Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1872-11-14


vertiSers.
Marriage and Death Notices, when not exceed
ing eight lines fifty cents.
The Instructions in the FewelI Case.
The instructions offered by the prosecution,
as revised aud corrected by the bench, were as
follows
First II the jury believe from the evidence
that the accused from any cause of grudge, or
from any provocatiou, no matter what, so that
there was sufficient time for cooling after the
cause of grudge or provocation was given, or
after knowledge or information OF such cause or
provocation was had by the accused, killed the
deceased in revenge wlliuly, deliberately, ma
liciously, premeditatcdly aud with malice atort :
thought, then the killing was murder ip the
first degree, and the jury should SO find by
their verdict =.
Second. If the jury believe from the evidence
that the deceased, JAS +. Clark, did induce
Fannie Fewell to leave her home, by any acts
of his own, OF of others assisting him, with
intent to defle her. and that he did defle her
and that the accused was intorHmed thereof
and believed the same to be true, and shat for
a considerable time thereafter sufficient for
cooling time, 10 revenge for said wrong done to
his sister by the deceased, did wilfully, deEb-
srately, maliciously, premeditatedly and with
malice atorethought kill the said Clark, then
it was murder in the first degree, and the jury
ought so to fnd IN their verdict. rl!.it
Third. If the Jury believe froan the e7ideocc
that James F. Clark, the deceased, did com
nit adultery with Fannie Fewell, the sister of
the accused, and caused her to commit tornl ca
tion, by having carnal knowledge of her, with
her consent, and that the accused, after being
informed of his sisters shame, did not kill him
s'in the first transport OF passion, but had
leho ~
and design In procuring weapons best suited
to the use of them he intended and in the
mode of killing the deceased, and did kill him
wifully, deliberately, maliciously, premedta.
tedIy and of ~fnalice aforethought, then the
wrong doue to his sister by the deceased was no
justification and no eXtenuation or mitigation
of the homicide, and the killing was murder in
the first degree, and the jury ought so to find
by their verdict, ;, 'Jii i! n.tt.I.f -
Fourth. IF the jury believe from the evidence
that the accused knew that the deceased, Jas.
F. Clark, had been committed to the jail OF
Prince William county for safe keeping to ans
wer the charge of fraudently abducting with
intent to de6e Fannie Fewell, and that there
after he left the neighborhood of the deceased,
and went on a journey to the county OF Albc-
marie or elsewhere, and had sufficient time for
the blood to cool and for Ieasou to re.une its
way before killing the deceased, and that he
then returned and went to the cell Of the de-
ceased, prepared with deadly weapons for the
purpose Of killing, Iand chat ahet dad without
other circumstances or causes OF, prov ocatlon or
justification than those aforesaid Wlltuly, de:
liberately, maliclously premedltately aud OF
malice aferethought kill the deceased, then At
was. murder in the first degree, and theJJury
should so iod in their verdict l..
Fifth. If the jury believe from the evidence
~ ooo,ca5 1phap ha or was informed
of an article in the Alexandria Gazette-now
nut in evidence by him on this trial-was at a
considerable distance from the Jail OF Prince
William county, and thatit took considerable
time, sufficient for the blood to cool and reason
TO resume her sway, before be could reach SAID
iail from the place where he then was, and
that the matter contained In said article caused
him to form purpose and alptan TO kill James
+ Clark. and to prepare himself with deadly
weapons selected to suit to carry out and exc
cute bis purpose at the place, where they were
to be used, and that be did 60 to said Jail and
to the cell where the deceased was confined
and after declaring hispurpose to kill said Clark,
and did.shoot and kill him, wilfully, deliberate
". maliciously and premedhatedy, the provo
cation contained in the matter of said article IS
no justification aud no extenuaton or m1tlgra-
tion of the homicide, aud the killing was murder
in the first degree, aud the jury should so Ind
in their verdict. II ~ !!
Seventh. If the jury believe, from the evil
depce. that the accused contrived and planned,
wilfuliy, deliberately, 1maliciousiy and premedl-
tatedlv as aforesaid, whilst said Clark was a
prisoner in jail, in the safekeeping OF the law,
then no provocation can justify or palate the
homicide and the killing was murder IN the
first degree, &c :. ,,.-..
dence, that the death wound OF James +, CiarS
was inflicted on him by the prisoner whilst ne
ithe nrsoner) was smarting under provoca-
ton so recent and so strong that the |prlsoner
NAV be considered as not being at the moment
the master of his own understanding, ana the
prisoner was 10 no danger Of losing his lite Or
sustaining great bodily harm, the offence was
mansausLter. But if the jury believe, from
the evidence, that after the .provocatlon there
was sufficient time for the blood to cool and ZOE
reason to resume it's seat before the mortal
wound was given, and that thesaccused display
ed thought, Continuance and design in the MODE
Of preparing himself with weapons, or 10 q, any
other way, such exercise OF eontrlyance ane oe-
sign is evidence rather OF the possession OF rea'
arn. hle nassion. and unless rebutted by suth
c;ent evidence to theu contrary the killing was
murder in the first degree, &c:
iJ Instructions by THE DEFENCE, ~ :
The following Instructions revised and cor
rected by the bench, were. submitted by the de-
fspsst F;2;t If at the tine m the pfisosr ID committed
the act charged upon him. from anI ASSOCIATION
of tho deceased with his real or tancied trouo'
les arising from the abduction, debauchlng OF
abandonment of. bis sister after she had neeo
debaucbed, deba has since beoomsssa dsrangedstha'
he was deprived of his memory and under a!iI
standing: 50 as to be unawars 1fi thea hature
character and Consequences of the act ne com