Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1881-08-18


ing the life of his assailant, although in fact he
is mistaken as to the existence or imminence
of the danger. Who're person in the lawful
pursuit Of his business and without blame is
violently assaulted by one who manifestly and
maliciously intends and endeayors to kill him,
the person so assaulted, without retreating, al
though it be in his power to do so, without in
creasing his danger, may kill his assailant if
necessary to save his own life, or prevent enor-
nous bodily harm; and in this connection the
accused has a right to introduce testimony as
to the character of the deceased as dangerous
man or otherwise, and that such character of
| the deceased was known to the accused at the
time, or that he had the means of knowing it.
1t is claimed on the part of the accused that
he was intoxicated at the time the act was
done. The court will say to you, gentlemen.
that, as general proposition of law, that in
toxication is no excuse for crime, but this gen.
eral proposition is subject to certain exceptions,
that is, in the higher grade of crime, where
premeditation and deliberation are necessary
| ingredients of the crime, as in murder in the
| first degree, the jury may consider the testimo-
n, as to the intoxication of the accused at the
time the shooting was done, and find whether
he was or was not intoxicated, and if they find
that he was intoxicated to an extent that would
l
aad deliberating on the act before the same
was perpetrated, such testimony would reduce
the crime to murder in the second degree OF
manslaughter, as the testimony would Justify.
| testimony was introduced by the accused
tending TO prove that Sterling Riggs, the de-
ceased, had turned States evidence, and testi-
fed against the accused touching certain charg-
es made against the accused party, George W.
Weir, and that Weir was excited in conse-
quence of such testimony on the part of Riggs.
The court will say to you, gentlemen, that such
a provocation would not justify the accused in
taking the life of Riggs. But such testimony
was permitted to be given as tendency to show
the state of feeling between the two parties,
Weir and Riggs, and whether the mind of the
accused was -afected thereby to such an extent
as to prevent him at the time the act was done
from celebrating and premeditating before the
shooting was done, and to show the condition
of Weir's mind as to whether il was clouded BY
passion. in which case the crime might be
manslaughter. If you find that the shooting
that caused the death of Sterling Riggs was
done by the accused party, George W. Weir,
purposely and maliciously, that would consti-
tute the crime of murder in the second degree,
unless you find it was done upon a sudden
quarrel or when the accused was in the COM
ullssiOH VI eOluc dCb III tTu6T 10
bring the grade of crime from murder in the
second degree up to murder in the first degree
it is incumbent upon the State to produce tes-
timony that satisfies your minds beyond a rea-
sonabe doubt that the accused party, George
W. Weir,, purposely and of deliberate and pre-
meditated malice killed the deceased, Sterling
Riggs; and that the accused at the time, in the
cond tion he was in, and under the circumstan-
ces that surrounded him at the time, was ~
condition to deliberate and premeditate and
know the consequence of his act. The words
''purposely and of deliberate and premeditatcd
malice, as applied to the killing have much
meaning. Purposely implies an act of the will,
an intention and design to do the act. 1t pre-
supposes the free agency of the actor. DELHI
Grafton and premeditation require action of the
mind. They are operations of the intellectual
faculties, and require an exercise of reason, re-
Election, judgment and decision. Then, gentle
men, with this definition in your mind, you will
inquire was the accused at the time the act was
done incapable, from any cause, of deliberating
and premeditating upon the act? Had he self
control and freedom of will? If you find that
he had such power at the time he would be
guilty as he stands indicted; but if you find that
he was incapable from any cause of acting with
premeditation and deliberation and freedom of
will, then the accused would not be guilty of
murder in the first degree; and then you will
proceed to find whether the act was purposely
and maliciously done; if so, the accused would
be guilty of murder in the second degree. Then
YOU will inquire whether the act was done in
the heat of a sudden quarrel or impulse, or un-
Intentionally when the accused was in the COM
mission Of an unlawful act. In such case the
accused would be guilty of manslaughter; that
is, if you find that the act was done in the
heat of a sudden quarrel, or impulse, or unin-
tentionally when the accused was in the COM
mission of some unlawful act, then he. would be
guilty of manslaughter.
In either of your findings of guilty against
the accused, you must first find that the act
was not done in self-defense.
You are to be the judges of the credibility of
witnesses that have been produced and sworn
before you. 1t is your duty to reconcile the
testimony so far as you can reconcile with the
truth of all of it. But if you are unable to do
so, it is then your duty to find the truth, and,
having found it, so render your verdict
You will take this case then, gentlemen, AID
pass upon the testimony under the law as the
same has been givenyou by the court in the
charge; and you MAY find the accused party
guilty as he stands indicted, or you may find
the accused not guilty ofmurder in the first de-
gree but gnilty of murder in the second degree;
or you may find the accused not guilty of either
murder in the first or second degree, but guilty
of manslaughter; or you may find hip not guilty
of either.
On your retirement to your room to deliber-
ate upon your verdict, you will appoint one of
your number foreman, who will sign the YER
dict that you may agree upon. Blank verdicts
will be prepared for you that you Will readily
understand, and when you have agreed upon
and signed your verdict, you will return the
same INTO open court. You will be kept to- |
gether by the Sheriff and officers of the court. |
1t is important that you strictly observe the
admonition heretofore given you as to holding, |
having Or hearing conversation with others on
the subject of the case submitted to you. Avoid
reading any newspapers until you have return
ed your verdict into open court. Avoid telling the
officers Or any person anything about the state
of your deliberations until you agree upon YER
dict. The officer having you in charge is only
permitted to ask you if you have agreed upon a
verdict. You may retire now, gentlemen, to
consider on your verdict.
On Monday morning short before O'Clock,
by direction of Judge Okey, the jury WAS brought
into court and placed in their seats, and in
presence of the attorneys for the State and OF
the accused and his counsel, were informed by
the court that il would not be proper for them
to state how they were divided, hut they we're
brought into court to learn from them whether
the differences between them were as to the
law or the testimony or facts; that if they disa-
greed as to tie law it was the duty of the court
to further explain the law to them, but iftheir
differences were on the facts the court could
give them no assistance.
Upon inquiry of the court ifthey had agreed
upon verdict, their Foreman, E. D. Barnes,
ESQ.,, answered that they had not, and upon the
further inquiry as to whether the difference was
as to the law or the testimony, the Foreman re-
marked that they did not differ as to the law he
believed. Mr.. s. Myers, one ofthe Jurors said