New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1855-12-11


tomci6e coald be considered jusnn.bie-
Mr.. H"fmap said he koew of DO psrtcu ar prinop'e
% law With they 6esi ned 70 apply ID this case
Were BE- 10 sum the case, be should cootefd oe'o
The Juiy hat II they believed these parties co1certed
together and TO that bouse that sht with the
view Of provoking Poole kpow wing him 10 be bolc,
ntsc be and f.a'e-s msn; thst If they went there
with oete mir a'ion even with language and without
blows, 10 excite the feelings Of Poole. and taus pro-
duce an alter csion which should result in the de sh Of
Poole II at the Court would lot low them 20 am
themselves and seek out 8 man ard provoke him and
if he then draws psto first and free 1pon them,
ard II ey sought this excuse TO cousuumste tbs
70. edS BY bllipg him, II was murder Ii was 10 this
view Of the e,se il be came perfectly mma edal and
be should coDttn nd under the Ia. that whether Poole
CT Bske fred first, If they went there with the purDose
Of irtati and provoking him until they led him to
draw ps o and then fired it, snd that this male
Irett1t 10 attack Poole, ard Poole killed their
&C; va murder. That q man to be justid ID in the
hs hit of selfoefense be must be at the time in the
peace Of God; sid that 4 roter VIII was armed for
sDy az g'r "as not 10 the peace of God and the kill
ing Of smother n an, whom he had provoked ana az
grsvsted was 10 Justification to take bis life
Dir. Whiting, IL s.a;ing tee principles of law on
which The prosecution should rrly referred to Sater-
mems law Of Homicide page 1877 aud should also TO
Il Of the People SGT Shooter, in the ID of Com.
stock, 1874.
Mr. Bray ss:d the defense should claim thst there
vss DO evdt nee placing it beg ord doubt that Poole
was kiltd by Baker, and 1t not free from do1bt
that Poo'e wss not killed by hs own friends in the
neee: that Baker Gli Kill Poole, w1etoer there was
preuediiaied design or ro it was tore under crodm.
Stances establishing g perfect jus ihcaaon. They
81 ud eorttLd that if there WA any grudge exisdug
by Baker egsipst Poole, there was equally grudge
txis'J with Poole sgslnst Baker; That ii one was
ho. tile the o.ter was; that II one had weapon the
other btd AnG hey should contend that when the
jury came 20 a det- rmination OF This case, n
Whether Baker killed Poole the jury must not
slider case as one where there was any aivsn'afe
o. nequsli:y in this re5ad This I'D bring up the
QUE siion 10 re obligation of Baker to retreat TO-
ward tie wall when Re saw Poole coming toward him.
They shCu crIt6nd that il impossible that it
w5ud involve the Iecessity OF his tn ming his back
uIcL Poole; and furtb, rmore, that uhder any crcum
stances the JurS were bounI to take itto cous iera
ten the excitement which would be apt 70 labor
up6er, which would tend TO prevent caln thought
upcI the question of retreat. Sir. Brady called a.
teb'ion 10 Wharon's Cimins la page 362 They
should oopte that though there may have been at
sly peoi desi4n the part of Baker, yet
If frsh provocsiion occurred such as Pools
staggering or waking toward hun, according
10 ie testimony on Gil sidee Of the by taking
hold Of him. be should assume that tue Jury hal no
right % fed that Biter killed Poole from the old
erudge rather than the fresh provocaton LESS /, be
sbown hat the o d srudge passed through the new
rrovocsiion aid WIS superior 10 II, and controlled
Baku's scts. r. support of this theory be should
rel to the Of Sboler They should aso contend
that il not unlawful in any way for Baker ID cary
pis oil, would he say thai l. was unla via for
Poo g 10 carry pistol And go tar as being IN the
pesce Of God wss concerned they should contend that
heJe was Eoli ing at war with that proposition in
Bsher being in public honsei that he hsd right to
be there and that there nothing In law that bqdJ
the tas G JUDI ment oscretioo, or Involves an obliga
ton on the part OF citizen to keep out of place,
pu' liz in its character, simply because foe is there.
Mr. Hoffman said they should contend that II the
jay believed Baker summon ed Get of men and went
10 the house that night knowing or having reason to
believe tia Poole was there, provoking controScs-
~ which be had reason TO sutGipste would be pro-
voBed, ard in the hea. OF that controversy be took
the lite Of Pooe WI dangerous weapon, 1t was
murder. Now il the Jury believ that Baker a0t
Poole were hos lie bi ter emies-thst feuds had
exibtd between them which almost rpenet into
bloodsbed previous to this transaction-tha, Ii 4ker
knew where Poe 70 was-that if they met, coutrover
sy and fight wsuId be opt to ensue between them
that Bsker had armed biuself with pistol, and went
there where Poole with party OF friends and ex
cited OIL d provoked Poole be jOnd endurance until an
encounter bsgsn, snd hfn took his liie-lt vas mar
DER He dia not deny the pr ncipe that actual dan
ger rot exist but OILY apparent dagger, to justly
tomi, ide. But TO make that publication, the per-
son shg the sa Was BsIer Without fault
" that night" He admitted the right Of person -
into pubic house; but if he knows An adversary is
there and prepares himself beforehand TO mse. that
occasion sh4 require and he then in and socks
that opportunity that adversary not seeking him, aud
beprov,kes quarrel ncb ends in taking the life of
tbht a6v.fsary-it was murder. And, farther
whether Poole Bal er clinched, whether Pools
Baker fired frs, under such circumstances the act
MIR. Clark u en- procee ed TO deliver the
ARGUMENT FOR THE DEFENSE.
Mr. Clark addressed the Jury subs anti lily as fol.
lows:
GENTLEMEN: When you assumed the seats you nov
occupy you gave assu frances that yc ar minds were ia
tbst conoton that, uninfusnced by prejudice
element you could rightly determine according 10 the
Truth Of the case the quest Of the guilt innocence
of the accused. He trusted you; aud nov that all
the evidence is la upon which that determination
skould be bad he is content that when you shall hear
the explain atoms which be alone can maze. through
the lips Of counsel you shall determine the momentous
question whether he shall live or Gle. And what a
que atom. 1t brings before him the dread reality of
eternity; and how 6ttiDg is it whsn such theme ia
discussed that there should be silence and attention.
AID nsw gentlemen, that You have become the ar
bters OF this mans destiny, 1t 10 not i0aprropua'e
tba; you should lnow something OF his personal
history. Lewis Baker was born 10 Wales
sbou, the year 1897. His "a her about that
tine emigrated to this country, leaving hin, his only
cbhd, and biz mother at home BY force OF that in
dusty Characteristic of the Welsh enigrant ia this
connry the faber earned enough in short Il ne to
senc for bis family, ard the accused rst eet bis foot
upon our shores when infant of two years Of age.
His mother died when be wss youth. His father
again married and reared another family He lived
al bone, in the Eighth Ward Of this city, until the
age oi fteep, when be abandoned the profession OF
he father, which was thst Of q bricklsyer, and wen.
upon The And it is not improbable that some Of
the p. cusr elements Of character may have derived
something ON that employment of his early life. He
subsequently, returned TO New. York about the year
ls47, in the year 1850 Wa appointed TO position
on he police, in which EN- ooymen. he remained un-
Ill sboa. the time Of The sray e. Patts saloon, when
Re resigned. The rest, genIem.n, you know. He
became acqu,inted with Poole in bis youth. Perhaps
be hst saw him, as did q witness, when DC was en-
esgec in street Aght. But no matter as to that
C.r-ain il is that at an early period Of his life he
Pooes friend, and that that friendship remained un-
in psired until about the time Of the attack msde by
Poole ulon the Masors. We have not before US the