Rensselaer Republican, Volume 22, Number 16, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 19 December 1889 — A MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE. [ARTICLE]

A MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE.

AWMte County Jury Acmite the Man Who Tried to Murder Simeon Dowell. bn Sunday afternoon the astonishing news was received that a White county jury had accquitted Samuel Remley far his attempt upon the life of Simeon Dowell. The case came up for trial at Monticello, whither it had been sent from this county On change of venue, last Wednesday afternoon. The old man Remley and his two sons, John and William were jointly indicted but the defense elected to try them separately, and the state elected to try the old man first. The following summary of the evidence in the case is impartial and we believe covers all material points. On the evening of June 7th, last, Dowell mounted his stallion and started out from his house to exercise the animal. After proceeding a short distance he saw the three Remleys, who were neighbors of his, in or near the road, south from him, and he accordingly rode north, to avoid meeting them. He rode some distance and then turned, to return home. When a little more than a quarter of a mile from his house he encountered the two Remley sons in the road, where they had evidently placed themselves to way-lay Dowell. The latter essaycd to ride by, but the Remleys stood on each side of his horse. There is a conflict of evidence as to just what cocured here. Dowell testified that that John Remley tried to seize his horse and that he raised a revolver and said, “if you touch the horse you are a dead man.”. The Remleys swear that they did not offer to seize the. horse, but only said, “Hold on we want to talk with you a minute.” The young men then stood back, and Dowell rode on. A little further on, the Remleys say at least a 100 feet, Samuel Remley, the father, and the defendant in the case, came swiftly into the roid and intercepted Dowell. Dowell swears that Remley came with ~a~pointect revolver in his hand, which he thrust towards Dowell’s face, with the remark: “You d—d niggardly s-n of a b h now I’ve got you . and I’ll kill you.” Dowell then raised his revolver, which be had carried in his hand, but by his side and not in the sight of the old man, and both ' men began firing at , very close range, but Dowell thinks he fired the first shot. Dowell fired i three shots, all of which struck Rem-1 ley in his hand and arm. Remley fired six times. Three shots struck Dowell. One shot struck him in the shoulder, one in the middle of the back, and one in the thick of his thigh. One shot hit his clothes, one struck his horse, and the other missed entirely. Dowell although badly wounded, kept upon his horse until he reached his house. Dowell swears that Remley came towards him, at this occasion, with his revolver in his hand and extended towards Dowell. The Remley boys swore that their father’s revolver was in his pocket until after Dowell raised his. As to what Remley said to Dowell, the sons claim that they were too far away to hear. As to the positions of the two men during the firing, Dowell says that several of Remley’s shot were fired after Dowell quit firing and was trying to ride away, and that at the last shoLbyHtendey, Dowell was quite a. distance aSftty. The . Remley boys ,SJWire.it was. all doiie at close range... Dowell’s testimony on this point was fully corroborated by the testimony of Mr. Zook and wife who witnessed the shooting from their house, fifty rods distant. They both swore that Remley’s last bullets were tired at Dowell from behind him and after he was quite a distance away. After the shooting the Remleys went to the house of the old man’s son-in-law, Cyril Steele, where they remained until morning. Henry Steele, brother of Cyril, swore that Remley told him about the shooting. Said that he came to the place to protect his sons. He admitted that he had called Dowell a “niggardly s— of a b—” and said that now he had got him, but did not say that he had said he would kill Dowell. Said that he fired in self-defense. Cyril Steele and his wife testified that they did not hear Remley give this story of the shooting. Willis McColly, of Rensselaer, talked with Remley the day after the shooting. To him Remley admitted having called Dowell the niggardly &c., and saying that now he had got him. But to McColly, also, Remley insisted that he did not draw his gun first. The testimony of Ben McColly, constable of Union township, was material as to the position of Dowell when he was hit the last time, which was in the thigh. Remley was beside and to the right of Dowell when he began firing, but when he ceased he was behind, and a little to the left. McColly saw Remley in jail, a day or two after the shooting, and Remley told Ben of having made the same insulting and threatening remark, as he told to Willis McColly and Henry Steele. Remley also asked Ben if his, (Remley’s) last shot had not struck Dowell in the . Ben said not quite, but pretty near it Remley said "I thought so," and then went on to tell Ben that he aimed the last

shot at Dowell’s shoulders and exj pected “to get him,” but just as he fired Dowell’s cavorting horse made a liound which raised Dowell high out of the saddle and the bulletstruck much lower than Reinley had aimed. The shooting took place at a point quite a distance from where Dowell had seen the Remleys when he started out to exercise his stallion, and the state held that they had gone to the place knowing that Dowell must pass that way in returning home, and that they went there for the purpose of way-laying him. The Remley boys swore, however, that they I went there to see if their corn did not need replanting and to look after some Canada sorrel. The state proved, in answer to this excuse, that the Remley farm was then rented to another party and that they had nothing to do with the raising of the crop. The state offered to prove that the I Remleys had previously made many ) threats against Dowell, but the court J ruled to exclude all evidence on that I point except as to things that had ! been said within two weeks previous to the shooting. Samuel Hersliman, a most reputable Anan, by-lhe-'way, as indeed we re aII the witnesses for the state, testified ; that less than a week previous to the shooting, he had ridden home from ! Blackford with Samuel Remley, the defendant, and that Remley had i talked much about his troubles with : Dowell and said that he “would put Dowell out of the way, in less than ; two weeks, and that he had the thing ■ in his pocket to do it with.” I Jas. H. Payne testified that Remley said to him, a few days before the ■ shooting, that in less than two weeks , his, (Remley’s,) two sons would give Dowell “the damndest beating a man ever got.” The defense did not at- , tempt to contradict, impeach or i explain the evidence of either of the above mentioned witnesses, in any way, nor of any other witnesses for the state, except Dowell. The state offered to prove by Joel F. Spriggs, that one month and 5 days previous to the shooting, RemIcy threatened to kill Dowell, but this was excluded. The state had about 50 witnesses present whereby to impeach the testimony of John and William Rem--1 ley, but the court would permit only 15 to be sworn on that point. Of these 15, there were 14 who swore . that they were aequaited with John’s i general reputation for truth, veracity and morality and that it was bad. I Thirteen of them testified the same iin regard to William. One of the 15. answered that he did not know their reputation. . ■ John Ryan, now of Rensselaer, a most estimable young man, was one .of the 14 who testified to the bad i reputation of the young Remleys, j and be lived a near neighbor* to them : for 15 years. The other good men 1 who swore the same way were Squire : Joel Spriggs and his son, D. C. Prevo, ■ Logan Wood, Cornelius Shay,Squire Elias Marion, M. P. Comer, S. R. Nichols, J. L. Nichols. Jas. Comej.stL T. Iliff (township trustee.) George Daniels and Geo. Adair. The defense did not offer any testimony to con- ' trovert the opinions of these men, nor did they attempt to impeach the characters of any of the state’s witnesses. | There was no evidence showing; that Dowell had ever made any threats against the Remleys. He had been carrying a pistol for about two ; weekS"~Tt was proved, on the testimony of Squire Elias Marion and other undeniable evidence, that he had been informed of. the threats against his life, made by the Remleys. An attempt which had been made in this county and was repeated in ■ Monticello to create a political feel- ; ing by claiming that the Republicans were for Dowell and the democrats for Remley was effectually disposed of ] by the fact that several of the good i men who testified to the bad reputai tions of the young Remleys, were ' prominent Democrats. In regard to the plea of self-de-I sense, set up by the defense, the court, in one of its instructions, distinctly stated that even if Dowell did begin i the shooting, and if the jury did believe that Remley’s first shots were in self-defense, yet if he wounded Dowell after the latter had quit firing and ■ was trying to get away, then the jury ■ must bring in a verdict of guilty. The evidence of Dowell himself, of the two Zooks, the statements of Remley to Ben McColly and the position and nature of the wounds all proved conclusively tlht Dowell had ceased firing and was trying to get ' away when the last shots struck him; i and the only evidence contrary to this was that of the impeached Remley boys; but neither the evidence of the witnesses nor instructions of the court 4 upon this point appeared to have any weight with the jury. The case was given to them at noon, on Saturday and on Sunday morning they brought in a j verdict of not'guilty. As to the standing of the jury at first, they are said to have been ten for conviction and two for acquittal. Mr. Remley, the defendant, himself stated to an acquaintance in Rensselaer that the jury stood at first 8 for > conviction and 4 for acquittal. The attorneys in the case were ■ Messrs. E. P. Hammond and S. P.