The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1844-08-20 00:00:00

THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD.

an end of the case; but it was different in the case of an indictment
framed upon the verdict of a coroner's jury; for in this case the
prisoner could still be tried upon the inquisition. He did not know
what the American Consul might do, but an application had teen
made to have the cook given up, and the depositions taken before
Mr. Rushton had been sent to the Secretary of State, to which
there would be an answer in the course of the following day. He
said that there were three verdicts open to the jury. The first was
one of murder; the second manslaughter ; and the third homicide
de defendendo. He thought he need not dwell at any length on
the question of murder; for, if they believed the witnesses, there
was an assault by the Captain. If so, it would cut the case down to
manslaughter; and with respect to that offence, and also on justifi-
able homicide, he quoted from Ist East, P. C as to the " proof of
malice," in which it is stated that " the rule oft law laid down is—
that a man may repel force by force in defence of his person, habi-
tation, or property, against one who manifestly intends or en-
deavours by violence or surprise to commit a known felony. In
these cases be is not obliged to retreat, but may pursue his adver-
sary until he has secured himself from all danger; and if he kill
of any person so lawfully defending him in so doing, it is justifiable self-defence; as, on the other hand,
thee killing. by
wellu such felons,ast hat another lies in wait to take away the
him-
self,ev will bgeromunrddeedr,. Buta bare fear of any of these offences, how-
party's life, unaccompanied by any overt act, indicative of such an
intention, will not warrant him in killing that other by aay of pre-
vention, there being no actual danger at the time."—Agiin, accord-
ing to Foster, in order to render the killing justifiable, it must ap-
pear that the act Was done from mere necessity, and to avoid the
immediate commission of the offence. Thus, a person, who in
a case of mutual conflict, would excuse himself upon the ground of
self-defence, must show that before the mortal stroke given, he had
declined any further combat, and retreated as far as he could for
safety, and that he had killed his adversary through mere necessity,
and to avoid immediate death. If he failed in either of these cir-
cumstances, he will incur the penalty of manslaughter. It was also
stated by Blackstone—When both parties are actually combatting
at the time the mortal stroke is given, the slayer is guilty of man-
slaughter; but if the slayer has not begun to fight, or (having be-
gun) endeavours to decline
ants f
struggle, and afterwards be-
ing closely pressed by his antagonist, kills him to avoid his own
and laid hold of the cook—being at that
time
destruction, this ishomicide, excusable by self-defence. If the Captain
went,saosbehrasorbeedrnusntka, madted' or sane, it nothing mattered—and indi-
cated an intention of doing grievous bodily harm, and the cook bad
no means of escaping from him, and it was evident his own life was
in danger, the cookwas justified in taking away the life of the Cap.
taro. If they thought he might have got away without inflicting the
mortal wound, they would say so by their verdict.
The jury, after an absence of about fifteen minutes, returned a
verdict of justifiable homicide, in which the Coroner, for their sa-
tisfaction,perfect concurrence. The jury presented
thesumal
The deportment of the prisoner (who is 32 years of age) during
the investigation before the magistrates, was most becoming. He
expressed
tsheaemeshisthe Northern Hospital.
to
was not present at the inquest, though he might have claimed to be
so. He appeared to experience the deepest regret for the unfortunate
occurrence, independent of the effect it might have on his own fate.
The deceased Captain is described as having been a powerful mus.
cular man, and though, from the evidence of some of the crew, it
would appear that he had occasionally drunk hard after his ast
leaving Liverpool, the surgeon, who made the post mortem exa-
mination, stated that the liver was sound, and a letter appeared in
the Albion of yesterday, signed by a great number of respectable
parties, who state that they have been acquainted with the deceased
for many years, and never knew or heard that he was other than a
sober man.
We understand that copies of the depositions taken before the
Coroner have been forwarded to the head American Consul in Lon-
don, and that though some of the American authorities here appear,
to be dissatisfied with the verdict given, two of his immediate rela-
tives are not of that opinion, and the probability is that no claim
will be made for his being handed over for trial in America.