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.