Burlington free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1827-1865, 1852-04-09


Il. Everest, NJ. Dougherty, D.. p. Squres, Lu-
CIV Parker, II. Everest, II. p. Segar, Towle
Mngce, and the testimony of the several wit
nescs introduced to impeach the reputation CG
Starkweaiher for truth. Judge Picrpoirt re-
capltuated, with some minutcacss Of detail,
the testimony of the several witnesses men.
toned above)
Now Gentlemen. it is for YOU to determine,
from the evidence given in Court and the law
applicable to that evidence, whether the re-
spondent is excusable for taking the life of
Eientiss.
1t IS true, as stated by the Counsel, that Jur-
Crg, in Criminal cases. are the Judges Of the
Jaw, us well as Of hc facts but they are not
1T liberty to diSrega,d the law. The law be
,lg plain and undisputed, You are bound by
your oath to make Tic application Of it to the
facts proved; and upon the point now under
consideration, vou must decide from all the
circumstances proved in the case such as
Of the nature ,rap1lty and violence tthc attack,
the weapon vita which it was madc.-thc
place where it was made, with the attending
circumstances, the comparative muscular vgor
The respondent and the deceased, the power
Of the respondent to resist or ily.--whcthCr he
could probably have saved himself from death.
or enormous bodily harm by rotrcating and
inf you believe, under all the circumstances
that the respondent could have escaped the
vengeance of Prentiss, Mt the time Of the attacs,
without killing him, the defence set up has fail
ed, and the respondent must be convicted OF
murder or man-Slaughtcr
But if you believe his only resort fer safety
vas to take the life Of the deceased. he must
De acquitted, unless bis conduct had been such,
previously to the attack, Ms to deprive him OF
the privilege of setting up defence of this
nature For, if a man for the purpose ofbring-
ing another into a quarrel, provokes bin so that
an ARRAY is commenced, and the person caus-
ing the quarrel is oyer.matched, and to save
himself from apparent peril of life or limb
kills his adversary, he would be guilty of muir
der or manslaughter, because the necessity be-
ing of his own creating shall not excuse him
Therefore, if you believe that the respondent
commenced the controversy with Premises
wife for the purpose of provoking Prentiss, and
bringing him into personal contest with the
respondent, he cannot avail himself OF the de-
| fence set mp.
II, Gentlemen, you shall come to the conclu-
sion, that the defence set up, has failed, tina
the killing was feloniou-,--It will then be your
duty to find whether the respondent is guilty
of murder or granddaughter.
! Murder is defined by Lord Coke. in that pre-
else largrage which characterizes all the VIII
tngs OF that great lurst, to be :-"When
person Of sound memory and discretion, un
lawfully killeth any reasonable creature, in be-
ing, and under the peace, with malice atore~
though, either express or implied"
Express malice, is when pc son, with sedatt
and deliberate mind and formed design, doth Kill
another. This design is evidenced BY circum-
| stances as lying in wait, previous rlenaces
former grudges, or concerted schemes to d,
him some bodily harm.
ManslauChter, is the unlawful and feloniou
killing Of another, without any malice, ethe
express or implied; as where, upon sudder
quarrel two persons fight, and one otithem kill
the other; or when one greatly pruvokeS anothe
by some personal violence, and the other i'm
mediatcIy kills him.
| | have now, Gentlemen, attempted 70 rccitc Il
you the material evidence given on the trial
and to lay down the law applicable 10 the case
as it is understood BY the Court. i is vour dn
ty To find what facts are proved, and make tn
application of the law to those facts, and rem
der verdict accordingly. Much tao been sal
about the responsibility Of the Jury in this case
Every man is irresponsible for the faithful dis
charge OF his duty. And if the necessary con
sequences of his act are of unusual lmpor
lance, the more deliberate. unlllnching and un
deviating, should lie be in the Performance
of plain duty. = conc erned in this iris
have an important duty to perform. The CoUR
are hound to see that the respondent has all Ii
facilities that the law allows him to prepare an
make his defence in open Court To see that +
has fair and impartial trial and to give n
case in charge to the Jury. Ifthey have faitf
fully performed this duty, they are not -espot
sibe for the consequences.
The COUNSEL in the management OF the tris
have an important duty to perform, and whe
they have performed that duiy,--as they hav
faithfully and ably done it in this case-thc
are not responsible for The conse1 aences
The WITNESS on the island has an impo
tant duty to perlo.m. 1t is TO tell the Who'll
truth and nothing butt he truth And when
has done that, he is not responsible for the COZ
sequences
; You, gentlemen, haze also an important ar
solemn duty to pertorri; which is, to paticntl
examine the evidence given in Court, make tn
application of the law to that evidence, and,
you are convinced beyond any reasonable dou
that the respondents guilty ofthe crime char!
ed in the Indictment, to SAY so. You are nj
| responsible for the consequences. If the res
pendent is guilty, the consequences legally n
suit from his own act and fall upon him
Gentlemen of the Jury, the most fearful re
possibility, in my judgment, that man can a
sumo, is that OF deliberately violating a dut
plainly imposed upon him by the laws of hi
: Country, and the oath of his God.
cannot torbear rcmarking, although it doc
not affect the question for you to decide, tn
I from what has been disclosed on this trial,
, fearful responsibility has been assumed. a
| Jude to that responsibility which every qu
citizen and every civil officer Enough lie ma
, not intend iO incurs, when he encourages {
; winks at, any attempt TO reform the morals
society, by an outrageous breach of the peac
, This is net the first case in this State wier
: a homicide has resulted, apparently from til
, same course of conduct.
| thlnt 10 one who has heard this trial, ca
, doubt tnGt, if the first violations OF the la
) here disclosed had been promptly arrested b
the application ofthe appointed legal relnedic
we SHOULD never have heard of the .ragcd
that has caused this prosecution.
Gentlemen, the prisoner Is IN your hands :
Ifyou arc satisfied from the evidence beyon
, any reasonable doubt, that the respondent
a guilty 81 The murder charged III the lndictmeu
= you will say that he is GUILTY, and you wi
? say 10 more; but if you find that re Is n
-