Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1881-01-22

events there appears no testimony that at
this time Crow or Hart or Clark advanced
one step toward those men who were sur
rounding the Marshal, until those men
rushed IN threatening manner upon them.
The testimony of all is, the testimony of
both parties, that there was rush upon them,
and MIR. Clark, gives a very graphic, and
what appeared to me to be a very candid
statement of the facts-whether candid or
not is a matter foryou to determine; whether
| true or not is for you to determine-Mr.
Clark gives very distinct narrative of those
events, and shows that he was in position
to observe clearly and carefully what took
place. Whether he told the truth or not is
question for you. He tells you that
while he sat, with Grow aud Hart by his side
in the other wagon close to him, the two
wagons close together, he saw Harris swing
his pistol around, or some other party,
| at the head of the. Marshal, de-
manding his arms. and soon after they
dashed up at him, Clark with drawn piatols.
lie tells you there were several with drawn
pistols. aud that Harris presented his pistol
to him and demanded his arms in a threaten
ing tone aud manner that he entered into
some colloquy with him; that when they
were dashing up Hart reached down for his
gun, and Crow seeing the movement, told lin
not TO shoot yet, the time had not come and
he tells you that before the firing commenced
Harris stood by him, his horses head reach
ing over his wagon wheel; that he stood fac
ing him, and entered into conversation with
him, with his pistol drawn and cooked
and aimed at him. Wilbur Doyle's testimony
indicates that there was q rush up there by
defendants party, but does not indicate that
Crow or Hart rushed down to them. In the
testimony of Mr.. Pryor, he tells you
he got there ffst-I think he said
first-and sitting on his horse by the side
OF Clark when Hart reached for his gun, and
that he also heard the expression from Crow,
The time has not come to shoot yet" His
testimony. therefore, confirms that of Clark's,
confirms Wilbur Doyle and the testimony of
the others, that there was rush up there to
Clark, Crow aud Hart, and that there were
other pistols drawn.
Now, gentlemen, they-the defendants
party-were the parties, then, upon all the
testimony, because there is none to the con-
trary, that were advancing in a threaten
ing manner with arms drawn. There is some
loose testimony of Mr.. Patterson, that while
be was on the way up he saw Hart reaching
for his gun, but he does not testify that he
presented the gun, and the testimony all ia
dicstes that there was no presentation OF the
gun by him until these parties rushed upon
them with drawn weapons. If that be so,
upon Crow, Hart and Clark with drawn
weapons in a menacing manner, that OF itself
was an unlawful act, q threatening act. 1t
was an assault on their part if they did 1t be-
fore any attack or aggressive act on the part
of the other party occurred.
1t ia not matter without doubt as to who
shot first. Some think one, some the other.
Clark thought Harris fred first. He saw
him fall. Both the reports were so nearly
of 1ha
preaching parties must have been out before
they were on this ground. Now, gentleme n,
if these parties rushed up there in threat
ening manner, with drawn pistols. aimed st
Clark, Crow and Hart, they committed an
assault which was a breach of the peace,
was breach Of the law, and if they did it IN
such way that Hart and Crow. or q reason
able man in their position, would have good
reason to believe, and should believe. that
! their lives were in danger, and that it was
necessary for them to shoot in self-defense,
they would be justified by the law in shoot
ing, even if they shot first 4 man who is at
tackled, who is assaulted with deadly weapon,
who is in danger of being instantly shot down,
is not bound to wait until he is shot himself
Then il Hart did shoot fret it does not affect
the question, provided he was in such posi-
ton that the law would justify him in shooting.
Whether he was in such dangerous position
or not is question for you to determine from
all the evidence in this case. Now then, who
ever it was that provoked that contest, who.
ever it was that was the assaulting party I'M
der such circumstances as placed the other
party so assaulted in position that justified
him in shooting to defend himself, that party
so assaulting is the one upon whose skirts the
blood Of these seven men rests, even II the
party thus assaulted was the first to fire.
Who it is do not know. 1t is for you, not
me, to determine from the testimony. Ii,
however, they made this assault Ia threat
ening manner, in the way that l have indi-
Gated, before any action upon the part OF
Hart or Crow, whatever Hart or Crows in
ternal unmanifested intention may have been,
if the defendants thus did it, they were the
assaulting party, and it was a continuation
of the obstruction and resistance before CON-
menc8d to the execution of the writ by the
Marshal. These things all occurred in very
few seconds. The testimony of all the wit
nesses is to that effect. The Marshal testifie5
that it was all over before he succeeded in
getting from the ground upon which he had
been thrown by the rushing horsemep, and
getting the dust out of his eyes so that he
could see.
Gentlemen, you ara to determine whether
that was also continuance of resistance
which had before already begun and been
perfected sufficiently within the law or not.
Immediately after, or soon after the firing
ceased, McQuiddy and another party of
settlers come upon the ground the Marshal
Immediately met him. McQuiddy informs
him at once that he must leave-gives him a
paper and tells him to take it and leave. That
is the testimony of the Marshal, and it is not
contradicted. The Marshal undertook to
read it, but McQuddy was 50 impatient that
he would not even give him time to read it,
Il. LII
to be true, and believe there Ia no contra
diction of that testimony-if there is you will
recollect it. McQuiddys action shows for
itself that he at least contemplated resist
ance. He was Grand Master of the organi-
Zatior This paper was prepared In adj
vance. 1t is addressed to the United States
Marshal It was delivered to him. The
Marshal had q right to presume it was in.
tended for him. and that it meant what it
said, 1t showed that this trouble or some
ether trouble had been anticipated, and prep
aration had been made for it by some action
| taken prior to their coming upon the ground.
1t is addressed "to the United States Mar
shall" and reads as follows: Sir: We I'M
derstand that you hold writs Of ejectment
issued against the settlers of Tulsre and
Fresno counties, for the purpose of putting
the Southern Pacific Railr ID in posses sion
of our lands" Whoever wrote this, and Nc
| Ouiddy adopted it because he presented it,
| if you believe the testimony, was aware of
the fact that the Marshal held writs, and
| that he was there for the purpose of execut-
ing then, and it was addressed to him in view
of that fact. After stating their equities
again. it proceeds 'We hereby notify you !"
you the United States Msrshal-" that we
have had no chance to present our equities,
! ETC., and that we have. therefore, determined
that we will not leave our homes unless
forced to do SO by superior force in other
words, it will require an army of at
least a thousand good soldiers against the
local forces that we can rally for self
| defense, and we further expect the moral
support of the good law.abiding citizens of
the United States sufficient to resist all force
that can be brought to bear to perpetuate
such an outrage" Now this Is McQuiddy 5
declaration TO the Marshal upon the ground,
in this document. There is no conflict in the
evidence that this was delivered there is no
conflict as to its contents. Gentlemen that
is not the language of persuasion that is the
| language of menace; it is the language of
threat, and il the Marshal believed that to
| express the true intent and acted upon it, as
the Marshal said he did, then it is not only q
resistance, but successful resistance In
connection with this delivery and command
to leave, McQuiddy detailed four armed men
| to take the Marshal out of the country, and
| told him not to go to Hanford. The Mar
shall tells you he gave his orders in an imperi-
ous manner, and he understood and believed
he meant what he said, and under the circum-
| stances he had right to believe that he
| meant IT. That is the language of meuace