Home Greene County IAGenWeb

What's New | Bios | Birth/Marr/Death | Cemeteries | Census | Courts | Directories/Lists | Families | History | Maps | Military | Photos | Resources | Schools

The Trial of Hugh McCahill
for the Murder of Nels Munson
1885-1888

The Conviction of One of the Leaders of the Angus Riots J. Horson Bee: Greene County has had eight trials for the crime of murder committed within her borders, and four convictions. The last trial prior to this term of court occurred two years ago, when a man named Higland was found guilty of the murder of his wife in Dawson township, and he is now serving a life term at Fort Madison. The trial just concluded, as relates to the man whose name heads this article, has occupied nearly a week of the present term of the district court, and is based upon the following circumstances: On the evening of the 7th of January  last, a Swede named Nels Munson was shot and instantly killed at his boarding house in Angus by a mob of striking miners. Prior to this act of violence, the striking miners had intercepted a body of  new miners twenty in number, on their way from the Standard shaft - where they were employed - to their boarding house, and by threat and violence turned them out of Angus by the Parey [?] Road. They compelled the man to kneel on the frozen ground and take an oath never to return, and afterwards those expelled miners were kicked, beaten and otherwise maltreated. About two hours after this affair, five new men employed at Keystone No. 2 (about two miles west of Angus) were surrounded in their boarding houses by a mob, the door was broken down and a number of shots fired into the house by the mob. One of the new miners - a Swede whose name was Nels Munson, was instantly killed by one of the shots fired by the mob, and at the same time and place another Swede, who was also one of the new miners, named Ole Alverson, was assaulted and beaten almost to death. The defendant in this case is charged with being one of the persons connected with the mob who killed Munson. There were about sixty witnesses examined for the prosecution and the defense, and counsel were indefatigable in their efforts to bring out every point which should weigh with the jury either pro or con in the matter. The jury were above the average of petit juries as regards intelligence and strict attention to the minute details of the evidence. Every point was contested by the counsel on both sides. The state was represented by Hon. A. B. Thornell, district attorney, and Hon. J. J. Russell, a large part of the work devolving upon the latter, as he has been connected with the case from the first, having appeared for the state in the preliminary examination before Justice Potter, immediately after the killing of Munson. The defense was conducted very ably by Messrs. W. W. Phillips of Des Moines, J. C. Merideth of Angus, and I. J. McDuffie of Jefferson. The question to be determined was whether the defendant was or was not connected with the mob who surrounded the house where Munson was killed on the evening of January 7, 1885. The state produced several witnesses who testified to having seen defendant in the mob, and on  the premises, and about the house where Munson was killed at the time and immediately after the killing. While on the contrary the defendant produced several witnesses who testified to having seen the defendant at the same hour in the town of Angus two miles away. The argument occupied two whole days, and the case was given to the jury at 5 o'clock Tuesday afternoon. The verdict of the jury was rendered about 5 o'clock Wednesday afternoon, they having been out twenty-four hours. The finding was manslaughter, and upon this declaration from the foreman the jury was polled, and each man assented to the verdict as rendered. A large crowd of citizens gathered to hear the conclusion of this great trial, the court room being more than half full. There was a fear that the jury would disagree, a result greatly to be deplored. As against such a conclusion, the verdict was well received. Mr. McDuffie promptly made a motion for a new trial and asked the judge for a hearing in the matter. At the convening of the court in the evening it was ordered that arguments relative to a new trial be made before the judge in this city on the   5th day of February next. Until that date the prisoner is released on former bail, $5,000. We are glad of this verdict, for it is a victory for law and order, and says that the law must and will protect property and human life. An acquittal would have said the reverse. Source: Daily Nonpareil, Council Bluffs, December 12, 1885 HOMICIDE BY MOB -- EVIDENCE OF MOTIVE -- CONSPIRACY. Iowa Supreme Court, December 3d, 1886. STATE V. McCAHILL On a trial for murder, in which the evidence shows that the defendant was with a mob of miners which surrounded a house, and tried to drive other miners out of it by firing several shots into the house and inside the house, and other acts of violence, during the perpetration of which deceased was killed, but fails to show that the defendant fired the shot, evidence of the facts and events of a strike, and of a conspiracy to drive out new men who had been brought in to work the mines, which led up to the fatal attack on the house, is admissible. Where, on a trial for murder, it is shown that a mob of miners on a strike, in carrying out a conspiracy to drive away new men who had been brought in to work the mines, surrounded a house in which deceased was, and fired shots into the house, and inside it, killing deceased, evidence of threats to kill a superintendent of the mines who was in the house, followed by immediate firing, made during the attack, but subsequently to the killing of deceased, is admissible as showing the desperate character of the mob, and that murder was part of their programme. In a trial for a murder committed by a mob of miners on strike, in carrying out a conspiracy to drive out new men, an instruction to the effect that if the defendant was engaged in a conspiracy to forcibly compel the new men to leave, and in carrying out of such conspiracy the act of homicide was committed, such homicide was binding upon him as much as if done by himself, is not error. Appeal from District Court, Greene county. Trial for murder. Verdict of manslaughter. Defendant appeals. The defendant, Hugh McCahill, was indicted for the crime of murder in the first degree. Upon trial he was found guilty of manslaughter, and sentenced to imprisonment in the penitentiary for three years. He appeals. No appearance for appellant. For the state, A. J. Baker, Attorney-General. Adams, C. J. The case is submitted to us upon a transcript of the entire record, without abstract, argument or assignment of errors. We have, however, examined the case as best we could, without the aid of counsel, and will proceed to notice some of the matters which we think it is possible are relied upon for a reversal. 1. The regular panel of jurors summoned for the term consisted of twenty persons, but two had been excused, and the court was proceeding with eighteen jurors. When this case came on for trial, one jury was out deliberating upon its verdict in a case, upon which jury were nine persons belonging to the regular panel, leaving only nine of the panel for the trial of the defendant. The defendant asked the court to delay until those of the regular panel who were out could be in attendance, or that additional persons be drawn from the jury lists.  The court refused the request, and ordered the jury to be filled from the bystanders, or from the body of the county. To the action of the court in this respect, the defendant excepted. It was competent for the court to discharge two jurors of the regular panel, and proceed with eighteen, if, in the judgment of the court, the business of the term did not require more. Code Section 233. We will presume that in the judgment of the court eighteen was deemed sufficient. A larger number being required when this case came on for trial, it was competent to summon jurors from the bystanders or the body of the county. Code, section 4396. 2. On the night of the 7th of January, 1885, a dwelling-house in the town of Angus, Greene county, was surrounded by a  mob, and entered, and one of the inmates, Nels Munson, was shot and killed. The evidence tends to show that defendant was one of the mob, and took an active part in entering the house, but the evidence fails to show that he was the one who fired the fatal shot. The difficulty which resulted in the homicide grew out of a miner's strike. A large number of the coal miners in and about Angus struck, and left their employment, as early as October, 1884. Various attempts were made by the proprietors of the mines to supply the places of the striking miners by the importation of new men. The plans of the proprietors were constantly interfered with by the striking miners, and many of the new men were caused to leave. Matters, however, did not assume a very turbulent appearance until about the 11th of December 1884. A considerable number of new men had been imported upon the 10th of that month. The striking miners appeared at once, and requested of the proprietors that they be allowed access to the new men, for the purpose of persuading them to leave. The proprietors acceded to their request, so far as to consent that a committee or representation from the striking miners should have access to the new men, and be allowed to talk to them, and that the new men should, after that, be allowed to act freely in the matter, and stay or leave as they should think best. On the morning of the 11th of December the striking miners were allowed to present their case to the new men. many words of persuasion were used to induce them to leave, and a few words of intimidation. But the words of intimidation were not approved by all the striking miners, and some expressly disclaimed any intention of using violence. The new miners, after the interview which was had with them, took a vote, and decided to remain. The result was very unsatisfactory to the striking miners. They began at once to show appearances of anger, and commenced the use of abusive language towards the new men, and to demand admittance into the house where they were, and to assume a threatening attitude toward them. The proprietors were led to believe that they would not, without assistance, be able to protect the new men from violence, and one of them went to a telephone and communicated with a telegraph station and asked that a request be sent to the governor for troops. The fact that such message had been sent became known to the striking miners, and their tumultuous assemblage was soon dissolved. To use the language of one of the witnesses, "it soon melted away." Troops were furnished, but soon withdrew. The withdrawal seemed to furnish an occasion for the renewal of hostilities on the part of the striking miners. The evening of the 7th of January was selected as the time for making an effective demonstration. They assembled in large numbers, and, as the evidence tends to show, the defendant was among them, taking an active part. They first assailed a gang of men on their way home at night from what is called the "Standard Coal Bank." They no longer resorted to persuasions, but to violence. They wounded several of them and drove them out of the town and to some distance away, and the assailed finally took refuge in the town of Perry. The evidence tends to show that the defendant was not only among the assailants, but used force in compelling the men to leave. The assailants returned in a short time and surrounded and entered the house in which Munson was killed. Several shots were fired into the house, and inside of the house shots were fired up the stairway in the direction of the chamber in which some of the inmates had taken refuge. The mob in the meantime clearly announced their purpose to compel the new employees to leave their employment. After the survivors had consented to do so, the mob retired in a body, but not without threatening, as they passed away, to take the life of one Markham who was present, a superintendent of one of the mines, and several shots were fired, apparently with the design of carrying out the threats. In the course of the trial a very large number of objections were interposed by the defendant to the admission of evidence, some of which were overruled. The evidence, which was admitted over the defendant's objections, tended to show the history of the trouble as set out above, a considerable part of which took place before there were any acts of violence on the part of any one and before it is certain that any acts of violence were contemplated. But, in our opinion, it was proper to trace the growth of the conspiracy from the beginning. The character and purpose of the combination before it became unlawful had a tendency to shed light upon its acts afterwards. Of course, if the defendant had withdrawn from the combination before it became unlawful, he would not have become a conspirator; but the evidence tends strongly to show that he did not withdraw but remained to the end. In view of the whole case, we are unable to say that the evidence objected to was inadmissible. 3. The defendant objected to the admission of evidence of threats to kill Markham. Their  threats were made after the killing of Munson. But the threats characterized the firing which immediately followed, and the whole was done in the execution of the single purpose for which the mob was formed, and that was the prevention of the employment of new men. It tended to show the desperate character of the mob and that murder had been made a part of its programme. 4. The court gave an instruction in these words: "It is proper for you to consider the situation fully, as the evidence develops it; the trouble, if any, which existed between the old miners and their employees; the fact, if it is a fact, that a strike existed among the old miners, and the extent and purpose thereof; the conduct of the striking miners, and the extent and purpose thereof; the conduct of the striking miners towards the new ones, and all other acts of the parties, in so far as they are shown and are shown to be within the knowledge of the defendant, but no others. The conduct or declarations of other parties, except such as are shown to be in the presence of the defendant, are not competent as against him to establish either the existence of a conspiracy, or the defendant's connection with it; but if a conspiracy is shown, and the defendant's connection with it as one of the conspirators is established, then the act of any one, done in carrying out the purpose of the combination, is competent, as against the defendant, and binding on him, the same as if done by himself." We have set out the foregoing instruction partly for the purpose of showing the guarded manner in which the jury was instructed in regard to the application of the evidence, and partly for the purpose of noticing a rule of law to the correctness of which we presume that the defendant's counsel do not assent. In the absence of all argument, we are not permitted to know what their position is, but we presume that they rely largely upon the fact that it does not appear from the evidence that the defendant was the one who did the shooting, or that it was understood by him that any one was to be murdered. Perhaps the most that the jury could have inferred from the evidence was that the defendant had formed, with others, a combination to forcibly compel the new men to leave their employment. We think that they might have inferred that much, because the evidence tends to show that the defendant actually used force in compelling others to leave on the same evening, and the evidence shows, beyond controversy, that the combination designed that all should leave. We think that this much can be said in regard to the defendant's designs, and perhaps not much more. It is possible, then, if not probable, that he contemplated driving out Munson, and those with him in the house which was mobbed, in the same way in which the miners from the Standard Coal Bank had been driven out about two hours before, and fire-arms had not been resorted to in the case of those miners. But where there is a conspiracy to accomplish an unlawful purpose (as the forcible driving out of the new miners was), and the means are not specifically agreed upon or understood, each conspirator becomes responsible for the means used by any co-conspirator in the accomplishment of the purpose in which they are all at the time engaged. See 1 Bish. Crim. L., section 636, and the cases cited. Whether, in case the defendant was not the one who fired the fatal shot, he was guilty of the same degree of crime as the one who did, we need not determine. The defendant was convicted only of manslaughter. The most which the instruction held was that if the defendant was engaged in the conspiracy in which the homicide was committed, the act of homicide was binding upon him, the same as if done by himself. By this the court evidently meant that the defendant would not properly escape conviction for the act. The degree of his guilt was a different question, and as to that we need not, under the verdict, express any opinion. We have examined the entire record and find no error. Affirmed. The supreme court has affirmed the decision of the district court of Greene county, and Hugh McCahill, found guilty of manslaughter and sentenced to imprisonment for three years, will serve out his sentence. He was a member of the mob of the 6th of January, 1885, that entered the home of Nels Munson, at Angus, and shot and killed him. Source: Audubon County Republican, December 16, 1886 November 8, to take effect November 26, 1888. Committed to the penitentiary June 28, 1887, under a sentence of the district court of the county of Greene, for three years, for the crime of manslaughter. This case grew out of the riotous proceedings in the neighborhood of Angus, in 1884 and 1885. The deceased, Nels Munson, was killed by a crowd shooting into a house. Several persons, McCahill included, were indicted for conspiracy to assault, and two others were indicted with him for the murder of Munson. Subsequent to McCahill's conviction, the cases against all the others were dismissed. Petitions from 125 residents of Rippey and vicinity, 123 persons at and near Angus, and from seventy other citizens of Greene county, are presented for this pardon. Z. A. Church (county attorney), Mrs. Turrill (county superintendent), and John J. Russell (who assisted the prosecution at the trial) urge the exercise of clemency, as do also the representative and the supervisors of the county. It would seem as if a desire to punish somebody for the reckless killing of Munson had not a little to do with the prosecution and conviction of McCahill. He appears to have been one of the crowd of people from which came the fatal shots; and could not consequently be looked upon as entirely innocent. His neighbors, however, speak of him as a man of previously good character; and the condition of his family of wife and five young children affors an additional reason for giving him his liberty, and opportunity to justify the favorable opinion entertained of him by his neighbors.

Site Terms, Conditions & Disclaimer