Western Reserve chronicle. [volume] (Warren, Ohio) 1855-1921, 1860-12-05

being. and not know what he was doing,
or was incapable Of calculating. reasoning.
or rejecting, or had a mere drunken, mad
or crazcd fit of anger upon him, ready to
stab anything that came in his way, in
obedience to mere brute passion. uncOn-
trolled by amy reason, then he would not
be the subject Of murder, of malice, ofpur-
pose or intent.
drunkenness, taking away reason, or tenn
porary insanity for any reason, offered as
excuse for apparent crime, must be shown
by the party setting it up, or appear from
the circumstances.
All persons of age. ordinarily 4 n and
in good health, are presumed to remain
sane, until the contrary appears by proof.
4 mere vicious act do4s not raise the pre-
sumption of insanity.
If you are satisfied that Defendant was
intoxicated to any extent. in asmuch as
that clouds the understanding. and has a
tendency to excite passion, you may look
to it and see whether it furnished evidence
of passion only, and rebuts any idea Of
malice or design in the killing
You will carefully look at Defendants
condition and all the circumstances we'll
established. and determine clearly in your
own mind what he did. what he intended
beforehand. what he then intended. what
state of mind, motive and malice he was
in when he did the act, if he did it. and
when you shall be clearly satisfied and
convinced, you viii say, on your oath7,
from the testimony, under the instructions
and rules given for your guidance, just
what you believe to be the truth, as to the
charges made.
LIST. Did defendant purposely and ofhis,
deliberate and premcditated malice, (by
stabbing with intent to KILL kill Archi-
bald Reeves, Jun. unlawfully?
If you are satisfied beyond the existence
Of any reasonable doubt, upon the neces-
sary ingredients of this offence. that he
did, then you will say guilty of murder in
the LIST degree.
If you are not thus clearly satisfied, and
convinced, then you will pass further.
ID. Did defendant ~purposely and mali
ciously, but without delibcration and pre-
meditation. by stabbing with intent to kill,
kill Reeves unlawfully.
If yea, then your verdict should be gail.
ty of murder in the Cd degree. If you
are not clearly satisfied of this then yOr
should 60 further.
Sd. Did defendant unlawfully Kill
Reeves, without malice,) upon a sudder
quarrel, by stabbing him. or, unintention.
ally, while in the commission of the unlaW
full act of sabbing.
If YOU are satisfied that defendant, un.
lawfully assaulted and stabbed Reeves. NO
in self-def:nce, but with intent merely Il
wound or injurs Reeves, and not to xii
him, then defendant would be guilty o
m~anslaughter, and that should be you,
verdict.
If defendant did not stab Reeves at all
or you are not clearly satisfied that he diC
the stabbing. then defendant is not guilt.
o. any offence charged"
The Jury then retired foT dcliberatiOn
At 81 ?. N. (having been out less thai
an hour the Jury having agreed upon
verdict, returned into court, the prisOhe
being present. The verdict was guilty o
murder in the second degree. The penalt.
of this crime is imprisonment in peniten
tiary for life. Counsel for prisoner CAV
notice of motion for new trial.