Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1874-08-01
TME ANALO0TAN HOMICIDE.
Trial Of Thomas Z. walker.
FOURTH DAY.


trial of Thomas z. Walker, indicted for the
murder ofMichael j. Hills on the 10th of June
last, was resumed.
District Attorney Fisher stated that he had
received telegram from Washington, Pa,
from which he inferred that the subpoena for
the witness Langley in Pittsburg had not been
served. He had Intended to call witnesses In re-
ply to those who had testified to the good char
scter OF the accused, but had concluded to allow
the prisoner tie benefit of q good character.
ARGUMENT OF DISTRICT ATTORNEY FISHER.
The evidence being closed the District Attor-
ney commenced his argument, stating that
death took place; did it take place within the
Jurisdiction Of this court? He was free to admit
that although In examining the witnesses he
bad come to the conclusion that the case was
one of murder, yet having heard all the evil
dence II he were in the jury box he would have
doubts as to whether ii was murder. After
reading the definitions Of homicides of various
grades he said that this was a case in which the
msnslaughter approached the crime Of murder,
and he would ask for a verdict of manslsu gh-
ter. He argued that the testimony showed that
the crime Of manslaughter had been committed
Admitting that Hills struck Walker Ii was no
excuse tor the killing; II must be shown that
the language of the law books. There were
large number Of persons present; police officers
were on the ground, and there were means for
him to retreat. When struck Walker did not
retreat, but made at Hills Was that anv ar
tempt TO retreat TO evade the controversy? The
police were there TO protect parties aud he
referred
fact that the deceased died IN another jurisfic-
tion-beyond high water mark on the Virginia
side.and said he had grave doubts as to
whether the act retroceding Alexandria county
was constitutional, and proceeded to read from
law books on the subject.
Judge Humphreys stated that time would be
saved II the counsel would conine themselves
10 the facts before the jury for they 1.-THE jury)
had nothing TO do with the points of law As to
tue jurisdiction of the court he was satisfied the
blow was inflicted in this jurisdiction and death
ensuPd fab ;rr;s
and so instruct the Jury.
The District Attorney said that If the court
bad not jurisdiction of the murder he would be
entitled to verdict of guilty OF assault.
ARGUMENT FOR DEFENCE.
Mr.. Norris followed for the defence, stating
that he and his associate could not understand
why the charge Of murder had not been aban-
doned by the District at the commencement of
the trial. He argued that there was no time for
the accused to retreat to the wall; that Hills
following him by kicks. He argued that there
was no weapon proved, and no wound of an ice
pick. Walker did not "retreat to the wall )" but
tber. He argued that there was no proof that
Walker gave the fatal blow. Might not some
one else have inflicted the blow? He argued
that, admitting the accused struck the fatal
blow, II was in self-defence, and 1t was not ne
eessary for party to wait for blow, but it was
bis duty to get in the first, if he could, when
menaeed.
Mr.. Davidge followed for the prisoner, stat
ing that he differed from the court as to the
question of Jurisdiction, and desired that an ex-
ception be noted. He called attention to the
caused by the wounds in the head and breast,
and said IL had been proven that the wound in
the breast was not fatal one. He claimed that
where IL was laid in the Indictment, but he
would not dwell on that point, for he did not
wish his ellie Mt to be cleared Of the charge on
any technical grounds. The prosecution had
made out trihing case-one by the harping
Earper-a rough and tumble fight; one by Ro.
dler-a stapd-up fight; and third, II not more,
by the character OF the wounds. He called at
that Harper had of a bar-room, but If
Hills place were in the District
and he was on trial for keeping bar-room,
Harper woTid have been more precise. He
argued that there was not much difficulty in
understanding the case; that Mrs Van Sewers
testimony fit precisely the testimony or the pros
Mrs. Sullivan and Mrs. Linkin all saw the be-
ginning of the ARRAY, and Rodier and Harper
the second scene in the drama. He urged that
Walker had endeavored to get away, and in the
apprehension of serious bodily harm, he had
acted on the impulses of nature when he
struck the blow. The prosecution attempt
the fracases together. He argued thai It
was necessary to retreat when the assault
was so fierce as not to allow the party to
retreat in safety In this case there was no wall,
no ditch to retreat to. The danger Is not nec-
essaTy 10 involve life, but serious bodily harm
He argued that Walker endeavored to get out
Of the difficulty: Was there any doubt that
Hills overlook Walker. The latter was obliged
to turn by the herceness of the assault, and
even II Hills was not armed his size was such
compared to the prisoners as to give the latter
reason 70 fear bodily harm If not his life. He
urged that the doctrine of self-defence was the
doctrine Of freedom. II all these Heterogeneous
wounds were inflicted by the prisoner he had a
night, under the circumstances. But there was
no proof that he gave them. Mr.. Davidge
again referred 10 the difference in the size of
the two men, and argued that it was impossible
ar hoe sr~Afn NA1 h.
top Of the head. He closed by recapitulating
tie testimony, and argued that there was no
evidence on which the accused could be con-
victed.
CLOSING ARGUMENTS.
At12 2. n, the District Attorney commenced
his closing argument saying that he was sur
Prised 10 hear the counsel on the other side say
that he had attempted to middle the case for
the purpose Of obtaining q verdict. He denied
that such was the case for il was not his nature
10 oSeTsseP the bounds OF PtSpriety in prosecut-
crepancy in the evidence for the prosecution "a
there always Is about transaction. Throwing
out the evidence Of Harper, who his friend
designates as the jealous witness, he claimed
that there was enough evidence left to find a
verdict. He referred to the admission of
Walker that he struck Hills, but would not
the case was one Of manslaughter. He claimed
none could doubt that walker indicted
the wounds. He denied that the doctrine of
y
for blow, and he claimed that the case was one
Of manslsughter. Would to God he could let the
boy 60 free, and if they had a reasonable doubt
he would say to the jury let him go free and
God go with him.
The court at ~ 80 p. m. took a recess.
THE JUDGES CHARGE.
The court reassembled at 1.15, when Judge
Humphreys proceeded to charge the Jury. After
the charge the case would be in their hands ex-
clusiyely, and they were to deal with the facts
in the case. The defendant was charged by the
grand jury with the crime OF murder, but the
government, In its power, when il was found
the facts would not warrant a verdict OF muir
der, had dropped that charge for one OF man
slaughter. They had nothing to do with the
higher crime Of murder. They should be sat.
isfed that the person named was dead. They
had nothing 10 do with where he died, but they
must be satisfied that the cause OF his death was
what the prisoner did to him. They hal moth.
ing 10 do with the particular instrument with
which the deed was done, but that the wounds
were inflicted by some instrument in the hands
of the accused. They need not trouble them
selves about the wound in the throax, for the
physicians as experts testified that that was not
mortal. The first question was, Did the de-
PENDANT iIfict the wound? II they find from
the facts that others with whom he
was combined inflicted the wounds be
was guilty. II there is reasonable
doubt they should give it to the prisoner, but