party of the sec- cut him, she was entitled to an acquittal if the j Caught the knife; that, in the struggl upon the theory that the stabbin st
ond Aart, and his heirs, forever, as a good blow which struck deceased was given by her ' that followed, the deceased uggle | In sudden heat and S was done
“ ; : s raed in self-defense as against his sister, and was and she after hi ran to the steps, | previous mali “ Passion, and without
a ndefeasible estate in fee simple. - | guilty of manslaughter only if the blow was | hamediobel m, and that appellant was the | ce. “It is not the province of
na Abagail Thompson, mentioned e | given in sudden heat and passion in a combat to th ately behind her; that, when she got € lower court, any more than of thi
y. She provoked and begun by the sister, and was the top of the steps, appellant pushed her ten conor for the purpose of “+ Bag
ether a person on trial for
his

imed at her, with the unintended result of against the d
hompson, | 80 . : e deceased, who was 1
ying her brother; and the jury should have on the steps 8 lower down | life {
» knocking him down. And e is entitled to
: the | slaughter

Whatever rights which pass nder the sec- | been instructed accordingly. stat
3. As it is competent to show the occupation atements of this witness are substantial
corroborated by Ardini ly | to show th

an instruction as to m
an-

If there is any evidence tending

e homicide is of the degree of

ond clause of the deed w gg ec reggie and associates of a witness, for the purpose of
Anna Abagail survived” her daughter, but - . a Garnett.
she left children syrfiving her. It will be pan agg ae ee ae —. testified that she had been —— fanslaughter, the accused is entitled ¢
Observed under jx€ third clause of the deed | upon cross-examination, with whom she lived. br the deceased for about five years, but | lin r Cogn pen teat hypothesis.” See Bow
that John ompson, Jr, was not to| Appeal from circult court, Jefferson coun- Was not married to him; that, in the after- lin v. Com., 94 Ky. 395, 22 8. W. 543, and
take any erest in the property if Ellen ty, criminal division. left fue the day on which he was killed; he ae v. Com. (Ky.) 29 8. W. 141 ~ —
Louisa any other heirs of the body of “Not to be officially reported.” peal _ saying that he was going to "the a based wholly upon the ‘theory f
Anng/Abagall died with issue. As Ellen Julla Trabue was convicted of murder, and iaaer in Shippingport; that a short time ms ental stabbing failed to give the ,
e the trouble she met John Ford, a pe sentrention, -v case. The same dudan
: nm should have been given ag if

brother-in-
er-in-law of the deceased, on his coal appellant had stabbed G

a left issue, John R. Thom , ”’ 8 Pp
pson Jr did he a peals. I wagon, and that he said to her: Ed says of Ed. If G

ertie Evans instead

not take an interest under the third clause
of the deed. This clearly shows that the H. T. Wilson, ac bearer as pie oe
grantors intended that he should not jake ea R. J. Breckinridge, for | pod -_ to come to Gertle Evans’ house, at | death t ertie Evans had been stabbed to
wn interest in the property if the chilgrén of | Commonwea t siray- rah gh ipotoncei and Congress, right | that an a Le, it can hardly be doubted
Anna Abagail died leaving Issue. e ques- P pane wants you. Get your ction on manslaugh
tion arises then: Did the grapfors intend Bh pene = ay se aan ie : bo eo ze on the wage’ Geant peti oe. under the uaumade Sen
% by the fourth clause of the to change w ouse, put on her hat . e testimony of appell
& county in April, 1901, for the murder of Ed ent with him, and » and | to sustain th ppellant tends
i: the import of the prec g clause? Cer- ‘ 7 Thi , and that he took her e theory that, elther {
i tainly the grantors world not have provided Evans; and a trial hee a st Be pet oe Congress and showed her Pa fense or in sudden beat and passion, remand
in the third clausgfhat John R. Thompson, lowing month resulted In a verdic Gan oh : she had never been there before: gaged in a fight with Gertie Evans, in the ,
her guilty of murder, and inflicting tf ce Neana e inquired for the quarters of Gertie — of which the deceased was killed b :
, and was directed to G0 upstairs; that, low intended for hig sister. The pd

e any interest in the prop-
nality of the homicide thus accidentally ac

uisa died leaving issue, and 1R ted by Ed 4 W. Hi , Esq., of the Frank- Ww
tort bar, and ‘ormeriy state camara ° hen she came to the top of the stairs, | complished

pus is measured b

y that of the hom.

gee

8
ry
*

a

——

a...

20 66 SOUTHWESTERN REPORTER. (Ky.
‘ .

which would have been accomplished
core blow reached its intended mark. If,
as appellant claims, the blow was given in
self-defense as against the sister, with the
unintended result of slaying the brother, it
was excusable. If, as a part of her testti-
mony indicates, the blow was given in sud-
den heat and passion, in a combat provoked
and begun by the Evans woman, and was
aimed at her, with the unintended result of
slaying her brother, then the offense was
manslaughter, just as it would have been had
it reached its intended mark. 1 Bish. New
Cr. Law, § 828. The jury should have been
instructed upon both theories, for the in-
structions are to be tested by the evidence

the defense.

ge ten cross-examination of Gertie Evans,
she was asked by the defendant’s attorney
who she lived with. The question was ob-
jected to, and the circuit judge remarked in
the presence of the jury, “No testimony that
will tend to discredit the witness is compe-
tent.” The court erred in refusing to per-
mit the question to be answered, as it is
always competent to show the occupation
and associates of a witness, for the purpose

iscrediting her.
ig ay the ric indicated, the judginent Is
reversed, and the cause remanded for pro-
eeedings consistent with this opinion.

BURDEN OF PR
Defendant

of an error of
the burden

roof, where he
objection.

agefnst the evidence.
that there was no error in refusin
aside the verdict on account of thoevidence.

e court, on the trial,
of proof on appellant,
without objection, and th

M’R v. LAY et al.t
als of Kentucky.
1902.)

TRATOR—APPOINTME
TION—CHANGE OF RE

, at which he had yésided over 60 years,
is wite remaining re, and went to his
daughter’s home, i
him nothing but

to ncaa Bae
i ougp
e of residence, sen ke went

aughter’s home that hg
ain *intil he died; ayy

y court was void, and
county had no jurisg
the decedent’s estgfe

testate. Judgment for de
tiff appeals. Affirmed,

James Montgomepf, for appellant. R. L
Stith and J. D. win, for appellees.

leged that Lay cla
po of Jones by Appointment of the county

this appeal.
By section 65, Civ.
court of the county

ke
1 ted by Edward W. Hines, Esq., of the Fran’
Sec tee. and lermerty state reporter.

4Reported by Edward W. Hines, Esq., of the Frank-

fort bar, and formerly state reporter.

loading a cart with coal fro:
rk

tee Reported by Edward W. Hines, Esq., of the Frank-

Ky.) TRADEWATER COAL Co. v. HEAD.

to which of the
counties Jones wpe resident of whens
The proof h

$, by com-
en and used
vits. We pre-

: as no objection
de to the proof. The
, Shows: That Jones
8 of age, and a cripple, be-
6 do any kind of work. }

ng in Edmonson county, orf the
ace, where they had resided over 60
Their children were all Married and
homes of their own. Q he child lived
n Texas, and one lived Hardin county,
on a farm of Jones, and“~where he died. The

Hson county. That there

proof, on the one }
was over 80 yes
ing unable

others lived in Edmg
pfation or estrangement be-

tween Jones gxfd his wife, but that he wer
to his daygfiter’s, in Hardin county, fér a
short yisit, and remained there Aeveral
mon , the

he went to

The reason it is
98 that he was not treated
RSon county, at home. He did
Our or five months, and died
May at sie home of his daughter in
din codnty. When Jones came to
courty he brought no clothing o

roperty
any kind, except what he . Upon
this proof the court below neluded that

Jones was a resident of
We are of opinion that {
the learned chancellorAhere was no error.
Jones had been a esident of Edmonson
60 years, and the in

onson county. | a ca
this conclusion of | ca

the car by
in, breaki
to his

one of

side of the car, and, besides,
e exercise of ordinary care,
that the car was sprung, an
not secured either by the
for the purpose or i
times substituted for

J. The appellant

tes at the ends, which swing
and are made to let down a
ends of the car open, if desi

ed, they are fastened to sides

en blocks.

protruding, and wa
coal when the a
a recovery is
pellee, as a Jeborer, performed vari
for the a ellant, a

n which coal was hauled
hich were being filled for sh

e case, to save the
is necessary to fasten

721

of which swung on hinges, attempted to leave

nage) over the end, which f

is legs, his injury wa

Wn negligence in attempting t
in that way, as steps were p

is engaged

ness of mining and shipping cual.
nois Central Railroad furnishes vars
at its mines. The car in question has

of the car

eyes. The sides of

ght in this action. The ap-

ous duties

mong which was to drive

from the
ipment to

furnace for the Purpose of generating
steam for running the machinery.

gineer was in need of coal, and he
or | vised the appellee, whereupon he @

The

e his
&@ short visi cart to the end of the car. He in the
condition car with another cartman enggfed in the

ce so long estab- | 1
ty court had no
to appoint an admin-
Therefore the Har-
ad no jurisdiction of this

ADEWATER OOAL OO. v. HBAD.1
urt of Appeals of Kentucky. Feb. 7,

MASTER AND SER VANT—CONTRIB
NEGLIGENCE.

Where a servant of a coal pany, after

car, the end

same business, and they 1
with coal. Then both o:

egs and broke It.

the result of the gross n
ppellant, its agents and

rt bar, and formerly state reporter.
66 S.W.—46

appellee was awa

appellee claims that the negligen
sisted in the appellant’s failure to
) gate of the car fastened, so as
RY falling in the manner descri
shows that the car had
on its side near its

the end gate, and,
fell in, and caught one

The ap-

that the injury which he re

egligence
serva

d rails and steps
which afforded an
oO get in and out of

e
only reason gifen by the ret arty “Ge


1own
Mise-
ed a
aggie
» him
they
fe he
send

laggie
yother

Then
apart
realize
cooled

yurned
a final
bunga-
n with

r is be-
uperior
ie mur-
syming-
Charles

les Fos-
ictitious.

———e

yon as he
R. Davis

\fee ‘tele-
-aine Mix
nard Tar-
home to
ng him, 1
mediary.”

boy come
waiting,”

nard ‘Tar-
id a khaki
ce tightly
with ram-
the court-

at. 1 don't
>Cormack’s
jared.

opportunity
| am going
ice,” Judge

ack be? 1
t 1 can be
load to be
dg morosely-
ick’s. where-
with equal

nm, Tarrence
not have the
in a terrible
of mistaken
1 the car Wis
ris a battle-

ship gray. And if Mr. McCormack was
kidnapped, then the kidnappers changed
their license plate to our numbers.”

The morning's publicity on the youth's
arrest brought forth a witness whose in-
formation served to heighten police sus-
picion that Tarrence was lying—and that
McCormack had met with a grisly ending.

The witness, a farmer, asserted that
three persons on the previous Saturday
had crossed his land to Harrod'’s Creck,
a tawny and picturesque strip of water
meandering through Jefferson County.
They had informed him they wanted to
fish and to “dump some garbage” in the
stream. The three were an elderly couple
and a young man, He had watched them
lug a sack to the stream’s edge; then he
had turned back to his own tasks.

Enlisting the aid of the Coast Guard,
awity and county authorities now began
dragging Harrod's Creek. The operation
attracted hordes of curious spectators,
clogging highways leading out of Louisville
and lining the banks of the winding stream.
Bitter cold and frequent snow flurries
failed to diminish the size or the morbid
interest of the throngs.

Meanwhile, Roy Tarrence was identified
by the farmer as the man who had crossed
his land. “Of course it was me,” ad-
mitted the bespectacled distillery worker
irritably, “he knows we always fished there
and sometimes dumped garbage. This
whole thing is ridiculous, I tell you.”

On the third day of a fruitless search
in the chill waters of Harrod’s Creek for
the body of the missing attorney, Roy
Tarrence was placed under arrest. His car
was impounded and a heavy chain, a por-
tion of the floor covering, and a piece
of the upholstery, still radiating an odor
of cleaning fluid, was dispatched by plane
to the Federal Bureau of Investigation in
Washington.

No attempt up until this point had been
made Yo confront Leonard Tarrence with
the witnesses who had observed the violent
interlude at Fourth and Oak. Now he
was placed in a lineup of six prisoners,
held on various charges unrelated to the
kidnapping. Mrs. _Lasting and Peterson
promptly picked him out as one of the
participants in what police had become
certain was a deadly encounter in which
McCormack gave up his life. Tarrence,
however, showed no emotion at the identi-
fication.

All but exhausted detectives kept grind-
ing away for evidence.

Nine hours later they came up with two
witnesses who averred they recalled seeing
Leonard and his father drive out of Jef-
fersonville on Route 42, leading into
Louisville, at around 2:30 P.M. the pre-
vious Thursday. This was in marked con-
tradiction to the youth’s statement that
he had remained all day at his Jefferson-
ville home.

Although they held a faint hope that
this might shake the suspect a bit, officials
were totally unprepared for the husky
prisoner's reaction when they confronted
him. Tarrence, plunging a hand through
his thick blond locks, arose and feverishly
paced his cell like a trapped tiger. Finally
he blurted: “It gets worse and worse—I
can't stand it! Everybody closing in on

me, everybody taking her side, hers and

De ll

McCormack’s. Nobody understands what
a man goes through when you keep hound-
ing him. Nobody but my Dad . . .” He
slumped on his bunk, his face buried in
his arms, quivering.

“You are ready to tell us all the facts
you know about it, Leonard?” asked
Young softly.

For several long, tense seconds he re-
mained sifent, motionless, Finally he
looked up and said dully, “Yeah, I'll tell
you. McCormack is dead. We killed him.
He kept hounding me, taking Gwendolyn’s
side, saying I had to take care of her

kid. I was in love with someone else, I.

wanted to marry her. But it looked to me
like he kept stalling the divorce, I got
to hate him. I never knew | could hate
one man so.much. Dad seemed to see it
my way. We went after him .. .”. Sud-
denly as if for the first time he realized
the enormity of his crime, he broke off,
staring with gaunt, tormented eyes at the
wall. He appeared oblivious to Young's
prodding questions.

“Just tell us where he is. Think of his
wife. She never harmed you,” pleaded
Young.

“He’s in twenty feet of water,” came the
toneless reply. “Right at the boat land-
ing, near the bridge on Route 42.”

Four car-loads of grim-visaged officials
lost no time in hurrying to the designated
spot. ; ;

In less than half an hour McCormack’s
body weighted with a huge block of
concrete, was recovered from the hissing,
olive-colored water. The dripping muck
clinging to him failed to conceal the fact
that his face and head had been crushed
by repeated blows’ delivered with merciless
abandon.

As the city reverberated to the shock-
ing climax of the case, Roy Tarrence, his
face ashen and his hands trembling under
the impact of turbulent emotion, choked
out a plea when asked if he wanted to

make a confession. “Please let me see my
boy first. You must understand that I
loved him, he was more than life to me.”
Commonwealth's Attorney A. Scott Hamil-
ton understood the situation and granted
his request.

At a little before midnight, father met
son. They stared at each other with tor-
tured faces, then fell into each other’s
arms, weeping unrestrainedly. “Son, we
made a big mistake, a terrible mistake,”
sobbed the father. “What possessed us to
do such an awful thing? I'll never be able
to understand why.” .

The dank;. shadowed cell echoed his
agonized question. The tight-lipped officials
waited with taut expectancy. But Leonard
voiced no answer. Perhaps he had already

_ given the best answer—hate. The malev-

olent, insidious power that destroys with-
out rhyme or reason.

On April 3, 1952, Roy Tarrence was
convicted of the murder . of Francis J.
McCormack, and sentenced to die in the
electric chair. His son, Leonard Tarrence,
is to be tried at a later date.

Mrs. Tarrence was, of course, absolved
of any blame in the case.

The names Olga Lasting, Frank Peterson
and Deke Wilton used in the foregoing
story are fictitious—EDITOR.

The Steady Pay Profession
“Good Times or Bad! ..

SCIENTIFIC CRIME DETECTION

it Is Easy to Learn!

FOLLOW 1 will teach you this fasci-
THIS MAN nating science during your
‘ F pare PM cod at bncoeisre ie
baa ee pays an ex in
Operator . ‘om Finger Printing,
: No. 38 ¥ ; identification,

FREE! "ovis

7] Of all Identification Bu.

reaua in the U.#, empleo

BLUE BOOK students ang uradustes at

OF CRIME LAs. A majort of these

eads 2

This book is full of exctt: Many of them knew noth:

ing information on scien: ing about crime detection

tife crime detection, It wilt .

show how You can get Now they have ateady jobs,

atarted in @ grand career. ood salarion and a fine

4 low ture. Write today for

cost. Citp coupon Now... full particulars and free
book. Give axe.

iy.
INSTITUTE OF APPLIED SCIENCE
1920 Sunnyside Ave., Dept. 376-B, Chicage 40, Wh.

INSTITUTE OF APPLIED SCIENCE

| 1920 Sunnyside Ave., Dept. 376-8, Chicago 40 a
Gentlemen: Without any obligation on my send me

| the **Biue Book of Crime,"” and complete 10st of Tdenti-
fication Bureaus employing your students or graduates,
togeth w Easy Terms Offer.
(Literature will be sent ONLY to persons stating the

] age.) |

| PMO covcccccccccccerossssceHssercssers en’ |

.

I PBB cv ccccccecges eons edpeeesseseseverns t

RFD or Zone...eeererrrrseerrss  . Pe

ome come mn et cn mn See seen cue SS SYS

SKIN DISORDERS

@ PIMPLES @ WRINKLES e@HAIR LOSS
@ OILY or DRY SKIN @ SKIN FLABBINESS
Allow us to send you a co of Bulletin #6 from
the files of the Western 'hysicians Association.
Without any charge or obligation

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
1400 - 20th Avenue San Francisco 22, California

IC WRITERS |
LYRIC WRITERS

One of the most tuneful and versa-
tile composers will set music to your

lyri A e song $10.
om nt) Gy tj MELODIES
New York

27, N. ¥.

508 W. 132ad St.

EACH BOOK Is packed with
thrills, romance and pas-
sion. Over 250 pages of good
reading. 2 BOOKS, both differ-
ent, sent prepaid for $1.00 in

AN gaatead..wrapper. No C.0.D.’ 8»
NATIONAL, Dept. 158, Box 5-STA. E Toledo 9, Ohio

ck
staghorn carved
ae Mew CAT Dealers
SPORTS, INC.

gril
ALOG.
(MFRS.)

Watch out for little bundies of dynamite
Be Careful—the child you save may be your own!

fend MONEY ‘fo YOU! >
SPARE TIME OR FULL TIME be)
NO EXPERIENCE NEEDE: :

D
¥
les
‘ORK Money ina year-'roand bus

; =)
NATOW GARMENT CO.,Dept. H-752 \\

250 Ww. JEFFERSON AVE., DETROIT 26, mich. J

for new, compact, colorful Sa!

63

ee

Father-and-son combo teamed together even in Death House,
where boy taught parent to read before they were executed.

- prominent attorney was tied with barbed wire,

he’d sink—and tossed into the stream.

alley behind the market and had
walked only a few paces when he
was set upon by two men. Five
witnesses watched from a distance,
in windows, as the pair slugged
and pummeled McCormack un-
mercifully—and dragged him into
a gray car and sped away.

It all happened so quickly that
none of the witnesses had time to
come to the lawyer’s assistance.
But they did have time to get the
license number of the kidnap car,
a gray Chevrolet.

But none of the witnesses had

recognized either the victim of the
savage attack, or his assailants.

Tracing the car, however, was
a simple matter. The trail led
straight to Roy Tarrance, 46-year-
old fireman in a Jeffersontown dis-
tillery.

The gray Chevrolet was standing
in front of a neat, if small, frame
house in Jeffersontown when police
arrived. Heavy-set Roy Tarrance,
the owner, came to the door when
the officers knocked. .

Certainly, said Tarrance, the car
in front of the house was his. And,

by James A. Blake

of course, nobody ever drove it
but himself. Had he been anywhere
that day?

“About three o’clock this after-
noon,” he said, “I drove around
looking for a friend. I looked for
him for five hours. When I couldn’t
find him, I came home.”

Nobody believed Tarrance’s
story. Indeed, Sergeant James W.
Bibb of the Louisville Crime Pre-
vention Bureau doubted it so pro-
foundly that Tarrance was brought
into Louisville and paraded before
the five witnesses.

23

—_—

t

ay

Youth (back to camera) relates details of murder to officials. (L. to r.), Detectives
Arthur Wallmeyer and Tom Burch weigh concrete block tied to his body.

Not one could identify him. To
the chagrin of police, and the arro-
gant contempt of Tarrance, he was
released.

All that night, Mary McCormack
wondered and worried at the fail-

‘ ure of her husband to come home.

She telephoned Wilson Beatty, his
law partner, who did his best to
reassure her.

But when the night passed and
morning came and still McCormack
had not appeared, Beatty himself
became alarmed and notified police.

No master mind was needed then
to solve the mystery of the identity
of thesekidnap victim. It was done
in short order when Mrs. Mc-
Cormack recognized her husband’s
spectacles, picked up at the scene
of the attack, and saw that the
groceries strewn in the alley were
the very.same which were on her
list.

Beatty gave police all the infor-
mation they needed to connect
Tarrance with McCormack’s kid-
naping—although it was not readily
apparent just what this connection
might be.

McCormack, revealed Beatty, had
for two years acted as attorney for
Leonard Tarrance’s 21 - year - old
wife, Margaret, in a _ series of
court actions which ranged from
seduction to non-support.

Police set out to find Leonard
Tarrance. It would certainly be
worthwhile asking him a few ques-
tions.

They found that Leonard was an
Army private at Fort Knox. But
they did not find Leonard—for he

24

had been AWOL for three weeks.

At the Fort, however, investi-
gators obtained a picture of Leo-
nard. When it was shown to the
witnesses of the attack all were
positive in their assertions—‘‘That’s
one of them, for sure.” .

As an alarm went out for Leo-
nard (who was already being
sought by Military Police) investi-
gators called again at the Tarrance
home. They found his mother there.
They also found a blonde girl who
identified herself as Helen Carson,
“Leonard’s girl friend.”

Both Mrs. Tarrance and Helen
admitted that Leonard had been in
the home Wednesday and Thurs-
day—and Thursday was the day of
the unfortunate Francis McCor-
mack’s kidnaping.

“He 'was homesick,” Mrs. Tar-
rance said. “But he-left Thursday
night.”

“He got food poisoning at Fort
Knox,” added Helen, “and they
weren’t giving him good treatment.
So he came home.”

Helen also explained that Leo-
nard’s wife, Margaret, was making
it tough on him, which was another
reason for his taking off AWOL.

She could have been right in the
second case, at least.

‘Margaret Welch and Leonard
met in the fall of 1949 and soon she
was spending weekends with him
and his family. Also soon enough,
Margaret informed Leonard that
she was going to have a child and
that he was the father.

Leonard’s reaction to this an-
nouncement was.something less

in January,

than joyous. In fact, he was so an-
noyed and determined not to as-
sume any responsibility in the af-
fair that Margaret took him to
court on a charge of seduction.

McCormack represented Mar-
garet in this action and the charge
was dropped when Leonard mar-
ried the girl. But the reluctant
husband had already abandoned
Margaret when a baby girl was
born to her in August, 1950.

So Margaret had Leonard in
court again and he was ordered to
pay $7.50 a week for support of
the child.

Then Leonard was drafted. In
the Army now, he resisted all his
wife’s efforts to obtain an allot-
ment from his pay. Once again
Margaret put the law on him and
he was indicted for child desertion
1952. Military au-—
thorities took over the case with a
briskness that no doubt dismayed
and angered the spoiled youth.

All the way through, of course,
Leonard was only too aware that
Francis McCormack was his pursu-
ing wife’s lawyer.

As can be seen, Margaret, just
as Helen had said, was making it
hot for him.

Roy Tarrance was present at this
session with the police and in-
sisted, ‘‘“my boy is completely in-
nocent.”

He also protested his own inno-
cence. As for the license plate on
his Chevy tallying with the tag on,
the kidnap car, he said that was
beyond his comprehension.

“I simply can’t understand that,”
he said. “Maybe somebody painted
their plate with the same numbers
as'mine. I just don’t know.”

On the Monday following the ©
attack and kidnaping, and still
without the slightest trace of the
victim, Leonard, accompanied by
his ‘doting father and distressed
mother, walked into the Louisville
Police Station and gave himself up.

Leonard, a good-looking youth,
was sullen and uncooperative when
questioned. About all investigators
got out of him was his repeated
statement that he had had no part
in the abduction of lawyer McCor-
mack. He even went so far as to
express the hope that McCormack
would “come back soon’ because
he (Leonard) wanted to be re-
lieved of the shadow of suspicion
which had been cast so unfairly
upon him.

The following day, Leonard’s
mother and Helen Carson, escorted
by a covey of newspaper reporters,
visited him in jail. The newsmen
asked Leonard who Helen was.

\velierson) March
EONARD TARRANCE and his
father, Roy, were inseparable.
They went everywhere to-
gether;

Leonard was often seen with his
arm about his father’s shoulders as
they walked along the quiet streets
of Jeffersontown, Kentucky, which
was their home, or started out on a
hunting or fishing expedition.

The bond of affection between
father and son went even deeper.

For example, when Leonard,
still in his teens, fathered two chil-
dren out of wedlock his Dad was
very philosophical about the mat-
ter, if not a little proud of his son’s
prowess. His attitude was one of
“boys-will-be-boys” and ‘those
things are bound to happen, you
know.”

As Roy Tarrance was heard to
say, Leonard could do no wrong.

“TI could never feel angry or any-
thing but good toward Leonard,”
he said. “He’d do anything in the
world for me. He’d die for me and
I’d do the same for him.”

On one. occasion, when Leonard -

» LOLICE LETECTIVE —

D% Ay,

Detective Charles Peyton (dark suit standing
in boat) directs removal of body from stream.

we ant @

HORROR AT

Kidnaped and beaten, the

tried to pistol-whip another youth,
and his victim struck back, his
father grabbed the gun and
shouted:

“Don’t you hit my boy. If you do
it again, I’ll shoot you.”

So it was like that with Leonard
Tarrance and his father Roy.
. And it would be like that all of
their lives.

But this Chronicle of sordidness,
of savage senseless violence per-

.-haps properly begins on the after-

noon of February 28th, 1952, in
Louisville, Kentucky, 15 miles dis.

weighted to make sure

tant from Jeffersontown, where the
Tarrances made their home.
It begins with Francis J. Mc-

Cormack, Louisville attorney,
leaving a supermarket laden with
purchases.

The market was situated at Oak
and Fourth Streets, only a block
from the 54-year-old lawyer’s
home where his wife, Mary, waited
for him. Half an hour before, Mrs.
McCormack had talked to her hus-
band on the phone and had given
him her grocery list.

McCormack stepped out into an

Wot. (FEE

Forced to walk across field to cabin on shore, victim, with premonition of fate in store

for him, told abductors, "Do whatever you're going to do with me, and get it over with.”

HE POLICE DISPATCHER’S voice bit incisively

through the static in the loudspeaker: “The alley be-

tween South Fourth and Garvin Place, 1100 block. A
man, beaten up, being forced into an automobile. He is
screaming for help.”

The Louisville, Kentucky, police cruiser was only a block
and a half away. Its driver wrenched on the steering wheel
and stamped on the gas pedal. His tires shrieked as he
spun into the alleyway beside the red-fronted A. & P.
grocery.

The narrow thoroughfare was empty except for a man
who stood looking down at a brown paper shopping bag
which had burst, spilling a load of groceries into the dirt.
His eyes lifted and he hurried forward as the police car
jolted to a stop.

“You're too late,” he said. “They’re gone. That way.”
He pointed toward the outlet of the alley into Garvin
Place, a block to the west.

* “What happened?” the patrolman queried. “Who called
the police?”

“One of the neighbors, I reckon,” the man replied, “I
was at work inside.” He nodded toward a dairy firm’s
building just behind the grocery. “I heard the yells. When
I came running out, I saw ’em, two guys beating the day-
lights out of another fellow. They were whacking him with
short clubs, then they pushed him into their car. One

held him down in the back, the other drove. They shucked
out of here like a tomcat with a firecracker tied onto
his tail.”

The dairy employee—he gave his name as Carl Seeders—
described the principals in the curious struggle.

The victim was tall, of average build, middle-aged. “I
think he had on khaki clothes,” he said.

Of the man’s assailants, the one whom Seeders saw
most clearly was in his 30s, tall, sturdily built. The other
man was older and bulkier. “He was on the far side of
the car. I didn’t get a good look at him,” Seeders told the
cops. “Both of ’em wore brown caps with stiff bills. And
here—” the dairyman fished in a pocket and brought out
a folded paper which he handed over, “—I got the license
number. I wrote it down so I wouldn’t forget.”

The officers flashed a radio alarm for the car that Seeders
described, a light gray Chevrolet sedan with Kentucky
license plate Number 374-681. The officers then inter-
viewed other witnesses to the attack and kidnaping.

In addition to Seeders, four other persons had seen the
fight, and their descriptions of the sedan and the three men
generally matched the dairyman’s. fi

Near the spilled groceries, the cops picked up a pair of
glasses with plastic rims. In the grocery bag they found
a sales slip from the self-service grocery fronting on South
Fourth Street, but no one there could remember who had

’

VARRAL) Ce ; FF thin a) ~f a

%

24

HORROR
at Harrods Creek

Abducted in broad daylight, before 5 witnesses,

there was no trace of him until a concrete block

Attorney F. J. McCormack,
long mysteriously missing

(L. to r.) Coast Guardman
Robert Gorden, Detective
Charles Peyton and Chief

Boatswain's Mate Claude

Albright bring to shore
their gruesome discovery

was fished out of the water

« BY C. L. LAMSON

HE |
throu;
tween
man, beat
screaming
The Lou
and a half
and stam;
spun into
grocery.
The nar
who stood
which hac
His eyes
jolted to a
“You're
He pointe
Place, a b
: * “What }
y the police
“One of
was at w
building j
I came ru
lights out
short clu!

26

Police photographer Charles Kays and Lieut. Young
record spotlessness of car identified as killer's

purchased the bread, tinned vegetables and can of Postum
which the bag had contained.

The gray Chevrolet was not picked up by any of the radio
teams that patrolled Louisville’s south side that Thursday
afternoon of February 28th, 1952. Nor was any missing
persons report received at police headquarters to hint at
the identity of the assault-kidnaping victim. By 8 P.M.
that night, the license number furnished by Seeders had
been traced through the Kentucky State Motor Vehicle
Bureau.

It had been issued fora 1940 Chevrolet sedan owned by
Roy Tarrence, who lived in Jeffersontown, a village in the
rolling uplands a scant 10 miles southeast of the city.

County police and Sergeant James Bibb of the city’s
Crime Prevention Bureau hurried to the Tarrence home,
a neat bungalow with an imitation brick siding.

Tarrence, a mild-looking, bespectacled man in his late
40s,:was preparing to leave for work in a big Louisville
distillery, where he was a fireman on the night shift.

“A fight? My car?” he echoed, when the officers ex-
plained their visit. “You must be mistaken. I—I don’t
understand.” j

“You drive a gray Chevvy,”’ Sergeant Bibb said. “Just
where was it at 4:20 this afternoon?”

“At 4:20? Let’s see, I left home around 3. That's about
right, ain’t it, Ma?”

Mrs, Tarrence, a small, solemn-eyed woman, looked from
her husband to the policemen. “About right,” she agreed.

“IT was down at Floyd’s Fork a spell,’’ Tarrence said.
“Then I drove up to Eastwood—over in Oldham County—to
see a friend about going fishing sometime soon. He wasn’t
home. I couldn’t turn him up anywhere. Then I drove back
here. Got here around 6, maybe a little after, didn’t I, Ma?”

His wife nodded again. “Around 6,” she repeated.

“You were alone all this time?” Bibb questioned.

“All by myself.”

“You won’t mind if we look over your car?”

“Go right ahead. It’s out in back.”

The officers trouped out. For 10 minutes their flashlights
winked in and around the sedan. Then the officers returned

Suspect (r.) accompanied by his father and mother
surrenders in Criminal Court, claiming innocence

to the house. The Chevrolet was certainly spotless, but—

There was a third person now in the living room with the
Tarrences, a pretty, long-legged blonde in her late teens,
whom Roy introduced as Mary Bixler.

‘“‘Mary stays with us most of the time,” he said. ‘‘She and
our boy, Leonard, aim to get married when we get a couple
of things ironed out. You boys satisfied with the car?”

“It’s clean,” Sergeant Bibb conceded. “Very clean, in

fact. We could still smell the gasoline you used to scrub.

the upholstery.”

“Sure,” Tarrence admitted proudly. “That old heap is
kind of a hobby with me. I like to work on her. I was
working on her today. When I got through, I had to clean
her up some. Got a few grease spots on the cushions. I
always keep -her nice and clean, don’t I, Ma?”

“He does,” Mrs. Tarrence said. ‘‘Goes over it at least
three times a week. It generally smells of gas. I’d as soon
it didn't, but that’s just Roy’s way. We let him have it.”

Bibb and the county men made ready to leave. Roy
Tarrence smiled indulgently as he let them out the door.
“No hard feelings, gents,” he said. “Somebody must've
made a mistake on my license number. I got no call to
tangle with anybody in this world.”

Thursday night passed with no further information on
the reported struggle and kidnaping in the alley off South
Fourth Street. However, at mid-morning on Friday, the
incident was ominously recalled to the attention of the
Louisville police.

Mrs. Mary McCormack of 1127 Garvin Place reported
her husband missing. Francis J. McCormack, 54, apparently
had disappeared while en route home from his downtown
law office shortly after 4 o’clock Thursday afternoon.

It was just at 4, Mrs. McCormack said, that he had phoned
to tell her he was leaving. He usually rode a bus out to
Oak and Fourth streets and walked the two blocks to
his house. On Thursday afternoon he had said that he
intended to stop at one of the groceries on Fourth near
Oak.. Mrs. McCormack had reminded him that she was
out of Postum, his favorite beverage.

The scene of the assault and kidnaping was only about a

block f
the att
Fourth
was kr

Polic
the all:
like th:
later I
lenses .

r and mother
ag innocence

potless, but-—
‘oom with the
er late teens,

iid. “She and
> get a couple
1 the car?”

ery clean, in

ised to scrub.

t old heap is
1 her. I was
‘ had to clean
‘ cushions, I
a?”
er it at least
3. I'd as soon
im have it.”
leave. Roy
jut the door.
yvody must’ve
ot no call to

formation on
ley off South
1 Friday, the
ntion of the

ace reported
4, apparently
is downtown
2rnoon.

e had phoned
a bus out to
vo blocks to
said that he
Fourth near
hat she was

only about a

|
:
|
A
|
|

4 : VB

block from the McCormack residence, and the alley in which
the attack reportedly occurred was a short cut from the
Fourth Street shopping district to the attorney’s house. He
was known to use it frequently.

Police showed Mrs. McCormack the spectacles found in
the alleyway beside the spilled groceries. The rims were
like those on the glasses her husband wore. A short time
later Dr. Frank Pearlman, an optometrist, identified the
lenses as those he had prescribed for the missing lawyer.

Mrs. McCormack could give the cops no hint of a motive
for the beating and kidnaping of her attorney husband. So
far as she knew, he had no trouble with any ‘client, and
she was sure he had no personal enemies. He génerally
carried only nominal sums of money in his billfold, and
his only jewelry was a thin, silver Elgin watch.

McCormack was a large man, 6 feet 1 inch in height and
weighing around 170 pounds. On Thursday he had worn a
slate gray suit, a pearl gray topcoat and a dark hat.

The case was turned over at once to Lieutenant Charles
Young of the Homicide Squad. Young’s men, under Ser-
geant A. J. Miller, flashed a warning to the city’s pawn-
brokers to watch for a thin, silver Elgin watch, and then
launched a double-pronged investigation which they hoped
would unlock the puzzle of the lawyer’s fate.

Wilson Beatty, McCormack’s law partner, knew of no
professional difficulties that might have led to four play.

“Mrs. McCormack telephoned me last night, after Frank
failed to show up at the house,” Beatty said. “I knew he
had been out of the office much of the day. I thought he
was on some case, so I advised her not to worry. But
when he did not come home all night, I instructed Mary
to call the police. What do you boys make of it? The
work of common footpads?”

Sergeant Miller shook his head. “It’s hard to believe
a couple of ordinary thugs would pull a job like this in

Accused kidnaper (c.) reveals scene of slaying to
Judge Loraine Mix (/.) and Sheriff Bernard Bax

broad daylight with half a dozen witnesses around,” he
said. “Suppose we look over the files on the cases Mc-
Cormack has been handling recently.” ;

These were run-of-the-mill affairs, domestic relations
adjustments, civil judgments and the like. When the
homicide detectives came upon a folder marked “O’Shiel,”
the pretty secretary assisting the officers pulled it out and
opened it.’ ,

“Now there,” she said, “is an Irishman wild enough
for almost anything. He’s threatened everyone connected
with this affair.”

Mrs. O’Shiel was seeking separate maintenance from her
husband; Michael, basing her plea on a long list of allega-
tions of drunkenness, improvidence and beatings which he
inflicted upon her in his alcoholic rages.

“He phoned Mr. McCormack one day,” the secretary went

on, “and promised to break his neck if Mr. McCormack had

him brought into court. O’Shiel, of course, was druhk at
the time.”

Sergeant Miller took notes from the file, and continued
with other folders. When he reached the “T”’s he paused
and a wondering’ frown creased his forehead. The folder
bore the name of Tarrence.

Legal action had been brought by Gwendolyn Tarrence
against Leonard Tarrence of Jeffersontown and later of the
United States Army. Leonard was Roy Tarrence’s son.

In April, 1950, a charge of seduction had been brought
against the youth, then 20 years old. This was dropped
when he married Gwendolyn, but a few months later he
was haled into Juvenile Court and ordered to pay $7.50 a
week for the support of his baby son.

In 1951, young Tarrence, had been drafted into the
army, and his wife then sought and obtained an allot-
ment for herself and the child. In August, Leonard had
gone AWOL from Fort Knox and (Continued on page 74)

Detectives Arthur Wallmeyer (1.) and Tom Burch
weighing the evidence—I28!/, Ibs. of concrete

*

sa FRIDAY MORNING, MAY

9, “1924

THREE SLAYERS
DIE IN THE CHAIR

Thomas, Weick and Miller
Are Baptised In
Death Cell.

“TRIPLE KILLER GOES FIRST

‘JGoutiuged trem Iirst Page.)
ber, would throw the sw itch.
Dr. Travis was assisted in his
examinations with a = stetho-

scope to see if the shocks had

proved fatal, by Dr. W. S.;
Durham, superintendent of
the Western State Hospital

for the Insane, Hopkinsville,
and Dr. BE. C. MacBeth
New York, who has bee
‘iting in Western Kentucky. |

The three condemned men
; Were baptized by immersion
late yesterday afternoon by
Chaplain Hanberry in a bath
tub in Thomas’ cell. Each
said he was ‘clean.’ The
aged man and the negro had
confessed their guilt, but
Weick maintained his inno-

cence, even atter the death
warrant had been read to him
last night by Warden Chilton.

Thomas’ Last Advice.

Thomas, as one of his last acts.
wrote the following “Advice to the
World’ and gave it to Chaplain Han
berry, with the request that it be
made public:

As [ have but a few more hours
on this earth, and, sitting in the
death cell at Fddyville Peniten-
tiary® I] wish to give the following
advice to the world:

I came from one af the best fami-
lies in the State of Kentucky. Young
people, keep out of bad companys
and obey your mother ard father
and go to church and work for
Jesus. For, if we all woula we
would have no need for peniten-
iaries and electrie chairs s

Mother, wateh your chil
see what kind
keep. And see that they
church instead of going + road-
houses, and other phices of — sin,
The devil with his cunning amiles
tellajthem to come on and let’g have
a good time, +

ty having the experience of those

and>
they
gO to

tren
of company

2a

things, L feel tke Doamoatie to ad
Vike Souoabeut them. Be those who
read thos dest statemeat of srime an
thay enrth. Po Wont to sy ts ond that
Dam peepared te meet nry Crod aed
rraviriu that oabh wll othe se arbi

of!

jinsane

n vis-!

PM eof AssisGanit: Worden Miler,

¥. ank

trembling from head to foot, she did
not break down. Thotnus tried to

console her. Mr. Mugging said. The
old man told her he haa only a yeur
or two tnore tu live, anvway and, un-
der his sentence of death, “it will all
be over In a few minutes.”

Boyd Thomas grippedehis father's
hand and kissed him through the bars
when they parted, and then mother
and father hissed for the last time.

After the farewelk Mrs. Thomas and
her son returned to the hotel where
Chev waited for an early morning train
back to Louisville. Ed Wetek did mot
witness his brother's execution, he also
Wailing at the hotel while the electro-
ceuten took place,

) Mr. Huggins, who became interested
in the Thomas case after the old maid
had been sentenced to die and who

represented Weick from the start,
One of the electrocution
Thomas, a former Chief
Jefferson County, shot
beret Who haved
his best friend and
iin get pardon from Gow, AL OU.
Stoney for the slaying of Councy
Poltee Chief rank Vowell. Before
Doth these killings Thomas had sia
Achegre. His conVicthom in
Was followed by qoaamy legal maieu
by Mr. Hlugeins and Mr. uid.
o Save him from execution. wv,
time, the old man wag dechiras
adel spent several months bai
In the Western strate tlospmuss
Hlopkinsville.

Flaviv this week, a4¢hief Justice Clem
Ly. Saimpson. of the State Court of Ap
peals, granted a writ of error, that
Would aut least have postponed the
execution, but this was rescinded the
next day. Then Mr. Oldham maiz
his hurried and unsuccessful trip to
Washington. In seeking a writ of
error, Mr. Hugging and Mr. Oldham
attacked procedure atva Hopkinsville
trial at which Thomas hud been de-
chired sane, while he was still con
fined to the hoypital.

All of Thomas’ killings were in
Jefteyson County. Weick also was a
Jefferson County slayer. His) vietim
was William Oelke. a metghbur with
Whose wife he is alleged to have had
an oaffair. His case was carried
the Court of Appeals and the convic-
tion was upheld. The negro was sen-
tenced in QGreckinridge County and
he, too, lost on an appeal. He has
been In the death house since June 1,
123. Weick came onty last month.
Thomas’ continement in the execution
chamber began January 20, 1923, but
was broken by several months’ stay
im the asylum.

Resides his wife and son, Thomas
had a sister, Mrs. Belle Worden of
Louisville. Weick, whose wife is
dead, was the futher of thirteen chil-
dren, tive of whom are dead. The
others are Wiiliam, 10; Mary, 12, and
John, 14, who are wards of the Louls
ville and Jefferson County Children’s
Home: George, Jr, 15, Rosa, 28;
Meyer, 22; Mrs. Carrie Caivin, 20, and
Mrs. iXatia May, 26. Twa sisters,
Mrs. Wate Lowry and “Mrs. Carrie
Crum, and otwo brothers, Edward
and Henry, ‘are living. Adal
in Loutsville or Jefferson

Was
Witnesses.

of) Pohes
and Kilied
conside, ed
had helped

of
ay been

Why

Vers
ham ¢
One

year
al

veside
ghounty.

In aceordance with custom, War

fden Chibton exchanged telegrams this

fields
deen

afterngyén owith Coovernor to

tivike sure na order fitd

prevent te executions
Death Warrants Read.

Warrants were
to the three
abo 7 ae toek,

to
read

tha
Ulver

Phe death
Mie Chiltern
rth

Lhe
yives

Phathe

hie tines Its

news
yA

rey sub eweb obey pe

Louisville |

to}

}

issued |
adoption

SENATE ATTACKS
ALIEN BILL DELAY

ee

Approval of Later Date In’
. Japanese Exclusion
Criticized.

\

\

Washington,
Senate and

May 8 UP)—Approval
House - conferees,
the request of President Coolidge of
&@ new section to the Immigration
Bill ta defer the effective dare of Jap-

anese exclusion from July 1 to Mareh
Ty neat, rhat opportunity may be given
for diplomatic negotiations to abro
Kate the gentiemé@n’s ngreement wees
subjected te severe criticism today
during # ¢wo-hour debate in the Sen |
ate.

From both sides of the chamber
disagreement with the President's po-
sition and compliaace to it voted by
the conference was expressed. Not
onty did the step constitute a move to-
wards surrendering the sovereign
right of the United Stateg to dese |
with “aostrietiv domestic question,’
ir was charged, but it tndicated an at
tempt to set aside the expressed de-
cision of both

by at

The conference report was not sul
mitted to the Senate today bug wis
presented to the LTlouse by Chidirman
Jonnson of the Immigration Commit
tee with the announcement that it
would be called up for action tomor
row.

Mr. Johnson and Republican lead
ers, for the mnost part, expressed cou-
fidence that the House would approve
the report. On the other hand, mem:
bers out of synapathy with the Japan
ese exclusion provision said) they
would seek to recommmiit the report to
the conference. and put out the claim
they would have the votes to do sa,

Senator Reed's was practically the
only voice raised in defense of the
conferees, Even Senator Lodge of
Massachusetts, chairman of the For
eign Relations Committee, declared it
would be “simple hypocrisy” for him
to attempt cto argue that ao special
treaty on immigration was desirabie.

“T have always believed,” he added
“thut the question of who should abe
admitted to the United States wis a
mnatter to be determined by the Con-
gress. Im my judgment the conferees
and the entire legislative body includ-
ing the President must say tu the rest
ot the world: ‘We alone have the pow-
er to sav who shall come into the
United States as immigrants.”

BUTLER ADVOCATES
4924 WHISKY PLANK

New York, May 8 (#)—Declaring
that the Repubhean parcy wilt lose
vieven important States {n the coming
Presidential electlan if it does not
make a declaration on the wet and
dry question. Dr. Nicnolus) Murrary
Butler, president of Columbia Univer-
aitv today
of an anti-prohtbition plank
a the Repabtic un 1924 platform,

ifouses of Congress by |
subterfuge, i

came out’ squarely for tne!

for the Hi

Beware of imitators
the genuineip iO: and
ages bearing above tra

Paps ma

A BEAUTIF
A PLEASA:

mand ot

PROFITA:

\

224-20 West Marke:
busnmas
Warns Midd!
Wemen To

High Blood e

Thousamds ef Wore 2:
ing time of hfe
blood pressure.
ONOUS Waste ace
tem ur the Weaaemimy
organs. Thig foreeg tro,
more werk and raises

ule
it i

U2ateihs €.0i

iste
The symptins are
neSs of Lreath, lreated
face, Mervuusness of
High bieod presgufe
and stopped fur eve
brings en Bricht’s disess
und often suckien dee! hy,
dangervus ami Qukik a
without Needimg tes svenp

Norma :s a doctor's pre

>

fea.’

ras

high beod pressure ch
used with great succes,

sold bw Taylor-isaace ane
Made Drug Stores and «<
everywhere.

Being a purely seget:tt
ft contains no hadi forms:
harmiess and worke on
that it drives oul @asta
seng the duty of tie beet

and reduces Sleawd  peoew
‘and safels QPP letg, ovrpet
creat relief. Ger a bedtie

y and free yourself of tt
bigh tolarered press: em eke

| ILLINOIS
a ee eee Se a a we a a

> CENTRE.

ary, When Sarden Chiltan entecel the! sempre to atny “eiarh x oe tein hv uni? ess icpiemiaisi aeye (ESP YVNIS Wallis ANG Lureat i¥°e
con Fhoen mag he ane is af Sere | appeal to rds 5 : Codi at the} EAVIG “CAVOEIHS fees eee es cw ee
he! omas Was SIReIng ine YON. | United States Mahington had s *
i Big Clifty, Ky. ( fr Har

rove | Jesus, lover of my henrt.” The old} eajed. ‘
‘ttle; man’s warrant was read to him first. Thomas’ wife, 8. Mtolh® ‘Lapmas, : : “ ° .
He heard it standing in the door of =8 yeurs old an his stinap Boyd Graysog Pring Ry, Ps Cle wee ner ce eocvueces &
his cell, stroking hts long beard and Thomas, 26, arciyed., ’ in the ,Géodfgoing on all tains Saturdays, scheduled to
— ee nis ener ; Mia iS | irtecnoon from Luiggsay ‘ompanied on_ {rain ing 6:4 “Sundays.
glasses, tne arden's face, by Cc m i vit t opin
1 y- | He gulped nervously when the War- ee, iy ers wr w pnt asin Pete Orme es ae
a : . ice, a ark

den read that part of tne warrant] say } re
whieh directed that electric ¢urrent Gnee’ He “J Stauon, 7th A Riger.

aihit be applHled and “the application Ol ton only
such current shall continue’ untill

é

eee green ere Otherwise, the old was sen coe Pi a

[nie ad The seaman oat sane i] A WONDERFUL TRIP
. y t wi Mr. Chil- i ‘ , -
tera [fon tnighed reading, "it's God's will | Sakis on, TO NIAGARA FALLS

dos: | and it's: mine. I'm |ready to gp. I'm] neatly .dresséd. = the ‘taxicab
Prepased to 0." | ride from the staf he hoté? here
Then, in a loud voice, ne proceeded she kept her eyes stQi@¥bf ahead and
and |to denounce Harry Burnett, Louls-} never gianced toward the gray walls
hich | Ville attorney, who represented him] o¢ the prison macht drove past.
hat his original trial for murder in the Surrounded by curioys loiterers in the
Jefferson Ctreult Court. hotel lobby she trénfbled and tears
Van “I’m telling thejtruth befor® my| dimmed her eyes and she almost
ared |God.” the prisoner jcried. “I’ve: been} broke down, but then, summoning uap-
w a j|betrayed by Harry} burnett. He's a} parently all her willpower she walked
an|Judas of the worstjon earth, though] to the-dining room, supported by her
very |i forgive him, God help him. son and tried bravely to eat supper.
abie} “He told me to! play crazy, and} {¢ is said of her that sbe would gladly
diag Morrow and the :Repubiican party ¥o to the chair in Thomas’ piace if
is a| Would fix it up. If I'd got: a fair} she could.
for | trial with Clem Huggins I wouldn't After the death warrants were read,
have been given! more than tW0/ she and the young man were allowed
» on | years. to visit Thomas with Mr. Huggins.
cive| He recited a long list of witnesses/anq no reporter intruded at ihat last
sjra, | he said wouid declare wee Arbegust, meeting. Ed Weick of Louisville,
fur whose murder he wus condemned, George Weick’s brother, came yester-
had threatened hig lite. 7 ..|day morning and until late last night
But I’m guilty," he said. “I don’t} .2t with bowed head in the prison cor- {\
deny nothing. I killed the poor soul. ridor looking far older jthan hia 39
And I'm sorry for it.” venrs :
sES » Negro is; Amused “The brother waited for a telepnone
; Then Mr. Chilton waiked to tne! eal! from (ov. Willlam J. Tields that
negro's ceil, reading the next wWat-|never came, The older Welck said
rant to him - that he visited the Governut Munday
aoe Miller seemed nat at ail concerned; pleading hig brother’s cuse and that
nor | indeed, perhaps a little amused at the! \ir. Fields promised to take the ap-
with long words of the deatn ‘warrant, Elis peal “under advisement.” Each ring:
dark eyes roved from one member of | ing of the telephone bell stirred a new
the’ little knot of! spectators to the hope in Ed Weick's. heart that it
¢ d./ other, and he curiousiy eyed the | would tell of a stay of execution of
ould | newspaper men with their note paper | nis brother.
he fund pencil. The bodies of Thomas and Weick
Weick next heard the document} werg preparéd for shipment to Louis-
ang | Woich sentenced him to cite. His eye8) ville and that of the negro to his
der | ere downcast, as he stood with bis |pome in Alubama. ‘
fore hands gripping the bars of his cell. Willtam Hayecroft, brother of Sam
‘gan | Em ready to go," he toi'd the re-|praycroft, one of Miller's victiins, was
my | berters, when Mr. Chiltan finished bis |among those who saw the negro elec:
dis. | SQlemn task, “Um going with a clean | rrocuted,
heart.” i 4

No matter how much yau paid
you could get no better accom-
modations. than are offered on
the Liberty Bank's Tour De
Luxe to Niagara Fails. Write
the Travel Department, Main
Bank, for diseriptwe folder.

LIBERTY
INSURANCE BANK

MAIN OFFICE—MARKET AT SECOND

sapien ins SPOR :
x ARES :

here

a “Are you guilty’ or innovent,’ a re- THOMAS APPEAL FAILS

porter asked point bhink. “[’'ny inno- -_——--

vent,’ Weick answered, and sat dvuwa; Two Supreme Court Justices Refuse
; on a chair, burying his face ing dts to Intercede;

hands. After the reading of the The Coumer-Juurnal: Washington Sureau.
— | warrants, Mr. (hilton  ailawed tue Washington, May &8.—Frank Thom-

correspondents to question the three as’ last thread of hope for another
men. Weick showed the least Incii- | 27 . ¢ lectric chair w

. respite from the electric ¢ r Was

died | nation to talk. *ite sald he wanted to broken today at the stern portals !

at-| see his brother. / The negro appears ot the Supreme Court of the United |

Mr, |@t any attention shown Aem, States,

a . ~ . . , fa ‘

Mra. Throws Away Teeth a ce sage eam in Goan. %. ;
: a ‘ arruious. “Pys[ rived here today te perform, t hi ; + id 2
C. Thomas was & nous I ing a writ of error, the ullimate 3erv- OLORADO ig an ideal +z

Mrs. {ihrown away my falae reath’ the | 1B a writ ot igs
urd:; aged man confided. “ft don't want] ice 4 lawyer can render to a client in

' " % it : fe and death> Mr.
nothing false about me. [want to}4 case involving Ii
Tob. meet me ‘God the way I came into} Vldham had hoped, after appealiog to

’ i t shes sour telegraph t«
he world. woh't have nothing {the highest court, to te
ww fale mivvat ner . * i Thonmus by nightfall that a. stay a

Thomas usked that the public he} evecuuon had veen possible. Inatead,

country. All the charm:
wilderness within a stone's throw
fertable hotel, camp or inn.
something for everyone to do—

-

Es:

he that Warden Chilton and Deputy

arden Miller are “the right men in
hi right place.” , His voice broke ars
he deserihed the! treatment by Mr
Chilton of'a reeni¢itrant negro prison
ev." E£ said rigbt then and there,"
Mr. Chilton’s 2 gman. There's 4 man
God loves a good! man.’

Miller, a mulatto, wanted first to

know (if his questioners were. “paper,

printers. “ Then he asked where each
was from and, what paper he repre-
sented. Hie talked about His crime
the slaying of two railroad detectives
near Hardinsburg, He seenved not at
adi struck by the qereie of kiting two
men.

“Are wou guil y or Innotgat.” he

was asked and he was plainly sur-

priseck “I'm! gyilty,” he answered.
No innocent in 1"

In a Httle while, the reposters end
the others left the detth house, - Then
Mrs. Thomas and the son, with Mr.
Hyggins, were admitted to see Thom
ad Whe hen they left, the Weuk brath-
cra were allowed a lust meeting. Af
ter that, the Ipng, silent wae for the
hour of execufion ’

‘With Frunband.

after appearing before two justices of
the tribuhal of last resort, the lawyer
sent thia telegra:n to the aged niur
derer:

My farewell message to you: Aft-
er a full, patient and fair hearing
twice toflay befora (Wo separate jus:
tices of the highest court Known to
man. your appeal was denied dy
each, That exhuusts the law of
mun availiable tu you. We have done
our best. Alay He who guides and
directs the destinies of nations, and
with whom you have mada peace,
absojve you of any sin that may
have connected with your acts in
this Hfe,

Mr, Oldharg, soon after his arrival,
sougnt oul Justice McReynolds (irst,
because that Justice presiies over the
Fedewal Circuit of wi§ch Reniucky ts
a part, Swager Sheriey, representing
the Altorney General of Keutuciy, al.

appeared when the justice agreed

hear the application, te present od
padysiead by the State to the appear
ance of Mr. Oldham on the ground
that he did not reprememt the State

(Board of Charftees and Corrections,
‘which, is was ciaimed, had Agured a

Ashing, golf, tennis, horsebacis
motoring, sight- -seeing, keodakiny
taking it easy and lcafing.

Days balmy and pleasant, so -
vacation hours lost. Nights <<
sleep soundiy under blanixets.

5 Round Trip
95223. Louisviil:
Bepaoing June

THREE DAILY TRAINS TO DE

Ly. Chicago 10:30am. 625 pm |
Ac. Denver 3:02 m sda m
& Firsa. Trig jume 1

riariag

deer GAM. W. Ry Jae! Age, °A
— amnes Tok loka 8
Segre SSS

a

iat

- attEddyville riony Slaftr

ae rey

* axe ai w:
ve scat

iat.
“3
“i ¢: 4

>

ne tah et We -¢ Wg %

First: Triple “Execution In:'the
.: State’s History ‘Carried. Out

of Arbegust* |ssifes: State-

ment’ Giving “Advice - ‘to
- World;””-. Asks: Mothers to
. Send d Cildrén to: Church.

‘BULLETIN |

LOUISV TLILE, May 9.—A special to
The Times from xg. staff correspondent
at Eddyville today sald that after
George Weick had malntalned hie In-

nocence: of the cflme foc ‘which he
waa convicted, he. confensed a few
minutes before he was executed. “I
shot and killed that man, but no one

saw me do it,” ,We
having nald. ‘ sia _ _auetes as

* eke ee

WESTERN STATE PEN :
TIARY, Eddyville, Ky., May $ ace.
tucky‘'s’ first triple execution by elec.
trocution was completed in Eddyville
Prison this morning, when Frank
Thomas, George Weick and Charles
Miller dled in the electric ehatt In
the order named..

Thomas djed at 12:3

Welck died af rake Poise

Thomas, 72 years old, slayer of
three men, one of them his best
friend and nefactor, Lee Arbeguent,
was the first to pay the ponalty: Hinz
march to the death hous= just = few
feet from the cell in w a_he spent
his last hours, began a ‘few minutes
after midnight,’ Bes:

Quickly he was strapped in the
death chair, the electrode was applied
to head and ankles, the attendanta
stepped back and, aa Chaplain A. F.

| Hanberry muttered a” prayer, the of-|:
‘ficlal elecuUoner threw a switch, a

convuls!ve ‘tremor passed. thru. the
aged man’s body and he was atill.
‘The current was turned off for half
a minute and.then reapplied. Prison
physiciana then “stepped forward, 1
Metened for: heart betas,’ felt for hia
pulse and, finding no Ratio ‘of f Hees
pronounced him ;dead,

as fie “iy

_-wen cu 15m Gead,
Welck’s Death March

Thomas! execution . completed, his
body: removed and the death march
for George Welck,.convicted of mur-
dering from ambush William Ockle
in Jefferson county, began. He met
| his fate as had the other, except that
he continued to declare his Innocence
of the crime for which he died.

Within a minute or two after his!
{body had been removed from the}
death house the third of the three
murderers to pay the extreme pen-
alty of the law, Charles Miller, Negro,

twho slew two ‘railroad guards in
| Breckinridge county, marched Into

the death house. |
The name procedure, followed with

machine-like schedule as Jn Thomans’
case, Was gone thru.
. Thomzs’ Last Advice .
Thomas, as one of his last: acts,
! wrote the following: “advice to .the
world” and gave it to Chaplain Hun-
berry, with the penuens that It be

made public: ve (

“Ag I have DSutia few more hourr
on this earth, and, sitting Jn the
death cell at Eddyville penitentiary,
‘1 wish to xive the following advice

o

to the. world: Le
“Il came from one: of the. best

families in the State of Kentucky.
ye aowne people, keep out of bad corn-
“pany and obey your mother dnd
‘father and Ko to church and work
for Jesus. For, Jf we all’ would, we.,
‘would have .no. need for. peniten-
aries. and electric chairs.’ '

*. Mother, watch your children and
wee: what. kind ,of company they
keep. . And: gee that. they go to
-church« instead of going, to road-
‘houses, “and ‘other: places of' sin.
“The devil .with his cunnning smiles
‘tella them to.7come .on “and Jet's -
‘have a times. grees

=> “By -having. the experience :: ‘of
those things,:1 feet ike Tam ‘able.
‘to ‘advise; you“‘about them. t5To |
“those who “read this laat statement °
of mine. ‘on-this-earth,.I want to,
“pay sto- all: that ;I: am “prepared. ‘to:
-‘meet-my God and praying. that;all
syil ~will strike glad hands In that celes.
Teal, city, .whoes builder and* maker,

Ia God.” wiygit: Rest tk “he a hg ts f
Une ‘thhee men’ were. “baptized Sby
immersion * Jate. Thursday * afternoon
jin a -dath.“tyd : ‘$n sThomas’+ cell : by
Chaplain iHanbéerry. The: aged | man
and the }Negro* had" confes Itheir
‘guilt, ‘byt cWelek , maintain this fn:
nocegee: even after the ‘death: warrant
was read” to \bim® ‘by: Warden | (7-2 B,

Pm ne aa

Chiltdn. sc Qe eA es


~

THOMAS, Frank, white, 73, elec. Ky. (Jefferson) 5-9-192h

y se 4 * 29 ee ae i *° e : Rem ee « te + si
: ., 4 4 sa ’ : : } .t ‘sy K . ipo)
gas ' } y ~ Y7 OD tas oe
tie : > . fs - he 4 ton aa
; EE SI Tae he SA Rt Mh ete lig te { op mbes: 6

* LOUISVILLE, Muy 8 (P)—“Frank
Thomas .will .be : a
‘| Su ma Court justices so ‘decided
:{: today,” says a Washington special:
to the Loulsville Post. Counsel for
Thomas and the ‘State ap ed be-
fore the Supreme “Court in conneo-
tion wth. the case’of Thomas, who
with two .other.men, [s to be ex-
ecuted at Eddyville for mur. .
der. Thomas’ counsel sought a stay |
of execution. .. { . « * |: f
OT eee @ errr
PADUCAH, ” Kyl May -8.—Frank
Thomas, .72' ypars old, must go to the
electric ‘ch Friday for the slaying
of Lee Arbegust in Jefferson county,
according’ to messages received by
Warden: Chilton ofthe Eddyville pen-
Itentlary, sald a ‘s fal dispatch from
‘Eddyville. to ithe News-Democrat. The
dispatch continued/; . .. ... ie '
“The lastiof ‘nine aftempts to save

ed when-at writ’ 6f.error filed:in the
Court. of’ Appeals, was thrown out of
court. Ve Bn Lied oe Shien
‘Thomas, : “George .. Welck,.-- and
Charlea Miller, a Negro.| will be exe-
cuted Friday. ; It‘will be t o first triple
execution at.the’ Eddyville prison. ‘All
three. of the condemned .'men told 're-
porters they “were: ‘ready to pay the
supreme penalty] ui foc ey
*.4"Thomas, ; bearded; and gray,’ sald

A phe ‘eyo {

be . executed. Twe)

‘Thomas from the‘ death sentence fail-4

aah ae

. he ; :
SE et oie Pa is 53 m Pisa: ‘ >
fat eds on RANK, THOMAS .,.-, LE Ra IIS GOB y te te
. ; 2 He 4; ¥ iid ’ ; oe * bs

eS «ite! si ihe ee Ear eA
simply, ‘I am: not:afrald-to fo,’ and
talked- principally. of his study of the
Bible during his imprisonment. How-
ever, he denied making overtures to
Louls Marsh’s wife, which -are’ said
to have led to the: murder. ‘In a let-
ter dated May :4, and written-to his
attorney, Clem Huggins, Thomas al-
leged witnesses-at his trial had testi-
Med falsely. | Copies of that: letter
were available herp today. : In. the
postscript. Thomas |wrote: ‘I forgive

‘jevery one of my enemies.’” -

‘An effort to carry Thomas’. case to
the Supreme Court! marks the final
skirmish .in the ‘mdst: stubborn legal
battle probably in the’ State*s: history
to Rave a condemned person.’ -He first
was placed in_the death house here tn
January, 1923, Shortly before / the
date set for -his execution his coun:
sel obtained ‘a hearing on’. his. sanity

es the Lyon‘ county court and'‘a: jury
el ‘

lared him insane, 3.45.83 og} 4
-He was removed to the, State asylum

At Hopkinsville .and sometime ‘later

a@ circuit court -jury declared he, was
sane. .An-appeal was. taken and the
circult caqurt’s findings affirmed, Last

week a petition fora writ'of error to:

¢arry the cass to the Supreme-Court

was granted iin-the /State-"Court of

Appeals and‘a -stay -of execution ‘or-
dered. : » The writ ; of ,erro#,.was Tre
scl n ded. wy en ee hal Ays F % aah : si) * pees:

Lowe rade Yl ay

LEADER, Co piagilore ty

Moy ti /9 2 d(l-242)


1108 Ky. 114 SOUTH WESTERN
price for board out of which a profit is
expected. Not only did he contribute his
earnings as a miner, but he worked on
the farm, and it hardly can be said that
his contributions were more than offset by
the support furnished by his parents. On
the contrary, there was some evidence tend-
ing to sustain the board’s finding of fact
that appellees were 25 per cent. dependent
on the deceased.

[3] We have the further contention that
appellees made no claim for funeral ex-
penses, and that item should not have been
allowed. The statute expressly provides
that the employer or his insurer shall pay
to the persons entitled to compensation, or
if none, then to the personal representative
of the deceased employee, reasonable burial
expenses of a person of the standard of
living of the deceased and not to exceed the
sum of $75. Kentucky Statutes, § 4893. As
appellees applied for and were awarded
compensation, and funeral expenses are a
necessary incident of compensation and go
as a matter of course, to those entitled to
compensation, such expenses may be allowed
by the board, without specific claim or proof
that such expenses were incurred. Stand-
ard Elkhorn Coal Company v. Stidham, 242
Ky. .228, 46 S.W.2d 120.

Judgment affirmed.

© © KEY NUMBER SYSTEM

sums

272 Ky. 714
TRIPLETT v. COMMONWEALTH.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.
Jan, 18, 1938.
Rehearing Denied April 19, 1938.

4. Criminal law ©=980(1)

In murder prosecution wherein accused
pleads guilty, the commonwealth may show
circumstances attending the killing to enable
jury to fix the punishment intelligently.

2. Criminal law €=53
Intoxication is not an excuse for crime.

3. Homicide 180

In murder prosecution, evidence of in-
toxication is admissible only to show wheth-
er accused could entertain the intent or mal-
jce .which is an indispensable ingredient of
certain grades of the offense.

REPORTER, 2d SERIES

4. Homicide 180

In murder prosecution, evidence that
accused was intoxicated at time crime was
committed is not available as a defense or
to mitigate punishment unless the intoxica-
tion was of such a degree as to deprive ac-
cused of power of reason and make him un-
conscious of what he was doing.

5. Homicide €=347

In murder prosecution, wherein accused
pleaded guilty, where evidence showed that
accused was in full possession of his facul-
ties when crime was committed and that
murder was a ruthless one committed with
premeditation, evidence that accused had
been drinking intoxicating liquor on day
homicide occurred would not warrant miti-
gation of death sentence.

-
6. Homicide €=354
In murder prosecution wherein accus-
ed pleaded guilty, that jury fixed accused’s
punishment at death rather than life im-
prisonment, did not authorize an inference
of passion or prejudice on their part.

7. Criminal law 684 :

In murder prosecution, evidence showed
that witnesses who testified after accused
testified in rebuttal, and hence their testi-
mony was admissible as against contention
that testimony was substantive and admis-
sible only in chief.

8. Homicide €>282',

In murder prosecution where accused
pleaded guilty, duty of determining the de-
gree of punishment rested upon jury.

————

Appeal from Circuit Court, Letcher
County.

Troy Triplett was convicted of murder,
and he appeals.

Affirmed.

John D. W. Collins, of Whitesburg, for
appellant.

Hubert Meredith, Atty. Gen. and W.
Owen Keller, Asst. Atty. Gen. for the
Commonwealth.

REES, Justice.

Troy Triplett has appealed from a judg-
ment convicting him of the crime of, mur-
der, and sentencing him to death. He
seeks a reversal of the judgment on two
grounds: (1) The punishment is exces-
sive; and (2) the trial court erred in per-

TRIPLETT v. COMMONWEALTH Ky. 1109
114 S.W.2d

mitting the Commonwealth to introduce
evidence in chief after it had closed its

case and the defendant had testified.

[1] Appellant shot and killed Dolphy
Hall in Letcher county July 16, 1937. Hall
was 13 years of age. When appellant was
arraigned, he entered a plea of “not guil-
ty,” but, when the case was called for
trial, he withdrew this plea and entered
a plea of “guilty” to the indictment charg-
ing him with the crime of murder; thus
leaving to the jury only the duty of fixing
his punishment at life imprisonment or
death. The Commonwealth, as it had a
right to do, introduced evidence showing
the circumstances attending the killing in
-order to enable the jury to fix the punish-
ment intelligently. Cornelison v. Com., 84
Ky. 583, 2 S.W. 235, 8 Ky.Law Rep. 793;
Holtman v. Com., 129 Ky. 710, 112 S.W.
851. John Henry Addington, the first wit-
ness introduced by the Commonwealth, tes-
tified that on the day of the homicide he,
Dolphy Hall, and Paul Akeman crossed
the mountain to pick huckleberries, but
found the berries were not ripe and re-
turned to the foot of the mountain, where
they were joined by Troy Triplett, Homer
Rose, and Harrison Spurgeon. Triplett
was angry because the Hall boy had tes-
tified against him in some court proceeding,
and, in the presence of the witness, said,
in substance, that he was going to kill Mall.
Triplett, Hall, and the others walked down
the road to a point where a path led
across the hill. Hall, Addington, and Ake-
man turned into the path, and Triplett
ran up to them and said: “You are going
down the road.” They turned and accom-
panied Triplett and Rose to Brack Quil-
len’s home, where Addington and Akeman
turned and started back. Triplett again
ran up to them and said: “You are going
with us.” They continued down the road
to the mouth of Webb branch, and then
to the home of Arlie Vanover. Adding-
ton told Triplett he wanted a drink of
water, and Triplett said he would go in
the house and get it. While he was absent,
Dolphy Hall walked into the house, but
Triplett took hold of his arm and led him
back to the road. When Triplett gave
the water to Addington, he said: “Take a
good cold drink, that is all you will need
until you get one in Hell.” They continued
down the road, appellant complaining all
the while because Dolphy Hall had tes-
tified against him. He threatened several
times to kill the Hall boy. Addington tes-

tified as follows concerning what Triplett
said and did when whey reached the place
where the killing took place:

“THe said ‘Damn him I am going to
bump him off? and I begged him up there
before we started not to bother him, not
to hurt him, and we come on down there
a little farther and he said that he didn’t
aim to leave no evidence and I says to
him, ‘You wouldn’t hurt that little harm-
less boy would you.’ He said ‘How old
are you son?’ and he said ‘I am thirteen’
and he turned to me and said, ‘I was in
the pen by the time I was as big as he is’.
And he said ‘I don’t aim to leave any evi-
dence, him nor none of you’. We got on
down to the mouth of the branch and he
kindly showed Dolphy how to set down,
there was a little bank there, just a
small bank and Dolphy set down and
placed his face down in his hands, and

he says ‘Let’s talk some’. Troy did, and .

just as he said that he commenced backing
backwards and pulling his gun and I com-
menced backing away up the road, I backed
up the road, I backed two or three steps
while he was that way and that throwed
‘us some little distance apart, well—

“The Court: Who was it drew the gun
and backed up? A. Triplett. Troy Trip-
lett, then he drew his gun and shot the
way the little boy was riding the mule
the first shot and the mule then whecled
and made a circle around, it hit the mule
and as she come around she knocked me
over against the plank fence kindly, about
six feet and he shot one more shot in the
ground under me as I fell or about the
time I fell and then he went right back
by the back of Dolphy Hall and shot into
him three shots in his side next to him in
the right side and then by that time I
got up there where that fence was and
took up through on my hands and feet
where I hurt my leg and he shot—about
the time he loaded his gun up, he was
working the gun about the time I started
and then he shot * * * there around
about the same place six more shots. Troy
told him to set down and motioned to him
—And he set down on a little bank and
when he sect down he put his hands down
that way and his head was something like
this and saying something, I don’t know
what it was, and he never did raise up no
more that I scen of.”

Paul Akeman, a boy 13 years of age, tes-
tified to substantially the same facts ex-
cept that he did not see the whole trans-

"Océ SO LEW UO (aeyoyeT) AyonquSy *oeTe feqTyM Sfoz] ¢ LLHId TUL

$
“
.
+
%

ahgepnhdidakiahabeds GQ 54iwetserms ebadate ra itis

ate Rahway RR RS id RRA

bh ine bes: 2 pirate 2

is Srrepe rarer gens t PeeTPTee Tvs eae |

piel Oia ME BAA tans Nk at tal oe

some ek

Pet TS

ce bigeber ty te ~

1004 Ky. 166 SOUTH WESTERN

stances it was for the jury to determine
whether they would accept Rice’s or
Trent’s version of the killing. Crawford
v. Com., 281 Ky. 557, 136 S.W.2d 754;
Carter v. Com., 278 Ky. 14, 128 S.W.2d
214; Clark v. Com., 237 Ky. 112, 34 S.
W.2d 963. When Trent was arrested
seventeen articles of jewelry were found
on his person, fourteen rings and three
wrist watches; also, he admitted on the
trial he had stolen a car on the day of
the killing. The record shows he had four
previous felony convictions against him.
It is not strange that the jury accepted
the testimony of Rice rather than that of
appellant, and no open mind can say the
verdict is flagrantly against the evidence.
Indeed, it is in full accord with the evi-
dence. When upon the proven facts it
is reasonable for the jury to return a ver-
dict of guilty, such verdict is not flagrant-
ly against the evidence. Shepherd v. Com.,
236 Ky. 290, 33 S.W.2d 4; Davenport v.
Com., 285 Ky. 628, 148 S.W.2d 1054.

[3,4] Appellant cannot complain that
the jury was summoned from Fayette
County, inasmuch as the record shows
that when a jury could not be secured
from Breathitt County, an order was en-
tered to the effect that both the Common-
wealth and appellant agreed it might be
summoned from cither Fayette, Clark,
Powell or Morgan County. While appcl-
lant complains of Sewell B. Williams be-
ing appointed special bailiff to summon and
guard the jury during the trial, there is
nothing in the record showing his dis-
qualification to act in this capacity or his
prejudice against appellant, or any mis-
conduct on his part.

{[5] The third and fourth grounds will
be considered together. The record shows
the officers did not arrest the appellant—
they only asked him his name and he
volunteered to identify himself if they
would accompany him to his room. The
shooting was not the result of the arrest
and appellant does not contend he was
resisting an illegal arrest at the time the
shots were fired, but that Smith opened
fire on him without provocation and that
he returned the fire in self-defense. Clear-
ly there was no evidence upon which the
court could have based an instruction upon
the duty of the officers while making an
arrest. Instructions are required only on
matters in issue. Stanley’s Instructions to
Juries, § 764, p. 1032; McGee v. Com.,

REPORTER, 2d SERIES

246 Ky. 445, 55 S.W.2d 382; Brinegar vy.
Com., 285 Ky. 400, 147 S.W.2d 1037.

[6,7] One of the grounds set out in
the motion for a new trial was the mis-
conduct of the jury in that they were al-
lowed to separate and were under the in-
fluence of liquor during the consideration
of the case. The trial judge heard testi-
mony on this point and same was reported
and the transcript of that evidence bears
an endorsement “Offered to be filed in open
court, July 1, 1942, G. L. Allen, C.R.C.C.”,
But we find no order in the record filing
it; nor was this transcript attested by the
circuit judge as provided by K.R.S. §
28.470, K.S. § 4644. Therefore, we have
no authority to consider it. Conway v.
Com., 261 Ky. 721, 88 S.W.2d 957. An-
other reason why we cannot consider the
testimony heard on the motion for a new
trial is that it is not incorporated in, or
made a part of, the bill of exceptions.
Schuster & Chambers v. Com., 232 ky.
171, 22 S.W.2d 586; Voils v. Com., 229
Ky. 305, 17 S.W.2d 238, and cases therein
cited. However, as the death penalty was
inflicted here, we have taken occasion
to carefully read the testimony heard on
this motion and had we authority to con-
sider it, we would be compelled to hold
it did not sustain appellant’s contention.

[8,9] There was no evidence that the
jury was under the influence of liquor
while hearing the testimony or during the
consideration of the case. The most the
evidence shows is that some of the jurors
took a bottle of beer with their lunch and
that others may have taken a small quan
tity of liquor in their room after court ad
journed the night they remained together.
In Smith’s Adm’x v. Middlesboro Electric
Co., 164 Ky. 46, 174 S.W. 773, 775, 782.
Ann.Cas.1917A, 1164, it was written:

“The occasional taking of intoxicating
spirits, in moderate quantity by jurors,
while not a thing to be encouraged, has
never been held as misbehavior authoriz-
ing the granting of a new trial in Ken-
tucky. * * * While in a few jurisdic-
tions it has been held that the intoxication
of a juror at all during the trial is a groun!
for a new trial, the weight of authority 's
to the effect that a new trial should not
be granted unless the intoxication inter
fered with the proper hearing and deci
sion of the case by the jury.”

See, also, 16 C.J., § 2537, p. 1080; 25
C.J.S., Criminal Law, § 1363; 64 Cj. $

SKAGGS v. ONIO VALLEY ROCK ASPHALT CO. Ky. 1005
166 S.W.2d 1005

802, p. 1017; Liverpool & London & Globe
Ins. Co. v. Wright, 166 Ky. 159, 179 S.W.
49; Gordon v. Louisville, St. L. & T. Ry.
Co., 29 S.W. 321, 16 Ky.Law Rep. 713; Rob-
inson v. State, 33 Ark. 180; Davis v.
People, 19 Ill. 74, to the same effect.

[10,11] The separation of the jury was
but momentary when one of its members
walked along in front and entered a res-
taurant while the others stopped for their
picture to be taken. One of the eleven
who had stopped immediately went after
the stray and brought him back to their
body. A temporary separation of a juror
from his fellows, when he remains within
view of the sheriff and the other jurors
and where there is no effort made to com-
municate with third persons concerning
the case under trial, does not violate § 244
of the Criminal Code of Practice. Wynn
v. Com., 188 Ky. 557, 222 S.W. 955; Mur-
phy v. Com., 263 Ky. 347, 92 S.W.2d 342.

We find no error in the record preju-
dicial to appellant’s substantial rights;
hence the judgment is affirmed.

Whole Court sitting.

KEY NUMBER SYSTEM

4aums

292 Ky. 758
SKAGGS v. OHIO VALLEY ROCK
ASPHALT CO. et al.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.
Dec. 1, 1942,

Rehearing Denied Jan. 22, 1943.

1. Appeal and error €=770(!)

In absence of definite rule as to what
course should be pursued by Court of Ap-
peals when it is apparent that appellee does
not intend to file brief, court may exercise
its discretionary power in manner most
consonant with justice and its own con-

venience.

2. Appeal and error €=770(1)

Where it was apparent that appeiice
did not intend to file brief, Court of Ap-
peals applied its rule that, in absence of
disagreement concerning facts and plead-
ings, court will assume that appellant’s

statement thereof is full and correct. Rules
of Court of Appeals, rule 5, par. 2.

3. Ejectment 10, 12, 15(1)

Plaintiff in ejectment may establish
his rights by proving connected record title
back to Commonwealth or a source com-
mon to his own and defendant’s claims or
by proving plaintiff's continuous adverse
possession of land involved for 15 years.

4. Adverse possession €=66(1)

Recorded title under which owner was
in possession of land had effect of extend-
ing such possession to ottside boundary
therein defined.

5. Property ©=7

Constructive possession of land is a
legal presumption which follows title there-
to and endures so long as title does, un-
less overcome in some way.

6. Abandonment C=4

One in possession of land under record
title did not abandon such possession by
placing tenant on land.

7. Adverse possession €=115(6)

In ejectment action, evidence held suf-
ficient to take to jury questions of plain-
tiff’s record title to land and continuous
adverse possession thereof under such title
for over 15 years.

——_>——

Appeal from Circuit Court, Edmonson
County; Clarence Bartlett, Judge.

Action in ejectment by M. L. Skaggs
against the Ohio Valley Rock Asphalt
Company and others. Judgment for de-
fendants, and plaintiff appeals.

Reversed.

R. H. Cannon and Allen P. Cubbage,
both of Leitchfield and Pleas Sanders, of
Brownsville, for appellant.

Charles E. Whittle, V. R. Logan, and
T. H. Demunbrun, all of Brownsville, for
appellee.

STANLEY, Commissioner.

This appeal, granted by the circuit court,
was filed as an appearance case for our
Winter Term, commencing January 5, 1942,
and appeared on the docket for orders on
that day. So appellees’ brief was due to
be filed December 27, 1941. Rule V, Para-
graph 4. The clerk reminded counsel, hy

sub-
‘asl-
e in

y.
e H.
his
ison,
arles
lican
iittee

jority
ously
litical

ed.

Sam
l toid

ckians
‘ity to
dential

of his

rid at
ned at

Sam
nt was
Harri-
ged off

neeting
ificance

m con-
impres-

Chiang
A Mid-

srings
3

reckless,
id driv-
s license
e Welch,
he result
5:36 p.m.

market.
<en driv-
liam F.
‘tstein, at
d Chero-
Biller, 41,
) p.m. on

Lexington

N rrested

Case

26, and
1 of 327 E.
at 10 a.m.
ged with
olen prop-
ved = three

bracelets
room. Po-
rere stolen
. P. Byrd,
levard, on

28, 1941; Jack Reeves, Anna Carl-
berg, Thomas Lunsford, W. B.
Tomlinson and Henry “Ike”
Stevens, Lexington residents,

Releases Statement.

While he was strapped in the
electric chair at Eddyville: Peni-
tentiary, Penney had released a
statement reiterating that Ander-
son was one of his partners in
the crime,

Anderson had been executed a
few minutes earlier and Baxter
was electrocuted immediately
Penney was pronounced dead. ~

A fourth man, Ernest Trent,
26, Perry County, Kentucky,
miner, was electrocuted also.
Trent was convicted of the slay-
ing of Hiram Smith, Jackson po-
lice officer, there in January,
1942. Almost tragically, Trent
played “Lord, I’m Coming Home
to You!’ on a harmonica and Bax-
ter chanted the words of the song
as the latter moved to the electric
chair. Both the voice and the
mournful music wavered re-
peatedly,

Says Both Fired Shots.

Penney’s statement, released
by Penitentiary Warden Jesse
Buchanan, said that both he and
Anderson shot at the Mileys dur-
ing the $130 holdup-killings on
September 28, 1941, but that he
didn’t know which one fired the
shots that killed the noted golfer
and her mother, Mrs. Elsie Ego
Miley, manager of the club.

Penney’s statement was given
on January 23, just five days be-
fore the three men were taken to
Lexington for a hearing on An-
derson’s new trial plea, which
was based on Penney’s new stery
that the late Buford T. Stewart,
Louisvilie bartender, and not An-
derson, was the third man in the
crime, the warden said.

Thursday afternoon, eight
hours before the execution, An-
derson himself said Stewart was
not the third man. He declined to
reveal the third man’s name al-
theugh he said he knew.

Tells of Confession.

“Tom Penney sent me word by
Porter B. Lady, deputy warden
here, that he had something to
tell me. So Mr. Lady brought him
to my office,” Buchanan said.

“Penney told me that he had
gambled with his soul by makin
the statements he had made an
he wanted to get it off his chest,
that he wanted to tell the truth,
that he knew when he was elec-
trocuted I would ask him if he
had anything to say and at that
time (just before the execution,
he didn’t want to say anything.

“‘I'm telling you now what L

want to say instead of at the time
of the electrocution,’”’ Penney r
lated, Buchanan said, .
The warden declared Penney
told him “that Bob Anderson was

with me (Penney) at Lexington

acy when ne and Anderson “te
cided—plotted to make the state-
ment involving Buford Stewart.
“Penney told me,” the warden
continued, “it was while they
were in the Lexington jail.” ~

Baxter’s Part Told.

Lady interposed® that Pennéy
told him that “Anderson knew
Buford Stewart was dead then.”
Stewart died February 2, 1942.

Buchanan said Penney went on
to say Baxter was not in the chub,
but had driven away. aks

After the executions, Dr. Par-
Trish showed newsmen a si
razor blade he said
gave him in death row. Dr. Par-
rish said Anderson told him. he
planned originally to slash his
wrists with the blade, but trad
been dissuaded. ~ le

Dr. Parrish said Anderson told
him he received the razor blede
while at Lexington last motrth
and that he smuggled it {fo
death row by attaching it to the
bottom of his foot with adhesive
inte. Dr. Parrish said Anderson
told him he received the ‘blade
in a box of aspirin'he had or-
dered at Lexington.

The body of Anderson was re-
turned to Louisville by a Louis-
ville undertaker for burial in
Resthaven Cemetery there. Bodies
of Penney and Baxter were taken
to Lexington and Trent’s to Haz-
ard for burial.

State’s Jobless Fund
Most Solvent In U. 8,

Frankfort, Ky., Beb. 26 (®—
The Federal Social Security
Board has declared Kentucky’s
unemployment compensation re-
serve fund, now $54,895,377.21,
the “most solvent” of any of the
states and territories, V. E.
Barnes, State director, reported
today.

The board’s analysis places
Kentucky at the top of the list
with a solvency percentage of 115,
Barnes said. He explained this
means there are sufficient funds
on hand to pay every potential
claim with some to spare.

Woman Held On Theft.
Prostitution Charge ~

Miss Lee Spears, 21, was st-
rested at 12:45 a.m. today at the
Kentucky Hotel on charges of ©
prostitution and grand larceny,
the l1#ter on a warrant sworn fo
by John Elliot, 35, of McKinney,
Lincoln County, police reported.
Elliot charged the girl stole $85
trom him. A technical prostitu-
‘tion charge was placed against
James F. Thompson, Negro, 30,

of 4002 Grand, who police said
was a Kentucky Hotel bell hop.

o — a

e


1002. ‘Ky.

[8,9] The motion for a new trial was
overruled, and an appeal granted by the
Circuit Court on December 13, 1940, but
the record was not lodged in this Court
until November 24, 1941. The motion to
set aside the order overruling the motion
for a new trial did not operate to extend
the time limited by law, Section 738, Civil
Code of Practice, for the filing of the rec-
ord; and hence, it was filed out of time.
But, as we have frequently written, where
the two year maximum limitation has not
been exceeded the objection must be
raised by a motion to strike before sub-
mission in order to be available to the ap-
pellee.

Judgment affirmed.

° KEY NUMBER SYSTEM

sHms

292 Ky. 735
TRENT v. COMMONWEALTH.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.
Oct. 30, 1942.

Rehearing Denied Jan. 22, 1943.

1. Homicide C=244(1)

Kvidenece that defendant, who was be-
ing accompanied to his room by officers
at his request to obtain evidence estab-
lishing his identity, obtained a pistol upon
entering the dark room and immediately
shot and killed one of the officers, as
against claim of self-defense, was sufficient
to support conviction of willful murder.

2. Criminal law C-1159(2)

When upon the proven facts it is rea-
sonable for the jury to return a verdict
of guilty, such verdict is not “flagrantly
against the evidence”.

See Words and Vhrases, Permanent

Edition, for all other definitions of
“Wlagrantly Against the [vidence”.

3. Criminal law C>1137(I)

In prosecution for murder, where or-
der was entered that the commonwealth
and defendant agreed that a jury might be
summoned from either of four named
counties, since the jury could not be had
in the county where cause was tried, de-
fendant could not complain that jury was
summoned from one of the named coun-

fies,

166 SOUTH WESTERN REPORTER, 2d SERIES

4. Criminal law @=850
Jury €=67(3)

In prosecution for willful murder, the
appointment of a special bailiff to sum-
mon and guard the jury was not error
where record failed to show such bailiff’s
disqualification, or prejudice against de-
fendant or misconduct.

5. Criminal law €=814(3)

In prosecution for murder of officer
who was accompanying defendant to his
room at defendant’s request to obtain evi-
dence establishing his identity, trial court
did not err in failing to instruct on duties
of officers while making an arrest where
there was no evidence that defendant was
under arrest or that he was resisting an
illegal arrest at time of the killing.

6. Criminal law > 1087(1)

Where record failed to reveal that
transcript of evidence taken on question
of jury’s misconduct in murder trial was
filed or attested by circuit judge as re-
quired by statute, Court of Appeals had

no authority to cansider such evidence.
KRS_ 28.470.

7. Criminal law G=1124(4)

Where testimony heard on mction for
new trial in murder prosecution was not
incorporated in or made a part of the bill
of exceptions, court of appeals could not
consider such testimony.

8. Criminal law €=956(13)

Evidence that some of jurors in mur-
der case took a bottle of beer with their
lunch and that others may have taken a
small quantity of liquor after court ad-
journed on night they remained together
was insufficient to establish that jury was
under the influence of liquor while hear-
ing testimony or considering case.

9. Criminal law €=926

The occasional taking of intoxicating
spirits in moderate quantity by jurors, while
not to be encouraged, is not “misconduct
of jury” authorizing granting of a new
trial.

See Words and Phrases, Permancnt

Edition, for all other definitions of

“Misconduct of Jury”.

10. Criminal law €=854(9)

I-vidence that one of the jurors en-
tered a restaurant while others stopped
for their pictures to be taken but that jurer
immediately rejoined the others did not es-

TRENT vy. COMMONWEALTH Ky. 1003
166 S.W.2d 1002

tablish “misconduct of jury”. Cr.Code
Prac. § 244.

11. Criminal law @=854(9)

The temporary separation of a juror
from his fellows when he remains within
view of sheriff and other jurors and no
effort is made to communicate with third
persons concerning the case does not vio-
late statute requiring them to be kept to-
gether. Cr.Code Prac. § 244.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Breathitt
County; Chester A. Bach, Judge.

Ernest Trent was convicted of willful
murder, and he appeals.

Affirmed.

R. A. Dunn, of Jackson, for appellant.

Hubert Meredith, Atty. Gen., and W.
Owen Keller, Asst. Atty. Gen., for ap-
pellee.

SIMS, Commissioner.

Ernest Trent, 25 years of age, was con-
victed in the Breathitt Circuit Court of
the wilful murder of Hiram Smith and
his punishment was fixed at death. His
motion for a new trial assigns twelve er-
rors, but in his bricf only five grounds are
argued: 1. The verdict is flagrantly
against the evidence; 2. the court erred
in summoning a jury from Fayette County
and in appointing Sewell B. Williams as
special bailiff to summon and guard the
jury; 3. the officers did not proceed ac-
cording to law in arresting appellant; 4.
an instruction should have been given coy-
ering the duties of officers in making an
arrest; 5. the misconduct of the jury.

A proper consideration of the first
ground necessitates a brief resume of the
evidence. On Jan. 14, 1942, the day of
the tragedy, Hiram Smith was a constabie
in Breathitt County and John Rice was
Chief of Police for the City of Jackson.
Information had reached them that a car
had been stolen and having a description
of the culprit they were looking for him.
About 5 o'clock P. M., they found appel-
lant in Napier’s restaurant in Jackson.
The officers asked Trent who he was, to
which he replied, “Ed Combs”, saying he
could identify himself by a social security
card if they would accompany him to his
nearby room,

Just arriving in Jackson that day, Trent
had registered at the Lovely’s Rooming

House under the assumed name of Carl
Johnson, where he was assigned to room
#2 on the second floor. The three men
entered Trent’s room with him in the
lead, Smith next and Rice, who was wear-
ing a policeman’s uniform, was last. Due
to the lateness of the hour and the shades
being down with no light on, the room
was almost dark. Up to this time every-
thing was amicable with not even a harsh
word having been spoken by any of the
three. As they entered the room, Smith
ran his hands over appellant’s body to
ascertain if he were armed.

Trent’s testimony is that as he ap-
proached a bed in the back of the room
to obtain his identification. card, Smith,
without a word, opened fire on him, which
he promptly returned with a .38 Special
he took from a jacket on the bed. There-
upon, Rice, who was at the entrance door
of the room, shot and Smith fell immedi-
ately after Rice fired. A bullet entered
Smith’s right temple and lodged just un-
der the skin over the left ear. Another
bullet grazed Smith’s chest. He never
spoke after he was shot. After Smith
fell, appellant shot a couple of times at
Rice who retreated to the hall and called
for help. Trent then went through the
window in the rear of his room, climbed
down a cable fastened to an adjoining
building and made his escape. While not
knowing exactly how many shots he fired,
Trent thinks he shot twice at Smith and
twice at Rice.

Rice’s version of the shooting directly
contradicts Trent. As Rice waited in the
door for the light to be turned on he heard
the report of a pistol and saw the flash
go toward Smith, who was several feet
from appellant. Trent then turned his
pistol on Rice inflicting a superficial wound
in his chest, and the fourth bullet hit the
door beside Rice’s head. Rice withdrew
to the hall and heard a large pistol fire
(Smith was carrying a .44) followed by
two more shots from it. Rice, who had
a .38 Special, testified he did not fire a
shot and did not even draw his pistol un-
til he retired to the hall where he ex-
pected appellant to make a break through
the door. The whole affray was over in
a few seconds,

[1,2] If Rice’s testimony is believed,
Smith was killed by Trent in cold blood.
If Trent’s testimony is true, the shots he
fired were in self-defense and it was Rice,
not he, who killed Smith. In the circum-

"ENé6T-9c=% (39TUVeeAg) *4Y *oeTe Saqtum §


g

ported to Lieu
yf the homicide squad,
1e case, said he wanted
1g in the morning.
s unidentified. Teams

ing spesidents near the
i: to trace the:
ma e glasses found *
culate on the tall man’s’
‘found themselves doing
ora kidnap? Would a
)? Young felt sure it
crimes. The attack was

azard. No, some other
e ambush—a motive of

. next day a call came
nm a well-known lawyer,
of the partners in his
on missing since 4 P. M.
missing man was Francis

yefore, Beatty explained,
| phoned him, saying her
xe home. This was odd,
left the office at 4 and ~
straight home. He was
, would do what he said
yy

. hospitals,” the lawyer | 4
any success.” He gave ae
; as 1127 Garvin Place.
1g, realized, was one plok 4

:

stion

me the identification was :
tristgimentified the glasses; t
for 3 rmack in 1948.
nan’s wife, told that a jar
g the groceries, was equally

4 her husband to pick some
e.

have any known enemies?
artners knew of none.

was put on the teletype: .
1 inches tall, weight 170.
dark hair graying at the A
t seen was wearing dark
y overcoat, black oxfords.
eckbook of the First Na-
1 silver Elgin pocketwatch
gious medal around his

RE asite RAN Hyg Sint

Hia'yd sap

saaghigsahers brass

at brought into headquar-
was led into a long room
one end and. was lined up
n., They were bareheaded,
in front of them and their
ler the spotlights.
in front of them were de-
nen and a woman, three of
had witnessed the alley

DMI, cage’
on aL Se ARNT

in a hushed voice. “Don’t
t see you. Take your time.
ase us. Now, do you see
who @id the beating?”

looked from face to face,
1. The woman spoke. “No,

_.” Opg of the men shrugged.
t @ The other man
it,” a detective shouted up.
The subjects trudged off in

a

released.

“Apparently he wasn’t there,” Young said
later. “But his car was—there’s no mistake
about that.” -He told a team of men to dig
into Tarrence’s background, to go to the dis-
tillery where he worked as a fireman, to
question his friends. “Somebody he knows
must-have used that car.”

Within an hour there was a name on

Young’s desk. The name was Leonard Tar- -

rence, Roy’s 22-year-old son. He was in
the Army, stationed at nearby Fort Knox. But
for over a month he had been AWOL.

Detectives returned to the Tarrence home.
Mrs. Tarrence spoke to them at the-door. She
didn’t know where her son was and she would
not let them in without a search warrant
authorizing them to enter.

You can’t shut the police out with a door;
it’s like trying to stop a water leak with your
fingers. If Leonard Tarrence was connected
with the abduction, Young was determined to
get at the facts. -

He phoned Fort Knox, asking for Tarrence’s
picture and record. Then he got on the wire
to McCormack’s partner in the law firm,
Wilson Beatty.

Knows The Name

Beatty immediately recognized the soldier’s
name. “We represent his wife,’ he said. “She
and Tarrence are separated. Francis was
handling the case and on Thursday the wife
called the office a couple of times.”

Young whistled. “Now we're getting some-
place. What’s the story?” =

It was a short but grim story. Beatty re-
called that two years ago young Tarrence was
accused of seduction by a Gwendolyn Abbott.
The charges were dropped a month later when
they were married. A baby girl was born and
in the fall of 1951. Tarrence was brought to
court and ordered to make weekly support

’ payments for the child. He was inducted into

the Army and in January, 1952, was indicted
for child desertion. No action was taken, but
military authorities were notified by the
court. .

In each of these litigations the girl was rep-
resented by Francis McCormack.

“Tarrence must have known McCormack,”
Young said. “That’s enough for us to go on
now.”
He got Leonard’s wife’s address and, though
it was late, questioned her. She _ verified
Beatty’s statements, explaining that she had
tried to get in touch with McCormack on
Thursday to tell him to start a divorce ac-

tion.

“Have you seen your husband in the
past week?” Young asked. :
“No, not for* months.” She spoke softly.,

NOW—train in JUST 8 WEEKS at fa-
mous National School for a big-pay job
with a SECURE future in the depend-
able trade of Meat Cutting, Meat Mer-
chandising and Self Service Meats.
Be an expert Meat Cutter, Market Man-
ager, Supervisor and make an Se
pay. Get a profitable market OF YOUR
WN. Unlimited opportunities in this
vital, nation-wide field.

LEARN BY DOING AT NATIONAL

You camp eemnk ae Be Reiene : '
way. You have yourown s and mea’ i

to work with. ‘ instructors shéw fafire ccna ‘oauoen AT ON
you how. You get actual, practical ex- age <illustrated school catalo
perience right here in our big, modern n training and telling about c
school where we have been training ING method. Read letters fr
meat men for nearly 30 years. inet Reggae re ee cou:
Cutting, percentage, pricing, advertis- . velope !

ing, Selling, buying A COMPLETE (RGaC Greene
RETAIL MEATEDUCATION. Diploma, Mibe@aialtLdel USE LS

FREE employment help. Thousands of National Schoo! of Meat Cutting, t
successful graduates. Dept. 54-W, Toledo 4, Ohio

TRAIN NOW—PAY LATER Send me your FREE school catalog

at Toledo in Meat Cutting, Meat
Get your training NOW. Pay tuition in

LEARN MEAT CUTTING

Service Meats. No obligation. No sa

easy installments after you graduate.
We'll help you ey a job, if you need it, Addr
hee pay YOUR EXPENSES while at bes
0002) ee ee ee ee ee

pramonos Si WEN

When dazzling Zircons from the | When you are satisfied tha

mines of the far-away mystic East | matter of value write me, +
is inexpensive 7? by A »
Thrilling | mauty, grand ecid. tree | full information on what st
8, rilliance! Exquisite secure a P;
id mountings. nes belore you
. Write for FREE catalog.
National SOF PATRICK D.
oe PE Registered Pate:
Wheeling, W. Va. N 908 Columbian Building,

STUDY AT HOME for Business
Success and LARGER PERSONAL
EARNINGS. Over 40 years expert
instruction—over 114,000 stu-
dents enrolled. LL.B. Degree
awarded. All text material fur-
nishtd. Easy payment plan. Send
for FREE BOOK.

AMERICAN EXTENSION SCHOOL OF LAW
Dept. 0-51, 646 N. Michigan Ave., Chicago t1, Ill. ‘5 140 N. Dearborn

How To Hold

FALSE TEETH Free for

you ee
e ° and gasp for breath, if r
More Firmly in Place because of the struggle to

send at once to the Frontie

Do your false teeth annoy and embarrass | 8 FREE trial of the F
by slipping, dropping or wobbling when you | MEDICINE, a preparatior
eat, laugh or talk? Just sprinkle a little | tomatic relief of paroxysm:
FASTEETH on your plates. This alkaline | No matter where you live
(non-acid) powder holds false-~teeth more faith in any medicine und
firmly and more comfortably. No gummy, | for this free trial, or get Fr
gooey, pasty taste or feeling. Does not sour. from your Druggist.
Checks pate odor” (denture breath). Get | FRONTIER AsTHMa Co.
FASTEETH today at any drug store. 462 NiaGara ST.

Game & Club Supplies

Transparent Beveled and Weights; Transparent Flats; Tops
and Bottoms; Door Pops; Hit and Miss Combinations;
Luminous Glasses and Reeders; Shiners; Daub; Bicycle.
and Bee Readers. Rush FREE Catalog request.

Easy to use Viscc

many old = sor’
gestion, varicose
and injuries or x

s

FREE "The Old Reilable’*
Catalog | DP. SMYTHE CO.
BOX 26 NEWARK, MO.

MONEY MAKING OPPORTUNITY FOR
YOU WITHOUT INVESTMENT!

No experience needed to act as our Local
Dealer for MASTER Werk Uniform gar-
ments. Every business concern a prospect. ‘ :
Advertising embroidered on garments is a BOA =
big sales feature. You can easily earn up to bce oak ie | cee ic
many thousands of dollars per year. We oi ce ac oD an ison
supply all Sales Equipment FREE. Write ie CHARM co
GEO. MASTER GARM . B , Ligonier, or Ste
a. ee oe Box 102, Knickerbocker Ste

oat od


LAVUADY suit, M1. MARUM O, 190%

HT HATE A LIAR

A man was attacked in a dark alley, beaten up, shoved

Acne >

in a car and driven away. Witnesses failed to recognize
him. The next day he was identified as Francis McCormack,
prominent lawyer, but where was he? Who beat him? Why?

~

—

by John F. Pearson

™@ A MINUTE BEFORE, an old man had led his dog through
the alley. And a boy, slapping his side rhythmically, had
ridden an imaginary bronco from one end to the other.
Now no one was there.

It was a clean, wide alley—not the kind that draws
flies by day and drunks by night. Many of the people in
this southside section of Louisville, Ky., used it to cut
from Garvin Place to Fourth Street, a distance of about
two city blocks. Kids used it too. On warm days you
could hear their shouts and the ping of balls bouncing
against the side of the apartment building that fronts on
Fourth Street.

But now the alley was silent and bathed in fading light;
it was late afternoon, the time of day in winter when you
want to get back to your warm house, when you can feel
night is not far off even though the sky is still light.

A tall man entered the alley. He had come out of the
Kroger supermarket—which stands across Fourth Street
from the apartment building—and was carrying a bag of
groceries. When he was about S50 feet in, a gray car swung
in behind him.

The tall man turned quickly when the auto pulled up
‘next to him. -He stared at the machine and at the two
khaki-dressed men. who jumped from the doors.

His groceries hit the ground with a crash when a heavy
fist connected with his jaw. A club caught him across
the head. The tall man screamed—a wail of torture that
filled the alley. The club cut it short.

Then another shrill cry. This one came from the apart-
ment house, from a woman leaning out of a second floor
window. The tall man wobbled, blood trickling from the |
side of his mouth. One of the men in khaki spun him
around, smashed a fist into his jaw and shoved him in
through a rear dodr of the ‘car.

Now the woman was screaming, “Call the police!”

A handful of men ran inté the alley. The car pulled
away, one of the attackers straddling the victim in the
rear seat. “Get the license number!” the woman in the
window yelled.

The car turned into Garvin Place and disappeared from
view. There was a moment’s silence, then a babble. to ‘d

1 n, they wanted to know. What hap-
pened? Mesh fy inns * ted to yes ‘ Weighted with a 200 lb. slab of deniont! the body

Off in the distance, sounding (Continued on page 64) was dragged from creek by sheriff's deputies.s

4
7

¢:

scat oe x ~~
: ; a

?

te ~ ~~

eit


WRINKLES?
Don't Worry!

and el
of all, it

UNCONDITIONAL GUARANTEE! Simp! ly as
irected—Watch e

caer ar? ot Delay. 32 oo" lus deli
! us
{3 Months’ Supply $4.00) ” iit

HOLLYWOOD PRODUCTS, 224 S. 3rd St.

Deot. W-832. Brookivn 11. New York

E) FIND OUT FREE—HAVE YOU
sj, GOT WHAT IT TAKES...

to be a FINGER PRINT EXPERT

or TRAINED INVESTIGATOR?

Send for free IAS Qualification Question-
naire. If in our opinion your answers indicate
that you “have what it takes,” then you will
rgceive absolutely free the famous “Blue

k of Crime”... plus full details on how
to train at home in Crime Detection and
Finger Printing! IAS graduates are key men
in over 800 Police Bureaus. See if
YOU can train for this exciting,
steady, “good pay’ work! o
obligation. No salesman will call. AAV2:Ibg 3
Write today, stating age. .

INSTITUTE OF APPLIED SCIENCE VUCe)'7-44
1820 Smtinde Ave., Dept. 118-A Chicago 40, itl,

MAKE $6.00 PROFIT— [ UY, . ue Ce {
-on 10-Second Demonstration to wit ;
perchants. Write on glass with

mazing Magic Crayon—Presto!—
color advertising message takes
ire—giows like brilliant Neon.
‘hree sales daily bring $18 profit.
tush name for FREE Sales Kit!
IAXLUME, 125 W. Hubbard, Dept. L-36-H Chicage 10, lil.

ASSET EE SS SSSISENTE teh

ERS-GCSATE

AYS BIG! sEnD FOR 8
ATALOG NOW! No obligation. Graduates report
abetantial incomes. Start and run yeur own

« Men, women of all ages, learn easily. Course covers
ales, M nt, Aexceinng. Loans, Mortgages,
nd related su’ ject STUDY A HOME or in our classrooms
\ leading cities. Diploma awarded. Nationally known.

VEAVER SCHOOL OF REAL ESTAT
asl iio 306 Law Bidg. Dept. D sue oy me.

.. Learn Protitable Proiession
“~ in QO days at Home

working full or spare time with doctors or .in

+ tala, health resorts, toriums, clubs.
; vate i A . in

or career! ify for wour uation cer-

a tificate. 4 et home as

class Write now for Illustrated

ae in roome.

Ham The College of Swedish Massage
ege Ss

i. ,, Dept.218G,41 E.Pearson,Chicago 11

RUPTURED?

Get Relief This Proven Way

Why try to worry along with trusses that gouge
yur flesh—press heavily on hips and spine—en-
rge opening—fail to hold rupture? You need the

luthe. leg-straps or cutting belts. Automatic
ijus d holds at real opening—follows every
dy ; ent with instant increased support in
SE 0 n.

slip whether at work or play.
ight. Waterproof. Can be worn in bath. Bend
r amazing FREE book, “Advice To Ruptured,”
- — of — truthful ae geod trial offer.
s endorsements from grateful Gsers in ur
ighborhood. Write: ”

lwthe Sons, Dept. 17, Bloomfield, New Jersey

I Hate a Liar

Continued from page 33

as mournful as owls in a cemetery, came the
wail of sirens.

When the police got there they pushed all
of the onlookers out of the alley. They
quickly weeded out those with legitimate in-
formation. Two men gave them the license
number—374-681—of the gray 1940 Chev-
rolet. Another handed them a pair of glasses,
found near the scattered groceries. The wo-
man from the apartment building described
the three men involved in the sudden vio-
lence.

“The man with the groceries was tall,” she
said, “and dressed in a gray hat and coat. He
looked like a regular businessman .. . No, don’t
recall seeing him before. The ones that beat
him wore khaki clothes and brown caps with
long bills. One of them was a great big man,
about 30, with real wide shoulders and blond
hair. They used clubs that were dark brown
and as long as from my elbow to my finger-
tips.”

Others had bits to add, but no one recog-
nized the victim. “I'll bet he was hurt real
oad,” one of them said. .

It - now was 5 p.m. of Thursday, February
28, 1952, half an hour after the strange crime.
The license number was phoned into the motor
vehicle bureau and the groceries examined at
the Kroger store. A clerk said they were
bought there, all right. He remembered the
customer but didn’t know who he was.

It took four hours to trace the license num-
ber. It was registered under the name of
Mrs. Roy Tarrence, at a Jeffersontown ad-
dress. Jeffersontown is a village about 10
miles southeast of Louisville.

A city detective and <ounty officers went
to the address. A gray Chevvy was parked
in front of the long, low, plain looking bunga-
low. A short woman answered the door and
said she was Mrs. Tarrence.

She said the car was registered in her
name, but actually was her husband’s. Who
had used it today? Her husband. She called
to him. :

Roy Tarrence was heavy set and probably
in his late 40s. He brushed back a thick crop
of brown hair as he asked the officers what
they wanted.

Can't Explain License

“When did you use your car today?” he
was asked.

“Most of the afternoon and evening.”

“Try to be more exact.”

Tarrence cocked his head to the side, look-

‘| ing hard at them through rimless glasses.

“Well, from 3 to about 8. Mostly I was out
in the eastern part of the county looking for
a friend’s place.”

Tarrence scratched his head. “I’don’t know
how to explain that license plate business—
unless someone altered theirs to make it look
like mine.”

His car was clean—too clean. The floor
mats looked like they had been washed only
hours before. The upholstery smelled of
gasoline.

Tarrence said he had cleaned the car after
the drive. “I go ‘over that car often,” he
explained. “Sometimes two or three times a
week.”

; ‘ h
The city detective reported to Lieutenant

Charles Young, head of the homicide squad, *
Young, in charge of the case, said he wanted’

Tarrence for questioning in the morning.

The victim still was unidentified. Teams. :*:
of men were questioning residents near the
scene, others were attempting to trace the> ©:
optometrist who had made the glasses found ' |

in the alley.

It was useless to speculate on the tall man’s’ _

fate, but the detectives found themselves doing
it. Was it-a mugging or a kidnap? Would a
ransom note show up? Young felt sure it
wasn’t either of these crimes. The attack was
too vicious, too haphazard. No, some other
motive lay behind the ambush—a motive of
impulsion, perhaps.

Shortly after 9 the next day a call came
into headquarters from a well-known lawyer,
Wilson Beatty. One of the partners in his
firm, he said, had been missing since 4 P. M.
the day before. The missing man was Francis
J. McCormack. P

At 10 the night before, Beatty explained,
Mrs. McCormack had phoned him, .saying her
husband had not come home. This was odd,
as McCormack had left the office at 4 and
had intended going straight home. He was
the sort of man who would do what he said
he would do. .

“I’ve checked the hospitals,” the lawyer

concluded, “without any success.” He gave
McCormack’s address as 1127 Garvin Place.

This address, Young, realized, was one block |

from the alley!

Positive Identification

Within a short time the identification was
positive. An optometrist identified the glasses;
he had fitted them for McCormack in 1948.

And: the missing man’s wife, told that a jar
of Postum was among the groceries, was equally
certain. She had told her husband to pick some
up on the way home.

Did McCormack have any known enemies ?

His wife and his partners knew of none.

His description was. put on the teletype:
“Age 54, 5 feet 11 inches tall, weight 170.
Light complexion, dark hair graying at the
temples. When last seen was wearing dark
gray suit, pearl-gray overcoat, black oxfords.
Was carrying a checkbook of the First Na-
tional Bank, a thin silver Elgin pocketwatch
and wore a religious medal around his
neck. . .”

Roy Tarrence was brought into headquar-
ters at noon. He was led into a long room
with a platform at one end and was lined up
with six other men. They were bareheaded,
with hands folded in front of them and their
faces glistened under the spotlights.

In the shadows in front of them were de-
tectives and two men and a woman, three of
the persons who had witnessed the alley
fight.

An officer ‘spoke in a hushed voice. “Don’t
be afraid, they can’t see you. Take your time.
Don’t try to please us. Now, do you see

either of the men who Gid the beating?”

The witnesses looked from face to face,

from leer to scowl. The woman spoke. “No, -~*
I don’t see him .. .” One of the men shrugged. :
The other man a3
agreed. , ~b

“Okay, that’s it,” a detective shouted up.

“Them two ain’t there.”

to the platform. The subjects trudged off in
single file.
Tarrence was released.

peste

ees ee Oe

RESALE ines ate Az

|

Yo
place.
It »
called

accuse
The c
they
in the
court
_ payme
the A:
for chi
militar
court.
In e:
resente
“Tar
Young
now,”
He g
it was
Beatty’:
tried t:
Thursd:

. tion.

“Hav
past we
“No,

eS )


Be sure to buy

the spring issue of
DELL'S

000 JOKES

MAGAZINE

OB HOPE is bound to PEP YOU
IP as you read HOPE'S GAG
G .. . you'll probably need

r our laugh muscles after -

ou finish reading the rest of the
ages of 1000 JOKES!

ery page laugh-loaded with

RIB-TICKLING STORIES

@ HILARIOUS CARTOONS
@ COLLEGE COMEDY
_@ NEW GAGS

many otker features
hkemorous to mention

{

Humor Magazine
W AT ALL NEWSSTANDS—15¢

~~

“Did he ever threaten McCormack, that you
know of?”

“No.” Her blue eyes opened wide. “Poor
Mr. McCormack. I wonder what’s happened
to him...”

The next morning, Sunday, headlines car-
ried young Tarrence’s name. He was the No.
1 suspect.

His picture arrived from Fort Knox and
was shown to witnesses. All.of them recog-
nized it.

The net
around him.

By noon tips were flowing into the homi-
cide bureau. Tarrence, according to the in-
formants, had been seen in Louisville, Jeffer-
sontown and other villages near or around
the big city.

Some were impossible to check, others
proved worthless when investigated. One of
them, however, looked like the real thing. “It
placed the suspect at Harrods Creek, a muddy,
winding stream northwest of the city. It
would be a handy place to dump a murder
victim’s body. ;

The informant—a man who lived near the
creek—said Mr. and Mrs. Tarrence and their
son came to his house at 9:30 the morning be-
fore, saying they were going to dump some
garbage in the creek and do some fishing in
the. same, fetid water.

was beginning to draw tight

They returned in two hours, the three of —

them leaving in their car. The man went
to the creek, he said, but saw no dumped
garbage.

“They’re in contact with the boy, all right,”
Young told an assistant. “Get a warrant
and search the: house.” Then the homicide
chief got on the phone. He wanted an im-
mediate search of Harrods Creek in the vicin-
ity of the bridge on Highway 42. “Now
we're looking for a body,” he said.

Within an hour city and county officers
were trudging along the banks of the slow-
moving stream, looking for a bit of cloth, scuff
marks, a fragment of wire or rope—anything
that might indicate a body had been trussed
up and submerged.

At the same time other officers were comb-
ing the Tarrence house and questioning the
father. He still denied any connection with
McCormack’s disappearance. “So help me,”
he said earnestly, “my boy is innocent. There
was no reason for him or me to hurt Mc-
Cormack.” - He said Leonard was home all
day Wednesday and Thursday. He had been
sick. He left on Friday morning.

Nothing was turned up in the house. And
it was the same story at the creek, there was
not a trace of McCormack.

No Trace Of Body

The operation at the creek was much bigger
the next day. Men threw out draglines from
the shore; the scraggly underbrush along the
banks was examined. At points where the
creek was 100 feet or more wide, small boats

manned by surly men were used to drag

hooks along the bottom.

It was a wearing, dreary search. Harsh
winds lashed at the men, numbing their faces
and forcing them to. move slowly and stiffly.
By late afternoon they were forced to give up.
If the body was in the creek, the top officers
decided, it must be in one of the countless
deep holes that pock the muddy bottom.

McCormack’s fate was as much of a mys-

| tery now as it had been four days before. And

the search for young Tarrence showed little

progress. New tips were investigated, his
home watched, his friends questioned.

Young explored every possibility he could
think of.. His men were working around the
clock. Yet, it wasn’t enough.

The FBI announced that it was entering
the case, since it was a kidnaping. And the
Louisville Bar Association told newspapers that
it was keeping a close eye on developments.
“A lawyer . . . should not be made the target
of personal revenge by irresponsible people,”
a spokesman said.

The police were in a fishbowl, with a thou-
sand expectant eyes peering in at them .

Lieutenant Young was far from optimistic
when the dragging operation that day also
failed. He returned to his office, slumped
behind his desk and idly flipped through re-
ports,

At 6 o’clock he was still there, pacing, look-
ing out of the window, wondering. His phone
rang. It was from Judge Mix of the Criminal
Court.

Leonard Tarrence had surrendered.

Detectives picked him up in the criminal
court chamber, where he waited meekly with
the judge and his father and m&ther. He

-pawed at his hair, rubbed his rather large

nose. His big frame was exaggerated by
baggy overalls.

“I’m innocent,” he said simply to the ar-
resting officers. “I’m innocent.”

Pop Talks Up

7

Roy Tarrence wasn’t as tight-lipped. He
explained that his son didn’t know he was
wanted by city police until the day before,
when he phoned. He phoned again this morn-
ing, the three members of the family deciding
that he should give himself up. They called
a lawyer who contacted the judge.

“Why was he hiding?” a newspaperman |

asked the father.

“Because he thought the Military Police
were looking for him .. .”

“Why didn’t he give himself up on Satur-
day ?”

He was afraid of being beaten by the
police, Roy ‘said. —

Leonard Tarrence was charged with mali-
cious assault and kidnaping and placed in
the county jail. Hours of questioning didn’t
shake his story. He was home all day Thurs-
day, he said. His girl friend would back
that up. ° *

Later she did. But police wondered if she
wasn’t just a bit prejudiced in the matter; it
was reported she had had a child by Leonard.

“It must be a case of mistaken identity,”
he said. “And I hope Mr. McCormack re-
turns so I will be cleared. This is a heck of.
a load to be placed on anyone.”

Police worked to close the case as swiftly
as possible. They could still press a murder
charge, even if they never recovered the
body.

Mats from Tarrence’s car and a length of

rusty tow chain were sent to the FBI lab |:

in Washington. Other sections of Harrods
Creek were being dragged. Wells, lakes,

streams in the vicinity of the Tarrence home =’,

were searched.

But nothing, not so much as a hair, was

found to indicate what had happened to the
prominent lawyer.
Leonard wasn’t talking.,

But his father

was; telling reporters that “it was just cir re

cumstantial evidence, and more than that i#
needed.” ‘

|


Se ee LOIRE TE Se: Se ROU Ee tae =e
ja Eee bg $ ae =.

ek RARE PS NOR EAS MAIO SSE SNES

Stages tg Fie BS

away, heading away from the crime
scene. The officer spun the wheel
around in a screaming U-turn and headed
back. Less than a minute later he braked
to a jolting stop at the entrance to an alley
beside a large, red-fronted supermarket.
The patrol car officers found the nar-
row alley empty, save for one man, clad
in working clothes, who stood gazing
down at a large brown paper sack which
looked as if it had been dropped on the
pavement and burst. Its contents, an
assortment of groceries, had scattered all
over the alley; several cans had rolled
every which way. ;
The man looked up as the two officers

‘came running toward him.

‘*You’re too late,’’ he said. ‘““They’re
gone. That way...’’ He pointed toward
the mouth of the alley into Garvin Place,
a block to the west. %

‘‘What happened?”’ one of the police-
men asked. ‘‘Who called the:police?’’

“‘T don’t know,’’ the man replied,
‘tone of the neighbors, I reckon. I was at
work, just on my way out to have a
smoke.’’ He nodded back over his shoul-
der toward the building housing a dairy
firm deep in the alley.

‘‘T heard the yells just as I was about to
step out onto the loading platform. When
I came running, I saw them—two guys
beating the hell out of another fellow.
They were whacking him with short

clubs, then they pushed him into their

29

car. soe
The man paused to drag on his
cigarette, and one of the officers asked
impatiently, ‘‘Did you see anything
else?’’
‘‘Yeah,’’ the dairy worker said. ‘‘I
was coming to it. One of the guys held

OD DOUBLE-LENGTH FEN

>.

him down while the other guy hopped in
behind the wheel. They shucked out of

here like a tomcat with a firecracker tied -

to his tail.’’

In response to the officers’ further
questions, the dairy worker said his
name was Ted Ashe, he was 29 years
old, and had been employed at the dairy
for about three years, give or take a cou-
ple months. Boe a iae

‘‘Did you recognize anyone? he was
asked. ‘‘How about the victim? You
know him, or can you describe him?

-*T didn’t know him,’’ the witness
answered, ‘‘but I can tell you what he
looked like. Middle-aged, maybe fifty or
so. Stood better’n six feet. Well dressed
He was wearing a coat, light-celored,
and a dark hat.”’ ;

Several people in the small crowd
which had begun to gather nodded affir-
matively, as if to corroborate the dairy-
man’s description.

One of the assailants, the one Ashe
said he had seen most clearly, was in his
thirties, tall and of husky build. The
other man seemed to be older, and con-
siderably heavier, he said. ~

‘‘He was on the far side of the car,”’
Ashe explained. ‘‘I didn’t get a very

good look at him. Both of the guys—the

ones who beat up on this fellow—wore
brown caps with stiff bills.”’

‘‘How about their car?’’ an officer
inquired. ‘‘Can you describe it?”’

-. “Sure ean,” the informant replied.":
“*t was an old Chevrolet—sedan, hight -

gray, kinda faded. And oh—I nearly for-
got—I wrote down its plate number.”’
‘He began to fumble in his pocket,
pulled out’ several slips of paper and
shuffled through them till he found the

- one he was looking for. ‘‘Here it is,”” he

said at last, ‘‘374-681, Kentucky plate.’’
One of the officers took the slip of
paper and ran back to the prowl car to
radio a report to headquarters. With so
little time lapse since the assault and
kidnaping, there might be a chance to
intercept the fleeing automobile carrying
the victim. fae
The other officer, meanwhile, began
questioning other witnesses. In addition

to Ted Ashe, the dairy worker, he found | 7
four other persons had seen the fight.

Their accounts, with only minor devia-
tions, were very much like that given by
Ashe. pe
_ One man said he had just come out the
side door of the supermarket for a breath
of air after tiring of following his wife
around inside. ‘‘All of a sudden,’’ he
said, ‘‘I heard yells and there was this
commotion out in the alley. I don’t know
where the hell they came from. I didn’t
notice ’em there only a minute before
when I came out of the store.

‘‘There were these two men beating
hell out of this guy with the groceries.

- The sack went flying. The guy—the one

who was being jumped—tried to fight
back, but he didn’t have a chance against

~ the two of them. They had clubs and they

were belting him on the head with ’em.
He went down. Looked to me like he was
out cold.

‘{ thought they’d beat it then, but

no—quick as a flash they’re carrying him

“py the arms and feet. They dump him in

the back seat of the car, the Chevy the
other fellow told you about. One guy got
in beside him. The other one gets in be-

hind the wheel and they roar out of
here.”’ (Continued on page 74 )

Official Detective 43


come to the lawyer’s assistance. But
they did have time to get the li-
cense number of the kidnap car, a
gray Chevrolet.

But none of the witnesses had rec-

ognized either the victim of the’

savage attack, or his assailants.

Tracing the car, however, was a
simple matter. The trail led straight
to Roy Tarrance, 46-year-old fire-
man in a Jeffersontown distillery.

The gray Chevrolet was standing
in front of a neat, if small, frame
house in Jeffersontown when police
arrived. Heayy-set Roy Tarrance,
the owner, came to the door when
the officers knocked.

Certainly, said Tarrance, the car
in front of the house was his. And,
of course, nobody ever drove it but
himself. Had he been anywhere that
day?

“About three o’clock this after-
noon,” he said, “I drove around
looking for a friend. I looked for
him for five hours. When I couldn’t
find him, I came home.”

Nobody believed Tarrance’s story.
Indeed, Sergeant James W. Bibb of
the Louisville Crime Prevention Bu-
reau doubted-it so profoundly that
Tarrance was brought into Louis-
ville and paraded before the five
witnesses.

Not one could identify him. To
the chagrin of police, and the arro-
gant contempt of Tarrance, he was
released.

ALL THAT NIGHT, Mary McCormack
wondered and worried at the failure
of her husband to come home. She
telephoned Wilson Beatty, his law
partner, who did his best to reas-
sure her.

But when the night passed and
morning came and still McCormack
had not appeared, Beatty himself
became alarmed and notified police.

No master mind was needed then
to solve the mystery of the identity
of the kidnap victim. It was done in
short order when Mrs. McCormack
recognized her husband’s spectacles,
picked up at the scene of the at-
tack, and saw that the groceries
strewn in the alley were the very
same which were on her list.

Beatty gave police all the infor-
mation they needed to connect Tar-
rance with McCormack’s_ kidnap-
ing—although it was not readily
apparent just what this connection
might be.

McCormack, revealed Beatty, had
for two years acted as attorney for
Leonard Tarrance’s 21 - year - old
wife, Gwendolyn, in a series of
court actions which ranged from
seduction to non-support.

Police set out to find Leonard
Tarrance. It would certainly be
worthwhile asking him a few ques-
tions.

They found that Leonard was an
Army private at Fort Knox. But
they did not find Leonard—for he
had been AWOL for three weeks.

28

At the Fort, however, investi-
gators obtained a picture of Leo-
nard. When it was shown to the
witnesses of the attack all were
positive in their assertions—“That’s
one of them, for sure.”

As an alarm went out for Leo-
nard (who was already being sought
by Military Police) investigators
called again at the Tarrance home.
They found his mother there. They
also found a blonde girl who iden-
tified herself as Myrtle Blevins,
“Leonard’s girl friend.”

Both Mrs. Tarrance and Myrtle
admitted that Leonard-had been in
the home Wednesday and Thursday
—and Thursday was the day of the
unfortunate Francis McCormack’s
kidnaping.

“He was home sick,” Mrs. Tar-
rance said. “But he left Thursday
night.”

“He got food poisoning at Fort
Knox,” added Myrtle, “and they
weren't giving him good treatment.
So he came home.”

Myrtle also explained that Leo-
nard’s wife, Gwendolyn, was mak-
ing it tough on him, which was an-
other reason for his‘ taking off
AWOL.

She could have been right in the
second case, at least. ;

Gwendolyn Abbot and Leonard
met in the fall of 1949 and-soon she
was spending weekends with him
and his family. Also soon enough,
Gwendolyn informed Leonard that
she was going to have a child and
that he was the father.

Leonard’s reaction to this an-
nouncement was something less
than joyous. In fact, he was so an-
noyed and determined not to as-
sume any responsibility in the affair
that Gwendolyn took him to court
on a charge of seduction.

McCormack represented Gwendo-
lyn in this action and the charge was
dropped when Leonard married the
girl. But the reluctant husband had
already abandoned Gwendolyn when
a baby girl was born to her in Au-
gust, 1950.

So Gwendolyn had Leonard in
court again and he was ordered to
pay $7.50 a week for support of the
child,

Then Leonard was drafted. In the
Army now, he resisted all his wife’s
efforts to obtain an allotment from
his pay. Once again Gwendolyn put
the law on him and he was indicted:
for child desertion in January, 1952.
Military authorities took over the
case with.a briskness that no doubt
dismayed and angered the spoiled
youth.

All the way through, of course,
Leonard was only too aware that
Francis McCormack was his pursu-
ing wife’s lawyer.

As can be seen, Gwendolyn, just
as Myrtle had said, was making it
hot for him.

Roy Tarrance was present at this
session with the police and insisted,
“my boy is completely innocent.”

» : : . ‘ y
Sede: pee saya ei Re

SLAYER (back to camera) tells Kentucky
officials how he and his ne‘er-do-well |
father killed Louisville attorney in fit
of anger over outcome of court case.

He also protested his own inno-
cence. As for the license plate on
his Chevvy tallying with the tag on }
the kidnap car, he said that was be-
yond his comprehension.

“I simply can’t. understand that,” j
he said. “Maybe somebody painted }
their plate with the same numbers |
as mine. I just don’t know.”

On the Monday following the at- I
tack and kidnaping, and still with- t
out the slightest trace of the victim,
Leonard, accompanied by his doting
father and distressed mother, walk-
ed into the Louisville Police Station
and gave himself up.

Leonard, a good-looking youth,
was sullen and uncooperative when
questioned. About all investigators
got cut of him was his repeated
staternent that he had had no part
in the abduction of lawyer McCor-
mack. He even went so far as to ex-
press the hope that McCormack
would “come back soon” because he
(Leonard) wanted to be relieved of
the shadow of suspicion which had
been cast so unfairly upon him.

The following day, Leonard’s
mother and Myrtle Blevins, escort-
ed by a covey of newspaper re-
porters, visited him in jail. The
newsmen asked Leonard who Myr-
tle was.

“She’s my girl,” he said.

The reporters reminded him that
he already had a wife and child.

“Sure, I know,” he responded,
adding boastfully. “I’ve got two kids.
Me and Myrtle have got an 11-
month-old daughter. I'd been going
with her a long time before I mar-
ried Gwendolyn.”

A short while later that day,
Leonard was arraigned on charges
of malicious striking and kidnaping
and was held with bail. Soon after,
father and son, who had been rare-

Roy Tarrance was arrested on
lar charges.

Prisoners in the Louisville jail
where Leonard Tarrance and his
Dad were held are permitted to lis-
ten to the radio. It was this circum-
stance which unexpectedly broke
the case and brought from both
father and son full confessions,

IT WAS ONE WEEK after McCor-
™ack’s disappeatance that Leonard
heard a news broadcast saying the
FBI had entered thé case and, more-
over, it was not essential to find a
body to obtain a conviction and put
into effect the death penalty for

kidnapers.

Frightened, wy _hoping to
his skin, Leonard said he would
Although authorities would not

gain, and promised him nothing, he

took the gamble.
Leonard began his story wi

bitter condemnation of McCormack.

“That lawyer,” he said, “prom-
ised to get me a divorce if I married
Gwendolyn. But he lied to me. And

I hate a damned liar.
“Pop and me were riding

Fourth Street that afternoon and we
him go in the market,” Leo-

saw
nard said. “So we
alley and waited.
“When he came out we hit
with our fists and shoved him
the car
Creek. We stopped and took him

pulled up in

and walked him across the field to

ACCORDING to youth's confession,
cottage (arrow), down steps and be:

ly separated, were together again.

and drove to Harrods

the fishing cabin. It was just about

getting dark out...

“He didn’t say anything, except
to ask what it was all about. So I
told him and we hit him again and
he fell down.

“Then he said, ‘Do whatever
you’re going to do to me, but get it
over with.’ ;

“We walked him some more,
about 100 yards, down to.the bank
of the creek. We made him walk
down the steps to the boat landing.

“I hit him with my fists and my
dad picked up something to hit him
with ... Then we found a concrete
slab and some barbed wire.

“We put the slab on his stomach
and tied it with the wire. Then we
Shoved him off the boat landing
into the creek. I don’t know whether
he was dead then or not...

“When he didn’t go out far
enough ...I got part of an iron hand
rail and we shoved him out farther
with that.

“Then we went home .. .”

County Coroner Dr. George Dwyer
examined Francis McCormack’s
body after it had been dredged from
the creek. A hole had been knocked
in the back of his head; there was a
three-inch gash over the left eye;
the skull was. fractured in a dozen

simi-

save
talk.
bar-

th a

on

the different places and three ribs were
broken.

him Dr. Dwyer said death was caused

into by the fractures and a brain hemor-

hage. It was doubtful, in his opin-
don, that McCormack was alive when
he was dumped into the creek, for

out

he and his dad parked their car off this

at him unconscious. They tied concrete slab

there was very little moisture in the

lungs when he was examined. - os

The elder Tarrance went to trial
first, on April 1st. He swore that his
only part in the murder was to help
his son dispose of the body.

When Leonard took the stand, he
corroborated his father’s story.

The case went to the jury on the
second day of trial. After deliberat-

ing five hours and 45 minutes, the 12
men returned to the tense, packed
courtroom at 4:32 a.m. with their
verdict—

They found the defendant guilty,
with’ no recommendation for mercy,
which meant death in the electric
chair.

Roy Tarrance’s wife, from whom
he had never been separated before
his arrest in 26 years, screamed hys-
terically while her sobbing husband
tried to comfort her.

Three weeks later, Leonard went
to trial. On the first day, he dis-
played an air of indifference, and
read a Bible most of the time. But
his attitude changed when Assis-
tant Commonwealth Attorney Carl
Ousley picked up the 122-pound
concrete block with which Francis
McCormack’s body had been
weighted, and dropped it.

This was something Leonard
couldn’t take...

Then toward the last hours of the
trial, during the closing arguments,
he went to pieces altogether.

Sobbing uncontrollably he slump-
ed against his mother, who sat be-

(Continued on page 80)

highway, marched victim across field, past
to -body (r.) and dropped victim into creek.

29


BE TALLER wsranmy:

BY 2 FULL

INCHES

VMc-m- LPs

Tired of being called shorty? Slip these invisible
HEIGHT INCREASE PADS in any pair of shoes. Now step
into them and add 2 inches inheight. THE SAME HEIGHT
INCREASE AS EXPENSIVE HEIGHT INCREASING SHOES,
for a fraction of the cost to give you new poise and
self confidence —a key to success and romance. No
one will suspect that you are wearing them. These
LIGHTWEIGHT FOAM RUBBER AND CUSHION CORK PADS
fit securely without gluing and interchangeable in any
shoes. Scientifically designed for walking comfort;
aids posture. Worn by thousands. Durable and shock
absorbing. State Man’s or Woman’s shoe size.

SEND NO MONEY! Free 10 Day Trial!
Just send name and address. Pay postman on delivery,
only $1.98 plus postage per pair of ‘“‘LIFTEE’’ HEIGHT
INCREASE PADS. Or send only $1.98 with order and
we pay postage. (2 pairs $3.50, 3 pairs $5.00) 10 DAY
TRIAL: MUST SATISFY OR MONEY WILL BE REFUNDED.

THE LIFTEE CO. DeptR200Box 608 Church St., N.Y.C. 8

> SPARE TIME
~ FULL TIMES

EVERYDAY IS PAYDAY!

Collect top commissions
daily. No experience or
investment needed. Every
business in your town im-
mediate prospect. Big re-
peat business. We show
you how. Write today!

Superior Match Co.
Dept. DA-469 7528 Greenwood. Chicago. Ill. 60619

#£105 SCUTTLES
Incredible, revolutionary
design of a new opening.
Almost magic elasticized
dime size opening that
S-T-R-E-T-C-H-E-S open
wide. Briefs are
bikini cut.
Nylon. White,
Black or Nude.
Sizes S-M-L

$3.99
TWO FOR
$7.50

FREE: Coupons
with every order
Use just like
money.

> REGENCY SQUARE - DEPT. K-5702

1800 North Highland
Hollywood, Calif. 90028

80

PRODIGAL SON

(Continued: from page: 29): e

side him, and began sliding from

his chair. Courtroom attaches rush-,

ed to his aid, whereupon he began
struggling and kicking violently un-
til he was borne bodily from the
courtroom by bailiffs and deputies
assigned to the Tarrance trial.

Ten minutes later he was brought
back, subdued and composed enough
to apologize to the judge. “I’m sorry
for all the disturbance I’ve caused
the court,” he said contritely.

Promptly, Leonard’s_ attorney,
Sandy Paniello, informed the jury
that the accused’s behavior was
“the result of a human body under
strain.”

But the prosecutor scoffed. He
called it “a shameful show.”

The jury needed only two-and-
a-half hours to find Leonard guilty
as charged and he, like his dad,
was sentenced to death.

And so father and son were to-
gether again. When they were taken
to the Kentucky State Penitentiary
at Eddyville, at their urgent request
they were permitted to occupy the
same cell. They were separated,
however, in February, 1954, when
work on a new death house was
completed.

During the ensuing two years
after conviction and sentence, At-
torney Paniello won repeated stays
for the slayers of Francis McCor-

mack, while Leonard taught his |

theretofore—illiterate father to read.

Both of them spent most of their
time studying the Bible.

At last, when Paniello had ex-
hausted every legal means and tech-
nicality to save his clients, f
and son came to the brink on March
18th, 1955.

Roy Tarrance was the first to go.
He went to the chair mumbling the
Lord’s Prayer.

A few minutes later, the son fol-
lowed.

So today, the inseparable Tar-
rances, father and son, are together
again in death.

There are those in Kentucky who
would say their reunion must have
taken place in Hell...

THE END

Roll up your sleeve
to save
a life...

BEA BLOOD: DONOR
CALL YOUR RED CROSS

REAL TH
in STAG FIL

We contend that the indivi:
right to choose for himself
rial which affords him persc
and satisfaction—-despite th
tactics of organized pres:

We have perfected an ingenious
Plan that assures your receiving
prized Stag Films others CAN:
from fittle known and discree
We do not ship but arrange all
details. Let us prove that only
connectrons you've long been se
now for free film strip and refe
Allow 2 weeks for delivery. (Er
for postage, special handling.)

POSITIVELY NO DEALINGS WIT
BS | nternational Exchange

1001 Glendale Bivd., (Dept C*
L LOS ANGELES, CALIF. 90026

SHARE OUR

We're a

we know
We offer
photos of
are 30 an
and s
photo

BRUNO &VAL your «

6311 Yucca St., Dept. 932, H

ILLUSTRATEDYde)," (1°

THEY'RE 3
WITH RARE CARTO:
ILLUSTRATIONS AS
FUN amd HUMOF
ALL DIFFERENT, S
IN PLAIN SEALED

ALL TYPES — POSECL
SPECIAL PHOTOS FOR THE
Private Dealer, not the usual

For full information and ph
types and poses send $1.0

P.0. Box 2493D, Pasadena,
N W ILLUSTRA

CATALC
OF ADULT MERCHANDISE. Fi
zines, Hundreds of adult boc
best in hard to get items
wrapper) You must be 21 or

ling, deductible from first ¢
BOX 96, MALDEN, MASS. De

We have the most !
and novelties for me:
Sample assortments
Catalog only 25c, re

er.
ARTCO MFG. CO.,

806 S. Robertson Bivd., Los


ae

TARRENCE, Leonard & Roy, - icntahgig electrocuted Kentucky (Jefferson County) ON)»: acapay
(Father and son) March 18, 1955.

_THEHORRORO

. IOLENCE is part of the fabric’
by RANDALL.SHANLEY of Kentucky’s history, a rather

Special Investigator for OFFICIAL DETECTIVE STORIES important part, the textbooks will

Cs
ae
—— are

never have been. wrested from the |
wilderness and, ever since, its sons have
been among the first to take up arms in 8 ¥
defense of home and country at the first
hint of any danger to cherished liberties.
For all the heritage of violence in the
Blue Grass state, however, Kentuckians, ©
have never become immune to the horror
of wanton bloodletting, nor indifferent “=
or apathetic in regard to the punishment 7
of those responsible. The code of most &
citizens is an ancient one: Let the punish-
ment fit the crime. | z
Few crimes in the history of the state
have ever evoked more shock or outrage
than the case which is remembered as
**The Harrods Creek Horror.’’ And  @
curiously enough, the reason for this in- E |
tense reaction stemmed less from the na- 4
ture of the crime per se than the character. =
of the criminals who perpetrated it. | “@
For it was not in any sense what one
might call an epic crime, at least not in its
inception. At that point, in fact, it was
about as prosaic and commonplace as
-modern crime can get. A mugging.
That’s what it looked like. One unusual
element was that it occurred in broad
daylight, in full view of several witnes-
ses. But even that is not un-heard of in ©
these days of criminals made bold by
lenient courts. a
It was late Thursday afternoon when ~
the Louisville police first heard about it, ©
via a telephone call to headquarters—it
was never determined who called into
report the incident—in which the caller |
Said a man was being beaten up inan @
alley. iad
Seconds later the police dispatcher’s. b
voice was crackling a radio message to 4
patrol car team in the area: ie a
‘‘The alley between South Fourth and
Garvin Place, 1100 block. Man being

Suspects in murder were 24-year-old Leonard Tarrence, here flanked by lawmen, and beaten up. He’s screaming for help.”’ A
his father, Roy, 47. Younger Tarrence reportedly held a grudge against slain man The cruiser was less than three blocks a

Ges
~

oF

* 4
Bes

j _ 42 Official Detective, February, 198),


ie
Spy dibs ?

Sieur
: te TAYLOR, William, black, hanged at Richmond,Ky

on 1-10-1895

_ GEORGE C. WRIGHT)

nena pps tinny marten bel ee ad :
Fe ‘ >. 5 ap jap Fax. — ea ere eset

Racial Violence in Kentucky

nee
bY

®

¥

i

5 186 5—-1940

|
t

3 Lynchings, Mob Rule, and “Legal Lynchin 3”

LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY PRESS

yee Baton Rouge and London

au

‘eh gash cee >
i
a DO Sica
ee RE ate or a §

iy fea

at
‘


232 Racial Violence in Kentucky, 1865-1940

prone to lawless activities: “For a successful hanging, artistically
done, I commend all criminals to the ministering officers of Washing-
ton county.’’?”

Public executions in late-nineteenth-century Kentucky were spec-
tator sports, drawing crowds that rivaled attendance at the Kentucky

Derby. All of the newspapers devoted extensive coverage to the execu- . c

tions. (The reporters thoroughly enjoyed writing that the condemned

had “expiated” for his crime.) This, of course, was part of the national

fascination with death. The newspapers gave details about the last

meal, the state of mind of the condemned, and whether or not he con-

fessed his crime to local law officers and God before leaving the cell
for the last time. White reporters often spoke with admiration of how
blacks faced death. The highly racist Mayfield Monitor headlined
the execution of Bob Brown, “He Met Death in a Composed and He-
roic Manner After an Eloquent Talk to 3,000 Spectators.” Brown's
“expiation” (for the murder of a white man) “was perhaps the most

remarkable hanging witnessed in this county for years and the most ©

successful, as well.” According to the paper, Brown acted and looked,
as he left the jail, more like a man on his way to a marriage feast than
to his own hanging. With the noose around his neck, Brown spoke to
the huge throng for more than an hour, advising them “to let whisky,
gambling, and down fallen women severely alone.” Several years later
in Richmond, condemned killer William Taylor spoke for eleven
minutes to the crowd, concluding with some words of wisdom:

My advice to both young and old is to leave whisky alone. My advice to
friends that I leave behind is not to follow the steps which lead to where I
am going. I am twenty-six years of age and this is the first and only crime
that I ever committed. ... Now that I am about to be ushered into the
presence of death by the laws of man, I feel that the laws of society that
inflict the death penalty for murder are just, and the penalty I am about to

pay is merited. I am going home to die no more.* aa

While executions for murder were on occasion held in carnival-like
environments, the execution of a black for rape often drew boisterous
crowds determined to lynch the condemned man because they be-

lieved that a simple hanging was too mild for such a heinous offense. jaa

27. Louisville Commercial, May 3, 1874. The account from the Louisville Courier- e

Journal, May 1, 2, 1874, is detailed but lacks the sarcasm of its rival’s version.
28. Mayfield Monitor, June 14, 1893; Louisville Courier-Journal, January 12, 1895-

“Sacrifice Upon the Altar of the Law” 2 33

In late October, 1878, Charles Webster and George Washington were
charged with the rape of a young white girl in Louisville. Even before
their capture—much less their trial—the local newspaper had already
found them guilty and had called for their execution. Indeed, the paper
called Washington “the colored fiend who committed the nameless
outrage on the little white girl.” Given the uproar and the threat of
mob vengeance, it came as no surprise that both men were quickly
tried, found guilty of rape, and sentenced to death. Even after the death
sentence was handed down, however, the threat of a lynching re-
mained. An estimated twenty thousand people came to Washington’s
public execution, and a riot nearly developed. The police resorted to
force to prevent the mob from seizing and carrying off the black man.
In an attempt to maintain control, Louisville authorities decided that
Webster would hang in private. On April 2, 1880, Webster and Robert
Anderson, a white man convicted of murder, died in the enclosed yard
at the Louisville jail with only a few selected people looking on.”
From that point on, all executions held in Louisville would be done in
private, and those who wanted to witness the “event” would need
tickets. Before each execution, thousands of people applied for tick-
ets. Some who were turned down resorted to purchasing counterfeit
tickets sold by enterprising con men. Lexington eventually joined
Louisville in holding private executions, while most of the smaller
towns continued public hangings, to the obvious delight of many citi-
zens. But even in the two larger cities, people still desired to witness
executions. Thousands of Louisvillians and Lexingtonians of all ages
paid for choice positions where they could look over walls or from
rooftops and observe the “private hangings.” ©

Many of the trials that resulted in blacks dying on the scaffold
were highly controversial, leading to the speculation that race had
been the deciding factor in these verdicts. As we have seen when
looking at lynchings, the word of a black man meant nothing when he
was accused of raping a white woman, especially if the woman identi-
fied him as her attacker. Tragically, this mentality carried over to the

29. For the capture of Washington and Webster, see the Louisville Courier-Journal,
October 22—November 10, 1878. The Courier-Journal of April 3, 1880, discusses the
execution of Webster and mentions Washington’s death.

30. Ibid., July 31, 1889, March 23, 1892; for the execution of a black convicted of
Tape in Lexington, see the Morning Herald, June 2, 3, 1896.


THOMAS, Frank, white,

ATL DENIED

* ) for expert in Cammerce and Finane

: vey ; 1 begged ee at tae
way’ ; . tye ington... t ary. of whith is, f
L cvy § pec P ai _ | {$4,900 to $2,500 annisily.: Applicants
be a “of upside t ‘posit the kt
. ' ;oustont house aiso were of ed +
; bed terday, and eitgibles will be assig
‘| to work trom time to time as ¥acan

a wr SS Poceur,. an :

- }

— ._|TO ANNOUNCE RESULT OF
Patroiman Thomas’ Case !s/- AUDITORIUM VOTE TO-D

7 inued To Monday. Ol Samer Ae
' Cont M flay Second Ballot Will Be Necessary,

Association will meet at 11 o'clock 4,
morning and afterward announce
result of the first ballot on the audi!
rium sites. :

. . HOLD FUNERAL TO-MORROW ne “ost”. cuaa t 8
Spring Suits .° arranged to make a repor e

rectors, who will meet at Board
,

Trade headquarters.
‘6 ° ~ ” . ’ A second bailot will be necessary.
% With a $25 Look County Judge Samuel .W.. Greene yas i as mane st a sit
. 4 * Ras received a Majority o of |
yesterday denied bail to County Pa votes of the auditorium corporation.

7 : None of Sites Has Received
; Majority.
Capt. Powell Shot In Self-De.| |
| fense, Says Prisoner. Directors of the Loulaville Auditor:

Correetly stvled, in new apd popular .
Pinch Pack modeis, and in a diversity |¢rolman Frank Thomas, of Rockford

of orher styles that appeal to Leper Station, who early yesterday morning P ) ‘
ular men and young men. Made o ~ IS¢

pure wool and wool-und-silk fabrics, |ShOt and kiYed Capt. BE. H. Powell, : i
In a \artety of patterns thus allow |head of the county police force,

wide chotce for every taste. Tatlored | Thomas is charged “with murder. His DISPOSSESSING FISHING GAM
ina canner to meet your Cullest @X- [case wag continued on the docket: un- ;
Peceta@ations and some more besides. 4

til 2 o'clock Monday afternoon, and he
315. was remanded to jail.’

Funeral services for Capt. Powell RESIDENT NBAR “THE 4
: 9 will be held at 2:30 o'clock to-morrow
afternoon at the family residence, 2931{ WOULD BUY ACRE FROM
¥ f ’ Bank street. Lewis Lodge of Masons,
of which he was a member, will have ;

charge of the services./ REQUEST FOR RECONSTRUCT!
. 4 . oe @
Third and Market Born In Louisville. ON UPPER RIVER ROAD.

wu Pay dere hy bes aad The victim was 33 years oid and a
. va naes pide y{ native of this city. He was a son of

on sea Sie 35 or more WF: PAY | ine late William Powell, a mail carrier. APPROPRIATION FOR FAl

“XPRESS for 200 miles, He made his home with his mother,

Mrs. Annie E. Powell, Hesides his

mother he leaves two sisters. Mrs. An- Measures
SSRN oh h 3 CO disposseas Aishin a
nie B. Potlard and Miss Effie Powell. whine hk * taken on we leat of a gen

@ouvrier- ouruwal He was a carpenter. appointed a pro- belongitg to “Seffersun county eve:
l bation officer by County Judge Greene summer for twelve or thirteen veq
=e several years ago and placed in charge | ~. ; ,
’ : Will be discussec neeun fs
minke ico pd : cere (NG pursuant co adjournment frum ve:
8 AK ~ fe 4 7 terd: on. .
Harmony ¢ amp, Modern Wowmimen of day noon. The land came to ihe Couns

. . . . in the purchase of Cane Hun Froud ar
rr ia and was captain of the drild is in the neighborhood of what fe know

Seneememene eel

pe =

warisicin ee The shooting occurred ut Clark Sta- |" “The Old Ferry.” j
WEDNESDAY. ....... MAY 17, 1916./cion, on the Elmhtcenthuatrect neud tg | WE. Miller, a thaident of the nergr:
—— front of the saloon amd grocery of Sni+ |bOChood, appeared before tne cuurt yeu
. der & Schell, WHilam Snider, who ve-]'’rday and represented that the camt

CONTEST T0 CLEAR TITLE signed his pusition as county patrol- attracts a disorderly clement asd whe
man Tuesday, ix one of the proprie-|'O purchase the ground fur $108 Whi!

tors of the estadlishment, and a num-| (ls Was considered a reasonable pricg
ON BUSINESS PROPERTY ber of county officers had attended the|!>® matter was referred ta the commiy
opening. A quarrel aruse between|'ee for the district and the County Ag

; ' | Capt. Powell and Thomas regarding |torney for investigation and report wef

$ ee assignments of coumy! patroimen and doles denee’s 7 ie anes
the shooting ensued. Thomas claims Uda James Fo hidware a
PETITION OF OWNER TO EN- self-defense. He alleges that Capt. in seg of orerty owmats ne
FORCE AS MPANY TRA Powell knocked him down and was in| * pper iver toad and am
= co. CON cr a of drawing his revolver when thoroughfare De reconstructed
4 AND DEMURRER FILED. he fired the three shots white iying on| Harrod’a Creek ty Prospect. a die
the ground. of about two and one-half miles
“ee hittle or no discusmon the court
Uneiibng to purchase property on Powder Burns Shown. to resurface the road Indicated By

- feation. olling, dressing with er
Coroner Ellis Duncan found the and roiling. The work wtil be

shots were fired at close range, all the an axlenaion of the prasemt ou®
wounds being powder burned. He wil! the section of the aame road
hold an inquest. One bullet fractured ty Hintte to Woodruff
Powell's skull at the left temple hy Upon an appeal made by fat
did not penetrate the brain. Anothe Senator Luther Owings in be
pierced his heart, while the thimt cut Jefferson County Keir Aes
his riper alge and the bivod vessel maf appropriatven of $600 was ve
plying the left kidney. County Patrol. , ed fot
Yon of the owner. and tte case will man Steve Urimmons disarmed Thomas (oh. Seeatee Detect pay

be laken under submisaion by Judge and
¢ placed him under arrest a it
y , betuity of the fair and i
Wallace after brefs have been, fled ne octane Ngee arene: -- lenefite to the mmrtcaltures

in the case -

The owner filed a petition during the SPEAKERS ARE ASSIGNED the county depended on me k
Morning seetang tw require the gas the court

the east suite of Third street, between
Main and Water. until the title has
been declared sound by the Court of
Appeais, but anxious to close the deal
by the payment of $15,500 to the Fi-
delity & Columbia Trust Company,
agent for Meta Starin, the owner, the
Louisville Gas & Electric Company
: yesterday tiled a demurrer to a peti-

} id specifically to perform a con- The eeconatenetion of tne De

act entered into with her agent. She power plant ac the county Ja
a@vers she ts vested in fee simple with FOR TRADE TRIP TOWNS Came Dy oni a report by slay
the marketable Utle of the property ty 1s Davia architect wie a ‘
the will of her mother. Charlotte smith. to The Committee of tne W

and her brother. Henry Clifford smith. ; be discuasnd again io-ee
and that the property is free from ail INFORMATION ABOUT PLACKS| (ever embraced (hree

encumiorance ace Slate and count Comt from $1400 te
leu for isis Shurtiy wee fae TO BE VISITED WILL BE two nowever it we
of the sutt had peen served on off. ' SUPPLIED be om mere mak?
Cis ef the gaa company a demurrer would I@ve eler

tO (he petiteon was Shetiny Juclee Matt The adppwir

Miidie and Wear Tennessee tow Ne tol aren anit
tow LOND eel Pos Tastee ithe blewle OL ye tea
Hhotinem on The beara of Prinete tastes |

Tre Ri Wee we boatitte ma til tag eure |

rer be sustained al oonee wtheut ihe
formuiitys of areuuis tne QUOMl ont oe
tne Hbne of write stating that the
COMM rats ote reat ° CROLEY Cr emerge yey

|
| (Doherty, woo asnedt that the demur vinkger Bn r
|
|


Poy EE

aedincanidieaietiedll

“ck a4 oe La

ITHER KEL

wait Eorves Now Betiev-
J Sufletegt to Pravent
Repetition! Attacks.

eee eggs
a

tekington. May 16¢.~-The net re

(ARMY BLL

iL
te 251 00
MEN IN WARTIME

Revised F eae Show in-
orsase Will Be Greater Than
First Announced.

—_—

PRAISED BY CHAMBERLAIN

Conference Chairman Tells
Senate Measure Will Pro-
vide Weil-Balanced Force.

meectnmen coments

Waahington, May 18.—Revieed fig-

of the milttars conferences om KigUTe® for the Army Reorganization bil

ag vevuried Sy Maj. Germ mboet
coreiatT® Reker Fan been [0 cone

‘#¢ ‘agreed upun by House and Senate
conferean and submitted to the Senate

» Be Cartan Governme to-day by Chatrman Chamberiain show
Unites” 3 di: rematch wy "mer here ‘That the new army will be aven larger

ane

Ba consvenebadule @uiste sab-
tig ee unerviten. anderseanding

Pha. larranse ‘foreag, the*: on- | |

or te demonatr
je Une- aituation oe
step toward: «=
ctean punitive ex
. Scott believes Gen. Odregon is
. in good faitH, and that the
situation (s jess critical to-day,
w aa the American Government
acerned.
carry out his ‘share of the plans
Ovoregon has agreed to occupy
police the Parral district, scour-
the mountainous regions to the
of that town in search of the
‘ants of Villa's followers. iie
agreed 'o establish a strong pa-
{ne along the Mexican side. of the
Bend country to prevent incur-
such ag that at Glenn Springs
Boquilias.
r that purpose Gen. Obregon has
sed into those regions 10,000
»s under Gen. Trevino, aaid to be
noat efficient fleld commander in
Carranza army, Advicea to the
and State Departments indicate
the movements are being carned
oromoptiy.

‘Won't Menace Rear.

ether important element and «ane
2. American army officers re-
=1 a8 Mast vital to Gen. Pershing’s
{ communwationa was cleared up
ren. Obregon’s agreement aot to
: ine iarge force af Carranza
“in Sonora through} Pulpit Pass
Gen. Perening’s rear. While the
Department ts wsatiefled of Gen.
ting s eguipmem (‘to care for his
il any circumstances, the poasi-
of a jarge Carranza force being
<doto hia rear was regarded with
concern.
wher side, prom Seo and Gen.
<0Q Qeeured, pregpom.. et
utliotas weenie SN in ae oy aber *
cominiandery notte Bethea thie
8 30 as to sakbasvasn the opera-
uf the Mexiwan troaps, and aiso
the border patrot on the American
would be strengthened.
to Villa himeeif, Gen. Obregon be-
+ him ¢dead. Gen. Scott reported
the stalecsent ofthe Meai¢an War
Mer im  %ae. nection wag not
- with the of wmpressing the
aean offfeerwwrith an argument ia
- of withdrawal, but merely as an
cagion of an opinion.
* Arst obstacte encountered by the
tean offfters at El Pasa was thea
aity of convinesag (Gien. Obregon
ime expedition after Viila was act
ler-ention step. The size and com-
oo of the force aroused alarm
® Mexican officiais, and ft was
ed owt to (sem, Scott Wat it waa
ustcomar) for posses ia pursuit of
Tan to « With deid guna and
‘tain artitiery.

Obregon Finally Convinced.

e American officers fineils as -j

4m pertuading the War Mt
sowever that the 1 mired Aeatte
mrrert Rat av omlention fared
‘Ma announced purpose fo
¢ a;tare (Le fmgctite and oan
sted condtitone arong the
The cnderwianding ag to «hae
wer: te tagen by tert military’
andere 6 ljawesy

-~- a in

vied r Was res Piavewiaema Liresive ~~?

then anounced when the agreement
vrai lagt Satueday.
a ul ateifsis shows the maximum
Da ac h in time of peace will be 211,-
-ficoers and men, including 25,000
!f troops, Philippine scouts and un-
assigned recruits, and that the war
atrength will be 236,500 officers and
combatant. troops, which, with staf
troops, scouts, -te.,, added, will bring
the aggregate maximum strength of the
regular army to 261.500. The National
Guard as reorganised would total 467,-
000, making a total of 718,500 available.

“The reeuits of the work of the
conferees, while poambly disappointing
to some few who have made hobbies
of certain features,’ Senator Cham-
berlain told the Senate. “must as a
whole be welcomed dy ali who are
Teasonabdie and unprejudiced as «4
good bill. For the first time in our
history we have provided for an army
that is well balanced throughout and
which will be an efficient Mghting
machina,

“It provides for troops anough for
the required over-seas garriaon and
the remaining troops at home will he
such as will make up complete bri-
gades and divisions, and the regular
army will nu longer be a hit and mias
collection of regiments and battalions,
as it nas heretofore been, due to piece-
meal Jegisiation of former years. Not
orly are the higher tactical unita
properly provided for, Dut the (nternai
structure of regiments and companies
of all arma has been (mproved lo Meat
the requirements of leesona jearted m
recent wara

Beal Working Unita

“~The company units will na longer be
skeittons, Dut real working units if
about two-thirds war strength. Ag in-
fantry compan ¥ will be 102 mes in
ponee and 150 in war 4 trop of my-

ee wie be seventy (2 ae i ied
tae mir thy op Tee
ee and

ottcare’ Fie ami ores ana ihe

reserve
been ad ad written in fH cote
tom) bile. They provide for tna ejur
cation, salaction and training of civil-
imme ix time of pemce for tbe depeee «A:
otRvere iM the of WAT, amd. la 4 ETHRL
eatent tiney will obvigtse (he Baaty anc
lective of uAtried and waknown yersong
for cmmmisaionsa of (he | Gutter mmk ¢

“The Netionai Guerd witli bare
greater inducementa to igre and
progres (Near wad Na;ed for tefose
this year, and it wilh be on triet Sue
ing the mext few yomre to prove shat
thte cimsrme made try ita  eprearia

eretacina (| te hope Mare heen ce

can te!) woether of tet the Mational

fouard will take Its Dime av am im
burtant fartaur i@ —_ astm

= ENGLAND MAKI
> FFFORTS 10 Ci

trening compe ee!

vee Were (otrect an Gihat it wae oniry!
held back from becnOling @ frei ae .
act im our naljonmsl defense ty fnt- on!
ever which ff fad no cents yt Treas ts

moved im the new bill, end me ainne!

FELLOW-OFFICER
SHOOTS CAPTAIN
OF COUNTY POLIGE

E. H. Powell Is Victim of Frank
Thomas’ Revolver Follow-
ing Assault.

STATEMENTS CONFLICTING.

Quarrel Grew Out of Question
of Assignment of County
Territory.

In a fight grewing out of a quarrel
over assignments, County Patrolman
Frank Thomas, of Rovkford Station, on
the Etghteenth-street road. at 12:40
o’clook this morning shot and killed his
supertor officer, Capt. E. H. Poweil, of
2931 Bank street, heac of the county
patrotmen. The shooting occurred tn
front of the grocery and saloon of Sni-
der & Schell, at Clark Station, on the
Eighteenth-street read, where a num-
ber of county officers had attended the
opening of the establishment, of which
Willlam Snider, who resigned as county
patrolman yesterday, is one of the pre-
prietors.

Three shots fired by Thomas took ef-
fect. One bduillet struck the left temple,
fracturing the akuil, but not penetrat-
ing the brain. Another pierced (he sic

the Intestines and the large blood ves- |
sel supplying the left kidney. Oorenet
Fillis Dunean found ali the wounde!
were powder hurned, ahow:ng that the
snota were fired at cioge range
Verstons of the shooting as tomt by
,officers witnessing the tragedy differ
County Patroiman Steve  Crimmons
who disarmed Themas and ioiaed «
charge of murter against him, to-day
Rave the foiiowing account So Teeerete
“Thomas and | jeff the city at!
10.14 o'cleek to attend the upraing ati,
Aniders piace Thomas and tagt

bs

OAR. ®. oper WrrDa.
$0 uf er: | Gare Aube Seenin Cees
Peweit w scm aeething = “hese nad
Trgmes rte ThE Pealivige tet Wee ie tem |

heard (he waite? weeteiig ff aes ger |
ting thred of were tig Anwm fer dome
lomndeare Aletsigt wie Go w ayt as ne.
ppeoe irevk svat $8 4 dtp Pewee ,
anewered Wheat ar pay vaiing 65 [US
{am tatking ta + oe! ahd Pi mee

Bncepes Themes Bows. | tse
sanveed Perna sj

Pawel. iyenn

fer ea! ase L sch ace
1 wae maeting ebont Benn fee: | | ;
- s-

from FKirweit aed Therpae when | i rs

tim’s heart, while (he third cut througn Almost Una

ence Yote

Sout!

Mee

. } dhabeogeiaes! ©
Powell were perfectiy aoter Theres nem:
had not taken more Unan a dering ert.
- _ = een ee pearing

wer and whe oe Rie Med Thome) 7"
‘ daem te fa@eriwes ana '
ole dorms tee | ew tee Py
pin @ @Atting pomttivngs whee {gra ietemt | :
1 Wig pie cmt ared ige arte 2,
i rem i »
' eiingews Mpa 6 7 Rowte toate ,
cenit Ore get » ao Ce + 7
reat oh warn . Aiea gage! is
it sme a: Wages ash ts Boedae «.e)
1, iifavant mer t
ees Oh war et es
mn me eee fee Ome. ee »
ot @e oe errr ee er
ote rian Tat |
woe - ane:

Pri. Vitee te a
soylearan.

Secetegs *:
ants ator
church anmé

Ff

:


C)

LVRS? tN 50 YEARS Cook's: Home,

o>

« Ont Grrask: bas eB bot
repere to for the ceremuny > of
.
: ive stay. -« ¢

Shoe « Last,

Found: in:

b4
34
i

“There. have’ been otaer unc on- i
-t@utioual bangings in Grart-cos as.
pnt this waetae Orstormal affair. A Sheep. black muffer, used by
of the Wind ty 40 seers. A grout Bt murderer:of Anna Lloyd to gag”

*orong waa expected to be poreepe the woman, holds the key to Cin-

abd although che Jaw permits only cinnati's baMing murder myetety. .

—.sSepguch a acild thing as a acaf-

s sisnta t9 see the sii penalty of

146 “Mancesen, it was feared Thal" o tne police realize the” Yaiport-

ford Jntloeure wou'd not stand he ater’ It ts the only sure way to;

fore 2 hig méb of Kentucky men, Fairmsu
etper ted «ni an incoming: train, yas des» Nore int er?

. “FIND, THE
the inw. meted fin? ou the ansa'l- 4

aut of @ woman, Cor that ae ane BLACK bd
the er ar woe pet” to Genre: bet

SA rein

<Wek that the, lad wonld dic game).
“ron, for Thompson war the aor =

phe SwHee- oe shit

£1 AS REE MUreL ER USED AS GAG

© % ‘last was discovered in the home
; 4 ae Vof “Diide™-Cook, Spring Grove-ev¥.,
Pa oe : {who has been held. by, the

th ,
on the shoe-last.
Tillie Krebs, 14, ie/the giel w o
be jaw “Dude” Cook come out. af thé
: 5 *SNorth Fairmount. ravine. en the
the murderer... The black muffler itght of the murder...
= Ee a we. plctore was the only,

THO LE KRESS.

‘ |

est person on and -arohnd © the-
iweaffold, There was a'dance here:
«Mast Wight. and that dida’t break

ay 3
: Laura fem othe soeiul to Ate
“hanging with the noncholanye of

np untihs o'¢lock this morning.

" DANCRKS, SEE HANGING
A pumber of men dancets ta :

tug from malls tule (wor;
two girls came over aa
Aram the dance hall to pee th
march to the gallows. The Wepur

iris ilége of helang in the: Aniahe

Aiew Lied with eack. cthor- for nf ate Sieamifinatne Jan. 7 Be

~t feotvlic ches on the contiemned boy. |

pening gun in Taft's campaign of
sQnel-heiped him. drees “In the’ Constructive legislation was fired

Siapk suit bought for the oet~" todé: whe

se nhother. hebied ok tie the bew

~.coine in. from the country Thure- |

* } recommending

yritent leatbe
thes v oll

— ® third, poe)
Th
‘Web and arranged the bluck four:

read °@PDF
“fuctrahd te: Congress... Foremost auiong’ rine | The appointheat of Ave addl- pence

fonal
Untted States Court of Com: ary tional Circuit Judged, whet sak

linnson Roberts, husband of the Sipe ftecommendations are:

“wunan whom Thompson -attacked, | Foleo

days and stayed ap all night, wait. 5

(7 ing. for the bresk of the day that!

Regis tu Led aud bud to be wak-- Dona fide physical’ valuation 0
~ ened. ; é [prope ¥.. aid~ voluntary incor-7~

_ SMOKED AND CHEWED

nnd) in. the tight af. the flanternnathe’ President provides that prac- mtysion tails. to ine eatigate a rate!
there was sithourtted the seaffold. “tically all cases entailing” the col- joa itted- within

Earner ieee stim: Femme Menad fo die and the’ Deputies” a discus- “tains ‘ror SHIPPERS ©

hiner it Away. time .to go, ‘nnd the

’ another nian called.

Li bring bi veuge. and he
eet acca ta Ine gailows, - Irom, bY the Department of Justice, in-,
first to last he said noke@ word, ;eteed-ol. by special attorneys.

oy} A~ provision | forbidding: rall-

bao niee a ny Sst uf, roads to’ acquire capital’ stock in |pouyt

satenlized the dread sigol:
Lathe moprone be didn't show. it dur- : competing linea; ‘a provision for-
the night.” He staid Dicding ‘the issuance® of ~capitat}

t

inthe morpin fstock without psyment of the pat}
joking. with the ‘quar lue, of-antess it is founded ‘on;

poration for concerns, @ugaged in

“Tm ready. he sald, and ate}TO MIGHER COURT :
Srewklant He alao-smaked -9 i in outlining the “jurisdiction

wir? und ¢hewed — tabucco.
looked ontof- the | jail Mindaws jthe proposed Court of Commerce, ;

“AWul Tot of himber te hang}

wid them Sh Leary caine, told

Sion. as to the facta of ‘the crim |
that scandalized even the hard

ened men’ who had come. to: seo
ithe execution... The boy was still
explaining when Sheriff Leary told
him (to hold hig breath because |

march to death began, The pro-}
eexmion passed the two girls who”
had) just come from” the -dauce.
= ‘fhe boy walked firmly up the steps
and, a»omuch. of the crowd. that.
eould get on, followed him-to the =
te the. aan tek 3
les’ going up Jike & muse go-7- |, 4
fing to, Bey id alee the sightseers - i T wall Seg hed pee opiate 2
said? ont © loud, as Thompaon Ka, SANE 1 Bae ‘of the scaffold
stumped hie way. up. Linventor and owner ()
4 hat’s right: be game: bos." on which fourteen” men have: al-
ready paid the wena): Faught
has been building. gallowa vince

“Then the, trap dropped 74

The prowecution and: defense of" piso iomms:

interstate commerce. *Tslon be givén the | (power .to adopt}
; Fates trey lire by, Ell aie and to
eer yrers

The*boy. was‘eho! tet ay death. «| says, becatse the present system |

an

in ngs:

charles pe fob in the. ple

- corporations to- pne-eF- three

Charles L. ‘Wariner gave out

his Aret-interview
Friday-mor
refutes statements attributed
Edgar: 8. Cooke and intimates
he pins be the principal wit

nd jury. takes up the
ter’s care. ~
_T.. Hunt

“Prosecutor. Henry
for several’ days. A substance,/ entered the center’ of the ay

out Ss (ooke to'the effect thet
had been sory to Cincinnat
“TE wast .mo “more. scasatio

said. Warriner. “It Cooke
ae ype poy 1s. a diffe

et the
the Sotarviews ‘cae neg 5 A
e newspapers nt Ww
ter, that ¢- I did not care to.
ieee ‘ope. Cooke has simply

:*First—They : * miuat: > resolve} here to oe up more trouble.”

“| themselves: into thefr component

‘parte in thé different’ States, with’
‘a consequent ‘loss, of. capil: aod
Porcententiog.:

“necond—In < defiance ‘of law,

- Legisl ation Polley SES

1 statu 4nd thus. bring

~ “any Inev

lection opel veualty. or the, inftest tony or,

tion. af” ‘Third
which -

eh eea8 fititely), 0
gt t Of the right to

ited ws ¢ law: are also Tecom=

‘ourt, shall be $10,000 9 year, is

" see : | Th IN
It ta -recomménded ‘that these’

| Judges be distributed to thore cir-}
eeits where there fa at the Present;
time th¢ ee busi- et

TY, while sitting fn the roel

the -
> Court:
egks |

4 :
The Presidept Tu aie Sate that} i : : }

the Interststectiors merce Commis-

case those saneueye ere found'‘ex- feet high> at the Procter -& Gam.

orbitant.’ If, however, the com- isle Soup Works, Evorydale, caved
in Vriday morning... The dead.man

0 days, the Fate | . P

all take effect, . J jis. Frank. ‘Thornton, 50) who“lived

The theskage alka “ree: inside | dale,’ Those hurt are‘Charlew Car. |
that’ shippers be given the right | ney, Thoméw Finegan, ~ Charles?
to select one of two or more pos- Seution and VAlliam Moore. Their

atl
me rita og ae ng phipmeat of} wounds are painful, but, with the

The handling of Saterutate com. exception of Carney, not serious.

that would. make: dying easier, j-merce cones by.the Department of Thornton and the ‘‘other- men’

Juntice is hecessury, the President | were shoveling coal from’ the piie.
confuses the judicial, executiveand | The immense mass’ was under:
legisiative functions in one body, Mimed ana, with @ terrific -roar,
<=the Interstate Commerce) Com-/ slid directly upon them.
mission-—and fobs it-of jis judicial A lump’ weighing . dyer: 500,
attitude, * pounds ~ struck Thorpton and
The President-believex the pro-. crushed him arainst, the aide ofa.

« ‘Theyothrew the noose over his Tq "and declares Chat Mists the “vision “forbidding “railroads trom {gtee! gondola:

race ag lio vont ace

be quiet.” . The gentlemen, had nae ans apeis eniitd ante cratant
moxt_improperty noiny for in Kemeny: hatieeaetaes Srtenitied

sho an occasion. Nar iw The on which Thompson was
pared: alittle oxpeech, od had aaa 2 pce eandw: fe Clacinngtl

been rehearsing it ever since he, = was as game A pendent}

Manx told that he must die. ag Lever saw,” said

Hix teeth rattted in the cold as
jobe repeated it for the last time, Faught, of Thaghpeon. hi re

+; nating, tMiat he was giad by wan; DOUBT. JUSTICK

‘)-golng..and "that he had been a!

There aré some in this itt!

om bad boy, indeed, and that while bad _town ‘who doubt whether the boy *
“natnre would inhe: oe his xoul} } deserved the ‘full pe palty.
» would, ericson f eel ol

a aed \ pd around the Courthouse, and

oa

Np He had mibace no 1 tiadinahéin ot: one juror has @ince said that: he; made by corporations reorganizing —— :
_fiepimtd Reef lo of them asked ; ?was afraid to render any eS tre proposed statutes are} George Grothaiis, “devtt-chaser.”
dt created'a scene in Covington

ears Rhy il f °th jbaudenth
aie which va aie nf we bd grime | Thompson admitted only an at-
psd Be Feullag inva "Roinper: | tempted tot peter eh new

- o-sir.”
victim has- recovéred.

“HOLD YOUR BREATRY i ‘The parents of the oy refused
:The crowd around the vedifoid ‘to to bury the body and ‘that duty
sir gb tee ecu T re | ale upon the State, The
» “No sir,” and then there | State tty the lad avery fanc:
. followed’ betwoaa wehignt ag boy bout cofin, ; watt é

besides: *

fon to the finish. His; These provisions are aimed at the | no’
».|¥ery root of be stock-watering | today: for lunacy jn Kenton Circuit

acquiring stock incom peting lines « The other men were aibdek by
shontd not be made applicable: to smaller, Timps.” They © were «cut
roads now holding more than-50 and bruised.

eeecent [Ir Finnegan and Carceytr

such roads desire to complete ‘the -Selbert'e Hotel.--Fulton-lives” tn
(purchase of the outstanding stock Glené@ale and *Moore at Kimball's
of the already controlled roads poet ging pacerntyore sale, house, pe sas

Stock and bond issues: are: diss.

cussed at’ letigth in the message, Qf
and iv-j« recommended that legis
"Nation he passe forbidding the is-
suance of stock and - bonds: until,
their full per value shall have been ©

issuing corpors a 3

Any issuea of stocks or ; bonds

0 be placed directly | w
| under the supery iston of the Inter- Pol ee Court recently by announe-
state ©. merce. Commission. jing that various loeal officials were
aseased of devils, {sg belog tried

evil. i Court.” Grothaus ‘objected to. be-

The President's reeomnfenda-}ing tried by Judge Tracy and th:
tion for a Federal incorporation; case waspostponed for a short
law outlines s.voluntary measure,’ time until another Judge could be
pet one ig he says will force ealed to she Pench. ey

s eriminal prosecu-

} extent
Spit undér the employers’;

One _man~—was ” killed” ‘and four}
“maximum ‘rate tn j injured when, a. pile. af “coal. tO y:

f 5e FIRES ee , neat
ik nae i isaac hound. at”

TURND Ox BUNT”

rottowins his arrest on ach
‘of receiving -etdlen goods. in
Charles: L. rene defalca
caze,- Badger 'S.-Oooke turned vy
Proseéntor Hunt Friday morn
hee— deen - dou
“Hie case, “which in get
preiina y henehig general
. wil} be sbostpc

RE scores Prosecutor . fr
oneouter. “Hunt, have bro

“and: to: stay here
sed Peeping ‘thei tooth
ane “They haven't's thing on 1
Cooke detailed“an account
paat conferences with thé Pr:
cutors which throws pew light
the Warriner case and the b!
ro rats against Mra. Jeann
ke, he saya, came to

: Nettie ctnletues begring ote
4from Warriver, ig whieh the

mer, Treasurer of the Wig 1
VC ineinnati oftice: totd him to
way aid gguinast Mra. Ford.
P ter f

“BLUEFIELD, -W: VA., Jan,
(Splh.)=—A» message from Br
wells near here, has summ«

iat. Adam Beibert’s hoter in Frory- all the fire-fighting appartus a

‘able. The appeal says practi
he entire town is on fire.

fire. started in -Peck’a poolr
and’ quickly spread to Peck’s
tel, Edward. Cooper's ~ he
-Abramson's clothing store,

/ant's pharmacy, the Bluestone
offices of the Pocahontas Con

dat Jo., the Postoie

fine residences.
snowstorin is raging. The
will ‘be~-more than $600,
Bramwell is where many coa)
eratora and wealthy men of
Pocahontas coal field live, an
considered ~ the = mosy — beau
town in Shia pee Con oe Sh section of the 8

COM ELENTOR
SWEPT BY

Fire Ex attly bet he fore neoh
diprabperedt Tepe of rhe

ternth and Madison-sts.. ©
ton: ° Several companies: of
Covington «Fire. Departinen!
sponded to the. alerm and
ceeded in saving most of thes
ture, The los« war held wey
;in $200,

NY
| .. BOY IS SUICIDE
PT. PLEASANT. W.VA
rpateunne)- -maveses he wa
j Elmer Frend, 17, of MiMN
shot himeelf through the hear

‘the epee en all he could in Ba

| : AL FALL ree

+h eee peraAnal le
}Warrmer and fhe request wa

fron. the jail
which he flatly

a

inst his ‘former friend wi
the beg

©

Sj ge

> s

THOMPSON, Earl, black, 4 hanged at Williamstown, KY, on January 7, 1910.

MOB FORMS, BUT DOES NOT LYNCH
Williamstown, Ky., Dec. 7, 1908. A mob of 200 men formed here today
to lynch Harl Thompson, eee: who was being brought from es
to trial here at Williamstown.

Officers learned of the lynching bee and sent word that they would be

ready for the mob. This foiled the lynching for the present.

—_—

& Three weeks ago the negro assaulted Mrs. Mattie Uoberts, of’ this
place. He was taken to Lexington for safekeeping, and was returned

here this morning for trial.

-The above is a copy of a Cincinnati (probably Enquirer) clipping.

@ Thompson was tried and hanged legally.

THE REIGN OF THE LAW
The Williamstown Courier, May 30, 1901. In the early part of the

fifties a negro by the name of Sam Eustis was brought here for trial

on a change of venue from Qwen County. He was accused of killing his

ee.

mistress. He was given a fair trial, and the evidence of his master
played an important part in his conviction. _

(This article goes on to say that they found Sam guilty, although he
maintained his innocence. He made the predidtion that a certain tree
would be blasted by lightning, thus proving his innocence. The follow
ing summer this. pened. Several years later, Sam's master confessed

on his death bed that he had committed the crime.)


4

ya

During the same decade another negro was hanged near the same spot.
He was Warrick Ford, the slave of John Ford, who killed his master.
The proofs were convincing and Warrick confessed his pe He was
tried, found guilty, and sentenced to be hung.
The article goes on to describe where the hanging took place and ends
with the statement that these two men are the only two men of shit oh
any record is given thet were ever hanged by the iaWw in Grant oo orate
(Articles in the same paper describe the hangings of three white men
in Opeat County, all done by mobs.)

| HH
Mr. spy,
I hope this will be of some benefit to you. I went to the Circuit
Clerk for official records but was unable to see them due to re-
modeling, moving, etc. Her name is Miss Frances Bicckoura if you
ion ie care to contact her. Mrs. Isabel Lanter, local historian,
might be able to fill you in on more details. Both of these ladies

can be reached by writing Williamstown, Ky. 41097.

Sincerely,

Peggy Kinman
Librarian


THOMPSON, Earl, black, hanged Williamstown, Ky.,
on 1-7-1910 |

Racial Violence in Kentucky
186 5—1940

Lynchings, Mob Rule, and “Legal Lynchings”

+ eee +

7,
1D caaeennaninmmanaiatneeineel POR CRP NO CAR LAY BT a AE Iii A EIT LE RRA NI Bien cutest eer ad ee : oo

LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY PRESS

Baton Rouge and London

te mais

_ aoe 4" =
SRS se neha areee sare Pa SERA trae ene Sika Na og tk A ees RAI a tease

fe wota te WE emai Pia eee ee ek Sa
vel nctog an BRATS wee patina tae Bah RE A Sa TAHT)

Sia.


SELTIVUN Z—le Pates

ay ANLAR

SATL

RET, TET

ab

5 ee ee

- io oa

pany are examined. by safety officials
director at Fetter Printing Company;
Stulck, Fawcett-Dearing plant engineer.

will end a two-day meeting today

Wants Firm To P

meeting here. From left are C. G. Schultz, safety
Miss Lillian Stemp, Whiting, Ind, and G. W.

Miss Stemp is
publishing section of the National Safety Council.
at the Brown Hotel.

ay $9,300

i

/ Covurter-Jovrnel Prete

BIG GUARDS over cutters on a rotogravure press at Fawcett-Dearing Printing Com-

chairman of the printing and
The section's executive committee

Widow of Executed Slayer Files.
Suit To Collect His Life Insurance

When a man is legally executed, can his widow
collect his life insurance?

This question was raised for the first time in
Kentucky yesterday in a suit in Federal Court.

Mrs. Clyda Varrence, widow of Roy Tarrence.
who was executed Jast March for the murder of
Louisville attorney Francis J. McCormack, asked
the court tu order John Hancock Mutual Insur-
ance Company of Boston tu pay hex $9,300

She claims this is due her under a policy her
husband had with the insurance firm

After a hearing Judge Koy M. Shelbourne
took the case under submission to allow Sandy
Paniello, Mrs. Tarrence’s attorney, and Thomas
Bullitt, representing the insurance company, time
to take additional depositions

Bullitt contends the insurance company doesn’t
have to pay because Tarrence was legally exe-
cuted, a risk not covered by the policy He argued

__ that neither Tarrence nor the company contem.

plated such a death for Tar:ence when the policy
Was issued

“It would be against public policy and good
Morats to insure against the penalty for crime,”
Bullitt said at the hearing

Paniello last night said Tarrence paid pre.
™iums on the policy while he was in Prison

~~

a a¢ |
Hoosiers Criven 7 Oe v

‘Gets Death

; Punishment at death. The jury
“deliberated 3 hours.

Policeman's

Slayer

Youth Shows
No Emotion
At Henderson —

Henderson, Ky., Jan. 27 (41 —
An all-male jury today found 18
year-old Ben Charles Sitton
guilty of murdering a Hender-
son policeman and fixed his

Henderson Circuit Court
Judge Faust Simpson said for-
mal sentencing would probably
be Tuesday.

Sitton listened to the verdict
with no outward sign of emo-
tion. His attocsney, George Clay,
said the defense would seek a
new trial

Commonwealth's Attorney
John Palmore, who had de-
manded the death penalty, ear-
lier told the jury Sitton had
been given “every protection. I
can't condone a crime like this
just because society caused it.”

Says Society Responsible

The defense attorney had
pleaded with the jury to temper
its decision, saying socicty was’
responsible for persons “such as
Sitton. [I don't argue the evi-
dence wasn't true, but you must:
temper your decision” ~

Sitton and another 18-year- .
old Fayetteville. Ark., boy were -
indicted for murder in the slay- *
ing last November of 24-year. ‘
old Jack Ramier, a Henderson”

awaiting execution. The last premium was paid |
in January, 1955, two months before he was |
electrocuted with his son, Leonard Tarrence,
Paniello said. _~

Tarrence took out the policy after he was
arrested and after he was fired by Bernheim:
Distillery, where he was employed While at the
distillery, Paniello said, Tarrence held seven’
small policies under &® company group plan
written by John Hancock

Under terms of the contract, Tarrence was'
allowed to convert the group policies to an in-
dividual one after he was fired, Panicllo said !
The conversion was made in May, 1952

Paniello said the issue is whether Kentucky ,
law governs the case, as he contends, or whether |
ut is covered by Massachusetts law, as Bullitt
claims. : :

Massachusetts courts have ruled in similar
cases that beneficianes cannot collect on
policies where death results from legal execution,
Paniello said ,

The Tarrences were electrocuted March 18,
1955, for the murder. The father and son forced
the attorney into their car in an alley near Fourth
and Oak February 28, 1952. They drove to
Harrods Creek, where they killed him and tossed
his body tn the creek.

ee ee we

we

wr te

json County. | want to make at’

City patrolman and Korean War 4
veteran. The other youth, Joe |
Pearman, was granted a sepa- 4
rate trial. _s v
Palmore told the jury ue had
heard talk that “human Iife in
Henderson County ts the cheap
est thing on Courthouse Hill. I
want to stop killing in Hender.

expensive to take a life in this
county.” é

Sitton, testifying today, de-;
scribed his home life and events |
leading up to the slaying. The
former marine said his father,
a sharecropper on a 20-acre farm .
near Fayetteville, was unable to
atlend the trial hecause he was

in Arkansas State Prison for ,
stealing. Bon EE RANT ia tae
The blond youth said he was |

looking in a used-car lot for a ;
¢ar to steal while Pearman kept |
watch when Kanier and another ‘
policeman arrived, © 4

ERO a Sew 7 ge 4
car. ae be aw =
ART AY Bae eet =—s


~ _. By HARRY BOLSER
. _ Courier-Journal Weel Kentucky Burses

day)—Roy and Leonard Tarrence
” diéd in the electric chair at Ken-

early today for the murder of
—Louisville. attorney Francis J.
McCormack.

Roy Leonard, 49, was the first
to go. He was led from his
death-row cell to the execution
chamber at 12:05 a.m. a was
-pronounced dead at 12:13 a.m.
ae oe: Two shocks of, 2,000 volts each

-* were required.

Ahead of Son a:
Ye ; Eddyville, Ky., March 18 (Fri- | :

— “ -tucky State Penitentiary here

re Fs

sa TARRENCE

LEONARD TARRENCE

Sto ock- Market-Crash Peril

papers spilled o
tional scene yes
Prime Minister ¥
reported “serio:
the American 2
publication of 2

should be consid

A dispatch fri
that the Russiar
silent for thé pr

was possible th

their own versio

President Eise
ing strictly out o
tary James C. He
White House tl
to release the {c
relating to the
velt-Stalin meet
1945 was made

fis banet el eee

. His_son, Leonard, 26, walked
. oD from his adjoining cell to the
execution chamber at 12:21 qm.
{ At 12:27 he was pronounced
H ¢ also uired ( 2,000-vol
, end eee req wo volt
y , Q<
‘Thus they paid with their lives
a for the bludgeon murder of the
5 attorney on February 28, 1952.
’ The men, both of Jefferson.
town, a Louisville suburb, were
2» the tirst_fathes
tucky te be executed for the
same crimesThey may have been
the first_in the nation.
_ Both of the men were led into
; the execution chamber by Prison |
= Chaplain Paul Jaggers who was

@ reciting verses from Chapter 14

* = OL dohn, “Lat pot your heart be
: hetieve da Ged: be.
eve also in Me . >."

~~<*Ged Bless You Al! -

ee When the father was led out
of his cell, Leonard asid, “Good-
_ by, Dad. fe long, eld pal, I'll see
you above” Roy led, “It ie
not goodnight, old pal, for we'll
eee each other above“
The father stopped as he
entered the execution chamber
: eld, “Wall. basa.
\ may God bleas pot prong ha os
forgive yea all”
f ~¢hied the Lord's hia:
As Leonard was led from hie

vd Angners.

‘>. Bible and in ft vere lengthy
igen statement.

_ tro helted midway be-

and.son in Ken. |

hing: fectery-

The chamber released statistics
ane at ibe goed the recov-
ery from rycoveice
has gained momentum 1a the
first three months of this year.

This coi with issuance
of the officigl, and almilarly
favorable, Margh feport to Coa
grete of the Ire t's Couacil
of Beonomic Advisers headed by
Dr. Arthur ¥. Burns,

Beveral Indices Neted

This report, the monthly Eco-
nomic Indicators. pictured ris-

momth. record-breaking wee!
earnings aod a longer work wee
for factory emplayees, aad eon-
unbroksa siz.

tracts ia February were
ont shove @ pear age. New coa~

oiraitie eutlays ¢ontinued

act sree thy fo it noted.

Het

\ the death chamber dber

BAF

toad.

Langit

Is Nil, U.S. C. of C. Says’

Outlook Is Called Bright Despite ‘Loose Talk’
Growing. Out of Senate's Study of Exchanges

By The Accecieted Press
“Woahingiob “March 17.—Busiseas 1s Oxpanding heatthity
and |s in no peril of a stock-market crash despite “some loose
talk" growing out of the Senate's stock-exchange investigation,
the United States Chamber of Commerce said today, ~~ _

1,500,000 cara tn the first quarter
ef this year—‘an increase of
more then one third above the
game period last year.”

owever, the chamber said
apne seasonal shille*” will
cause the rate of auto oulpul to
alecken in the last half of the

year,

Car Bales Mey Galn

Demands of the CID United
Aulometile Workers “fur a guar

anteed annual wage may stimu.
bow car uttion end

Secretary of §
released the pa
night, refused e
to say why he di.

House Speak:
Texas gold repor
that the papers \
a result of requ
publican senator

“If it helps the
cans)" he sald,
a glorious thing,

rty in my }
help, it's the Rey

Republicans b
tending lor year:
Roosevelt made
salons to Premie:
at Yalla te brie
into the war egal

ce ae ana apron

~Afler the xe
busines@
party wee rer i
were drunk end


your Army pay. You were seen forcing
him into your car, then you were seen
with him again at Harrod’s creek. You
murdered him and threw his body in
the creek, didn’t you? Confess and get
it off your mind!”

A shrewdness came into Leonard’s
eyes. “Let me talk with Prosecutor
Hamilton,” he said.

Commonwealth’s Attorney A. Scott
Hamilton was sent for. Leonard Ter-
rance offered to confess and turn state’s
evidence against his father. The offer
was promptly rejected.

Leonard blinked and swallowed hard.
Then he began to talk anyway. He said
that late Thursday afternoon while driv-
ing through Louisville he and his father
had happened to see McCormack enter
the A. & P.

“I hated that guy more than any man
living because he made me marry that
girl,” he said. “I suggested to Pop that
we beat him up. Pop knew how I felt
and he said OK.” oom

“We pulled into the alley and waited
for him to come out. Then we slugged
him and threw him into the car. He
was bleeding pretty badly. We took the
groceries along so there’d be no trace.

Finally we drove him to Harrod’s

Creek. We parked nearby and walked
him over there. I remember he said:
‘Do whatever you’re going to do with
me and get it over with.’ I beat him up
some more. Then dad picked up some-
thing and hit him over the head. We
saw that he was dead.

“I went over by the road and found
some barbed wire and a concrete slab.
We put the slab on his stomach, tied
it with the wire and shoved him into
the creek. Then we took off the bloody
seat covers and threw them in the creek
too. The upholstery underneath was nice
and clean. Pop drove me back to Louise-
ville and then went on home himself.”

Told of his son’s statement, Roy
Tarrence still refused to make a formal
confession. But when he was brought
face to face with Leonard, he ‘said:
“Son, we made a terrible mistake. I
don’t know why we did a thing like
that.” i
Leonard Tarrence took a party of
officers and Coast Guardsmen to the
creek and pointed out the spot where
he and his father had sunk the body.
It was hauled out of 15 feet ‘of water,
wrapped in barbed wire and weighted
with the concrete slab.
~ An autopsy showed that McCor-

mack’s skull had been fractured by
blows with a heavy instrument.

Murder affidavits were filed against
both father and son, and on March 12,
1952, a grand jury indicted them on
charges of first degree murder.

At their trial the following month,
both were found guilty and sentenced
to the electric chair.

But their attorney, Sandy Paniello
of Louisville, was a shrewd lawyer and
a fighter. He appealed to the State Su-
preme Court and finally to the U. S.
Supreme Court.

At last the Tarrences’ final hope of
escaping the chair was closed on March
16, 1955, when Governor Lawrence
Wetherby of Kentucky denied a plea
for clemency. .

On March 18th, shortly after mid-
night, they were led from their cells.

Roy Tarrence was strapped into the .

chair first and was pronounced dead at
12:13 a.m. His son died in the chair at
12:27 a.m.

It was the first time in Kentucky his-
tory that a father and son had been
executed for the same crime. *

Editor’s Note: The names August Mey-

er and Carol Conroy are fictitious.

CASE OF THE UNLUCKY WIVES
(Continued from page 25)

Criminally Insane.

He remained confined at the institu-
tion in Chester for six years.‘ In 1932
George Sack was released against the
advice of Dr. Frank Stubblefield, super-
intendent of the institution, who re-
iterated the trial judge’s charge that
Sack was “a menace to society.” {n ad-

dition, the Cook County State’s At--

torney’s office fought the widower’s re-
lease bitterly.

George Sack’s name did not appear
on any police blotter for the next seven
years. Exactly where he was, or what
he was doing during that period was
known only to Sack. In 1939 Sack
turned up as a tenant chicken farmer
in Sunnydale, Washington, not far from
Seattle. He had begun as a hired hand
on the farm of Joseph C. Young. In
January of 1939 Sack leased the farm
from the owner.

The name of George Sack again came
to the attention of the police when, on
a cold February Sunday, Joseph C.
Young disappeared from his home in
Seattle, Washington. Investigating offi-
cers found a letter in Young’s desk
signed with the initials, “G.S.” The miss-
ing man’s family explained that the
writer of the note had, apparently, been
George Sack.

When Detective Sergeant Robert
Hinkle called on the 42-year-old chicken
farmer in Sunnydale he was greeted
cordially. Sack was still well dressed

and well spoken. His hair had turned
64 - eat ee *

gray and he had grown a little plumper,
but he was still the same glib, dapper
little man. Sack told the detective that
Young had visited him a week before
and he had not seen him since. The
investigator had a look around the place
anyway.

In the kitchen, Detective Hinkle ob-
served tiny spots on the wall which
could well have been blood. He found
a chunk of wood in a back shed, blood-
Stained and with strands of gray hair
clinging to it. There was also an axe
and two hammers which had obviously
been cleaned recently. The detective
noted that the floor of the shed had
been scrubbed thoroughly, recently.
When Hinkle questioned Sack’s neigh-
bors he learned that they had seen a
huge bonfire on the chicken farm the
previous Sunday; the day that Joseph
Young had been there.

Sack had an explanation for every-
thing. He had burned a lot of trash on
that Sunday night after Young left. The
floor of the shed had been washed be-
cause it had been dirty. Any blood
found around the place was either chick-
en blood or Sack’s own. He had cut
himself recently and produced a bandag-
ed finger to verify it.

N Seattle, Detective Hinkle learned

that there had been bad blood be-
tween Young and his tenant. Sack want-
ed to buy the property he leased but
Young refused to sell. There had been
arguments and threats on both sides.
Then Joseph Young disappeared.

Sack was arrested and the sheriff’s
office launched an intensive search for
the missing man’s body. It was never

found and the state was unable to build
a sufficient case against the dapper little
chicken farmer. In May, 1939, he was
released.

1940 found Sack in Portland, Oregon.
His activities for the next three years
are unknown. However, they must have
been profitable years, for in 1943 he
purchased a lovely apartment house in
a fine residential area of the city. He
settled in one of the apartments and
lived a leisurely life as landlord. It was
not until May of 1951 that a police
document again saw the name George
Sack written on it.

On May 28th, a Monday evening, a
tenant of Sack’s building, named Roger
Sherman, was found dead in rather pe-
culiar circumstances. On Sunday, the
27th, Sherman’s sister had come to visit
her brother and had found him out. Sack
had given the sister a key to the Sher-
man apartment so that she could leave
him a note. As she later testified, the
sister had walked all through the apart-
ment, not finding her brother. Late
Sunday evening the sister called at
Sherman’s apartment, again receiving
no answer to her knock. The following
evening a friend of Sherman’s called
at the apartment. Receiving no answer
to his knock, he tried the door and
found it open. He entered and found
his friend, clad in pajamas, dead on the
kitchen floor. The police were summon-
ed and an investigation launched.

The coroner reported, incredibly, that
Roger Sherman had been dead not less
than 48 hours before he was found by
his friend. The police were baffled as
to how Sherman’s sister could have

gone through the entire apartment with- __
7 DETECTIVE CASES —

MATE

= OMS AS Sig ALS: dae Ae es

Se ee a

2 he ink st
Preaek.


heen

stile

so et a

“SUBSCRIBERS READ

WEEKS IN ADVANCE
OF RELEASE DATE

BROOKSIDE ENTERPRISES, INC.
1472 Broadway, New York, N. Y. 10036

| want the next twelve issues of DETECTIVE
CASES earlier! Enclosed is $4.20 for my (new)
(renewal) subscription.

i REWARD $9,985.50 for This Coin #

$600,000 SEARCH fer Rare Colas Old & Rew!

.

GIANT 2-COLOR
CATALOG

and luscious blondes .
Many illustrat! featuring exp
readheads and delightful blondes
modelling the latest, intimate
fashions just for you. See them wear
the latest in lacy bras, sheer negligees,
tempting baby dolls, glamorous garters
and many other bedroom fashions.
Mail teday for your giant, exciting free catalog.
Please enclose 25c to cover postage and handling.

VOGUE SHOPS
Suite $07-DS, 1472 Broadway, New York, N. Y, 10036

62

featuring fiery redheads

The two officers soon left. Back at
the station, Young looked up Sergeant
Bibb and told him of the conversation.

“Well, there doesn’t seem to be any-
thing very definite against Meyer,”
Bibb said. “But his alibi could stand
checking and it’s quite a coincidence
that he'd just cleaned the inside of his
car. Parsons said McCormack was
bleeding badly from the mouth.”

“Meyer certainly wasn’t one of the
men who attacked the lawyer,” Young
said. “But he could have hired two men
to do the job. Let’s put a tail on him,
see where he goes, whom he meets.”

Young assigned Detective Arthur
Wallmeyer and Tom Burch to keep a
round-the-clock watch on Meyer, fol-
lowing him to and from his job daily.

The lieutenant then telephoned Jef-
ferson County Police Chief Walter Lay-
ton. Layton agreed to accompany him
to the home fo Leonard Tarrence’s
Parents in Jeffersontown, about 20 miles
east of Louisville.

Roy Tarrence, a mild-mannered, be-
spectacied man in his late 4Us, was get-
ting ready to go to his job on the night
shift at a Louisville distillery when the
officers arrived. He invited them in.

“We understand your son, Leonard,
lives with you,” Young said.

“He did live with me,” the elder
Tarrence said, “but not any more. He
was drafted into the Army last April
and he’s at Fort Knox.”

“Has he been home on leave since
then?”

Tarrence hesitated. “He was home
over the Christmas holidays, but not
on leave. .He went AWOL. I finally
persuaded him to go back.”

Young brought up the question of
Leonard’s ill-feeling toward Francis
McCormack.

Tarrence looked at him interestedly.
“I just heard over the radio that Mc-
Cormack has been reported missing.
I figured maybe you’d want to ques-
tion Leonard, because everybody knows
he had it in for McCormack after he
made him marry that high school girl.
But like I say, Leonard is at an Army
camp.”

As proof of his statement, the elder
Tarrence produced a brief letter from
his son mailed from Fort Knox on
February 23rd, only six days  previ-
ously.

At this point, a slender, shapely
teen-aged blonde wearing an apron en-
tered the room. Tarrence introduced
her as Carol Conroy. “She’s Leonard’s
childhood sweetheart,” he went on. “He
aims to marry her if he can ever get
a divorce. Carol’s been staying with us,
helping Ma around the house.

Carol Conroy gave the officers a
sweet, shy smile and went on into the
kitchen.

“That wife of Leonard’s is getting a
regular allotment out of his army pay,
while the girl he wants as his wife
doesn’t get a penny,” Tarrence volun-
teered. “McCormack saw to that, too
and it made Leonard even madder.”

Young asked the elder Tarrence what
kind of a car he drove.

“A 1949 Chevwvy,” Tarrence replied.

“Mind if we take a look at it?”

“Not at all. I'll unlock the garage.” *

Young noted that the car was a gray
sedan. Though an old model, it had
been kept in excellent condition. Look-
ing inside, the detective saw no evi-
dence that the car had been used to
transport a bleeding man.

But since the car was so similar to

the one the dairy worker had de-*

scribed, Young asked Tarrence how
he had spent the previous afternoon.

“Well, first I drove to Louisville, to
an auto parts place,” he replied. “I
always keep my fishing tackle in the
car, so I stopped at Harrod’s Creek on
the way back and did a little fishing.
Didn’t catch anything, though. I got
back here around seven-thirty and went
on to work.”

The officers soon left.

“I know that place along Harrod’s
creek where most of the fellows go to
fish,” County Chief Layton said. “I’ll
stop by in the morning and see if any-
body saw Tarrence there.”

ig tne further developed that
night. But at nine-thirty in the
morning, Young had an excited phone
call. from Detective Wallmeyer.

“I' followed August Meyer to his
plant this morning,” the detective said.
“He didn’t go in right away, but waited
outside the door. After a while, two
other employees came up to him. One
was a young man and the other was
around 50. They went away from the
door and I saw Meyer give both of
them some money. Those two- could
have been the pair Parsons saw, and
Meyer could have been paying them
off for beating up McCormack.”

“That makes sense,” Young said.
“Meyer may have loaned them his car
to do the job. Inquire around. See if
you can get a line on those two men.
Find out where they were Thursday
afternoon.”

The lieutenant waited eagerly for an-
other call from Wallmayer. It came
shortly after noon. .

“I'm afraid I’ve got bad news,” the
detective said. “I talked with the plant
supervisor and he showed me _ those
men’s time cards. Both worked overtime
{hursday. They didn’t leave the plant
till eight o’clock.

“Well, at lunch time I watched Meyer
again. He came out before the others.
and again he hung around the door, 1
saw three other men come up to him
separately. He gave each one of them
some money.

“Finally I got wise. That guy’s a
loan shark—a shylock. He loans out
money until payday—probably at 20 or
30 percent interest. That’s why he’s
a rich man.”

Young hung up dejectedly. For a
while the police had seemed to be
making headway on the case, but now
things were bogging down badly.

He telephoned the FBI and found
that they had made no progress as yet.
A phone call to McCormack’s wife
brought the information that no one
had contacted her to obtain ransom.

More than 48 hours had now passed

DETECTIVE CASES

WR, es Me NL

ret TITTY aioe Sat PE

ec

tae a Eni, AOE tens ict

77

since the lawyer’s disappearance and
Young was rapidly becoming convinced
that McCormack had been murdered
by his attackers.

With Meyer out of the picture and
Leonard Tarrence away at an Army
camp, there was no one left who bore
a grudge against the attorney.

Se Young remembered
something. Roy Tarrence had said
that his son had gone AWOL over
Christmas and returned home. If he
had gone AWOL once, then perhaps—

The lieutenant picked up the phone
and made a long distance call to Fort
Knox. He was put through to Tar-
rence’s commanding officer.

“Leonard Tarrence went AWOL for
the second time on Monday, February

25th,” the officer said. “We’ve just no-*

tified the FBI in Washington to pick
him up as a deserter.”

Young had barely put down the re-
ceiver when his phone rang. It was
County Chief Layton, who had been
checking Roy Tarrence’s movements
on Thursday.

“I can’t find anyone who saw him at
Harrod’s Creek,” Layton said. “But the
keeper of the general store at Floyds
Fork, a mile or so from there, says he
knows Tarrence and that he came in
that evening about 6:30 to buy ciga-
rettes. The storekeeper happened to
look out the door and noticed there
was another man—a young man—in the
car.”

“Let’s go and have another talk with
Roy Tarrence,” Young said.

He and Layton met and returned to
the Tarrence house.

“Yes, I stopped in that store for cig-
arettes,” Tarrence said. “What of it?”

“Who was riding in your car with
you?”

“Nobody. I was alone.”

“Where’s your son?”

“Leonard’s at Fort Knox, like I said.”

“He’s not at Fort Knox, because I
just telephoned there and he’s gone
AWOL again.”

A look of caution appeared in Tar-
Trence’s eyes. “Well, if he’s AWOL, it’s
the first I heard of it,” he said. “He
certainly hasn’t been home. Ask the
neighbors. They’d have seen him if
he’d been here.” ~

“We want to search your house,
Tarrence.”

“Help yourself. You won't find any-
thing.”

But Young did find something. On
a list of names and phone numbers be-
side the telephone he found a Louis-
ville number scrawled in pencil with
no name to identify it. On a hunch he
jotted it down.

When they had left, he called the
operator from a booth and obtained
the address where the telephone was
located.

' The officers raced back to Louisville
and found the address to be a rooming
house in a run-down section of town.
The telephone was in the first floor
hallway. Young asked the landlord
whether a young man of about 23 had
taken a room there that- week.
DETECTIVE CASES

“Yes, I rented a room to a young
fellow who said his name was Jack
Weber,” the landlord said. “He’s up-
stairs now. Room number seven.”

“Did you happen to notice what he
did Thursday afternoon?”

“Yes, an older man called for him
about two or three o'clock and they
drove waay in a car.”

“Come upstairs with us,” Young
said. “Knock on Weber’s door, and
when he answers say you want to see
him.”

The landlord did as he was told. The
door was opened and the detectives
forced their way in.

A. slender, hard-faced young man
with blond hair stared at them as though
taken completely by surprise.

“You're Leonard Tarrence, aren't
you?” Young demanded.

He hesitated. “You’re not from the
army, are you?”

Young said they weren’t.

“Well yes, I’m Leonard Tarrence.
What do you want?”

“We want you at headquarters,”
Young said, “to answer some questions.
Come along.”

Leonard went without protest. Then
Chief Layton drove to Jeffersontown
and picked up Leonard’s father at his
job. The two were questioned separately
and both denied any knowledge of Mc-
Cormack’s disappearance.

“But you were with your son Thurs-
day afternoon, weren't you?” Young
demanded of Roy Tarrence. “Why did
you lie to me?”

“Because the boy was AWOL and I
knew you'd tell the Feds and they’d
send him back to the army stockade,”
Tarrence said.

LS yet men maintained they had gone
to a Louisville auto parts store in
mid-afternoon, then had gone fishing.
A check-up with the store next morn-
ing confirmed the first part of their
statements. Then County Detectives
Robert Francis and Charles Peyton,
going from house to house in the Har-
rod’s Creek area, located a teen-aged
boy who said he had seen the Tar-
rences, whom he knew, getting out of
their car near the creek. ‘

“They had another man with them,”
the boy said. “He looked either drunk
or very sick.”

Young telephoned the Coast Guard,
and they sent boats up Harrod’s Creek
from the Ohio River and began dragging
the bottom. But there are many deep
holes in the creek and the dragging pro-
duced no results.

That afternoon, Roy and Leonard
Tarrence were put in a police lineup.
The dairy worker, Henry Parsons, im-
mediately picked out the father and
son as the men he had seen in the
alley.

The detectives, noticing that Leonard
Tarrence was growing increasingly
nervous, concentrated their questioning
on him.

“You hated McCormack,” Young
charged, “because he made you marry
that girl, forced you to support the
baby, then helped her get a big hunk of

BE A CRIME
FIGHTER!

THIS EMBLEM ON YOUR CAR
— SIGNIFIES GENUINE INTEREST

This is your opportunity to become a Chars
ter Member of the International Association
of Investigators and Special Police — an |
international organization of citizens inter<
ested in fighting crime and c¢ rating
with local law enforcement officials. Valu- |
able credentials include |AISP Membership j
identification Card, Car Emblem, Member- |
ship Certificate and Roster, plus many other
benefits. Membership Fee of $5. includes
dues for full year... join now and receive
Official 1AISP Membership credentials. |
A
ti

V;

international Association of

investigators and Special Police

860 Transportation Bidg.

Chicago 5, Illinois

Enclosed is $5.00. Send me Official 1AISP
Membership credentials. i

Name
Address
City Zone. -State............

BE AN INVEST

= You can have a profitable and in,
\\ feresting coreer as a professioncf
\S investigator. Learn at home in your
spare time. Write today for free
details of our complete home study
\ training course.

NATIONAL . DETECTIVE ACADEMY.
Box 374, Garden Grove, Calit,

« IS THE MAHLER WAY!

Thousands of women like yourself, after readiri
and following our instructions carefully, have ,
learned to remove unwanted hair permanently thi
Mahler way. Re-discover the thrill of an exciting! '
beautiful complexion — don’t detay another day

Send 10c for 16-page illustrated booklet “New
Radiant Beauty” . . . learn the secret for yourself!

MAHLER’S INC. Dept. 194-F, Providence 15, Rl.

SONG IDEA

WANTED

Write with active, Professional song.
writers with publisher contacts. Rec-

~——~"__ ords made. Share royalties. Send ideas.

SONGWRITERS’ ASSOCIATES ‘Free examination
Studio 30, 236 W. 55 St. at Broadway, NY 19, NY

j; HIGH”
| SCHOOL |

AT HOME IN SPARE TIM :

Low monthly payments include stana- f -
j ard text books and instruction. Credit | :
for subjects already completed '

I Progress as rapidly as your time |
a

and abilities permit. DIPLOMA AWARDED
SEND FOR BOOKLET—TELLS YOU HOW %

4 -- ae OUR 67TH YEAR -————- 5
AMERICAN SCHOOL, Dept. T-528,

Drexel at 58th, Chicago 37, Illinois.
i Please send FREE High School booklet. | .

ciry aia an ee Oe Ree en ee er
Accredited Member NATIONAL HOME STUDY COUNCT) :
2 ee eee ee eC
635 |

with me?” de-
ural voice.

the murder of
sees evenly.
<u 'aS con-
‘wi __,, -he men

ind the six wit-.

in the vicinity
hom positively
efused to con-

the fingerprint
k On a special
im by Weeks.
when he had
into an ante-
-cutor’s office,
ctor had been
1e bare yellow

Hanson placed
soner’s finger-
‘om the lethal

side by side.
fle cast the
the wall.

r fingerprints,
found on the
strict attorney

Kubal cried,
‘d running his
‘, damp hair.
r! Only stop

yn and Kubal
. Weeks sum-
1] began
20) ions in
ninal history.
'b for a long
ce. “Two days
ng Lynbrook
boys picking
Bartlett yard.
> lived in that
, a rich lady

by the trolley .

thinking that
dn’t get a job
* without the
{ would come
d call on the

put a small
in my pocket
ntended only
ok along the
1yself in case
ought to kill

r and asked
1 noticed the
> and wanted
-. She asked
>in and look
would.

I knew it, I
he waist and
1 it five
iri :d to

yuth and she
on the head
pped to the
yehavé your-

TECTIVE CASES —

self.” She was then in the hall, five or
six feet from the door. She got up and
caught hold of me and squeezed my
neck so hard I was weakened. She
rushed toward the dining room, still
holding and talking with me.

“In the living room, I beat her on the
head with my fist about ten or fifteen
times and she fell. Then she began to
scream, got up again and grabbed me.
I said ‘Jeeze, it’s hard to kill people, and
damn it, what will I do now?’ ”

Kubal paused and Weeks prompted
him to continue. “For a little while,” he
went on, “I don’t know what I did.
Then I remember her bleeding badly
and I knew she was going to die any-
way. I didn’t want her to suffer and I
made up my mind to kill her. I took
out the pipe and hit her a couple of
times on the head. Then I took the
chisel and jabbed it into her face a
dozen times. At last I choked her a
little. I wanted to be sure she was dead.

“I took off het wedding ring and wrist
watch. Then I ran upstairs and looked
through the dresser drawers. I grabbed
up some beads and things but I lost
them later.

“I was beginning to get-scared so I
ran down to the front door. I peeked
out to see if anyone or any cars were
around, but the coast was clear. I went
outside, sneaked through two gardens to
Fulton Avenue and across into the
woods.

“Then I took my knife out of my
pocket and cut off my shirtsleeves which

had blood on them. I hid them in some
bushes and threw the chisel away. I
guess I dropped the pipe in the kitchen
where I tried to wash away the blood
before I left.”

“You did,” reminded the District
Attorney. “That’s how we got your
prints. Then what did you do?”

“I went home and changed my
clothes. Then I took a trolley to Jamaica
and sold the jewelry. After that, I éame
back here, went down'to Roosevelt and
had my mustache shaved off. Then I
went home again.”

Next day, Kubal was taken back to
the scene of the crime, where he re-
enacted the murder. He led officers to
the spot in the woods where he had
buried the chisel and the bloody sleeves,
both of which were recovered.

Two weeks later, on July 7, 1921,
Kubal was placed on trial before Justice
James C. Cropsey and a jury in Nassau

. Supreme Court. The same day, after

deliberating only eleven minutes, the
jury found him guilty as charged, setting
a record in the.county for speedy mur-
der convictions. Justice Cropsey prompt-
ly sentenced him to die.

An August 14, just before midnight,
he was strapped into the electric chair
at Sing Sing. The brutal murder of a
defenseless woman at last had been
avenged. *

Editor's note: The names Sam Turner,
Bill Maynard and Jake Masters are
fictitious.

SECRET OF SHOTGUN WEDDING
(Continued from page 11)

Leonard Tarrance of Jeffersontown.
Mac represented the girl in the case.
He agreed to get the’ charges against
Tarrence dropped if he would marry
the girl, and Tarrence did. But then he
haled Tarrence into court a few months
later on a charge of failing to support
the child. The court ordered Tarrence to
pay his wife $7.50 a week. He was
pretty burned up at Mac about it. He
told him off once when he met him

’ on the street.”

Beatty said that Leonard Tarrenge,
who was only 21 at the time, still
lived with his parents in Jeffersontown,
10 miles southeast of Louisville. Young
jotted down this information.

E and Sergeant Miller went first

to the modest one-story home of
August Meyer on the outskirts of
Louisville. The first thing they noticed
was an ancient-vintage gray Ford se-
dan in the driveway beside his house.
Meyer, who answered their ring,
proved to be a thin, sharp-faced man.
in his late 50’s. His living room was
untidy and ill-smelling and its furniture
was threadbare. There was a small safe
in one corner. Meyer went at once to

DETECTIVE CASES

a wheel chair that was piled high with
dusty newspapers and removed them.

“I’m supposed. to use this chair all
the time since my back was injured,”
he said, “but I can get around a little
without it.”

When the detectives questioned him
further, however, they learned that
Meyer, a bachelor, could not only get
around but that he was working full
time as an electrician at a nearby plant.
He professed not ot know that McCor-
mack had been abducted.

“Well, I’ve got no use for that shy-
ster,” he told the officers. “He swindled
me out of $50,000 that was rightfully
mine. But I certainly didn’t beat him
up and throw him in my car. I’m not
strong enough to beat up anybody.”

“Where were you yesterday between
5:00 and 5:30 p. m.?” Young asked.

“I must have been driving home from
my job.”

“We'd like to look at your car.”

“Go ahead.”

Young and Miller examined the old-
model gray Ford. The car was dirty
and mud-spattered, but the officers saw
that the upholstery had recently been
cleaned. They asked Meyer about this.

“I got grease on the front seat while
I was fixing the wiring under the dash-
board the other day,” Meyer explained.
“Figured I might as well clean all the
upholstery while I was at it.”

‘| pensive surgery may be the only

Afflicted With Getting Up }
Pains in Back, Hips, Le
Nervousness, Tirednes

If you are a victim of the abov:
toms, the trouble may be due to (
lar Inflammation. Glandular Inf
tion very commonly occurs in
middle age or past and is often
panied by despondency, emotionz
and other mental and nervous re
... often signs that the glands
functioning properly.

Neglect of such conditions or
conception of adequate treatmer
cause men to grow old before the

. . loss of vigor and possibly
incurable conditions.

NON-SURGICAL TREATM.

Most men, if treatment is ta
time, can be successfully NON-S
CALLY treated for Glandular J
mation. If the condition is agg?
by lack of treatment, painful ¢

Through intensive research, a:
sultful Non-Surgical treatment
for Glandular Inflammation he
perfected by the Excelsior !
Clinic. The, mild Non-Surgical
has proven‘so successful it is ba:
a Lifetime Certificate of Assura

Men from over 1,000 commun
all parts of the country, have be
cessfully Non-Surgically treatec
found soothing and comforting
and better Health.

RECTAL-COLON REDUCIB
DISORDERS HERNI/

Are often associated with | is also amenable
Glandular Inflammation. | Non-Surgical tre

Either or both of these disorders may be
at the same time you are receiving ¢
Inflammation treatments.

2 ILLUSTRA

REE BOOK Jells/
Fcc | Our New FREE Boc
HOw-

N illustrated and de
| diseases peculiar to
| women. Gives exce
tual knowledge a
prove of utmost im
i} to your future fi
| How and Why nev
| Non-Surgical Tr
methods are provir

: H cessful. It is to y

interest to write for a FREE copy today

PRs eee eee eee
1 EXCELSIOR FILL OUT
1 MEDICAL CLINIC COUPON T
i Dept. B-4150,

a Excelsior Springs, Mo.

8 Gentlemen: Kindly send me at onc
§ New FREE Book. | am interested in *
formation (Please Check Box)

g CHernia () Rectal-Colon [) Clandu
Inflam

a NAME
-§ ADDRESS.
i TOWN
i STATE


By LAUNCELOT WHIG

EONARD TARRANCE and his
father, Roy, were inseparable.
They went everywhere together.
Leonard was often seen with his
arm about his father’s shoulders ‘as
they walked along the quiet streets
of Jeffersontown, Kentucky, which
was their home, or started out on a
hunting or fishing expedition.

The bond of affection between
father and son went even deeper.

For example, when Leonard, still
in his teens, fathered two children
out of wedlock his Dad was very
philosophical about the matter, if
not a little proud of his son’s prow-
ess. His attitude was one of “boys-
will-be-boys” and “those things are
bound to happen, you know.”

As Roy Tarrance was to say, Leo-
nard could no no wrong.

“I could never fee] angry or any-
thing but good toward Leonard,” he
said. “He'd do anything in the world
for me. He'd die for me and I’d do
the same for him.”

On one occasion, when Leonard
‘tried to pistol-whip another youth,
and his victim struck back, his
father grabbed the gun and shouted:

“Don't you hit my boy. If you do
it again, I'll shoot you.”

So, it was like that with Leonard
Tarrance and his father Roy.

And it would be like that all of
their lives...

BUT THIS CHRONICLE of sordidness,
of savage senseless violence perhaps
properly begins on the afternoon of
February 28th, 1952, in Louisville,
Kentucky, 15 miles distant from Jef-
fersontown, -where the Tarrances
made their home.

It begins with Francis J. Mc-
Cormack, Louisville attorney, leav-
ing a supermarket laden with pur-
chases.

The market was situated at Oak
and Fourth Streets, only a _ block
from the 54-year-old lawyer’s home
where his wife, Mary, waited for
him. Half an hour before, Mrs. Mc-
Cormack had talked to her husband
on the phone and had given him her
grocery list.

McCormack stepped out into an
alley behind the market and had
walked only a few paces when he
was set upon by two men. Five wit-
nesses watched from a dista in
windows, as the pair slugged and
pummeled McCormack unmerciful-
ly—and dragged him into a gray car
and sped away.

It all happened so quickly that

none of the witnesses had time to
26

apes *

“HARRGDS «Creek! ‘gives op
victin's body fo police. Father
and son killers (r3. paid the
sypreme~ penalty. for: murder.

“Boys will be boys”, said the
wild youth’s father, when
told of his lad’s wrongdoing .. .

Uosuegzer) Ayonquey

*d66T-gT~

48 _—siKy..

ute requiring the list be put in a sealed en-
velope does not apply to a specially drawn
panel,

[15,16] Another point raised is that in
selecting the names to fill the jury box for
examination, the clerk did not do so by lot
in the manner prescribed by KRS 29.250,
29.260, but called the names at his pleasure.
The testimony of the deputy clerk is that
the names on the regular panels were drawn
from “a sliding drawer” by lot. But the
special panel, except those excused, was
listed on four sheets of paper, apparently
by the sheriff, and the names were not
drawn from a container by lot. The order
in which the persons were called to the jury
box is not the same order in which the pan-
el had been drawn from the wheel. It thus
appears that in some way there was a ran-
dom selection. On the same question it was
held in Robertson vy. Commonwealth, 269
Ky. 317, 107 S.W.2d 292, that the provision
in Sec. 2265, Ky.Stats. (now KRS 29.250)
requiring the selection to be made from a
“suitable box with a‘sliding lid” related to
a regular panel and did not apply to Sec.
2247, Ky.Stats. now KRS 29.280, which
covers the selection of a special venire
whether it be drawing from the wheel or
summoning bystanders. It is suggested as
a reason for this different procedure that
“in many cases a large number of names are
drawn from the wheel and if the court
should be required to wait until all had been
summoned and had appeared before pro-
ceeding with the trial, unnecessary delay
would result.” We, therefore, find no er-
ror in overruling the challenge to the panel.

[17] Exclusion of women jurors. Dur-
ing the voir dire examination the court ad-
vised the several women they were exempt
from service, KRS 29.030(1)(m), and all
claimed exemption. The defendant object-
ed and insisted this was not the court’s duty.
It does seem from the course of the exami-
nation that the Commonwealth wanted
women excluded because, as it is indicated,
of the difficulty in providing facilities for
keeping the jury together over night. The
appellant argues this advice was prejudicial
to his rights, since it saved the Common-

65 SOUTH WESTERN REPORTER, 2d SERIES

wealth its peremptory challenges, for ex-
emption is not a cause for challenge. Sec.
211, Criminal Code of Practice.

[18-20] The trial judge has a large
measure of discretion in exercising his pow-
er to examine and to excuse talesmen in a
criminal case. We have held that it was not
error for the court of its own accord to ex-
cuse from a group of five accepted by both
sides two men who requested it on account
of their age. Webb v. Commonwealth, 223
Ky. 424, 3 S.W.2d 1080. In Fall v. United
States, 60 App.D.C. 124, 49 F.2d 506, certi-
orari denied, 283 U.S. 867, 51 S.Ct. 657, 75
L.Ed. 1471, after the jury had been select-
ed but before being sworn, the court in-
formed the jurors that they would be
locked up during the continuance of the
trial and if any of the ladies desired to be
excused, they could inform the court. One
was excused. The statutory exemption was
like ours. It was held there was no error.
We think it proper for the court to advise
persons exempt from jury service of their
right to be excused if they desire.

[21] Challenges for cause. ‘Appellant
submits that certain prospective jurors were
improperly excused for having “such con-
scientious opinions as would preclude him
from finding the defendant guilty.” Sec.
210, subsec. 7, Criminal Code of Practice.
Many were excused on this ground. The
appellant points out that a number an-
swered the interrogation in terms not di-
rect or specific. We have carefully consid-
ered every one of them, and think their re-
sponses leave little doubt that the conscien-
tious attitude of the men and women was
such as would have influenced their consid-
eration of the evidence or in arriving at a
verdict of death in any case. We find no
error in these rulings nor in those on other
challenges for cause.

[22,23] The court has a broad discre-
tion in determining the qualification of a
juror from his entire examination. Smith
v. Commonwealth, 100 Ky. 133, 37 S.W. 586;
Williams v. Commonwealth, 254 Ky. 647,
72 S.W.2d 31; Farmers’ National Bank of
Somerset v. Tartar, 256 Ky. 70, 75 S.W.2d

TARRENCE v. COMMONWEALTH Ky. 49

Cite as, Ky.,

758; Howard v. Commonwealth, 282 Ky.
663, 139 S.W.2d 742; Watts v. Common-
wealth, 308 Ky. 197, 213 S.W.2d 795; 50
C.J.S., Juries, §§ 245(b), 278(c). We do
not regard the court as unfair in not allow-
ing the defendant’s attorney to question
prospective jurors more thoroughly. Quite
a liberal examination was permitted.

Admission of incompetent evidence. Po-
lice officers produced a tire tool such as is
used in taking lugs from automobile wheels
and a pair of wire cutters found in the de-
fendant’s automobile. Defendant objected
to their introduction in evidence. There
was no blood or other indication that either
instrument had been used to kill the dece-
dent. On cross-examination, over objec-
tion, the Commonwealth’s attorney asked
the defendant, and later his son as a wit-
ness, whether McCormick was struck with
this tire tool. Both stated he was not.
Evidence as to the nature and character of
the wounds inflicted shows that McCormick
was struck several times on the head with
a blunt instrument of some kind. No such
weapon was found at the scene of the as-
sault in the alley or near the place where
the body was found. The coroner, Dr.
Dwyer, expressed the opinion it was possi-
ble for the instrument used to have been
a “pipe or tire tool.” The body had been
tied up with wire and it was a logical con-
clusion that wire cutters found in the de-
fendant’s automobile had been used in the
gruesome operation.

[24-26] It has always been considered
competent for the Commonwealth to show
that the defendant had in his possession at
the time of the killing a weapon which
could have caused the death and that it is
not necessary to prove that the instruments
introduced had in fact been used. See Allen
v. Commonwealth, 82 S.W. 589, 26 Ky.Law
Rep. 807; Miller v. Commonwealth, 182 Ky.
438, 206 S.W. 630; Edmonds v. Common-
wealth, 230 Ky. 725, 20 S.W.2d 745. The
cases relied upon by the appellant are dis-
tinguishable. In each of them the identity
or connection with the use of the instru-
ments introduced was too speculative. In
one of the cases, Higgins v. Commonwealth,

265 S.W.2d—4

265 8.W.2d 40

142 Ky. 647; 134 S.W. 1135, 1138, the court
laid down this rule or guide for the ad-
missibility of such evidence:

“It should also appear from the evi-
dence that it was found at a time and
place furnishing reasonable ground to
connect it some way with the homicide.
The proof need not positively show the
connection; but there must be proof
rendering the inference reasonable or
probable from its nearness in time and
place or other circumstances,”

We think the introduction of these instru-
ments came within the rule.

Evidence of threats by the defendant.
Norris Flint, who lived on Harrods Creek
near the place where McCormick’s body
was found, testified the Tarrences were
frequently nearby on fishing trips. About
three or four weeks before the homicide,
the defendant on trial, Roy Tarrence, was
at the witness’ house and they were talking
about how much money it took for a living.
Tarrence called the attorney representing
Leonard’s wife, but without mentioning his
name, a son-of-a-bitch, and said he was
“trying to get all the money they [sic]
could and that someone should knock him
in the head and throw him in the creek.”
The witness was a little reluctant and add-
ed that Tarrence never said he was going
to do it but that it “ought to be done.”

[27,28] It seems to us the statement
was close enough in time and sufficient in
reference to be admissible as showing mo-
tive and malice. It had particular signifi-
cance to subsequent events. Puckett v.
Commonwealth, 235 Ky. 340, 31 S.W.2d 383;
Thomas vy. Commonwealth, 257 Ky, 605, 78
S.W.2d 777. The defendant’s failure to re-
quest an admonition that the purpose of its
admission was only to show motive or intent
and was not of itself sufficient to establish
guilt, waived his right to claim it now. See
Holman v. Commonwealth, 291 Ky. 622, 165
S.W.2d 167; Johnson v. Commonwealth,
310 Ky. 557, 221 S.W.2d 87.

[29] Improper cross-examination. In
the course of vigorous cross-examinations


+50 Ky.

of the defendant and his son, the Common-
wealth’s attorney asked a number of ques-
tions, the affirmative answers to which
would have revealed deliberate prepara-
tions for the killing and cruel treatment of
the man while being taken to Harrods
Creek. But the witnesses answered in the
negative. It is claimed the interrogations
were unfair as having no -foundation in
fact and no record as a basis. The line of
questioning was based on statements in ad-
missions and confessions of the witnesses
which they had denied in their direct ex-
amination. An enlargement or develop-
ment of the details sought would have been
res gestae and competent. We regard the
examinations as within the proper latitude
of fairness and reasonableness.

[30] Admissions of other evidence.
The testimony concerning the finding and
raising of the body of the deceased from
the water was kept well within the court’s
admonition to avoid details which might
have been of a gruesome nature.

[31] Having admitted without objection
the widow’s testimony concerning the de-
ceased’s family, including the fact that a
son was in the air corps and confined to a
hospital in Texas, the court should perhaps
have not observed as having nothing to do
with the case the defendant’s statement that
his son, a soldier, had just returned from
Korea to attend the trial. This was of no
consequence and certainly not prejudicial
error. There is likewise no merit in other
contentions of impartiality in admitting
evidence.

[32] Two rebuttal witnesses stated the
first assault was committed by both men
and described its violent character. This
was in somewhat more detail than the tes-
timony of witnesses originally introduced.
The evidence might well have been present-
ed as direct proof but it was also competent
in rebuttal. The defendant and his son had
testified that the father did not take any
part in this assault but had remained in the
automobile until he got out and tried to sep-
arate McCormick and Leonard Tarrence.

265 SOUTH WESTERN REPORTER, 2d SERIES

Instructions. The instruction defining
“wilfully” and “malice aforethought” as
used in the preceding instructions included
the statement that if the jury believed from
the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that
the defendant alone or jointly with his son
was at the time of the assault “engaged in
the act of committing the felony of false
arrest or false imprisonment of the de-
ceased,” the “said circumstances constitute
malice within the meaning of these instruc-
tions.” False arrest or false imprisonment
was then defined “to be the felonious and
forceable detaining of another or prevent-
ing free locomotion on his part against his
will and without his consent and committed
without legal or lawful authority.” The
appellant contends this was a prejudicial
error since there is no testimony in the rec-
ord to sustain a theory of false arrest.

[33] Abduction, in the broad sense of
carrying a person away wrongfully, was
what the witnesses described and what the
jury was or could have been justified in be-
lieving had occurred. This is the most ag-
gravated species of false imprisonment.
KRS 435.150 makes it a felony for any per-
son to arrest or imprison another otherwise
than according to law but under circum-
stances not constituting kidnapping and
holding for ransom, or for any person to
cause or in any manner counsel, aid or abet
such arrest or imprisonment. Whether
this would cover the mere unlawful re-
straint of the physical liberty of another
person is doubtful, but it certainly includes
an abduction of this character.

[34-36] Incorporating in an instruction
that the perpetration or attempted perpe-
tration of another crime constitutes malice
is unusual, Although the accused may not
have had the intention of taking a life, mal-
ice in respect to such homicide may be im-
plied or inferred on the ground that the
killing was done while the person who did
the act was engaged in the commission of
some other felony or in an attempt to per-
petrate some offense of that grade. “The
turpitude of the act contemplated is by im-
plication of law transferred to the homicide

sas)

TARRENCE v. COMMONWEALTH Ky. 61
Cite as, Ky., 265 S.W.2d 40

which actually is committed so as to make
the latter offense a killing with malice, con-
trary to the real fact of the case as it ap-
pears in evidence.” 26 Am.Jur., Homicide,
Secs. 188, 309. It makes no difference that
another participant used the weapon with
which the killing was done. All are equal-
ly guilty. Marion v. Commonwealth, 269
Ky. 729, 108 S.W.2d 721; Whitfield v.
Commonwealth, 278 Ky. 111, 128 S.W.2d
208; Simpson v. Commonwealth, 293 Ky.
831, 170 S.W.2d 869. An instruction de-
fining the law applicable to such a state-
ment of facts may be given and such in-
struction may properly define and explain
the other offense involved. 41 C.J.S., Hom-
icide, § 361. However, in this jurisdiction
the usual form is an instruction that if the
accused committed or attempted to commit
another felony and in doing so killed a per-
son, the jury should find him guilty of mur-
der. Instructions to Juries, Stanley, Sec.
870. Therefore, the unusual instruction
was more favorable to the defendant than
one the law authorized.

The omission of instructions on volun-
tary and involuntary manslaughter is a
claimed error. As we have stated, Leonard
Tarrence’s testimony is that he approached
McCormick in a friendly attitude, but when
he responded with the threat to send him
to the penitentiary or to Korea (it being
the policy of the Army to send soldiers who
had been AWOL immediately into active
service), he, Leonard, struck McCormick
with his fist and knocked him 5 or 6 feet
away and then picked up a stick and hit him
3 or 4 times across the head. It was then
that the father came into the affray and
they put the man into the automobile.

[37-40] No matter. how violent the
slayer’s passion may have been, it will not
relieve him of the implication of murder
unless it was engendered by the degree or
character of provocation to kill as would
have naturally overcome and suspended the
self-control of a man of fair, ordinary and
average disposition or will power or cause
such a one to act rashly or without due de-
liberation or reflection. McHargue v.
Commonwealth, 231 Ky. 82, 21 S.W.2d 115.

This finds expression in the traditional in-
struction on voluntary manslaughter, In-
structions to Juries, Stanley, Secs. 868,
869. The adequacy or reasonableness of
the provocation to reduce a homicide to
voluntary manslaughter is usually for the
jury to determine but whether certain un-
disputed facts constitute legal provocation
is a matter of law for the judge to deter-
mine. Roberson’s Ky.Crim.Law, Sec. 375;
Helm v. Commonwealth, 156 Ky. 751, 162
S.W. 94; McHargue v. Commonwealth, su-
pra. This provocation must not be merely
slight in character but must be substantial
in nature. While extreme harsh, abusive
or grossly insulting language by the de-
ceased may constitute lawful provocation,
yet it has been held in a number of cases

that mere words of reproach or gestures,

though insulting, or threats when unac-

companied by assault, are not adequate to

reduce murder to manslaughter. Rober-—
son’s Ky.Crim.Law, Secs. 374, 375, 382.

We do not regard the statement attributed

to McCormick by Leonard Tarrence as

evidence of substantial provocation. Cox

v. Commonwealth, 69 S.W. 799, 24 Ky.

Law Rep. 680; Helm vy. Commonwealth,

156 Ky. 751, 162 S.W. 94; Cooksey v. Com-

monwealth, 235 Ky. 454, 31 S.W.2d 703.

[41,42] The appellant, Roy Tarrence’s
right in this respect was no greater than
his son’s right, for where one interferes
and espouses the quarrel of another, he
stands in place of the other and is as guilty
of the crime as the person who actually
committed it. Roberson’s Ky.Crim.Law,
Sec. 343; Crockett v. Commonwealth, 100
Ky. 382, 38 S.W. 674, 18 Ky.L.R. 838;
McHargue v. Commonwealth, 231 Ky. 82,
21 S.W.2d 115; Hurd v. Commonwealth,
257 Ky. 315, 78 S.W.2d 9.

[43,44] If this were not a death penal-
ty case, we would have no hesitancy in
saying there was no evidence of provoca-
tion, but since this is a death case, we
could well resolve any doubt on the ques-
tion in favor of the defendant. But even
so, since the jury gave the extreme penal-
ty for murder rather than the lesser pen-
alty of life imprisonment, it is readily

44 Ky.

4l. Homicide €>45

Where defendant and son allegedly as-
saulted and killed attorney in heat of pas-
sion engendered by attorney’s threat to
send son, who was absent from army with-
out leave, to the penitentiary or Korea, de-
fendant’s right to rely on such provocation
as sufficient to reduce the homicide to vol-
untary manslaughter was no greater than
right of son.

42. Criminal Law €=59(5)

Where one interferes and espouses the
quarrel of another, he stands in place of
the other, and is as guilty of the crime as
the person who actually committed it.

43. Homicide €>341

Where jury imposed the death penalty
for murder, failure to give instruction on
voluntary manslaughter was not prejudicial
to defendant, though doubt as to sufficiency
of provocation to reduce the homicide to
manslaughter could well have been resolved
in favor of defendant.

44. Homicide €309(3)

In prosecution for murder, instruction
on involuntary manslaughter was properly
omitted in absence of any evidence on
which to base such instruction.

45. Criminal Law @=1171(1)

Improper statements and appeals to the
emotions in closing argument to jury in
prosecution for murder were not prejudicial
to defendant, where it appeared that such
statements did not affect the verdict.

46. Criminal Law @>855(7)

That deputy sheriff in the presence and
under direction of trial court asked jury
several times during the night whether
they preferred to continue their delibera-
tions or go to a hotel for the night was
not improper, though motion to have official
stenographer report such conversations was
overruled.

47. Criminal Law €=857(1)

Permitting a jury which has gone
through an all-day trial to continue their

265 SOUTH WESTERN REPORTER, 2d SERIES

deliberations practically all night without
interruption may result in an unjust verdict
from tired minds, but is not improper,
where record discloses an express prefer-
ence of jury to continue deliberations and
there is no objection.

48. Criminal Law €>633(1)

Record on appeal from conviction of
murder with imposition of death penalty
was free of any material error and dis-
closed that defendant had received a fair
trial as measured by the law and the rules
of procedure established through years of
experience as conducive to impartial jus-
tice.

Sandy Paniello, Louisville, for appellant.

J. D. Buckman, Atty. Gen., H. D. Reed,
Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

STANLEY, Commissioner.

The appellant, Roy Tarrence, and his
son, Leonard Tarrence, upon separate trials
were convicted of the murder of Francis J.
McCormick and sentenced to death. We
first consider the appeal of the father.
There is no question of guilt but there are
many questions as to the fairness and legal-
ity of the trial. Our summary disposition
of some of them is in the interest of reason-
able brevity and should not be regarded as
indicating summary consideration for every
question has been given full consideration.

To avoid prosecution for seduction, Leon-
ard Tarrence had married the girl involved
and she had obtained an order of court re-
quiring him to pay her $7.50 a week for the
support of their child. Tarrence had then
joined the army, but in a short while had
become absent without leave. Leonard’s
wife brought him before the court for fail-
ure to maintain his child and it seemed that
he was about to be returned to the army.
Francis J. McCormick, an attorney, repre-
sented the girl in all these proceedings.
The Commonwealth presented evidence
that the father and the son had become
angered at the lawyer, and upon two occa-

TARRENCE v. COMMONWEALTH Ky. 45
Cite as, Ky., 265 S.W.2d 40

sions the father, Roy Tarrence, had ex-
pressed his animosity in terms which
proved to be prophetic. He had said that
before he would let the lawyer and the girl
send his son overseas to get killed, “I’ll take
a club and beat his [the lawyer’s] brains
out.” Later at the home of a friend on
Harrods Creek he said, “that someone
should knock him in the head and throw
him in the creek.” He denied any ill-will
and the threats.

In the late afternoon of February 28,
1952, while McCormick was walking home
through an alley between Fourth Street and
Garvin Place near Oak Street carrying
groceries, which was according to his cus-
tom, the Tarrences pulled up beside him in
the father’s automobile. Both men got out
and apparently without warning or immedi-
ate provocation began beating McCormick.
They forced him into the car and drove
away. This is the evidence for the Com-
monwealth adduced by several eyewitness-
es. One of them noted the license number
of the car and this soon led the officers to
the Tarrence home.

The Commonwealth deduces from certain
evidence that the assault and abduction, if
not the murder, had been previously deliber-
ately planned.

The defendant and his son testified they
had been working on their automobile at
their home near Jeffersontown, southeast
of Louisville, during the day and that after-
noon went to a junk yard in the city west
of the point of assault to obtain a certain
article. This was corroborated by the deal-
er. They testified that on their way home
they happened to see Mr. McCormick at the
grocery. Leonard walked with him into
the alley a short distance to talk with him
amicably about getting his trouble settled,
when, according to Leonard, McCormick
replied that he was going to send him to
the penitentiary or back to the army; then
Leonard hit him with his fist and in the re-
sistance picked up a stick and struck him.
Both the father and son testified that the
father did not get out of the car until the
affray had started and then he undertook to
separate the men. McCormick became un-

conscious, The Tarrences became frantic
and put him in the car and drove around
the city for awhile until they could deter-
mine what to do. Their testimony is that
McCormick died in the car. But when
Leonard surrendered to Judge Mix, one of
the judges of the criminal branch of the
court, a few days later, he told him that he
and his father had both assaulted McCor-
mick and that he was killed at the creek
while conscious. Their formal confession
will be stated in the opinion in Leonard
Tarrence’s case.

We pass for the moment the intervening
developments.

The men took McCormick 12 or 13 miles
away to a rather remote place on Harro
Creek; weighted his body and dropped it
in a deep hole in the creek.

(1-3] Demurrer to the indictment. The
appellant’s attorney recognizes that a de-
murrer reaches only a defect appearing on
the face of an indictment. The indictment
was returned March 12, 1952. The appel-
lant points out that under the law the
grand jury had been convened on the first
Monday in that month, which was March
3, hence, he argues, it must follow that the
grand jury had been in session nine days
without an order of court extending the pe-
riod beyond six days as stipulated in the
statute. KRS 29.240; see Harrod v. Com-
monwealth, Ky., 253 S.W.2d 574. The ar-
gument is that considering the date of the
indictment with judicial knowledge of the
calendar, the defect appears on the face of
the indictment and the demurrer to it should
have been sustained. If we should accept
the premise of the argument, the conclusion
of invalidity would not follow. Unlike the
records in the Harrod habeas corpus pro-
ceeding, this record does not show that the
grand jury had been in session continuously
every day during the first week after being
impaneled nor that there was no order ex-
tending the period. Regularity in the pro-
ceeding is to be presumed. Sizemore v.
Commonwealth, Ky., 262 S.W.2d 817 is di-
rectly in point. We find no merit in this
contention.


/

46. OW

Change of venue. Before a severance of
trial was ordered, the defendants jointly pe-
titioned for a change of venue. There had
been a great deal of newspaper and radio
publicity concerning the abduction and hom-
icide and the events of the following two or
three weeks. A number of affidavits stated
that public opinion was hostile tothe de-
fendants and a number filed by the Com-
monwealth controverted this and expressed
the view that the accused men could obtain
a fair and impartial trial in Jefferson Coun-
ty. Several of the affiants who had served
on juries in the past related their observa-
tions and experiences, among which were
that many jurors do not read the newspaper
accounts or have any knowledge of sensa~
tional crimes, several of which were men-

*tioned. An extended oral hearing was had

on the motion and many representative wit-
nesses testified in support of the respective
contentions. It was shown that the Louis-
ville newspapers and radio newscasts have
wide circulation in the adjoining counties
and far beyond. The trial court filed an
opinion justifying his order overruling the
motion for a change of venue and in it
stated that if upon examination of the 150
veniremen summoned for the trial it should
appear that the defendants could not receive
a fair trial he would give further considera-
tion to the motion. In the examination of
these veniremen no prejudice or antagonism
was developed nor was any unfair influence
traceable to the publicity. Many were ex-
cused because of conscientious scruples
against the death penalty. The defendants
did not renew their motion during the
course of selecting the jury.

We have carefully considered the volu-
minous evidence on the motion. It ig not
shown there was denunciation of the ac-
cused or any expressions in the newspapers
or on the radio of a prejudicial or inflama-
tory nature that might tend to turn the
readers or listeners from an impartial atti-
tude if they should be chosen for the grave
responsibility of jury service. The publicity
was of facts and circumstances later pre-
sented in the evidence except that of the de-
fendants, which had not been previously
revealed.

265 SOUTH WESTERN REPORTER, 2d SERIES

[4-7] Every case in respect to a change
of venue must be determined on its own
state of facts. Jefferson County has a pop-
ulation of around 500,000 and a large reser-
voir of qualified jurors. This fact differ-
entiates some of our opinions in cases in
less populated counties. The evidence pre-
sented in these two cases is much like that
in Bircham v. Commonwealth, Ky., 238 S.
W.2d 1008, which was a homicide in Jeffer-
son County more calculated to inflame the
passions of the people than this one. In that
opinion and many others we affirmed the de-
cision of the trial court who in his discre-
tion overruled the several motions for
changes of venue. Action on a motion for
a change of venue is addressed to the sound
judicial discretion of the trial judge, and on
review it must be shown that it has not been
justly and properly exercised under the cir-
cumstances. Denial of the motion will not
authorize a reversal of a judgment of con-
viction where it appears from the record as
a whole that a fair and impartial trial was
given the defendant by the jury chosen.
We see no abuse of discretiun in overruling
the motion for a change of venue in these
cases and consequently no error in thi» par-
ticular.

Continuance. The indictment was re-
turned March 12, 1952. The next day the
defendant was arraigned and the trial set
for April 1. Meanwhile, hearings were had
on the demurrer to the indictment and on
motions for bail and change of venue. On
the 22nd, after a motion for severance of

the trials of this defendant, Roy Tarrence,.

and his son, Leonard Tarrence, the Com-
monwealth elected to try Roy Tarrence
first. On the day of the arraignment of the
two men, the court had appointed Mr.

Sandy Paniello and Mr. Manny Frockte as.
attorneys to represent Leonard Tarrence,.

and two other attorneys were appointed for
Roy Tarrence. A few days later Roy Tar-

rence indicated to the court that he desired:

the attorneys appointed for his son to rep-
resent him also and the other lawyers with-
drew on March 20. Thus, it appears that
the appellant was represented about a week

after arraignment by the other attorneys,

and thereafter by Paniello and Frockte.

tl

TARRENOE vy. COMMONWEALTH Ky. 47
Cite as, Ky., 265 S.W.2d 40

But from the beginning Paniello had been
actively participating in the proceedings in
behalf of both father and son. During the
19 days between the day of arraignment and
the day set for trial the attorneys had been
engaged in preparing for argument of the
demurrer and the hearing on the motion
for change of venue. Only nine days inter-
vened between the ruling and the beginning
of the trial.

[8-10] Some incidental grounds upon
which the motion for a continuance rested
in part passed out of the case. The only
point is that of insufficient time for prepa-
ration. A review of the many cases is not
necessary. They are of value as precedents
in the application of the fundamental rule,
universally recognized, that an accused per-
son and his attorney should have full op-
portunity to prepare adequately for the tri-
al. And we have observed in this connec-
tion that busy lawyers who contribute their
services without compensation under ap-
pointment of the court are often entitled to
greater consideration. Davis vy. Common-
wealth, 310 Ky. 360, 220 S.W.2d 844. In the
present case, Mr. Paniello displayed unusual
diligence and performed much hard work.
He was fully occupied, under pressure, with
the responsibility assigned to him. There
is no indication in the affidavit supporting
the motion that any other testimony in the
defendant’s behalf might be available, and
there is nothing in the record showing that
the defendant was deprived of testimony
of any material witness, or that the attorney
could have done anything more than he did
or have made a better defense had further
time been granted. The case is unlike
Johnston v. Commonwealth, 276 Ky. 615,
124 S.W.2d 1035, where we laid down the
rule that if during the course of the trial
the denial of a continuance appears to have
been unjust or to have had prejudicial re-
sults, the error ought to be corrected by
granting a new trial. It does not appear
that any prejudicial error was committed in
this respect. See Penman vy. Common-
wealth, 141 Ky. 660, 133 S.W. 540; Harris
v. Commonwealth, 214 Ky. 787, 283 S.W.
1063; Carter v. Commonwealth, 258 Ky.
807, 81 S.W.2d 883.

Challenge to the jury panel. The argu-
ment of error in overruling the defendant’s
challenge to the jury array or panel is
directed toward several claimed deviations
from statutory requirements. The argu-
ment rests upon what seems to be a misun-
derstanding of the facts; at least there are
conflicting variations.

[11-14] The regular panel of jurors in
the second division of the criminal branch
of the court having been exhausted through
challenges, the panel which had been sum-
moned for the first division was brought
into service. A special panel had been
drawn from the jury wheel and summoned.
The challenge of the special panel rests up-
on the charge made in an affidavit that the
judge in drawing the names from the drum
or wheel had deviated from the meticulous
directions of the statute. KRS 29.080, 29.-
130, 29.140, 29.180. We have held that a
substantial deviation from the procedural
steps is prejudicial error. Williams v.
Commonwealth, 254 Ky. 277, 71 S.W.2d
626; Kitchen y. Commonwealth, 275 Ky.
564, 122 S.W.2d 121; Bain v. Common-
wealth, 283 Ky. 18, 140 S.W.2d 612, In
those cases there was no contrariety in the
evidence of a departure from the prescribed
Procedure. In the case at bar the trial
court put into the record his statement to
the effect that he had selected the jurors
according to the statutory directions. We
have held that a defendant was not preju-
diced by the fact that the judge, in the proc-
ess of drawing names from the wheel, per-
mitted a deputy clerk to take down the
names so long as they were not otherwise
divulged. Central Kentucky Asylum for
Insane v. Hauns, 50 S.W. 978, 21 Ky.Law
Rep. 22. So much more is this true in the
Jefferson Circuit Court where the present
Statute places the duty upon a clerk or offi-
cial stenographer under direction of the
court to prepare a record of the drawing of
the jury panels with a provision for secrecy.
KRS 29.130(3), 29.140(2)(b). Be that as
it may, the statement of the trial judge sup-
ported by the presumption of regularity
must be accepted as revealing the facts.
Hopkins v. Commonwealth, 279 Ky. 370,
130 S.W.2d 764. The provision of the stat-


929 90 SOUTHWESTERN REPORTER. (Ixy.

have been rabbit hunting during the day.
The witnesses for the commonwealth say
that he had made Laura Brame come out to
him from her husband’s home by threats to
do her violence if she refused, and that he
detained her in front of the house and would
not allow her to return; she claiming that he
wished her to go with him, while he claims
that the subject of his conversation was a
photograph of himself which she had and
which he desired returned. James Brame
went next door to a neighbor’s, James Lewis,
and asked him if he had a pistol, to which
Lewis replied that he had not. Thereupon
Brame said, substantially: “Garth Thomp-
kins is trying to make Laura go with him, and
she don’t want to go. Go out and see if
you can’t get her away from him.” In re-
sponse to this request Annie Lewis, the wife
of James Lewis, did go out, and appellant
pointed his gun at her, but, finding who it
was, did her no harm, only saying, “Come to
me.” Annie got hold of his rifle, and started
to take it into the house; but Thompkins
drew his revolver, and told her if she did
not return it he would shoot her. She then
returned his rifle. James Lewis also came
out, and undertook to get Laura away from
appellant, and finally James Brame himself
came out. About this time Laura Brame got
away from appellant and ran into the house
of a neighbor, Frank Childs. James Brame
also left, and the Lewises returned to their
house. In a few minutes two shots were
fired in rapid succession, and when James
Lewis and other neighbors went out they
found Brame shot through the back; the
bullet having shattered his’. spinal col-
umn. He was lying on the ground; the ap-
pellant supporting his head in his lap. The
commonwealth’s witnesses, who were present
at this time, all say substantially that the
appellant explained the shooting by saying
that he did not intend to do any harm to
James Brame; that he thought it was Laura.
Upon the trial appellant claimed that it was
too dark to recognize the person at whom he
shot; but this person fired at him, and he
returned the fire, with the result as above de-
tailed. It was Christmas eve, ac there had
been much firing of pistols and guns, and ex-
plosion of giant firecrackers during the whole
day. After Brame was carried into the house
by the neighbors, appellant fled from the
state and went to work in Illinois. He was
afterwards located, and arrested by the au-
thorities in Illinois, and returned with J. W.
Powers, the deputy sheriff of Hopkins coun-
ty, without a requisition. Subsequently he
broke jail by overpowering the jailer and
taking from him his pistol, but was caught
within a few hours and returned to prison.
As to the facts it is only necessary to say that
there was ample evidence for the common-
wealth on the trial to support the verdict,
and that if its witnesses testified truly the
killing was an inexcusable murder, done ei-
ther to remove James Brame, the husband, in

order to obtain possession of Laura, or the
husband was shot believing him to be the
wife, in order to wreak revenge on her for
refusing to leave her husband and become ap-
pellant’s paramour. If appellant testified
truly, he fired the fata] shot in his apparently
necessary self-defense. The jury were the
judges of the facts, and we will not review
their conclusion.

Appellant insists that the court erred in
telling the jury, in the first instruction, that,
even if the defendant had shot James Brame
believing that he was Laura Brame, he was
guilty of murder. The indictment charges
the defendant with the murder of James
Brame in the ordinary language of such in-
struments. It is not therein set forth, as a
description of the offense, that the appellant
shot James Brame believing at the time that
he was shooting Laura Brame. Nor was it
necessary that this statement should be set
forth. It was only necessary to describe the
offense in language sufficiently plain and un-
ambiguous to inform the appellant of the of-
fense with which he was charged, and as
would enable him to intelligently prepare his
defense. That the accused thought he was
murdering Laura Brame when he shot James
Brame (it being too dark to distinguish the
one from the other) in no wise changed the
moral or legal complexion of the crime. If
one waylay and assassinate B. supposing him
to be A., the crime is precisely the same in
law as if A., the intended victim, was assas-
sinated. Appellant could not create a vari-
ance, when he was charged with the murder
of James Brame, by declaring that, at the
time he fired the fatal shot which killed the
latter, he thought he was murdering Laura
Brame. The instruction states this princi-
ple of law in clear and lucid terms, and is
not subject to the criticism of counsel. Be-
sides, it was tacitly approved on the first ap-
peal.

Appellant complains that the court permit-
ted J. W. Powers, the deputy sheriff, 8. W.
Offutt, the jailer, and Judge Wilson, police
judge of Madisonville, to testify against him;
their names not being on the commonwealth’s
subpeena or at the foot of the indictment. The
evidence of Powers was favorable to appel-
lant. It was to the effect that, as deputy
sheriff, he went for the appellant and brought
him home from Illinois; that he came with-
out a requisition, and stated that he had
killed Brame by accident. The testimony of
Offutt, the jailer, was simply as to breaking
jail by the accused, and all of his statements
were corroborated by the latter. The testi-
mony of Judge Wilson tended to impeach the
moral character of the accused. The testi-
mony of all these witnesses was clearly com-
petent, and the fact that their names were not
in the subpeena of the commonwealth, nor af-
fixed to the foot of the indictment, in no wise
injured the appellant. He did not claim that
he was surprised at their testimony, nor did

—rs--scsttt eeeitapenectetMNNpernen nen

Ky.) GOSLIN v. COMMONWEALTH. 999,

he ask additional time in which to obtain evi-
dence to rebut it. The fact that these men
were officeholders of the county, and there-
fore influential citizens, in no wise lessened
the commonwealth’s right to avail itself of
their testimony in prosecuting appellant for
the crime of which he stood charged. It is
true, section 120 of the Criminal Code of
Practice provides that, “when an indictment
is found the names of all the witnesses who
were examined must be written at the foot
of or on the indictment.” ‘The witnesses
whose testimony is complained of were not
examined before the grand jury, and there-
fore do not come within the purview of this
section; and, even if they had been, the omis-
sion of their names would only have been
cause for quashing the indictment upon mo-
tion made within proper time. Sutton v.
Commonwealth, 97 Ky. 308, 30 S. W. 661.

Appellant urges that his substantial rights
were injured by the improper language used
in the closing speech of the commonwealth’s
attorney. It seems that the attorney for the
defendant, in his argument, had given expres-
sion to a definition of the phrase “with malice
aforethought,” to which the commonwealth’s
attorney did not agree, and in undertaking
to refute it said to the jury: ‘Because you
are country people, he thinks he can ram such
as that down your throats.” We are at a
loss to know how this declaration of the com-
monwealth’s attorney could injure the appel-
lant in an illegitimate way. It may be criti-
cised as inelegant, or as lacking in courtesy
to the counsel of appellant, but it is not legal-
ly objectionable.

Just at the close of his speech, the common-
wealth’s attorney indulged in the following
exhortation to the jury, to which appellant
excepted, and of which he now complains:
“T want to know if the jury has the nerve to
do its duty in this case. Before you were ac-
cepted on this jury I asked each one of you
if you had any conscientious scruples that
would prevent your returning a verdict of
guilty and fixing the death penalty if the law
and facts justified it. I went further and ask-
ed you if you knew you could do that, and
you said you did know it; and I now ask you
to have the nerve to do your duty and return
a verdict which will hang the defendant.
Will you fail? Will you be worse than the
grand jury, which did its duty and returned
an indictment charging willful murder? Will
you be worse than the court, which has done
its duty and given you the law, which says
that you may hang the defendant? Are you
going to be worse than Mr. Laffoon (the coun-
ty attorney) or myself, who have brought you
the evidence which justifies it, and we have
the nerve to ask you to hang him? It is up
to you to say whether you will do what you
swore you could do, if the law and facts
justified it, and fix the death penalty.”
When analyzed, this excerpt from the argu-
ment of the state’s attorney means no more

223

than to remind the jury that every one else
connected with the case had performed his
duty faithfully, and to urge upon them also to
do their duty, as seen from the point of view
of the commonwealth. The trial of a mur-
der case is always exciting and dramatic, and
the closing argument of the commonwealth’s
attorney in this case was doubtless up to the
high-water mark of the enthusiasm usually
engendered by such trials. Much latitude
along this line must be allowed to attorneys
for the state, and, as said before, we do not
think that officer overstepped the boundary
of the defendant’s legal rights on the occasion
under discussion.

Perceiving no error in the record, the judg-
ment is affirmed.

(121 Ky. 698)
GOSLIN v. COMMONWEALTH.
(Court of Appeals of Kentucky. Jan. 9, 1906.)

1. INDICTMENT—SuFFICIENCY—CERTAINTY.
Under Cr. Code Prac, § 124, providing that
the indictment must be direct and certain as re-
gards the particular circumstances of the of-
fense charged, if it be necessary to constitute
a complete offense, an indictment need only
charge in ordinarily intelligible terms such
facts as will apprise the accused with reason-
able certainty of the particular offense for
which he is sought to be punished.
on age cases in 7. see vol. 27.
‘ent. . Indictment. an nformation,
193, 194.7 =

2. PERJURY—INDICTMENT—F'aLse SwWEABING—
PARTICULARS OF TRANSACTION.

_ ., Under Cr. Code Prac. § 124, requiring an
indictment to be direct and certain regarding
the particular circumstances of the offense
charged, an indictment for false swearing,
charging that on a prosecution before the judge
of the county court for gaming defendant was
sworn as a witness on his own motion, and
falsely testified that he did not play at a game
of craps with one * * in that county for
money or property, etc., sufficiently set out the
particulars of the transaction with sufficient
certainty.

3. SamE—TIME oF OFFENSE.

Time not being of the essence of the of-
fense, the false swearing need not be alleged
otherwise than that it occurred before the find-
ing of the indictment.

[Ed. Note.—Ior syn P point, see vol. 39,:

Cent. Dig. Perjury, §

4. Same—Fatse SwrarRiInc—MAatrTerR Ixqum

ED ABOUT—MATERIALITY OF ISSUE.

In a prosecution for false swearing, the
matter inquired about need not have been mate-
rial to the issue then being tried, as is necessary
in a prosecution for perjury; and it is suffi-
cient if the court had jurisdiction of the case,
administered the oath to the witness, who was
required to and did answer the question, and
that his answer was corruptly false.

[Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see vol. 39,
Cent. Dig. Perjury, § 38.]

5. SamE—GAMING—ALLEGING TIME oF PLay-
ING.

An indictment for false swearing in a
prosecution for gaming need not state when
the alleged game was played, nothing appear-
ing in the oath of the witness on that point.

6. GAMING — CRIMINAL PROSECUTION—SUFFI-
OIENCY OF EVIDENCE.
In a prosecution for gaming, evidence that

|


712 77 SOUTHWESTERN REPORTER, (Ky,

are ignorant, whether they are true or un-
true, they are as responsible as if they had
asserted that which they knew to be untrue.
Whether a party misrepresenting a fact knew
it to be false, or made the assertion without
knowing whether it were true or false, is
wholly immaterial. For the affirmation of
what he does not know or believe to be true
is as unjustifiable as the affirmation of what
is known to be false, and the same is true
where the party is negligent, or ought to have
known or remembered the truth, and did
not.” Whether appellee used ordinary care
to post himself as to the condition of Bar-
nett’s accounts before he made the statement
to appellant was a question for the Jury. For
the same reason we think the jury, under
proper instructions, should have been allowed
to determine whether the plaintiffs, prior to
the execution of the bond, knew that Bar-
nett was engaged in any gambling or specu-
lative business which would have materially
enhanced the hazard of the risk assumed by
appellant.

For reasons indicated, the judgment is
reversed, and cause remanded for proceedings
consistent with this opinion.

(i7 Ky. 138) i ;
TOMPKINS v, COMMONWEALTH.
(Court of Appeals of Kentucky. Dec. 16, 1903.)

WITNESSES—HUSBAND AND WIFE—PRIVILEGED
COMMUNICATION — SUBSEQUENT DIVORCE —
PRESUMPTION — HOMICIDE — MOTIVE — AD-
MISSIBILITY OF REBUTTING EVIDENCE—SELF-
DEFENSE—INSTRUCTIONS.

1. Where, in a prosecution for homicide, a
witness testifies that she is the widow of the de-
cedent, a presumption arises that she was di-
vorced from accused, her former husband, be-
fore marrying decedent; and hence parol proof
of the divorce, instead of the offer of the judg-
ment record, is not ground for reversal.

2. A witness in a homicide prosecution who
testifies that she is the widow of decedent is pre-
sumed to have been divorced from accused, her
former husband, before having married dece-
dent, and therefore, in the absence of evidence
rebutting such presumption, is a competent wit-
ness against accused as to matters occurring
subsequent to the divorce.

3. In a prosecution for homicide, where, to
show motive, the state offers deceased’s widow,
who testifies that she was frequently in accused’s
company under his compulsion, thereby inci-
dentally charging him with the crime, denounc-
ed as a felony by Ky. St. 1899, § 1158, of un-
lawfully and forcibly detaining a woman against
her will, it is error to exclude evidence for ac-
cused that the association between him and the
witness arose at her solicitation, and without
compulsion on his part.

4.In a prosecution for homicide, it is error
to charge, as to self-defense, that accused had
the right to kill, if there was, as it then ap-
peared to him, no “reasonably” safe means of
averting the danger of losing his life or suffer-
ing great bodily harm at the hands of the dece-
dent, since accused would not be compelled to
choose an alternative method of escaping danger
unless it promised absolute safety.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Hopkins Coun-

Garth Tompkins was convicted of murder,
and appeals. Reversed.

Lee Gibson and ©. J. Waddill, for appel-
lant. O. J. Pratt and M. RB. Todd, for the
Commonwealth.

O’REAR, J. Appellant was convicted and

sentenced to death under an indictment char.

ging him with murdering Jim Brame.

The widow of the deceased, Jim Brame,

was one of the principal witnesses against

the appellant. She had formerly been appel-

lant’s wife. She testified that she had, how-

ever, been divorced from him, and then had

married Jim Brame. Appellant objected to

the admission of parol evidence of the di-

vorce on the ground that there was neces-

sarily a record of the judgment of divorce,

and that, being the best evidence, must be

produced. This is the general rule, and, in

a proceeding involving directly the legitimacy

of the second marriage, it would doubtless
be applied. But here the main inquiry is
not whether the witness had or had not been
divorced. That question arose collaterally,
The law raises a presumption based upon ex-
isting conditions. That is, it will be presum-
ed, nothing to the contrary appearing, that
the second marriage of a person has been
preceded by a lawful dissolution of the first
one. This is partly because of the law’s fa-
vorite presumption of innocence, by which it
always supposes an act or state of being to
be lawful rather than criminal. There is
another policy of the law, no less favored
than the one first mentioned, which supports
the presumption of the legal dissolution of
the first marriage, which is the concern of
the law for the legitimacy of the offspring
of men and women, for the integrity of the
family, its honor, and a policy that favors the
capacity of inheritance. Bishop’s Marriage,
Divorce & Separation, § 1157, fairly states
the rule of practice deducible from the cas-
es, and supported by sound reason, so far
as it may be said to be a rule. He says:
“In respect of divorce, the proper direct proof
of it is by the record, if in existence and ac
cessible; otherwise, by showing the contents
of it. But marriage being a status, and di-
vorce being the annulling or modifying of it,
evidently there are various circumstances in
which record evidence can be wholly dis
pensed with. And if in the particular in-
stance the rules of evidence permit a divorce
to be presumed, as often they do, the record
cannot and need not, therefore, be shown, for,
in the nature of things, proof by record Is
never proof by presumption.” Also, see How-
ton v. Gilpin (Ky.) 69 S. W. 766. It was
therefore unnecessary to have proved in this
case, after the witness Laura had testified
she was the widow of decedent, Jim Brame,
having been married to him, that she had
been divorced from her former husband, the
appellant. There being no evidence rebut-
ting the presumption that she was legally ab-

ty.
“To be officially reported.”

solved from the marriage bonds with appeF

Ky.) TOMPKINS v. COMMONWEALTH. 713

lant, she was a competent witness against
him as to subsequent occurrences.
The xilling occurred on the night of De
cember 24, 1902. Appellant was more or less
under the influence of intoxicants. He went
to Brame’s house armed with a Winchester
rife. Laura Brame, the woman whom we
have just been discussing, testified that she
left with appellant, but that he forced her to
go. She also testified that on a number of
occasions before the killing she had been in
appellant’s company, but that he had sought
her out and compelled her to accompany him.
Appellant denied that he had ever forced or
compelled Laura to go with him, but that, on
the contrary, since his return to the communi-
ty, she had sought him out, and voluntarily
kept him company. Appellant offered also to
prove by five other witnesses that Laura had
sought appellant’s society, had sent him mes-
sages, and offered to accompany him to vari-
ous places, and that he had not sought her.
This was rejected by the trial court, which
we deem a prejudicial error. The Purpose in
allowing the prosecution to prove that appel-
lant had forced Laura to accompany him, and
on other recent occasions had compelled her
to submit to his society, was to show a mo-
tive in appellant for the homicide with which
he is charged. Otherwise the introduction of
that evidence was Prejudicially erroneous.
If the witness Laura told the truth, it tend-
ed to show that appellant was violently
enemored of her, likely producing jealousy in
him—one of the most controlling passions su-
periaducing crimtaa! violence. It further-
More showe. or tended to show incidentally
that he was thereby guilty of another statu-
tory felony—that of unlawfully and forcibly
detaining a woman against her wili, with in-
tent to have carnal knewledge of her. Sec-
tion 1158, Ky. St. 1899. At least, such an in-
ference by the jury would not have been un-
reasonable. While proof of one crime com-
mitted by the accused may be allowed as
evidence of his motive in committing anoth-
er, if it have that tendency, yet it would be
wholly unauthorized to admit such evidence
it it did not have that effect. In every view
of the case, it was therefore proper to have
allowed appellant to show that the prosecut-
ing witness’ statements were untrue; that he
had not forced her to accompany him, but
that she was voluntarily and willingly doing
80, and had time and again recently sought
his society. Although the presence or ab-
sence of the facts just discussed may not at
all have affected the fact that appellant shot
and killed Jim Brame without any lawful
Justification, they were material as affecting
his motive, and particularly so as bearing on
the enormity of the offense, probably impel-
ling the minds of the jury, if believed to ex-
ist, to affix the extreme penalty for his act,
instead of the lighter one of life imprison-
ment, or even a term imprisonment under the
manslaughter instruction, as they might have

In instructing the jury, the court gave the
law of self-defense in its instruction No. 4,
as follows: “If the jury believe from the evi-
dence that the defendant, at the time he shot
said Jim Brame, if he did shoot him, had rea-
sonable grounds to believe, either real or ap-
parent, and did in good faith believe, that he
was then in imminent danger of losing his life
or suffering great bodily harm at the hands
of said Brame, and there was, as it then ap-
Peared to the defendant, no reasonably safe
means of averting said danger, then the de-
fendant had the right, in the exercise of a rea-
sonable discretion, to shoot and kill the said
Brame; and if, under these circumstances,
he took the life of the said Brame, he is ex-
cusable on the ground and under the law of
self-defense, and the jury will find him not
guilty. The danger which authorizes one to
act in defense of his life or in defense of his
Person from great bodily harm may be either
real danger or only apparent danger.” The
act of self-defense is instinctive, and the right
of self-defense is based upon this law of na-
ture. One’s right to protect himself from im-
minent death or great bodily harm by reason
of an unlawful assault extends only so far as
to avert the impending danger. If necessary,
or apparently necessary, to take the life of
the assailant, it may be done. Whether that
is necessary may depend upon the appear-
ances to the assaulted person in the exercise
of a reasonable judgment. If, in the exercise
of such judgment, there is another means of
averting the danger that is as safe to him as
to slay his assailant, he must avail himself
of that means. He is not bound, though, to
take hazardous chances to save himself from
the assault. He owes no such duty to the as-
sailant as to take a chance of losing his own
life or limb, or sustaining other great bodily
harm, in order that the life of his wrongfu!
assailant may be spared. That would be put-
ting the balance against the innocent, and in
favor of the wrongdoer. When one assaulted
is placed in such immediate peril of his life
or limb by the wrongful assault of another,
his right of self-defense rests upon, and will
not stop short of, his own safety. Rowsey v
Commonwealth (Ky.) 76 8. W. 409; Meridit):
v. Commonwealth, 18 B. Mon. 50; Kennedy v.
Commonwealth, 14 Bush, 340. The instruc-
tion quoted seems to considerably curtail this
right of the person assaulted. It permits him
to act upon the appearances, in the exercise
of a reasonable discretion, but even then he
was not allowed to strike in the defense of his
life or body unless there was no other reason-
ably safe means of averting the danger. The
adverb “reasonably” is a qualifying word, and
modifies the adjective “safe.” Webster de-
fines it as meaning moderately or tolerably,
and that is its commonly understood meaning.
The instruction, as worded, then, would mean,
if, in the exercise of a reasonable discretion,
there appeared to the accused another means
of averting the danger to him, although such

done otherwise,

means were only tolerably safe or moderately

‘efy ‘eTTTAuostpew pesuey **Tq *Qqae9 *SNTYdWOHL

*906T“9T-£


714 77 SOUTHWESTERN REPORTER. (Ky,

safe, or in a measure safe, or partly safe, and
partly unsafe, he could not lawfully strike to
save his life or body from the assault. We
are aware of no adjudged case in the juris-
prudence of any country where the common
law prevails that justifies such a qualification
of the right of self-defense. The word “rea-
sonably,” discussed, should have been omit-
ted from the instruction.

The other matters complained of—that of
limiting the argument, and the alteration of
an instruction after the argument was fin-
ished—are practices which have been discuss-
ed and to some extent questioned by this court
in the cases of Williams v. Commonwealth,
82 Ky. 642; Harris v. Commonwealth (Ky.)
74 8S. W. 1044; Combs v. Commonwealth, 97
Ky. 24, 29 S. W. 734; Smith v. Common-
wealth, 100 Ky. 133, 37 S. W. 586; Wilhelm
v. Commonwealth (Ky.) 28 S. W. 783; Pearce
and Howell v. Commonwealth (Ky.) 42 S. W.
107. We will presume that the trial court is
familiar with these opinions, and will conform
the practice to what is therein said.

The judgment is reversed, and cause re-
manded for a new trial under proceedings not
incgnsistent herewith.

(117 Ky. 179)
SMITH v. BALLARD et al.
(Court of Appeals of Kentucky. Dec. 17, 1903.)

WILLS—CONSTRUCTION—VESTING ESTATE IN
FEE—DEATH WITHOUT ISSUE—EFFECT.

1. A will bequeathing to testator’s daughter,
free from the claim of any husband she might
have, certain real estate, but providing that in
the event of her death without bodily issue the
same should go to others, vested the fee in the
daughter, subject to be defeated if she died
without bodily issue at any time.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Oldham County.

“To be officially reported.”

Suit between Lou Bell Ballard and others
and R. M. Smith for the construction of the
will of James B. Ballard, deceased. From
a judgment for the former, the latter appeals,
Reversed.

D. H. French, for appellant.

PAYNTER, J. This appeal involves the
construction of the will of James B. Ballard,
deceased. The second clause of the will reads
as follows: “I will and bequeath to my two
daughters Lou Bell Ballard and Maud Shrad-
er formerly Maud Ballard free from the claims
of any husbands they now have or may have,
the farm on which I now reside and containing
about one hundred and sixty acres.” The
third clause reads as follows: “In the event
of Lou Bell Ballard’s death without bodily
issue then her portion of my estate shall be
equally divided between Martha Hitt wife of
John Hitt and Marietta Arvin wife of Robt
Arvin free from the claims of their said hus-
bands and in the event of the death of Martha
Hitt and Marietta Arvin before the death of

Louis Ballard my son then their said portions
shall go to Louis Ballard.”

The question which lies at the foundation of
this case is what estate Lou Bell Ballard takes
in the land devised to her. It is provided in
the will that, in the event Lou Bell Ballard
dies without bodily issue, “then her portion in
my estate shall be equally divided between
Martha Hitt,” ete. When a devise is made to
one person in fee, and in case of his death to
another in fee, courts interpret the devise over
as referring only to death in the testators
lifetime. The courts were led to so interpret
such devises, because of the absurdity of
speaking of the one event which is sure to oc
cur to every one living as uncertain and con-
tingent. 2 Jarman, Wills, c. 43. The rule is
different, however, when the death of the tes
tator is coupled with other circumstances
which may or may not take place, as, for in-
stance, death without children. In such case
the devise over takes effect according to the
ordinary and literal meaning of the words
“upon death,” under the circumstances indi-
cated, at any time, whether before or after
the death of the testator. 2 Jarman, Wills,
c. 49; Sale, etc., v. Crutchfields, etc., 8 Bush,
649. In Thackston v. Watson, 84 Ky. 206,
1 8. W. 398, the same doctrine is recognized.
The death of Lou Bell Ballard was not uncer-
tain, but the event of her death “without
bodily issue” was uncertain, for it might occur
with or without bodily issue. So, under the
plain language of the will, if her death oc
curred either before or after the death of the
testator, then the estate devised to her goes to
the persons designated in the will. Our opin-
ion is that Lou Bell Ballard took the fee sub-
ject to be defeated, if she died “without bod-
ily issue” at any time. Counsel for the ap-
pellant has not cited any authorities upon the
question involved, and the case is not briefed
for the appellee. We presume the court be
low was of the opinion that because the dev-
isee survived the testator she took the fee.
This is upon the idea that the testator intend-
ed she should take the fee, unless she died
without bodily issue in his lifetime. The court
was evidently controlled by the principle an-
nounced in Aultman Co. vy. Gibson’s Guar-
dian, etc, (Ky.) 67 S. W. 57; Ferguson v.
Thomason, etc., 87 Ky. 519, 9 S. W. 714;
Dickison vy. Ogden’s Ex’r, 89 Ky. 162, 12 8.
W. 191; Pruitt, etc., v. Holland, 92 Ky. 641,
18 S. W. 852; Mercantile Bank of New York
v. Ballard’s Assignee, 83 Ky. 481, 4 Am. 8t
Rep. 160; Forsythe v. Lansing’s Ex’rs (Ky.)
59 S. W. 854; Baxter, etc. v. Isaacs, ete,
(Ky.) 71 8S. W. 907; Lee, ete., v. Mumford,
etc. (Ky.) 44 S. W. 91; Clements v. Reese
(Ky.) 74 8S. W. 1047. In that class of cases the
rule is recognized to be, when an estate is
given or devised with remainder over, but in
the event the remainderman should die without
a child or children then to a third person, the
general rule of construction is that the words,
“dying without children or issue,” are re
stricted to the death of the remaindermen be

Ky.) DENUNZIO’S RECEIVER v. SCHOLTZ, F1i5

fore the termination of the particular estate.
This rule is not applicable to the case at bar.

This judgment is reversed for proceedings
consistent with this opinion.

(17 Ky. 182)
DENUNZIO’S RECEIVER vy. SCHOLT.
(Court of Appeals of Kentucky. Dec. 17, 1903.)

GIFTS INTER VIVOS—CORPORATE STOCK—DE-
LIVERY—WITNESSES — COMPETENCY — COM-
MUNICATION TO ATTORNEY.

1, The owner of a mercantile business decided
to incorporate the same, and on doing so one-
third of the stock was issued to an employé,
who had formerly been given one-fourth of the
profits of the business in lieu of salary. The
owner at the same time took the employé's
notes for the stock, and retained the stock as
security, but thereafter spoke of the employé’s
valuable services, declared his intention to give
him the stock, delivered the certificate to him,
and tore up the notes. Held a sufficient deliv-
ery of the subject-matter to constitute a gift
inter vivos.

2. An attorney was employed by the owner of
a mercantile business to prepare articles of in-
corporation for the business, and was at that
time told by the owner that he intended to give
an employé a certain amount of stock. Later
the attorney was employed to prepare the own-
er’s will, and was’ then told that the stock had
been given to the employé. The attorney’s ad-
vice was not asked as to the giving of the stock.
Civ, Code Prac, § 606, subsec. 5, declares that
no attorney shall testify concerning a communi-
cation made to him in his professional character
by his client without the client’s consent. Held
that, as the communications to the attorney
with reference to the gift of the stock did not
concern the matter with reference to which he
was employed, the statute did not render him
incompetent to testify thereto.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Jefferson Coun-
ty, Common Pleas Division.

“To be officially reported.” :

Action by Joseph Denunzio’s receiver
against Charles Scholtz. From a judgment
for defendant, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

Shackelford Miller and Wallace & Miller,
for appellant. Kohn, Baird & Spindle and
8. B. Sloss, for appellee.

PAYNTER, J. Joseph Denunzio died in
September, 1894, possessed of a very large
estate. In June, 1878, the appellee, Charles
Scholtz, who was then quite young, was em-
ployed by Denunzio, and continued in his
service until his death. So faithfully did he
serve his employer that he was advanced
from time to time until he was practically in
charge of the business. In September, 1893,
Denunzio was in bad health, and contem-
Plated a trip to Hot Springs, Ark. Before
going he conceived the idea of separating
his large fruit business, managed by Scholtz,
from his other business. So he concluded
to organize a corporation, and its capital
stock was fixed at $30,000. The stock was
paid for by the assets of the fruit businéss.
Previous to that time Scholtz, in lieu of a
salary, was given one-fourth of the profits
of the business. There was issued to Scholtz
$10,000 of the stock of the corporation. At

the same time Denunzio took from Scholts
five notes, of $2,000 each, without interest,
and retained the stock which had been issued
In Scholtz’s name as collateral security. The
notes which Scholtz gave were not found
among the assets of the estate, neither was
the certificate of stock. This action was
brought by the receiver, as in an action on
lost notes. The defense to it is that the
notes and certificate of stock were given by
Denunzio to Scholtz inter vivos.

The principal question involved is, dia
Scholtz show that the gift had been consum-
mated? The testimony discloses the gener-
al facts as stated, and in addition thereto
that in March, 1894, Denunzio, in his place of
business, spoke of Scholtz’s long and valu-
able services, and declared his intention to
give him the $10,000 stock in the corporation,
and then delivered the certificate therefor to
him, and tore up the notes taken from him
for the $10,000.

It is insisted on behalf of the appellant
that these facts did not constitute a deliv-
ery of the subject-matter of the gift, and
therefore the effort to make the gift was in-
effectual; that it could only have been done
by an assignment or delivery of the notes.
Several cases are cited by counsel for ap-
pellant showing that there must be a de-
livery of the subject-matter of the gift and
an acceptance of it. This is the general
rule. The mere unexecuted intention to give
of itself does not discharge an obligation.
While the notes in this case were not hand-
ed to Scholtz, they were destroyed, and the
certificate of stock actually delivered to him,
with the intention that he should have it
free from liability for the indebtedness in its
purchase. In Roche v. Jenkins, 93 Ky. 609,
20 S. W. 1039, the court upheld a gift where
the donor told his physician to tell his son
Joseph that he wanted a certain note col-
lected and the proceeds given to his sister.
In Meriwether v. Morrison, 78 Ky. 572, the
gift was upheld where the donor went to his
desk, took out the notes, and handed them to
a party, telling him to return them to the
desk, and at his death deliver them to the
party designated as the donee. In Stephen-
son’s Adm’r v. King, 81 Ky. 425, 50 Am.
Rep. 173, it was held that a delivery of an
inventory to certain property in the posses-
sion of an agent was a gift of the property.
In Southerland v. Southerland’s Adm’r, 5
Bush, 591, it was held that the gift of a
note was effectual by a declaration of the
gift, the note then being in the hands of the
trustee. In some of these cases the court
held that the act and declaration of the donor
created a trust, and the gifts were effectual.
In Darland v. Taylor, 52 Iowa, 508, 3 N. W.
510, 35 Am. Rep. 285, it was held that the
destruction of the notes, together with the
declarations of the donor that he did not
intend for the defendant to pay the debt,
constituted a delivery. In Gardner y. Gard-
ner, 22 Wend. 526, 34 Am. Dec. 340, it was


ee

220 90 SOUTHWESTERN REPORTER. (Ky.

testified that it was but a minute or two be-
hind time, and was running at the rate
of 30 miles an hour, and the engineer and fire-
man testified that as soon as the horses were
seen by them they immediately gave the stock
alarm, put on the emergency brakes, and used
every means in their power to stop the train,
and thatits speed was reduced to 12 or 18 miles
an hour by the time the collision between
the horses and the train occurred. They were
corroborated by the conductor and brakeman
as to the slackening of the speed of the train
after the stock alarm was sounded. The en-
gineer further testified that there were some
houses on the side of the railroad track that
obstructed in some sort his line of vision in
approaching the horses, and that he did not
see them until within 150 or 200 feet of them,
and when they got upon the track the train
was within 50 or 60 feet of them, and, fur-
ther, that after the horses turned and ran
down the track, they only went about 50 or 60
feet until one of them was killed. The en-
gine, he said, did not strike the other horse,
and if he was hurt by some other part of the
train he (the engineer) did not see it. The
fireman testified in substance to the same
effect, and the section boss, who examined the
place of the accident and the tracks made by
the horse that was killed, corroborated the
engineer as to the distance he ran ahead of
the train before he was struck by it.

» The question as to whether the engineer
or fireman did see, or could have seen, the
horses in time to have avoided killing the
one and injuring the other, and whether
they failed to use ordinary care to do 80,
were for the determination of the jury un-
der proper instructions from the court; and,
as there was a conflict of evidence on these
points, there was no ground furnished the
trial court for disturbing the verdict. Ill.
Cent. R. R. Co. v. Gholson (Ky.) 66 S. W. 1022;
L. & N. R. R. Co. v. Moore (Ky.) 84 S. W.
1144. As in nearly all such cases, the dam-
ages allowed by the jury were fixed at the
maximum; but as appellee’s witnesses fixed
the value of the horse that was killed at
$185 and the injury to the one that was
crippled at $100, and there was no other tes-
timony as to such values, it would hardly
do to say the verdict is excessive.

It now remains to be seen whether or not
the jury were properly instructed. It is
earnestly contended by learned counsel for
appellant that instruction No. 1 Is radically
wrong. That instruction is as follows:
“The court instructs the jury that they
should find for the plaintiff and fix his dam-
ages at such a sum as will fairly and rea-
sonably compensate him for the damage sus-
tained by him on account of the defendant’s
engine or cars striking and killing his dark
bay horse and injuring his light bay horse,
not exceeding $135 for the death of said
dark bay horse and not exceeding $100 for

the injury, if any, to his light bay horse, un-
less the jury shall believe from the evidence
that said injuries were caused by defendant
without any negligence on the part of its em-
ployés in charge of and operating said train.”
This instruction is wrong, in that it told the
jury in effect that any negligence, however
slight, on the part of appellant’s servants in
charge of the train would authorize a re-
covery. While, under the statute, the killing
or injuring of stock by a railroad train is
presumed to have been caused by the negli-
gence of those in charge of the train, and the
burden of showing that such was not the
ease rests upon the railroad company, it is
relieved of that presumption when it shows
by competent evidence that its servants used
ordinary care to avoid the killing or injury
complained of; but when, notwithstanding
the testimony of those in charge of the train
that such care was used, other witnesses
testify that they were negligent, it becomes
the duty of the jury to pass upon the question
at issue from all the evidence.

We think the other instructions given by
the court cure the error in No.1. These are
as follows:

“No. 2. The court instructs the jury that
it was the duty of defendant’s employés, in
operating said train on the occasion in con-
troversy, to exercise ordinary care, consistent
with their higher duty to preserve the safe-
ty of the passengers and property in their
custody, to avoid or prevent injury to plain-
tiff’s horses; and, unless the jury shall be-
lieve from the evidence that defendant’s
said employés in charge of said train on said
occasion exercised such care, they should find
for plaintiff as set out in instruction No. 1.

“No. 3, Negligence, as used in the in-
structions, means the failure to use ordinary
care; and ordinary care is such care as an
ordinarily prudent man would use under
similar circumstances to prevent or avoid in-
jury to his own property.

“No. 4. The court instructs the jury that
it was the paramount duty of defendant’s
employés, in charge of and operating said
train on the occasion in controversy, to look
after the safety of the passengers and prop-
erty in their charge on said train, and that
subordinate to this obligation it was their
duty to exercise ordinary care to avoid or
prevent injury to plaintiff’s horses.”

These instructions fully advised the jury
that appellant’s servants were only required
to exercise ordinary care in avoiding injury
to appellee’s horses; and as they define ordi-
nary care, and further tell the jury that negli-
gence as used in the instructions means the
absence of ordinary care, we do not think
they were misled by the error in instruction
No. 1, or that appellant’s rights were preju
diced by that instruction.

Wherefore the judgment is affirmed.

Ky.) THOMPKINS v. COMMONWEALTH. 221

THOMPKINS v. COMMONWEALTH.
(Court of Appeais of Kentucky. Jan. 4, 1906.)

1. HoMICIDE—WEIGHT AND SUFFICIENOY OF
EVIDENCE.

In a prosecution for willful murder, evi-
dence held sufficient to support the verdict.

2. | an i aoe alent OF QUESTION OF

‘ACT.

The jury having found defendant guilty
of murder and the evidence being conflicting,
the Court of Appeals will not review their de-
cision.

{Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see vol. 15,
Cent. Dig. Criminal Law, § 3076; vol. 26, Cent.
Dig. Homicide, § 701.]

8. Same — KILLING ONE wiTH DESIGN TO
Kitt ANOTHER.

That one accused of murder thought he
was murdering another person when he shot
deceased in no way changes his liability for
committing the crime.

[Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see vol.
Cent. Dig. Homicide, § 23.] fe ~

4. CRIMINAL LAW—INSTRUCTIONS — APPLIOA-
TION TO INDICTMENT.

An instruction that, even if defendant shot
deceased believing that he was another person,
he was guilty of murder, was correct, although
the indictment charged defendant with the
murder of deceased in the ordinary language,
without setting out as a description of the
offense that defendant shot deceased believing
at the time he was killing such other person.

5. Same—TRiaL—WITNESSES Not NAMED ON
SuBPa@na oR INDICTMENT.

That witnesses were called by the common-
wealth whose names were not on the common-
wealth’s subpoena or at the foot of the indict-
ment afforded no ground of objection on the
part of defendant, where he did not claim
that he was surprised at the testimony when
asking additional time in which to obtain evi-
dence to rebut; and the fact that the witnesses
were officeholders of the county in no wise less-
ened the commonwealth’s right to avail them-
selves of their testimony.

[Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see vol. 1
Cent. Dig. Criminal Law, § 19)" ‘

6. Same.

_Cr. Code Prac. § 120, providing that, when
an indictment is found, the names of all the wit-
nesses who were examined must be written at
the foot of or on the indictment, did not pre-
vent the commonwealth from calling witnesses
who were not examined before the grand jury
and whose names are not on the indictment.

{Ed. Note.—For cases in point see vol. 14,
Cent. Dig. Criminal Law, § 1416.]

7. Same—IMPROPER ARGUMENT oF COUNSEL.
In a criminal prosecution, defendant’s at-
torney in his argument had given expression to
a definition of the p “with malice afore-
thought,” with which the commonwealth’s at-
torney did not agree, and in repudiating it he
said to the jury, “Because you are country
people, he thinks he can ram such as that down
our throats.” H eld, that such remark was not
egally objectionable.
8. Same.

In a prosecution for murder, the common-
wealth’s attorney in his closing argument re-
minded the jury that the grand jury had done
its duty and returned the indictment; that
the court had done its duty and given the law,
which said that the jury might hang defendant;
that the county attorney had brought evidence
which justified it; and that it was up to the
jury to say whether they would do what they
swore they could do, so long as the facts
justified it, and fix the death penalty. Held,
that there was no ground of objection. ;

Appeal from Circuit Court, Hopkins Gounty.

“Not to be officially reported.”

Garth Thompkins was convicted of the
crime of murder, and he appeals. Affirmed.

Lee Gibson and W. C. Hopewell, for appel-
lant. N. B. Hayes and C. H. Morris, for the
Commonwealth,

BARKER, J. On the 24th day of Decem-
ber, 1902, between 5 and 6 o’clock p. m.,
Garth Thompkins shot and killed James
Brame with a Winchester rifle in Hopkins
county, Ky. He was indicted by the grand
jury of Hopkins county, charged with willful
murder, and a tria] resulted in his being
found guilty and the death sentence being
imposed. An appeal to this court resulted
in the judgment being reversed, for the rea-
sons given in an opinion to be found in 77 S.
W. 712, 25 Ky. Law Rep. 1254. Upon the
return of the case to the circuit court a re-
trial was had, and appellant again found
guilty of willful murder as charged in the in-
dictment, and the death sentence again im-
posed. Of the judgment based upon this ver-
dict appellant now complains.

Several years prior to the killing of Brame
the appellant had been convicted of the crime
of “willful and malicious shooting at with
intent to kill” and sentenced to the peni-
tentiary for a term of three years. During
the period of his incarceration his wife,
Laura Thompkins, obtained a divorce from
him and married James Brame. Upon the
expiration of his term of imprisonment ap-
pellant returned to Hopkins county, and
found that his former wife was living with
her husband, James Brame, in Bailey Row, a
miner’s settlement within the corporate limits
of Madisonville, Ky. The parties were ne-
groes, and the men at the time of the tragedy
were engaged as laborers in coal] mines in
Hopkins county. It is the theory of the
commonwealth, and the testimony of its wit-
nesses tended to show, that upon his return
from the penitentiary Garth Thompkins un-
dertook to establish illegal relations with his
former wife, Laura Brame; that he often
threatened to take her from her husband,
and forced her, under threats of death, to
go with him from her husband’s home; and
there is but little doubt that they had at
various times sexual intercourse. Appellant,
on the contrary, insists, and the evidence of
his witnesses tended to show, that the woman
was enamored of him, and much to his an-
noyance sought his company with a per-
sistence that left no doubt that she desired
to establish illicit relations with him, despite
the fact that she was the wife of another.
Without undertaking to decide which of these
two conflicting theories is true, we pass on to
the facts of the tragedy.

About 5 o’clock p. m., of the 24th of De
cember, 1902, the appellant went to the house
of James Brame in Bailey Row, armed with
a Winchester rifle and a revolver. He was
under the influence of liquor, and claims to