The daily phoenix. [volume] (Columbia, S.C.) 1865-1878, 1873-05-09

Judse Oarpentsr look His scat promptly
!1t 10 O'Clock, yesserdsy morning. Mr.
sanney, of the counsel for the State,
opened the cases. Mr.. Dunbar thou ght
the jurymen should be carried to the
scene OF the difficulty. but it was deemed
unnecessary.
The line OF Mr.. Janney's argument
was, 6tst, defining the law of self-de-
fence; second, regarding msn-slaughter;
third, regarding murder. He called the
attention Of the ,jpry to the nature of
that OF murder. He said atheRrly eSesS
term of court sope ono was arraianea
for the crime .of murder and, in his
opinion, ali this srosa fbecause the pu.
nishment OF crime had been insufficient.
He reviewed. the circumstances OF the
killing, commencing with Judge Mel
toms testimony, the event Of Melton's
frst meeting with Caldwell on the fatal
day, the oondtct OF the prisoner and
Montgomery eyeing them across the
street, and believed, he said, this testi.
mony should have very great weight with
the jury; also, tho circumstance of Mel
tons remark at the time: "There is my
man; ]. have good mind to attack him,
and Caldwell interposing to stop him;
the facing OF the parties. the salute at
the entrance Of the Club Room, and the
next meeting i'll Pollock's saloon, the
coming from the upstairs room below,
and the walking towards the dining room
door OF Melton, and Caldwells remark:
"Good Godl there's Melton going in"
then turning to go back. and beckoning
Melton not to go in there. He held that
the object of Morgan and Caldwell enter
ing from the alley was TO keep Melton
out OF the dining room. The testimony
OF tue defence that Caldwell caught hold
OF Upper, and OF those Witnesses that
| he did not touch him. Mr.. Janney held
points OF the case-tLat Morgan and
Caldwell went in there to take Melton
ont. The witnesses swore TINT no wea.
pons were in the hands Of Caldwell when
be went in. AS to the act OF shooting,
Morgan appeared to have been there cool
and collected. After he saw Caldwell
shot down, he acted like O brave, cool
man-rushed up in the face Of the
pistol, as he says, with the intention of
pitching the prisoner out of the window.
The testimony that EImore went to the
Northeast corner. by the wall, when the
affray commenced, and when Cald veil
was murdered, and in the state Of excite.
me mt he Yas then in, would not be able
to see or hear as correctly as-Morgan,
who appeared cool and collected. 10
considered it very significant circum-
stance that no one could tell who fred
the pistol. He did not believe the wit
nesses for the defence meant to tell q
falsehood about the matter. but simply
thst there were some things they were
mistaken In. Morgan was not.at enmity
with either OF the parties. 1e swears
that Caldwell and Tupper never olinched.
Mr.. Janney then referred to the expert
ments made by himself and DR.. Tailey
that had tho parties been ciinched. the
marks OF the gun-powder would have be-
smeared the shirt where the ball entered,
but Of the distance testified to, grains
would have been left upon it, as in the
piece of linen exhibited, and as were tes.
tilted to. Authorities were referred to,
relative to murder and killing in self.de-
fence. The law requires that the defend
ant should retreat as far as he can before
he kills his adyersary-not retreat to
gain an advantage, bat from his tender
ness OF feeling regarding the shedding OF
blood OF fellow-creature. It was ar
gued that Topper did not do 30, and the
testimony regarding his motions in the
room repeated, and his remark to Mestze,
II have protected my friend, and will
do so again" and that it was the inten-
ton of the defendant to kill any man
who interfered. Was there anything
done by Csidwell-blows. menaoes or
words7 The evidence was then cited,
and it was argued that it showed beyond
q doubt that there was not. Wharton on
Homicide, p. 1874. In case Of murder
or manslsughter, tho instruments with
which it is comnitted must be taken
into consideration. It was argued that
if the killing was done by any weapon
except q deadly weapon, the offence
might be smaller; but in this case it was
a deadly weapon, a fve-barreled pistol.
Mr.. Janney closed by asking careful
consideration OF the evidence, aud With
q peroration partly in poetical language
descriptive of the occasion. His remarks
were highly commended by all who heard
them.
Col Wallace, for the defence, opened
in beautiful language that commanded
the attention of the jury and the audi
ence. He said, in substance: When a
homicide is committed in the commu.
nifty, sympathy is attracted towards the