Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1879-07-03


on the day Of the homicide, made violent threats
against the person or the life Of the prisoner, de-
claring he would beat or kill him on sight, and
at the time was armed, or had gun in his hand
and said he was looking for the prisoner; and
that the prisoner being advised OF these threats,
shot the deceased unawares, or in lying In wait
for him, charge you that the offence is murder.
On the question of manslaughter, his Honor
charged that it Is the unlawful killing OF another
without malice expressed or implied. It may be
| either voluntary, or the sndden heat Of q. blow.
or involuntary In the commission OF an unlawful
act. The distinction is the want OF malice. II
the prisoner meeting the deceased Unexpectedly,
interceptng him In his lawful business, or watch>
ing or besieging his door when he might have
avoided it, the provocation being sudden and un-
the killing to have been upon the old grndge, but
upon the new insult, and the killing will be
nanslau ghter.
Here 4 party was defending himself fearing
bodily harm, and firing when more prudent
man would not have fred under circumstances
which would render it a less offence.
.Yhe things that transpired on the Thursday be-
fore, except the threats, have nothing to DO with
except the threats, bears upon it. can refer to
no act of Monday arising from the occurrences
of Thursday Cooling time had elapsed:
-, Then to the threats and knowledge Of threats.
not cooled down yet"-showed that he supposed
anger still existed. lie, too, may othave cooled
down. The passing and repassing six times may
have excited anger and provocat10n, and been
sufficient to arouse evil passions. The remark Of
the deceased, passing Caston's door, There Is the
man I intend to whip" instruct you was sufi-
cient to reduce the offence to manslaughter, II,
when he went out he did not know that the de-
ceased would be in his view. The remark may
have been considered a tact challenge, and If he.
stepped out and shot, under the excitement of feel
ing, 1t is manslaughter.
= If this deed was not committed in elf.defenes.
1t must be manslaughter or murder. If a person
engaged in sudden affray quit the combat before
he have inflicted mortal wound, and retreat and
fly as far as he can with safety, and then urged
by mere necessity kill his adversary for the pres.
ervation of his oVT life the homicide is excusable
Threats weD6 proved by fourteen witnesses,
that the had full benefit of that character
of testiHlKy to the exclusion of unoommunicated
threatthe admission of which in evidence is
uDa6lnmon.
Ks to the question of danger or reasonable fear,
4ourteen witnesses proved that deceased was Of
dangerous, violent character, but when sober, az
arms Elght-residents Of this place-spoke of
his character as being peaceable here, where he
resided eight or fifteen months. At common law,
to justify the killing, the bare fear Of danger OF
great bodily harm, unaccompanied by any overt
act, indicating present intention to kill injure.
would not warrant a man in killing another.
There must have been actual danger at the time.
circumstances of the case-as the manner of the
assault the weapon or the like-that the partys
life was In imminent DANGER otherwise the kill
ing of the assailant Is not justfahe selfdefence.
On the subject of good character, witnesses are
always useful. In doubtful cases they may af-
feet or influence the verdict. I instruct you that
where the facts are such as to satisfy you Of the
guilt of the prisoner, character. however excel
lent, is of slight weight but should you enter
tain q doubt Of the prisoners guilt, then you