Southport telegraph. [volume] (Southport, W.T. [i.e. Kenosha, Wis.]) 1840-1850, 1843-10-31

Now that the trial is over, we shall not
hesitate to comment upon the affair freely
and fully. AT the time the outrage was
committed, we carefully examined all the
statements that were made. and all the tes-
timony that was taken. From that exam;-
nation, it was perfectly evidcns that Vine
yard went into the Council that morning
armed-that he had not the least reason TO
expect viol n e from any one-that he most
falsely charged MIR. Arndt with falsehood.
and persisted in ii with the intention of pro-
voking Mr.. Arndt to strike him, in order
that he might shoot him; and that, the in
slant MIR. Amdt touched him. he. without
any necessity of selfdefencc, shot him
dead.
We then turned to orr law books, and
in RUSSELL on Crimes and Currr's criminal
Law, both high authorities, We found the
following Where the provocation is sought
by the party killing, and induced by his own
act in order to afford him a prctencc for
wreaking his m ,iace, it will in no case be
of any avail Was there any cause what
ever for Vineyards going into the Council
that morning SO unusually and fatally armed?
Had not he frequently made the same state
ment which he charged to be ftlsehood in
Mr.. Arndt? Did he not frequently repeat
in the charge in the most offensive manner.
so that Mr.. Arndt would have no other al
tentative as he supposed, but to strike him?
Again: we find it stated that the nature
of the instrument is always taken into &C
count in determining the malice Why use
a pistol! Why shoot him in vital part?
Was there any need, in the crowded room
of the Council, of killing Mr. Arndt to pro-
tect himself from violence? Why was the
blow from Mr.. Arndt and the firing of the
pistol almost at the same instant of time.
unless Vineyard had before determined to
shoot him!
Again the authorities say, s'that if on any
sudden provocation of slight nature, one
person beat another III an unusual and cruel
manner, so that he dies. it is murder by ex-
press malice; though the person so beating
the other did not intend to kill HIM" What
ever light we have viewed this occurrence
in, we have never been able to think of it
as any thing less than wilful and malicious
Murder-murder most foul. Yet however
strongly we differ in opinion from our
Chief Justice, We do not censure him for
pronuncing it ranslaughter. While we
cannot but think that he decided erroneous
ly, we believe he did SO honestly and con-
scientiously.
This murder was perpetrated in the up
per House of the Territorial Legislature,
almost during its session, in open day be-
fore twenty witnesses. by one of the high
est elective officers OF the Territory. The
criminal is first permitted to go at large
on bail, then indicted for granddaughter, and
finally acquitted of that even by jury
This will forever remain foul blot upon
our Territory. We do hereby, and shall a
all times pronounce the transaction murder
We enter our protest against the decision
of the Court and Jury; and we hope thai
Vineyard, although he has escaped the lie
gal punishment due to his crime, will new
er escape the efiec, of public opinion anc
the public adherence of this bloody TRACE
Edv.- Racine Advocate.