The Washington union. [volume] (City of Washington [D.C.]) 1857-1859, 1858-07-04

inferred, Also, That lac fclt some regard
MI. Thonass position. This gentleman we are in
formed has maintained unblemished reputation for
moral integrity and strict sobrcty for several years It
ithe andoubted right Of the board however to request
time for the investigation of any scruples which may be
entertained against nominee, but we trust that the
soundes discretion may be used when the security of
citizens is compromised
We regret that the corporation attorney recognised the
committee Of the Board Of Aldermen the other evening
for the that the law of 1883 which prescbes his
duties makes it appear that his opinions should only be-
given at " the request of the Mayor In cases where
there exists difference of opinion between the mayor
and branch Of the City Council both parties ought to be
heard before decision is promulgated
-
CRIMINAL COuRT.---1RIAL OF THE DEyI.IN
BROTHERS FOR MURDER.
SATURDAY, July 3.-The court met at the usual hour
Mr. Ould made further remarks in reference to the
instructions which had been prayed and was followed by
Mr. Cross The court then proceeded to instruct the jury
in reference TO the several questions of law involved in the
As to the first and second instructions prayed for
by the United States the court remarked that during the
discussion of the instructions asked for by these prayers
the District Attorney had stated that his object to
fer the homicide not to anything which occurred on
the day it happened but to grudge which had prior
existence and therefore the court instructed the jury
that they believe from the evidence that the act of
killing il perpetrated by the defendants either of
Them proceeded not from anything that occurred the
9th Of April but from grudge and malice that existed
prior to- and independent of that day and its occur
rences then the killing would be murder.
The third instruction prayed for by the United States
was granted, as follows
g. If the Jury believe from the evidence that the de-
ceased married at the time he pretended to
enter into marriage contract with the sister of the de-
fendants such fact is legal justification excuse for
an assault upon the deceased either with without
deadly weapon
The first part of the fourth instruction PRAYED for was
refused as not founded any evidence in the cause
and In reference to the latter part the court instructed
the jury follows If you believe from the evidence
that either of the said defendants prepared himself with
deadly weapon for the purpose of using it in antcpa
ted combat with the deceased, and did use it fatally
corng to such intention he would be guilty of murder
in the absence of any other qualifying proof
The fifth prayer is as follows:
"5. If the Jury believe from the evidence that the de-
ceased at about the time of the homicide,
hitting trespass against the property of Mrs Devn
but not against the dwelling house. then such rcspass is
not in law sufficient provocaon to warrant the
anybody else in using deadly weapon or in aiding
and abctting such and If deadly weapon, under
such circumstances be used and the trepasser be killed
Ivy it, such offence is MURDER although the jury shall
further believe that such killing actually necessary
to prevent the trespass.
On this the Court said that every man has the legal
right to order who intrudes into his house to with
draw and if he does not to compel him to do So But
1t is not every invasion of mans dwellnghouse thai
will authorize the of dangerous deadly weapon
he should abstain from such unless violently assault
ed by the intruder he he owner having other
of avoiding the assault having to apprehend
great bodily harm injury to himself, being
unable otherwise to maintain his lawful possession His
efforts to the intruder, following request for his
withdrawal, should commence in moderation, and
tinue until necessity for different is forced
upon him. The proprietor may delegate the power he
possesses and IL may be properly aud lawfully exercised
by behalf of his widowed mother, if she be the
propretrcss without any request from her The homi
eide in this case is said to have taken place in the yard
small garden attached to the house by enclosure
within the curtilage and is the evidence and the in
srucon asked supposes the protection is not
tended to the curtilage the house This naked
point it is unnecessary for the court to decide but it has
been contended with force, and argued with at least
great plausiby, that every part of the curtlage and
the buildings within it, though not in point of fact
part of the dwelling house, shielded by the same
law which is thrown over the house Burglary which is
breaking into dwelling house in the night to commit
felony may be committed by breaking into an clubhouse
within the curtilage In the before yon if you be-
evc the evidence there intrusion into the dwell
Ing and attended with violence cxcrted against the
efforts to exclude the deceased the proprctress with
drew, desiring of the prisoners to follow her. from
her parlor to her Kitchen whittier they followed by
the deceased and upon retiring from the kitchen to tho
yuTd te deceased having first taken of his coat and hat
which he left in the Kitchen joined them in the yard
where the younger prisoner was and where the unfortu
nate conflict which terminated fatally arose. | detail
these circumstances to say that this whole very brief
aia may be regarded as an invasion of the Devn dwell
ling, and was in law according to my Judgment con-
unuou invasion of it, especially the deceused il may
DC iairly inferred, intended and might be expected
go back into the kitchen for his coat and hat
The sixth prayer granted, in the following words
SC 1.-THE jury believe from the whole evidence that the
defendants intended to kill the deceased or To do him
some goat bodily harm, which intention may be inferred
rom the weapon made OF, from any other crcnm
stance in proof then such homicide is murder notwth
standing the jury may believe that at the time of the
killing, the defendants hal received slight provo
cation"
The seventh instruction prayed for by the United States
Is as follows:
l. IT. from the evidence, the jury shall find that sud-
zen quarrel between the deceased and the prison
erS-and that, assault first committed by the de-
ceased, blows passed between them and that, in the
course OF the contest after becoming heated therein
VI me Devlns under the influence of such passion killed
te deceased by sabs inflicted with knife; and that the
oer Dcyln was present. aiding aud abctting in the
saon OF the killing, acting in concert with bis
uomer committing the kng-such killing amounts to
maanghtcr unless tho jury shall further find that the
p'y VINO inflicted the stabs gave them In selfdefence
N'er rereang far he could with safety to himself
u thot at the time OF giving the stabs he abored
Wei-ioundcd apprehension Of great bodily harm.
The Instructions of the court on this point were
you believe, from the evidence that the two pris-
vtLt were actsg in concert in committing tho homicide
,S united Tor the purpose Of committing 1.-THE in
"uoh s granted except that to entitle them to the
c1a ih., Ia q.