The Watt-schwartz Case

It was the instant and unammous verdict of the jury that tried Watt and Schwartz that botli were guilty of the ' atrocious naurder of Kellogg Nichols. Such a conviction was forced probably, upon the minds of roost persons who : followcd the trial as reportad in the newspapers. The verdict was : pnmeut for life. If these men wero ■ guilty the death penalty might more properly have been pronounced npon them, for the killLng of a brave man engaged in the faithful performance of ,i duty, defending Iris trust fearlessly and aggressively until stricken down I by vulgar robbers who, for protection, j probably, from the consequencesof their ci"ime, became assassins, was not only an atrocious, it was also a despicable crilne. The mere robbery would have justified the imposition of a long term of imprisonment upon the oOenders. The crime, deepened into murdcr, is not suiïïciently condemned, the assasskis are not adequately punished, short of the gibbet, It is odd, then, that where there was such unanimity of conclusión as to tho guilt of the acensed and a sentence which might be regarded as mercifiil onder the circumstances, any suggestiou should be offered that the punishment named by the jury is extreme. The prisoners are entitied to the usual review, but upon ! tho iinding of their guilt, n findlng ' generally conceded to accord with the fact, that they aro ent tled to no consideration whatever. lf guilty, they may thank their stars that the jury has been so lenient as to giye them a life sentence. The case seems to havo been fairly tried. The state was zealoos and in defatigable. The defense was the strongest that conld be made. It is highly improbable that the jui'y has erred. To seek sympathy for the prisoners while ■ admitting their gxült is ridiculous. Jn the h rriblo crime there wasn't a single mitigating eircumstance.