The national Republican. [volume] (Washington City [D.C.]) 1866-1870, 1868-07-15
LOCAL DEPARTMENT

OF THOMAS II. KsLLEHER.-The proseeutIon
haying closed on Monday, -
ne defined murder to be the deliberate taking
me lie OF another with malice nforetbought
an a9a contended that even In the worst aspect
slaughter. He argued the probs bility az IN
pistol going of accidentally in the hands OF
me prisoner was q. pregnant probability 10 DO
II. Gorbutf was called and sworn for the do.
iencS witness saw Dubsnt at his restaurant
o on the night Of the Cd e June lscs, about
had a carbine strapped across his shoulder
and cartridge box. They drank together.
soon after Turpin, deceased, and Dubant came
friendly. Dubant gave witness his csrbine'
saying 1t was understood that the InfeHiqencep
once was to be torn out TINT night, and they
might tear him out, therefore he gave him the
carbine. Witness kept the carbine tcn.days
WIN. II, Hopkins. Witness has known I.eysn
his reputation for peace and quietness is good;
SO lar as witness knows, Il is very good ,
never knew him to be Troublesome unless
NJ. Tobias; witness lives on Missouri ave-
nue., and is bookbinder; has known Turpin
since the beginning Of the war; both were
mail carrier; Turpin's character as a peace Bile
Cross;exsmined; Never heard of any change
Edward Davis. Witness ia a printer, and
~ lives on Fifth street, has known Turpin in.
timately for ten or twelve years; he was liked
0 oy everybody with good reputation for
Cross-exsmined; Never heard of any change
10 him within late years; when drunk, he 10
Captain Howell. fitness has red IN Wash.
ington for six years; was In the service during
the war, has known Turpin for three years,
hearted man; never heard anything against
,Cross;examined: 0nse kept The woodblne
House, but made Turpin's acquaintance atthe
p. H. Brownins. Witness has known Tur-
pm I'VE or zig years. he has good reputation
Cfoss-examined; Made Turpin's acquaint.
ance at the LichAu House; when drunk, Tur-
WIN. Miller Witness lives on the Navy
nardi has known Turpin for three years, met
Turpin every day when he was conductor on
the street earsi he had a. good character, but
was easily excited when IN liquor. ' -
Cross-cxamined; Witness Ia bar.kecper at
the Green House, does not know when Turpin
ceased to BIO a conductor, which was about
nothing; when under the influence Of liquor
he did not know what he was doing.
Mr. Norris said that he had seven or eight
more Witnesses, but they were cumulative, and
he would not further delay the trial. He
would like to have the member OF Congress
here, however; Ito the Marshal) Mr.. Phil
lips, has hr. Lafin been served with sub
pBnal ..0-
The Marshal: No, siri he is not in the city.
MT Norris. Then I've closed my case.
Mr.. Darlington said he had no rebutting
testimony.
Arthur shepherd, Witness ia reporter for
acquainted with T1rpin for many years, his
attention being particularly drawn TO him by
MS extraordinary exertions to save property
at the FIRE at the Central Hotel.
Mr.. Darlington asked the Court to give GER
jury lat +! Tsr fns' kI nhsi
hat farpn Sss tss I'm, 'aS ss
mitigate the crime, and they must convict him
OF murder Nor could good character be Of
e a fact which will aid the jury to determine
the guilt or Innocence OF the accused. Itcould
not reduce murder to manslapghter:
had carried him back two hundred years. For
himself, he conformed his practice TO the pro.
,S %.ns GR nmo Of n; profession The
vancing civilization. IL was the law OF a de al
civilization, which had always required that
sacrificed to his names. He argued that in.
toxication, while no excuse or pAlliation for
crime, yet went Into the consideration Of the
ted. II the crime charged was such as re-
CURED deliberate intent, and the proved con-
dition OF the prisoners mind was such that he
cound not have deliberate Intent, he could not
be convicted. But 1t was proven that Turpin
was out OF his wits, In liquor, and, therefore,
that he could - not have the deliberate intent
Mr.. Darlington replied at length enforcing
=, The Court hrst Instructed the jury as to the
law In regard to the effect OF drunkenness as
untsry devil, but Whatsoever III he doeth he
must h ,t suffer LOT f. Other writers asserted
gate one crime by another. There have been
decisions weakened by this position in mod;
DOWN Sy sSs and s%siHs nj. aiS
proceeds from the cautions of public policy.
Il a man who 10 drunk, without any provooa-
holds him 10 the full measure OF responsible
ity. But II there have been provocstions aud
the question is homicide, malice, prepense or
homicide on sudden heat, then drunkenness
is a fact to DO considered in determining that
question. He was not going to depart u hair
from the salutary rule OF law that drunken
ness was no excuse for crime.
II, however, the question be whether the
crime was deliberate murder or homicide, com.
mitted on sudden proyoeation, the fact OF
been an old srudge, and the prisoner had re-
sorted to int0xlcation to nerve himself for a
crime, which he committed, then he was
could excuse crime must be absolute In
sanity, but ordinary drunkenness will be
fact to show the animus with which q deed is
committedj evidence of good character was
admissible In this case, but Its weight was
question for the Jury; The Court also laid
'hf S m 70 ais
prisoner was entitled to the benefit OF all
doubt.
Captain Goddard then asked witness few
questions. The case was argued by MI. Oar
rington and Mr.. Norris. Before the close OF
the argument of the latter gentleman the
At 6;25 p. m. Mr.. Norris resumed his argu-
ment In behalf OF accused,
lie said when he broke of his argument he
was about to remark that there was physi-
cal fact that would control this case more than
any moral evidence that could be producedj
this was the nature of the wound-the course
the ball took. No one could shoot on that
line through mans head, unless q man for
: Home such motive should hold the pistol in
just that manner. 1t must be intentional. It
saw the uplifted hand and the fash of the pis-
tol, and no man could make such shot with
an uplifted hand. Should man shoot In his
natural way, the ball would pass through the
Jaw direct. This was voluntary shot, 1t
must have been an accidental discharge OF the
pistol
Mr.. Norris next referred to the fact that a
witness stated that the flesh of deceaseds face
was burned by gunpowder, This, he said, was
no guarantee that accused was within reach
ing distance Of deceased when the fatal shot
was fired. The same might have been the case
had the shot been fired from distance OF six,
eight or ten feet at the deceased.
Here the Judge became too much heated to
remain on the bench, and he took a seat at the
door of the ante-room
Mr.. Norris commended that Mr. Dubant Zone
ofthe witnesses) was drunk, and he admitted
he WAS drunk, and he came here and testified
toa falsehood-not wllfully, but because he
was crazy. He admitted on the stand
that he gets dunk and that makes him
crazy, Should man BIO convicted on