Daily national Republican., 1863-10-02
CAL NEWS.

III NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. NNoS8s ~
tCAisf ysaics Ca,Hsr-Verktct u Gully q
aisr Esp,sasiso~ Of ne Pvsssssv, MsoAssl
j-SsalsMcs Of Ne Cosn.-Ysstsrday o.
n, aftss the RrrusLicAH was put to
District Attorney Carrinston concluded
farGument In behalf Of the Uaited States
J,inst Mishssi Comeford, Of the F1fth New
,rk cavalry, on trial for killing Philip Reilly, OF
lie same regiment. The honieids occurred .
foath or 90 since, on seventh near N street.
address " few words 10 the jury bsfore he I ansIy
with regard 70 the law, and whsthsr II should or
you Tor oonsidsrstion. You passed that point point
judsmsnt q, that the laws should Be- executed as
expsrlsncs Of ali society has shown that there are
men upon the face Of civilization not ~ TO live.
9S1 sy' have provided for that s.;.
case now pending, but with reference to the law.
And while have no scruples about executing the
law, want to bnd a man not nj to live when do
The defendant, Michael Comeford, 10 indicted for
uiiul murder. One single count-wilful mur-
ment as Il that were the only Issue you had to de-
termine IN the investigation ef the case; but II In
wolves all the issuss which have been commented
upon. II involves the defence Of excusabls homi.
Involves the consideration OF manslaughter, the
greater sh.ss somp,shee9d!og ass Lesser. Ara e
homicide, man.laughter which 10 q lesser offence
may BE- eomprehcuded under II, and you may rem.
s ,,ssl ys q y.ar verdict
deiibsrals murder under Ii. sspi.ss.cn OF iRs tSe
i not he duty Of NE Court to color !. % even,
understand the funetions OF the Bench. II there
!. any responsibility 4 AZ attached e your posi-
jnst ~ they are intellisLle to you. The Court IL
responsible for the law Of these facts, and what
ssS:: scn *: *:
tss law Is veil !" Il cam Se eand IL shs booEs
IL sSs %esss Win We've 70 sssns % ,oS sp
preciate Its general signiacation This is the e.
sence Of all authority on the subject.
The Iourt read, as follows:
Murder 10 where 0 person Of sound memory
and discretion unisvfdiiy kills any | ressonspis
& rom ana n!fsIs .oG
murder il The nrst degree The person a sommissins
wiifGiIy, and Of malice sforethousht" You viii
"wiifully," and that term wiifuliy means little
more than "intentionai." II means " "corruptiy
Intentional, y intellectually Intentional" Hs must
purpose to take the life must Ne formed before
hsnd-must BE- deliberately formed
Now ,pPly that feature At of he i1Sctment and
.,e life Of the deceased, and that purpose delib-
parpo.s can b. Traced. Il can % Se trscsd iEs iH al
cases Of homicide where robbery 10 part OF the
purpose, and life u taken for the purpose OF steal
Do you ind 4 - ssstimosy, on he day o. before
the day, when tAese parties met, the existence Of
any %:lsioH; paTpS:s on the part q 4. pri.on:i
lind that II 10 not to be Imagined but il must BE-
proved, and that 10 not ALL II mus be proved be-
yond the psradysnture Of 2 doubt. The law No
tion, In case Of this masnituds. II doesn't exc
cute one OF its eit,ens upon mere guess-work; but
essr, conclusive stsse of facts which proven @ sSs
understand me upon that point,
merely observe that Il YOU DO not od in the proof
anl hin saii.s q mSIa:; 81 shs vsat q pu,:
their bsrscks together In the ordinary Companion.
ship Of soidiers TO . particular place, and that
SSps st:.Sos .S sF uUS Sss
quarrel any occasion for vengeance prsvousto that
time, without you and . moive superveniny after
Sr x: ao.iSs
crate mar1si-S rstiossI-s reasonable ietermi-
must ind some period Of their sonpsnionSh,p Al
the grocery, which has been referred to In the tes-
timony, where that determination was deliberately
formed; and ~ you cannot md II 10 the period OF
of murder IN the first degree.
and you know whether the homicide was caused
hy the ordinary, almost universal, attendants Of
drinking; ynu know whether 1t was the deliberate
and distinctive reeling OF q drunken man or not;
but that question 10 with you.
~ insisted on the other aide that this is ex.
eusable homicide in selt defence. Now,
iendsnt the benefit Of IT, Ifthere Is not any proof
you will not do II. The law Is that no provocation
iusIifu him. This has bRPn ARMED the
pripclple OF compensation to very great extent.
That has very little To- do with II in my Judgment.
does not signify the man struck has . right 10
strike the assailant back, or right to kill him,
until all used every eaart to avoid the asssiisnt.
no part Of seltdsfence. does not enter into its
spirit.
The reason why the law says that II a man 10
By an Q. sss,s y y .nn ssnss
wAids 10 simply this It furnishes proof that the
mind OF the party who replies to the violence 10 30
responsible for deliberstion and cool conclusion.
That is the reason OF the ruling. II not because
a man may strike you In the lace that therefore
purposes; or that YOU may draw upon him pistol
and XIII him. The offence 10 permltted not 1, jus.
titeation, but a. commentary upon the conditions
Jaw iniers that 20 man can DO IN = cool, settled,
And deliberate state OF mind under the excitement
il is to the quality and condition Of the mind that
this proof ID granted For purposes Of selfdefence,
any man has right TO strike back when there 10
mode Of escape, but the blow given must be plea
his defence aud not for retaliation. consequently,
YOU md II laid down In the books that before
shall be permitted to draw deadly weapons upon
an assaiiAnt, he shall resort 10 any and all other
rational means OF getting away from tho violence.
Now, pride does not permit men to do this but the
law does not Justify pride. The law says that the
initiation and ahAll retreat, II retreat will save hls
body. He shall not be permitted to deal on the
principle OF an q eye for an oye and tooth for n
Tooth" Now, II You find from the testimony In
this cause that tho prisoner at the bar res0rtel to
reasonable means to save his person and attempt-
ed to retreat, or II you lind that retreat WAS nse
/. IS, you may superyene the defence II It were
that Is set up by the defendant. u you do not lind
1t in the proof, YOU cannot, Of course, give him
the benefit Of 1t. There Is another feature Of this
case that the prosecutor and the defendant both
your attention II ~ manslaughter.
Voluntary manslaughter is defined 70 be the
unlawful killing 0f another without malice (the
malice that have been speaking OF In connexi0n
With deliberate murder) on sudden quarrel or In
the heat Of passion. Where, upon . sudden quar-.
rel two persons night, and one OF them kills the
other, It Is voluntary and 50, II they
upon such occasions, go out and fight In hell
They must not 90 out to fight duel. II must be
done under the excitement Of tho passion, for this
is one continued act Of passion. So, also, II man
medateiy kills his aggressor, 1t 10 voluntary man.
slaughter, and not excusablc homicide. Not belng
81 ds5rndendo-not being In self-defence, neither IL
IL murder, ifthere Is no previous malice.
phere YOU have yeiy concise and clear view OF
,nansIaughter. Under the light Of that law, pro-