Laura Jane Harvey Murder: Part Nine

On the first day of the trial of Lant McComb, he was brought into court along with his counsel, M.J. Williams of Ottumwa and Hon. J.C. Knapp of Keosauqua. Judge H.H. Trimble presided over the court and asked McComb how he pled. McComb responded back, "Not guilty."

Two applications were made for a continuance of the trial but one was dismissed by Trimble and the other one granted. But the granted one did not lead to a continuance in the trial because the State admitted that they could prove the allegation set out in the affidavit. What exactly was written in those affidavits were not recorded by the newspaper and I haven't found any official court records on the matter. 

Next, a request for 100 jurors was issued and it took another day and a half for a jury of 12 men to be formed. Those men were George Tacker, S.B. Fuller, J.A. Hartman, John Montgomery, O.U. Gates, H.D. Hall, E.E. Mastie, Henry Wheeler, O. Moffit, E.T. McCormick, James Van Fleet and F. Gaylord. But before the trial could begin, one more matter needed to be settled and it was an important one. 

It was unclear which statute the case should be prosecuted under because McComb had been indicted on 2 June 1860 prior to the Revision of 1860 taking effect. Why it mattered was in the Revision of 1860, it stated at one point that, "all prosecutions or proceedings in criminal cases, which shall be commenced before the first day of September, 1860, and which, by the existing laws, would be valid, shall not be rendered invalid by this act, but may be prosecuted to their conclusion, and enforced according to the existing laws, as if this act had not been passed." Judge Trimble ruled that the prosecution must be conducted by the law in force at the time which was the Code of 1851. 

The jury was finally sworn in on Wednesday, 8 June 1864 in the early afternoon. Prosecuting Attorney Harris made a statement to the jury and then called John Prosser, the ferryman to the stand. For awhile Prosser was questioned on the details of the removal of Ms. Harvey's body from the river, the condition it was found in and the details of the inquest since he had been present during that. Gradually the questioning turned towards the details of the night he had been returning home and met a wagon late at night heading back towards the ferry. He ascertained that there was a lone man driving the wagon pulled by two horses and one died in the rear and that the man was medium sized but couldn't be described him any further. 

The Defense cross examined Prosser about the condition of the ferry road and whether or not is was unusual for a team of horses to proceed down it in a trot. Prosser declared that while the road is rather uneven, it wasn't unusual for teams to be trotting down it. The Defense asked Prosser if the team had stopped at all and Prosser said they hadn't stopped at all.

The Prosecution re-examined Prosser by asking if it was unusual for the wagon to be fording the river below the ferry to which Prosser replied that they had been doing so that spring due to the lower water conditions. He was also asked if he had heard a team ford the river again after the initial wagon and Prosser responded that a team had come back across but he didn't know if it was the same one or not. 

Next to the stand, O. Ormick the milkman, was called and sworn in to testify. The Prosecution proceed to question Ormick about discovering the body of Ms. Harvey, the moving of the body and the inquest held in a house where the Moss store now stood. His testimony did not add a lot of details beyond what Prosser had already provided.

On cross examination, the Defense questioned Ormick about whether he had seen the body before he entered the river or was in the river and asked the location of the body in relation to where people had been crossing the river. Ormick detailed that he had seen the body before he actually got to the river and that people had been crossing the river in many places that spring due to the low water but that the body had been found downstream of all those places. 

Next up was the ferryman's son, John Prosser Jr. who was questioned in more detail about the night he had spotted the team and wagon fording the river. He stated that by the time he had reached the river some 15 minutes after it had gone by the house, it was stopped 25 yards in the river and the driver had been looking down at the water on the downstream side. When the man saw that he had an audience, the team had continued on across the river some four to four and a half feet deep in places but John Jr. hadn't stuck around to see if it made it all the way to the other side. 

While being cross examined, John Jr. reinforced that the man had seemed like he was in a hurry but didn't notice any particular details about him.

The last witness for the day, Isaac Logan was sworn in to the witness stand. Logan was the other male in the wagon that night with Prosser as they had made their way back from an evening in town. Logan testified that when they had turned their buggy slightly off the road to make room for the oncoming wagon pulled by the team of horses, they had been coming towards them at a fast gait. As the wagon went by, Logan thought he had seen two people lying in the back of the wagon covered up. He went on to answer more questions about the condition of the body when he and Prosser had been summoned the following morning to help move it to the town side of the river and also questions dealing with the subsequent inquest. 

Logan was cross examined about whether the team had been walking fast or trotting and he answered that he didn't know which specifically but that it had been a fast moving team. He was questioned if the covered objects in the back could have been sacks of grain but he affirmed that they weren't grain sacks and looked like two people covered up.

Court was then adjourned until 8 o'clock the following morning.