The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1877-01-17

Of conspiracy, For the purposes Of
this case, it is only necessary that I
should say, that where two or more
persons, combine, confederate, and
agree together to prosecute some I'M
lawful purposes, and steps be taken,to
effect that purpose this is q con-,
spiracy, and is indictablc at common
law. And it appears that all indict-
ment lies, not only wherever a con-
spiracy is entered into for an unlawful
purpose, but also where the conspira-
cy is to effect q lawful purpose by the
use of unlawful means; and this, al
though such purpose be not effected. |
If a fact amounting to murder
should be committed in prosecution of
some unlawful purpose, though it
were but a bare trespass, all persons
who had gone in order to give assist
alIce, if need were, for carrying such
unlawful PURPOSE into execution,
would be guilty of murder. But this
will apply only to a case where the
murder was committed in prosecution
of some unlawful purpose, some COM
mon design in which the combining
parties were united, and for the effect
ing whereof they had assembled; for
unless this shall appear, through the
person giving the mortal blow may
himself be guilty of murder or man
slaughter, yet the others who come to-
gether for q different purpose will not
be involved in his guilt.
IF A, 3 and G DO in company and
"wnlking in the field, G assaults 3
"who flies, G. pursues him, aud is in
danger to kill him, unless present
"help, A, %thereupon kills G, in de-
"fcnce OF the life of Is, 1t seems that
sin this case Of such an inevitable
"danger of the life of 3, this decision
"of G, by A, is in the nature of se-de-
".tendendo, but there 1t must appear
''plainly by the circumstances Of the
"caso, as the manner of the assault,
"the weapon with which G, made the
assault &c-That the imminent dan
igor of the life Of B, DO apparent and
"evidert."
It must be apparent from this law,
that A, is called upon suddenly, with
out time for meditation, to so act as to
}save the life of B, who is assaulted by
C, and yet the law holds him respon-
siblo for using any amount of
resistance moro than Is absolutely nee
essary to save the life of 3. TO justi-
fy him in using a deadly weapon, 1t
must he apparent and evident that the
life Of 3, must be inimminent dan
ger.
The prisoners at the bar have several
ly come Upon the stand md testified
that the object of theif assembling
was to prevent any violence to Rhodes
who had been lodged in the calaboose
for failure to give bond to keep the
peace. That he had informed them
that his life was not safe &c. This
statement is in direct conflict with
that mado at the Coroncr's inquest
over the body Of Allen, tho deceased,
by those of the prisoners who gave
evidence. The aus then assigned
for thoir assembling being to take
Rhodes out of the calab0osc. Tho lat
ter object on their assembling is sus'
tanned by other proof than their own
contradictory statements, and it is fol-
you gentlemen of the Jury to recon-
cile tho testimony ard determine
which is true. 1t matters but little for
which Of these two purposes they as
scmblcd. If they had conspired to
release Rhodes from the custody OF
the law, or to prevent violence to his
person, in either event it was for all
unlawful pnposc, and the magnitude
of their crime must be determined by
the facts of the case. In general ev-
cry homicide is presumed to be mali
ciOus, and of course amounting to
murder, until tho contrary appears
from circumstances of alienation, ex-
cuse, or justification and that it is in
cumbcnl upon tho prisoner to make
out such circumstances to the satisfac'
ton Of the Court and Jury, unless
they arise out Of the evidence produc-
cd against him. What are the cir
cumstances of alienation, excuse, OF
justification if any exist in this case.
If you should come to tho conclusion
that Allen the deceased and Baker
fired upon the prisoners in the night
time first, and that the prisoners i'll
turn fired believing their persons In
danger of great bodily harm or their
stop right there and write your
verdict not guilty. But should
you come to the opposite conclusion.
that the prisoners fired first, then they
must satisfy you from circumstances
of alienation, excuse, or justification,
that they are not guilty OF murder OF
manslaughter as the proof may justify.
All the prisoners admit that they were
notified several i hours beforehand
OF the purpose for which they wore to
assembled armed, and from this fact
you may or may not conclude that
they had ample time to communicate
with the town and other civil author
tiles, their apprehensions OF violence
being done to the person Of Rhodes,
and that there was no necessity for
taking the law in their hands, and
that the act of shooting was prelnedi-
tated. And just here l will remind
you of tho testimony of the colored
man named Henry Valentine. This
| witness said he told Asberry Allen,
Edwin Prince, Capcrs Allen and Ed
ward Prince four of the prisoners that
they ought to go and consult Beckham
ham Trial Justice and the Intendant Of
tho Town Of Lowndesville about get
ting Rhodes out of the calaboOse. TO
which Asbery Allen and Edwin
| Prince replied-'it was of no use."
| You ma or you may not, as I have
already said, infer from this fact, as
we'll as the length of time the pris-
oners, with arms had guarded the
road, that they meant to take the law
into their hands.
Gentlemen of tho jury, in this
case tho prosecution to strength
OIL its clso has used two nc
completes. The law makes 1t my duty
to tell you that it is not safe for the
Jury to convict upon the unsupported
testimony of an accomplicc. In this
case, however, there is proof, (whcth-
CT you cal rely upon it or not) corrobo-
rative of the testimony Of tho two nc
completes.
In conclusion gentlemen of the Jul
| ~, if you should find from the evil
dcncc that the prisoners were fired up
Oh by tho deceased and Baker, and
that they returned the fire believing it
necessary TO a themselves from
great bodily harm, " death, you will
find u verdict of not guilty. But in
the event you should con,o to the op-
posite conclusion, you will then de-
tcrminc from the testimony whether
or not all Of the prisoners were pres
cnt at the shooting, and that they had
assembled to carry out q common de-
sign, lawful or unlawful, and that,
that common design was carried out,
and of what crime the prisoners are
guilty under the law as expounded to
you by tho Court. If the proof does