Newspapers: Court Proceedings: Commonwealth vs. Ralph Kramer, 1919-20: Chester Co, PA Contributed for use in USGenWeb Archives by Robert C Flipse. flipse@nosc.mil USGENWEB NOTICE: Printing this file by non-commercialindividuals and libraries is encouraged, as long as all notices and submitter information is included. Any other use, including copying files to other sites requires permission from the submitters PRIOR to uploading to any other sites. We encourage links to the state and county table of contents. From Daily Local News September 15, 1919. QUARRY SUPT. DIES BY BULLET. Ralph Kramer, Cedar Hollow, Under Arrest on Charges of Murder. Hearing May Develop Family Complications, as Neighbors Say -Both Were Well Known in Chester Valley - Early Morning Murder. John Humes, Superintendent of the Lime Quarries at Cedar Hollow, was shot and instantly killed this morning about 6 o'clock. Ralph Kramer, a young white man, residing in that section, has been arrested as suspected of having committed the deed. Humes, who is about 33 years of age, is married and has three small children. He has been employed at the quarries for the past 18 years and was highly respected by the entire community. The story as told by an official of the quarries this morning is as follows: Humes lives with his family near what was formerly known as Tablet, a small settlement near the quarries. He was regarded as one of the most promising of the employees of the company. This morning he arose as usual and after dressing went to a small shed at the rear of his home to get some wood and as he stepped into the shed and held the lantern he was carrying aloft, to see where he was going, a shot rang out and Humes fell to the ground dead, with a bullet through his heart. Mrs. Humes hearing the shot, hurried to the side of her husband and then finding him dead hurriedly called for aid. Word was sent to Malvern and constable Ezra King, Magistrate H. Moegan Ruth and others hurried to the scene of the crime. Word was also sent to Coroner John S. Garrett and County Detective Wm. Mullen and the latter with District Attorney Truman D. Wade left immediately for the place. The arrest of Ralph Kramer, a young man followed closely after the shooting, and, it is said, that Mrs. Humes claims that Kramer did the killing of her husband. Inquiry of others residing in that section reveals the fact that strong suspicion points towards Kramer being the guilty party. It is also hinted that some startling developments in the case may occur after the county officials arrive and commence their investigation. The entire community is much agitated over the occurrence for Humes had the respect of the entire neighborhood and his employers at the Charles Warner Company are eager that the guilty person be persecuted for the wanton act. Daily local News Tuesday 16 September 1919. KRAMER ADMITS KILLING HUMES Prisoner Says He Shot in Self Defense While in Woodshed. Had Been Familiar at Home for Two Years and Was Waiting for Husband to Leave House, at Cedar Hollow. Ralph Kramer, the youth who was arrested yesterday, charged with killing John Humes, the Superintendent of the Lime Quarries at Cedar Hollow , early yesterday morning, made a full confession yesterday afternoon to Assistant District Attorney H. L. Sproat, admitting the taking of Humes' life. Also the youth, who is only 20 years of age, recited a sordid tale of an acquaintance he had had for over two years past with Mrs. Humes. It was a sad story of a faithless wife and the ending of a husband's life which should not have been taken under the circumstances. The story of the shooting appeared in yesterday's News, and as stated, Mr. Sproat and County Detective Wm. Mullen learning of the murder, left at once for Cedar Hollow, where they found on their arrival, found the entire community aroused over the killing of one of the most popular men in that section. Indeed, the feeling was so strong against Kramer that for a time it was feared that some of the weeping Italians who worked under Humes might take the law into their own hands. After Mr. Sproat and Mr. Mullen had made a survey of the place, they went to Malvern to the of Magistrate H. Morgan Ruth and there was brought Kramer. The youth was thoroughly frightened at the predicament he was in and cried frequently, while Mrs. Humes fainted several times. Coroner John S. Garrett empanelled a jury, and after listening to the evidence of Mrs. Humes rendered a verdict that John Humes came to his death as the result of bullet wounds inflicted by Ralph Kramer. With the Coroner's inquest over, Kramer, after a short time, was induced to tell his story of the crime. He stated that he had known the Humeses for some time past and for two years at least he had been secretly meeting Mrs. Humes. A short time ago Mr. Humes had caught the two together and had warned Kramer that if it occurred again that he would give Kramer a good thrashing, and with this warning Kramer purchased a revolver which he loaded and carried with him and it was with this weapon he ended the life of the man he had betrayed. It appears that on Sunday evening he met Mrs. Humes and he claims she made a date to meet him yesterday morning after the husband had gone to work at the quarries and so Kramer arose at 5:30 and went to the Humes home, where he secreted himself in the shed and waited for Humes to leave the house. Humes arose and ate his breakfast and was about to go when he decided to get a sweater hanging in the shed and so walked to the place and when he opened the door he saw Kramer. Kramer says he made a dash for him and the two fell to the floor and that Humes gave him several hard blows to the face and in self-defense he shot the man. This part of the story is not credited by the officials, who believe that Kramer deliberately shot Humes as he entered the door. Mrs. Humes on hearing the shots, ran from the house to her husband's side and as he lay there she says he exclaimed, "Get a light, I am shot," and then gasped and died. The wife asked Kramer if he had shot Humes and he replied he had and then he left. Mrs. Humes summoned aid and the body of the dead man was carried to the house and Kramer was shortly afterwards placed under arrest. When Kramer left the Humes place he threw the revolver with which he had committed the murder , into a clump of bushes alongside the road and it was later in the day found by Constable Ezra King, who worked on the case. Neighbors in that section say they have been looking for just such an outcome to the dual life that the wife led. They state the murdered man was a good and kind husband and father, and tried to trust the wife. Mrs. Humes is considerably younger than her husband and rather good looking. She cried continually yesterday during the Coroner's inquest and in a dramatic manner pleaded to be allowed to die also. Kramer was brought to this place and lodged in prison without bail and will be given a hearing some time next week. He was much dejected when brought to prison. Mrs. Humes was put under $500 bond as a material witness. The dead man was about 42 years of age and was of a jovial nature and seemed happiest when in the company of his wife and children. Kramer is about 20 years of age single and a son of Mr. And Mrs. Harry Kramer, of near Devault. From Daily Local News Tuesday 16 September 1919. HUMES- In Tredyffrin township, on Monday, September 15 John M. Humes, in the 32nd year of his age. Relatives and friends of the family are invited to attend the funeral without further notice from his late residence on Thursday September 18, 1919. Services at the house at 10:30 am. Interment at Morris Cemetery. Daily Local News 24 September 1919. RALPH KRAMER MUST ANSWER FOR MURDER Wife of Victim Is Held as Material Witness for the Grand Jury. Hearing Yesterday Afternoon was Brief and Statement of Kramer was Sufficient to Hold Him for a Trial. Ralph Kramer, of near Devault, aged twenty years, and for three years according to his statement, held in the clutches of Mrs. John M. Humes, mother of three children and wife of the superintendent of the Cedar Hollow Lime Company's quarries, who was shot to death in the most brutal manner by Kramer on the morning of Monday, September 15th, was taken from the Chester County Prison yesterday afternoon by Constable Ezra King, who had arrested him on the murder charge, and escorted to the office of the Justice of the Peace H. Morgan Ruth, of Malvern, where he was given a brief hearing and sent back to a cell in default of bail for the action of the Grand Jury at the next turn of criminal court. Mrs. Humes was also held in $500 bail as a material witness. Although the authorities declare that the woman is morally guilty of participation in the murder they have no evidence that she was connected either in any plot or the actual commission of the deed and no charge has been made against her. At the hearing, which occupied but a short time late in the afternoon, Dr. W. L. Hamilton testified that he had performed an autopsy at the request of the Coroner and District Attorney and had found that Humes had been shot twice, once in the abdomen and again near the heart, either wound being sufficient to have caused death. The shots had been fired at such close range that there were powder burns about the wounds. Constable King identified and read the statement made by Kramer to the authorities after he had been arrested and it was identical with that made by him at all times since the shooting. Kramer said he had been intimate with Mrs. Humes since he was seventeen years of age and had visited her on many occasions when her husband was absent and had met her at many places in addition to meeting her in the Humes home. He said he had arranged on Sunday afternoon September 14th to meet her at her home after her husband had left for work at the quarries and went to the house for that purpose. While in the yard Humes appeared carrying a lantern and Kramer hid in a shed which his victim entered to procure a sweater to wear to work. Kramer declared they met and a fight ensued during which Humes fell on him but he had managed to shoot him twice in the struggle with a revolver he had purchased recently in Phoenixville. Mrs. Humes appeared after the shots had been fired and asked Kramer to assist in carrying her husband to the house, but he refused and fled to his home where he was arrested soon afterwards by officers summoned by the widow of the dead man. Kramer seemed to take little interest in the proceedings and paid but slight attention to Mrs. Humes although the two spoke as they first met in the office. He was back in a cell within two hours after leaving for the scene of the hearing. Daily Local News January 29 1920. Court room, no. 1, was filled with spectators this morning at ten o'clock, when was called for trial the case of Commonwealth vs. Ralph Kramer, twenty years of age, charged with having shot to death early on the morning of September 15th last, John Humes, Superintendent of the Cedar Hollow lime quarries. The prisoner is a young white man, son of Harry Kramer, of near Devault. THE HISTORY OF THE CASE A brief history of the case, as published in the Local News at the time of the crime is as follows: Kramer had known the Humeses for some time past and for two years at least he had been secretly meeting Mrs. Humes. A short time ago Mr. Humes had caught the two together and had warned Kramer that if it occurred again that he would give Kramer a good thrashing, and with this warning Kramer purchased a revolver which he loaded and carried with him and it was with this weapon he ended the life of the man he had betrayed. KRAMER ARRAIGNED. The young murderer was brought from the prisoners' pen and took a seat at the counsel table beside his attorney, W. W. MacEltree, Esq. He appeared frightened and dejected, sitting with eyes downcast upon the table before him. When formally arraigned by Clerk of the Courts Few, He stood up, and, on being advised by his counsel, he pleaded "not guilty" in a low voice, and stated he desired to be tried by his God and country. JURORS CALLED. The jurors as called were questioned as to whether they have conscientious scruples against capital punishment, and whether they had formed an opinion on the case. James H. Dawson, Contractor, Easttown, was first called. He had no conscientious scruples against capital punishment; he had formed an opinion from reading Local News, but it was not fixed: he would take that opinion into the jury box, and it would require strong evidence to remove that opinion. Challenged for cause by defense, but Judge Hause ruled the juror was competent, yet sustained the challenged. Morton Fulton, farmer, West Pikeland-has scruples against capital punishment. He said he was ill, and was excused. Herbert Ash, lumberman, Downingtown-has conscientious scruples, Challenged. Wm. H. Stohl, merchant, Phoenixville-has scruples; has formed fixed opinion which he expressed; can't be changed. Challenged for cause by defense, Harry Stauffer, farmer, Spring City-has scruples and could not render verdict of guilty. Challenged. Brooke Lewis, farmer, Easttown (Berwyn)-has no scruples, nor an opinion on the case. He had read of the crime. In reply to District Attorney Windle, he said he is opposed to capital punishment. Challenged. Samule Boone, farmer, East Nottingham-has no scruples, nor opinion. He had not read of the crime. Accepted by Commonwealth; challenged by defense. Charles Sagebeer, merchant, Phoenixville-has no scruples, nor opinion. He has lived in Phoenixville for forty years, but when a boy lived at Chester Springs. He does not know the defendant. Challenged by the Commonwealth. 1. 1. 1. THOMAS P. WORTH, farmer, West Bradford (Marshallton)-no scruples, nor opinion; has wife but 1. no children; owns farm and three houses, Accepted by Commonwealth and defense as Foreman of the jury. George S. Holland, farmer, EastWhiteland-has no scruples, but has fixed opinion. He is a neighbor of the defendant. 2. LEVI AMMON, insurance agent, Honeybrook borough, has no scruples nor opinion. He has a wife and two children, and own his home; never heard crime discussed; he is 39 years of age; born and raised in Honeybrook; does not know defendant. Accepted by Commonwealth and by the defense as juror No. 2. George W. Channell, photographer, East Pikeland, has scruples; challenged. Mark Trego, wheelwright, Glen Moore, Wallace Township, has no scruples, nor opinion. He owns house and shop; is married; has lived in Glen Moore for 26 years, after removing from Pottstown. He has not read of the crime. Accepted by Commonwealth, but challenged by defense. J. Arthur Smale, ironworker, North Coventry, has scruples. Challenged. Harry W. Geiger, Justice of Peace at Elverson, has scruples because he doesn't believe in taking life. Challenged. 3. CLIFTON PRIZER, farmer Nantmeal, has no scruples nor opinions. He owns farm; is married, and has several children. He has read of the crime. He does not know defendant. Prizer is 62 years of age. Part of his property is in South Coventry township. Accepted by Commonwealth and defense as juror No. 3. 4. WM. H. HUSTON, farmer, East Vincent, has no scruples nor opinion. He owns farm and has a family. He read only the headlines in the newspapers of the crime. He has lived in East Vincent for 44 years. He does not know the Kramer family. Accepted by Commonwealth and by defense as Juror No. 4. 5. HERSHEY QUILLEN, farmer, Lower Oxford, has no scruples nor opinion; never heard of the crime. He owns farm and has family; does not know Kramer and has always lived in lower end of the county. Accepted by Commonwealth and defense as Juror No. 5. Amos Strickland, farmer, lower Oxford, has no scruples nor opinion; has not heard of the crime; he owns farm and has wife and 11 children; he does not know the Kramer family. Accepted by Commonwealth but challenged by defense. Samuel McAllister, farmer, West Bradford, has scruples; challenged. John McGraw, merchant, Downingtown, has no scruples; has opinion, not fixed but could be changed by strong evidence. Challenged for cause by Commonwealth. Emerson Wade, farmer, North Coventry, has fixed scruples based on the ten commandments. 6. JOHN R. BINGAMAN, gentleman, West Chester, has no scruples nor an opinion; he has family; he does not know Krames nor Humes family. Accepted by Commonwealth and defense as Juror No. 6. Robert Deery, laborer, West Vincent, has scruples. Challenged. A. C. Fox, tinsmith, Elverson, has no scruples nor opinion; he is married and has eight children; he does not know defendant. Challenged by Commonwealth. Isaac Meredith, farmer, West Whiteland, has no scruples, has opinion from reading of the crime; he would be influenced by the evidence. Challenged for cause by the Commonwealth. 7. HARRY J. WICKERSHAM, farmer, West Bradford, has no scruples, has read of the crime; had an opinion, not deep-seated; he would be influenced by the evidence. He had read the Local News. He is 47 years of age; has a family and lives on his mother's farm. He does not know Kramer family. Challenged for cause by the Commonwealth, but challenge overruled by Court (Judge Hause). Accepted by the Commonwealth and the defense as Juror No. 7 Still on trial. Daily Local News 30 January 1920. The case of Commonwealth vs. Ralph Kramer, the young white man, of Devault, charged with the murder of John Humes, the superintendent of the Cedar Hollow lime quarries, in September last, which was opened in Court Room, No. 1, with Judge J. Frank E. Hause, on the bench yesterday morning, attracted a large crowd of spectators, and the spacious Court room was thronged throughout the day, many persons standing for hours in the aisles along the sidewalls and in the aisles between the sections of seats. Kramer sat at the table beside his counsel, W. W. MacElree, Esq., and displayed little interest in the proceedings, sitting almost unmoved with his eyes cast upon the table before him. MRS. HUMES IN COURT ROOM. Mrs. Humes, the widow of the murdered man, during the afternoon, occupied a seat on the front row of the center section, with several women friends. She appeared to be laboring under the strain incident to such an ordeal. She will be called as a witness for the Commonwealth, with about twenty others. When the Local News went to press yesterday at noon, only seven of the desired twelve jurors had been accepted by counsel, and the work of securing other jurors was continued as follows: Frank A. Young, carpenter, Charlestown, lives near the scene of the crime; was excused. Elmer Fertig, farmer, Charlestown, has scruples. Excused. I. V. Kirk, yardmaster, Coatsville, is not opposed to punnishment for cold-blooded murder, "If not too severe," he told Judge Hause. He has fixed opinion. Challenged for cause by Commonwealth. Wm. Floyd, florist, West Grove, has scruples, challenged. H. C. Ford, undertaker, Coatsville, has scruples, challenged. Leo A. Gotwals, clerk, Phoenixville, has no scruples, had an opinion that was fixed. Challenged for cause by Commonwealth. B. Harry Warren, gentleman, West Chester, favored capital punishment, has fixed opinion. Challenged for cause by Commonwealth. 8. JOSEPH B. SCOTT, clerk, Coatsville, has no scruples, had an opinion but would render verdict in accordance with the evidence. He does not know Kramer family. Accepted by Commonwealth and by defense as Juror No. 8. 9. HARRY D. JONES, farmer, Honeybrook Township, has no scruples nor opinion. He owns a farm of 113 acres and has a family. He has lived 60 years on the same place. He does not know the Humes or Kramer family. Accepted by the Commonwealth and defense as Juror No. 9. Frank Graeff, superintendent, Kennett Square, Has no scruples, nor an opinion, he is married and has three children; he is employed at Supplee creamery. Challenged by Commonwealth. Robert Sloyer, gentleman, Phoenixville, has no scruples, nor fixed opinion; he has read the newspapers. His opinion would require strong evidence to decide the case. Challenged by Commonwealth. Abner W. Few, liveryman, West Chester, has scruples. Challenged. George Morse, carpenter, Tredyffrin, has no scruples, nor opinion. He has read of the crime in the Local News. He has lived in Tredyffrin for 44 years; he is not married. Challenged. John Miller, P. & R. R. brakeman, Coatsville, has no scruples, nor opinion. He has two children; he is 42 years of age. He read casually of the crime but never talked about it. Challenged. Elwood Vanderslice, farmer, Schuylkill, has scruples. Challenged. James Hurtt, blacksmith, West Chester, has scruples. Challenged for cause by Commonwealth. George C. Chambers, farmer, West Bradford, has scruples. Challenged. George Pyle, farmer, East Fallowfield, has scruples. Challenged. 10. M. S. HICKMAN, farmer, Westtown, has no scruples, nor opinion. He owns farm and has lived there 25 years; he has a family. He read of the crime in the Local News. He does not know Kramer. Accepted by Commonwealth and defense as Juror No. 10. Harvey C. Lysle, farmer, Franklin, has scruples. Challenged. Harry J. Strictland, farmer, Lower Oxford, had no scruples, nor opinion. He owns 70-acre farm, and has a family. Accepted by Commonwealth, but challenged by defense. H. M. Wollerton, merchant, Downingtown, has scruples; has no opinion. Challenged for cause; sustained by the Court; exception noted for the defense. He further said he had fixed opinions. Thomas Funk, farmer, of Schuylkill, has no scruples; has fixed opinion. Challenged for cause by defense. Adam Wagoner, gent., Parkesburg, has scruples. Challenged. Albert G. Hall, barber, West Chester, has scruples. Challenged. Allen Good, farmer, East Vincent, has scruples. Challenged. John H. Quinn, clerk, Phoenixville, has no scruples, has formed fixed opinion. Challenged for cause by defense. Harry R. Rogers, farmer, Oxford, has no scruples, nor opinion. He is married; he doesn't know Kramer; hasn't read of the crime. Accepted by Commonwealth, but challenged by defense. Clayton Ayers, farmer, Honeybrook, has scruples. Challenged. PANEL EXHAUSTED. The panel of jurors, being exhausted. Sheriff Pechin was directed to summon twenty additional talesmen. Sheriff Pechin summoned the twenty extra men and they were directed to report to the Court room. THE EXTRA JURYMEN. The twenty extra Jurors were: John F. Pollock, Warick. J. Barton Keech, George Sanders, A. B. Williamson, John Ritter, Arnold E. Lear, Joe W. Belt, Howard Bevan, Harry Newlin, Clarence A. Short, Michael Higgins, Frank Hedden, M. G. Hilbrand, Frank A. Doyle, West Chester. Harry O. March, Westtown. W. E. Powell, Downingtown. Zeth Miller, Caln. Alvin Peters, Coatsville. L. H. Crossan, Franklin. W. L. Reardon, London Britain. VENIRE SET ASIDE. Attorney MacElree moved to quash the venire as the Sheriff did not personally summon the talesmen. The Court sustained the motion of counsel and discharged the twenty men selected, most of whom hurriedly departed from the Court room. Each received three dollars. Judge Hause directed Sheriff Pechin to summon twenty others, which he did as follows: ADDITIONAL TALESMEN. S. I. Ivins, West Chester, has scruples. Challenged. Norman Hannum, East Downingtown, has no scruples, has an opinion from what he read in the newspapers; his opinion is fixed. Challenged. Leon Darlington, West Chester, has scruples. Challenged. Chester Sharpless, West Chester, has no scruples against capital punishment; has read of the crime in newspapers, but has no fixed opinion. He is 32 years of age. Challenged by Commonwealth. Frank Pierce, West Chester, has no scruples; he has formed an opinion, but not fixed. He is 51 years of age and has family; he owns home. Accepted by Commonwealth, but challenged for cause by defense. Henry V. DeHaven, West Chester, has decided scruples. Challenged. Wm. Few, West Chester, has no scruples, nor opinion. He has a family and has lived here for 50 years. He never served on a jury. He did not believe in Capital punishment. Excused. John S. Groff, West Chester, has no scruples; has formed an opinion, but not fixed; he would be guided by the evidence, but it would require strong evidence to offset his opinion. Challenged by the Commonwealth for cause. Leonard Quillen, West Chester, has scruples. Challenged. Wm. P. Marvel, Avondale, has scruples. Challenged. Howard J. Darlington, West Chester, has no scruples, nor opinion; he has a family; he has lived here for 50 years; he owns his home. He does not know the prisoner. Accepted by Commonwealth and challenged by the defense. Lewis W. Gunkle, West Chester, has no scruples, nor an opinion; he is not married, but owns his home; he is 68 years of age. He does not know Kramer; he has lived here for 28 years. Challenged. Henry McCarter, Cheyney, has no scruples; he has formed an opinion from reading the newspapers. He lives about 200 yards from the Delaware county line. Challenged for cause by Commonwealth; over-ruled by the Court He is married and works on a farm. Challenged. Clifford Dutton, West Chester, has no scruples; has an opinion that cannot be changed. Challenged for cause. Jesse C. Farra, West Chester, has no scruples; has an opinion that is pretty solid in his mind. Challenged. Paul Grubb, West Chester, has scruples against capital punishment. Challenged. W. O. Lamson, West Chester, was called but failed to answer. Later he appeared and said he had no scruples, nor had no opinion. He had read of the crime. He is 32 years of age. Challenged. Allen Darlington, West Chester, has scruples. Challenged. C. T. Richards, Kemblesville, has no scruples, nor an opinion. He owns property; he is 43 years of age; and has family. He does not know Kramer nor Humes families. He has not read of the crime. Accepted by Commonwealth, Challenged by defense. N. Harlan Slack, West Chester, has scruples. Challenged. This exhausted the panel and the Sheriff was directed to summon twenty-five more talesmen. Court then adjourned for the day. EXTRA JURORS PAID. The extra talesmen who had been summoned by the sheriff made claim on the Commissioners for compensation, when, after conference of attorneys, it was decided that as they had been summoned for duty they were each paid three dollars. As there were forty extra jurors summoned, it just cost the taxpayers $120 and not a single juror was accepted out of the entire bunch. THE COMMONWEALTH'S WITNESSES District Attorney Windle has names of twenty witnesses on his subpoena, but it is likely that not all of them will be called. The list includes two doctors who will testify to the nature of Humes' wound and that death resulted therefrom. It is likely that the case will occupy at least two days or maybe more. Daily Local News 30 January 1920 The second day's session of the Chester County Court for the trial of Ralph Kramer, the young man charged with the murder of John Humes, of Cedar Hollow, last September, was opened this morning at ten o'clock, when the Court room was again crowded with spectators. The work of securing the two jurors needed to complete the trial jury was resumed with the following results: 11. EDWIN J. KEENAN, Marshallton, has no scruples; was born in 1885, and is married; he is a farmer; he was born in Pocopson; he does not know the Kramer or Humes families; he read of the crime; he is a constable of West Bradford township. Accepted by Commonwealth and defense as Juror No. 11. John W. Thornbury, butcher, West Bradford, has no scruples; he had an opinion but it could be changed by evidence. He owns two farms and several houses in Marshallton; he is unmarried and lives with his father and sister; he does not know Kramer family. Accepted by Commonwealth but challenged by the defense. Court over-ruled challenged, and exceptions noted. Challenged pre-emptorily. W. Howard McFarland, of Marshallton, West Bradford, has no scruples, no opinion, has lived in Marshallton for 52 years; he is married and is foreman of Pennsylvania State Highway Department; He does not know the Kramer or Humes family. Accepted by Commonwealth but challenged by defense. 12. M. Norton Johnson, Marshallton, has no scruples, nor opinion; he is 30 years of age and has a family; he formerly lived in Pocopson and Newlin townships; he does not know Kramer. Accepted by Commonwealth and defense as Juror No. 12. This concluded the panel and the others summoned by Sheriff Pechin were discharged by Judge Hause. Mrs. Humes, widow of the murdered man, occupied a seat with a friend and one of her children in the rear row of benches; Kramer sat beside his counsel at the table. After the bill of indictment was read to the jury by Clerk Few, after which District Attorney Windle opened the case, in which he reviewed the facts that led to the crime- how Humes had been married for thirteen years and was a good husband; how Kramer had often visited Mrs. Humes in the absence of her husband from their home; how Kramer came to the Humes house and was detected by Humes hiding in a storeroom to which Humes went for some clothing; thus Humes was shot twice and killed by Kramer =, on September 15th last. He asked the jury to convict Kramer as he is indicted. THE TESTIMONY. Nathan R. Rambo, County Surveyor, of West Chester, made a plan of the house occupied by the Humes family. (Shown and identified and explained by witness). This was offered in evidence by the Commonwealth. WIDOW ON STAND. Mrs. Nellie Marie Humes, the widow of John Humes was married thirteen years ago, and lived at Devault; they lived three years in the house in which her husband was murdered; she had four children, one is redeased, three living at age of ten years, eight years, and four years; one is boy and two are girls; her husband was superintendent of the Charles Warner lime quarries; he was 33 years of age and had worked for the company since he was 16 years of age. He earned $200 per month and provided all her needs and gave her money whenever she wanted it. She knew Kramer for twelve years; she met him at his home when taken by her husband's aunt; he was then a young boy; he was a frequent visitor to her home, and often when her husband was away. On the night of September 14th she and her husband and the children went to Valley Forge Park, accompanied by Harry Friel and John Ross. They arrived home late after midnight. She saw Kramer standing outside the house at a window pointing a revolver at her. She had picked up a newspaper and walked over to a sewing machine on which to place the paper, when she looked up and he was close to the window; there was light in the room and she saw him plainly. Kramer said something, but witness was so scared she didn't understand him. She was shown revolver by District Attorney Windle and said it resembled the one displayed by Kramer. She had often seen revolver in Kramer's possession. When discovered Kramer dropped his hand, when she blew out the light and ran upstairs and got into bed. She said that Kramer had often threatened to kill her and her husband. While in bed she and her husband engaged in some conversation, but her husband was deaf in one ear and she had to talk loudly Kramer was outside the house and called through the window screen to kill her if she didn't run away with him; he had threatened to kill her several times. Her husband didn't hear Kramer. Kramer broke into her home one night last summer; he heard Mr. Humes at the garage, on his return from a trip; he knocked down Mrs. Humes to the floor and escaped from the house. Kramer had once beaten her and blacked her eye because she wouldn't run away with him; she told her husband, who threatened to lick Kramer, and Kramer pulled a revolver to shoot. Humes was a very mild-tempered man. She remembered September 15, because that day Kramer killed her husband. On August 15th Kramer was in the neighborhood and cursed her when she secured a revolver and drove him away; he returned and pleaded with her to elope with him; she again drove him away; again he returned and threatened to kill her; he reached for a butcher knife and threatened to carve her to piece; she screamed for help and alarmed the neighbors. Kramer struck her several times and then knocking her down ran away. He told her that if she didn't leave with him he would kill her. She declined his repeated invitations, for she had no reason to leave her family. On September 15th, they rose late because of retiring after midnight, when her husband called to her at six o'clock; she was dressing, when he asked, "Kid, where is my heavy shirt?" She told him it was in the store room downstairs. He went down and she followed. She heard him unlock the door and exclaim, "You son of a b-; what are you doing here?" She heard two shots and her husband cried, "Come, kid; bring a light; I am shot." She saw her husband lying on the floor and Kramer standing nearby. Her husband was lying on his face. She testified under great strain and with manifest agitation. Still on trial at noon. Daily Local News 31 January 1920. COURT NOTES --When a murder trial is being arranged there are always a certain few residents who hover about the Court rooms or corridors, hoping they may be called as members of the jury. They are usually so anxious and show their desire so plainly that they are ignored by the sheriff when he goes forth for talesmen. There are others who would do anything to escape duty, even to taking some liberties with the truth. --Easy money came the way of several residents of this place who were called yesterday as jurors in the murder case for various reasons. They went after the cash as soon as relieved from duty. --Many out-of-town visitors to the Court House spend much time watching the lettering of the marble tablet to the deceased soldiers. When the Local News went to press yesterday at noon, the case of Commonwealth vs. Ralph Kramer, the young man of Devault, charged with the murder of John Humes, the superintendent of Cedar Hollow quarries, in the latter's home, early on the morning of Sept. 15th, was on hearing before Judge Hause, in Court Room, No. 1, and Mrs. Nellie Humes, the widow of the murdered man, was on the witness stand. A portion of her testimony was published in yesterday's issue of the News. She appeared calm, but labored under a great strain to suppress her emotions, particularly when she was asked by council to describe the killing of her husband as she appeared on the scene just after the pistol shots and he was falling to the floor. She emphatically denied all charges of immoral conduct with the prisoner. Her recital of the story of the murder thrilled the great crowd in the Court room and was listened to with rapt interest. In reply to queries by Judge Hause, Mrs. Humes said that the outer door of the store room had been locked the previous night, but it had been broken off its hinges. At the time of the shooting, she said to Kramer, "My God! Have you killed my husband?" Kramer said, "No." She fell fainting on her husband's body. Kramer took hold of her and she screamed. She ran from the house and told the neighbors that Kramer had killed her husband. She was greatly worried and didn't recall what became of Kramer. She last saw him standing in the kitchen with his hands in his pockets unconcerned. She saw no struggle between Kramer and her husband; Kramer's clothing was not disarranged. Her husband was in good health and was never sick; he weighed 210 pounds and was six feet in height. She never made any complaint to the officers of the law relative to Kramer's frequent visits to her, as she desired to avoid the notoriety. MRS. HUMES ON CROSS-EXAMINATION. On cross-examination by Mr. MacElree, Mrs. Humes said she will be 29 years of age on July 8, 1920. She said she knew the Kramer family well; the brother of the prisoner died in Europe; he was a friend of her husband; she had been very intimate with Ralph Kramer for a year past, and he came often to her home, and got so he began to come every day; he took her out in her auto; he came at different times in the day, when her husband was absent. Kramer lived a short distance from the Humes home; he didn't work at any employment. Her husband often took his dinner with him. In summer of 1919 Kramer was forbidden to come to their home, but he broke in. She never gave him a ring; she never visited him at his home; she positively denied fondling him in his home; she never sent for Kramer to come to her home. She had gone to his home on business. She complained to her husband of Kramer's actions, but he declined to report the affair to the officers. She once went to Kramers to get some flowers for her child's grave, but she didn't see Kramer. She denied having been discovered by her husband in a compromising position with Kramer. Kramer ran to her home daily. Her husband complained to Kramer's father, who promised to have Kramer enlist in the army for three years. She went to the store twice and telephoned for her husband to come home and eject Kramer, but her husband was away. Humes declined to have Kramer arrested for trespass because he did not care to have her name connected with a "bum," she said. One thing she regretted was that she never had Kramer arrested. She never remained in her home with Kramer, but went out in the yard and walked around in snow and rain while he remained in her home. About a year ago he choked her and threatened to kill her if she wouldn't go away with him. It was a common thing for Kramer to come to her home and enter into arguments and often threaten to kill her. She often advised him to go to work. She never sent anyone for Kramer, for she saw him too much to have to send for him. She said she did not tell her husband of having seen Kramer at the window with the revolver, because, she said, she intended to tell him next morning. She said Kramer told her he was not treated well at home and that he loved her. Mrs. Humes was on the witness stand for more than an hour. She is now living in Phoenixville with relatives. DOCTOR TESTIFIES. Dr. W. L. Hamilton, Malvern, was graduated in 1903 from Hahnemann Medical College. On September 15th he was summoned to the Humes home and found John Humes lying dead on the floor. Witness described the position of the body. There were two wounds in the chest. Witness then notified the authorities. The outer door had been broken from its hinges; he arrived soon after seven o'clock. At the post-mortem he discovered that the aorta had been severed and the liver had been penetrated. Death was also instantaneous, he said. There were some powder marks on the skin and clothing; his clothing was not disarranged as if he had been in a scuffle. His death was due to the gunshot wounds. CONSTABLE DETAILS ARREST. Constable Ezra H. King, of Malvern, said that on the morning of September 15, 1919, at half past six or seven o'clock, he learned that John Humes had been shot at Cedar Hollow; he autoed to the Humes house where he learned that Ralph Kramer had committed the crime; with State Policeman Harry Basslove, he went to Kramer's home and arrested Kramer admitted shooting Humes and the Humes house, but had been to John Trego's farm to search for work. Kramer had been in bed. Later Kramer admitted shooting Humes, and said the revolver was hidden in some rugs near the body of Humes; it couldn't be found, when Kramer said he had hidden it up in the woods. The officer went with Kramer, who located the weapon (Revolver shown and identified). After arrest Kramer made a statement, reduced in writing by Assistant District Attorney Sproat. (Confession shown and identified). THE CONFESSION. Assistant District Attorney Sproat, of West Chester, testified that on September 15th, he was notified of the shooting affair at the Humes home, and, with County Detective Mullen, went to the scene, where he found Kramer in charge of Constable King and two State Policeman. Kramer told Mr. Sproat that he was the man who shot Humes. Mr. Sproat cautioned Kramer that any statement he made would be used against him at his trial. Kramer volunteered to tell all the details of the crime. The confession was read to Kramer who signed it in the presence of witness. (Confession shown and identified). Confession offered in evidence. MORE TESTIMONY Wm. King of Malvern, testified that on September 15th, his father was notified of the murder of Humes. (It was intended to prove by this witness the finding of the revolver hidden by Kramer, but the defendant's counsel admitted that Kramer had hid it.) Witness withdrawn. John Selfinger, of Cedar Hollow, who lives near the Humes home, testified that on Armistice Day, 1918, after the parade, Mr. Humes took several of the young men to Phoenixville in his auto. On their return home Selfinger heard some screaming at the Humes garage; witness found Mrs. Humes crying in the yard, it was half-past ten o'clock at night; Humes appeared on the scene and asked if Ralph Kramer was there. Harry Friel, a young white man of Cedar Hollow, was called but was excused. DEFENSE OPENS. Mr. MacElree, counsel for the defendant, on opening the defense, outlined what it was intended to prove. He said there were several questions: (1), was the prisoner unduly intimate with Mrs. Humes? (2), did Kramer go to the Humes home for immoral relations with her, or to kill her husband? Henry Whistler, of Cedar Hollow, lives one-eighth of a mile from the Humes home, and knows both Kramer and Mrs. Humes: in 1918 and 1919, he saw them together very often, at her home and on the road. He admitted being an uncle of Ralph Kramer. Bessie Kramer, 15 years of age, sister of Ralph, testified that Mrs. Humes told her in 1918 to come down to her home; witness delivered a message to Ralph; it was in the spring of 1918. Harry Kramer, father of Ralph, lives near Devault; he works at the lime works, and has thirteen children; he lives near the Humes home; he knew Humes and his wife; Mrs. Humes came to his home; Ralph went to the Humes home; one day he found Ralph and Mrs. Humes playing together on the lounge; Ralph is 21 years of age; he did not work steadily. Mrs. Kate Kramer, mother of the prisoner, testified that Ralph often went to the Humes home in 1918 and 1919; Mrs. Humes visited the Kramer home, but never protested against Ralph's coming to visit her home. On August 17th, John Humes told her he intended to punish Ralph for intruding in his home. Mrs. Kramer told Humes she did all she could to keep Ralph away. Humes never did attack Ralph. The prisoner testified that he was 21 years of age on December 10, 1919; he has lived with his parents, at Devault, since 1915, near the Humes place; he knew Mrs. Humes since 1915; in the winter of 1917 he had immoral relations in her home; he continued criminal relations with her almost every day in her house until September 14, 1919; he often took her out in her husband's automobile, to Valley Park, Phoenixville, and elsewhere; she often sent the children for him to come to her house; she never ordered Kramer to stay away from her home; once Humes detected them together in the parlor and threatened to kill them both. On Sunday night, September 14th Kramer was at the Humes home after she came home; he had his revolver and showed it to her; he talked with her and made arrangements to come to her home next morning; he went there on September 15th, and, finding the door broken off its hinges, went into the house; he often went to the house at that early hour and went in through the same door. He carried a revolver in 1917, belonging to a fellow named Rambo, to whom he returned it. In 1918 he borrowed a revolver from his brother. About a week before the tragedy he went to Phoenixville and bought a revolver because Humes had threatened him. He took the revolver with him because it happened to be in his pockets. He did not intend to shoot Humes. When Humes discovered Kramer in the house he kicked Kramer and knocked him down; Kramer was afraid of his life and shot his assailant. As soon as Humes opened the door, he rushed at Kramer and knocked him down. Humes was sitting on Kramer's body when Kramer fired. It was half past six o'clock. Humes set down the lighted lamp after he discovered Kramer. Humes shouted he would kill Kramer. Kramer said he didn't run because he didn't want any trouble with Humes. In the struggle, they rolled around on the floor for nearly ten minutes. When Kramer heard Humes walking around in the kitchen, Kramer took the revolver out of his pocket and laid it beside him on the floor as he sat awaiting Humes' departure. When Humes was shot, he called to his wife to bring him a revolver. Humes struck Kramer twice on the right jaw and kicked him in the side. Humes was sitting on Kramer when the latter pulled the revolver from his left hip pocket and put the gun close to his body and fired twice. He said he declined to go away with Mrs. Humes because he didn't want to take her away from her husband and children. He added that he had no money for such a trip, but was content to call on her in her home. After shooting Humes, then Kramer ran home and refused to go after a doctor, when Mrs. Humes requested him; he said he wanted to get away. When he reached home he went to bed. Defense rests. IN REBUTTAL. Dr. Hamilton was re-called to testify as to condition of the storeroom as to evidence of a struggle. He said the clothing of Humes was not disarranged. Testimony closed at four o'clock p. m. ARGUMENT OF COUNSEL. Mr. MacElree, in opening his argument to the jury, said that this was one of the most despicable cases ever called before a tribunal. There are three prominent characters-John Humes, who has passed to the great beyond; his wife, who stands before the tribunal of her own conscience, and the prisoner, who is on trial for his life. If the facts point to the electric chair, then there is where the prisoner should go, but the facts do not indicate that. He cited from Hugo's "Les Miserables" the story of the man who was engulfed in the sands of Brittany, and likened that traveler to Kramer, who was enmeshed by his lust. Once Kramer's father was proud of him and his mother loved him. * * * Mr. MacElree defined the several degrees of homicide. * * * No matter how degenerate a defendant is, yet he is entitled to a fair trial. * * * He then defined self-defense, in which a man who is in peril of his life, is permitted to use any means in his power to protect himself. He argued that Kramer did not go to the Humes home to kill the husband, but to meet the wife by arrangement. He said the sanctity of the home should be preserved and protected from the foes without, the traitors within. He said Kramer was a low adulterer, but not a murderer. He contended that his client could not be convicted of any higher crime than voluntary manslaughter. His address occupied about one hour. DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S ADDRESS District Attorney Windle followed Mr. MacElree. He reviewed the testimony that pointed to the guilt of the prisoner, as indicated. He questioned why did Kramer remain in the store room and not escape when he heard Humes approaching. Why did Kramer go to the Humes home with a loaded revolver? He argued that there was no struggle between the men that endangered Kramer's life and warranted his killing Humes. Humes never had a chance, he dramatically proclaimed most earnestly. He contended that Kramer went there ned and prepared for whatever might happen; he could have readily have escaped from the house, but he remained and murdered his victim; Kramer did not fire in passion of terror or fear. That shot was fired through malice, and the murderer lay in wait for Humes. Mr. Windle occupied about twenty-five minutes in his address to the jury. CHARGE TO THE COURT. Judge Hause reviewed the testimony and cited the law governing the trial. He incidentally referred to the outrageous misconduct of the prisoner and the wife of the murdered man. He gave the legal definition of murder. The jury retired at half-past five o'clock. THE VERDICT. Immediately after the jurors had been served with their supper in Court Room, No. 2, they took their first ballot, which stood: For second degree murder, 8; for first degree murder, 3. Soon after, another ballot was taken, in which all jurors voted for murder in the second degree. As soon as the jurors agreed upon their verdict, at twenty minutes after seven, the Court officials and Judge Hause were notified, and they promptly appeared in the Court Room, the prisoner being brought up from prison by the sheriff. Quite a crowd of spectators also gathered in Room No. 1, when the jury entered. Foreman Thomas P. Worth announced to the Court that they had agreed upon their verdict, and rendered verdict of murder in the second degree. The jurors were then discharged with the thanks of the Court. THE SENTENCE. Kramer was haled before the bar, when Judge Hause sentenced him to pay a fine of $1000 and costs, and to serve not less than fifteen years and not more than twenty years, in the Eastern Penitentiary, at solitary confinement and at hard labor. The prisoner's demeanor was about the same as during the short trial, he stood almost unmoved with eyes downcast and displayed very little interest in the affair. KRAMER'S CONFESSION. Part of the evidence offered in the trial was the signed confession of Kramer written by Assistant District Attorney Sproat, a few hours after the arrest of the prisoner. In it Kramer stated that he had known Mrs. Humes about four and for three years prior to the crime had visited Mrs. Humes at her home daily; he would slip in the house at various hours of the day and wait for him at nights to leave his home on business; he bought the revolver in Phoenixville for $6.50; he showed the gun to Mrs. Humes; he made agreement with her to come to her home on September 15th, and got up at half-past five o'clock; he entered the Humes home and heard Humes approach the store-room in which he was hiding; Humes jumped on him and knocked him down and kicked him; Kramer raised up and shot Humes; for the past two years, Mrs. Humes has urged him to go away with her; Humes on one occasion caught them together, and threatened to kill both; he bought the revolver to protect himself; Mrs. Humes left the door open so he could get into the house. There were parts of the confession not fit for publication. It covered seventeen pages of note paper. THE EXTRA JURORS. Of the twenty-five jurors summoned by Sheriff Pechin for duty yesterday morning, only four were called, the additional ones were: John H. Davis, John J. Nichols, J. Harvey Gauer, Joseph Snyder, Warren Bender, Charles Reel, Harry Raudenbush, Loyd Yohn, Wm. Pawling, Downingtown. R. W. Miller, Wm. Bauhen, Andrew Torbert, C. N. Speakman, J. F. Ritter, Charles J. Folen, George Holbrook, Coatsville. Patrick H. Corcoran, Joseph H. Pusey and W. Howard Sharpless, West Chester. These were discharged when the jury trial was completed.