The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1882-08-23
THE ORDER OF ARGUMENT
Causes Considerable Discussion he
tween Counsel.
COMMONWEALTH ATTORNEY ORGAIyS
OPENING.
MIR. Taylor's Argumcnt-Mr. Finch Begins
for the Defence--Sharp Talk Among
the Lawyers.
Especial telegram 10 the Dispaich.I

22.-Upon the opening OF the court this
morning Judge Perry read TO the jury his
instructions, as follows:
First. That II they believed from the evil
dence that the accused went to the place of
meeting with a wiIful, deliberate, and pre-
medtated intention to Kill the deceased,
and in pursuance OF such intention did
kill deceased the accused Is guilty Of muir
der in the first degree.
Second. Every homicide il presumed by
law TO be murder in the second degree, and
in order to elevate the offence to murder
in the first degree the burden OF proof is
on the Commonwealth, and in order TO re-
duce it TO manslaughtcr the burden Of proof
is on the prisoner.
Third. That il they believed from the
evidence that the accused wrote on the 9Th
Of July, 1889, 4 letter cOuchcd in the fol-
lowing language: "Joseph ADDISON
You said III your note TO me that you en-
dorsed everything Miss Hatchett said to
me in her letter; will attend to you in
due season, you internal, low-lifed, living
Scoundrel," which letter was sent to and
received by deceased on or before the 9th
Of July, and that accused, in pursuance OF
any purpose indicated in said letter, armed
himself with a deadly weapon and went,
in company with two other persons, on the
18th Of July, one Of whom was likewise
armed with deadly weapon, to the place
Of killing with view 10 meet the deceased,
and failing TO meet deceased on that Occa-
sion, left word for deceased that gentleman
would be TO see him the next morning; and
il the Jury believe from the evidence that
the accused on the next morning, July
18th, armed himself and one John A.
Roach each with deadly weapon, and in
company with said John \. Roach and one
William w. Boswell, who was also armed
with 4 deadly weapon, went to the place OF
killing. and. in pursuance OF any purpose
indicated in said letter, sent for deceased,
who came to the place Of killing 10 meet
him; and il the jury further believe from
the evidence that upon the meeting OF de-
ceased with the accused the accused killed
deceased with the deadly weapon with
which he had previously armed himself
without any lawful proyocation, then the
Jury must find accused guilty OF murder
In the second degree.
Fourth. That if the Jury believe from
the evidence that the accused voluntarily
went 10 the vicinity Of deceased, III pllrSu-
ance OF notification to that elect preVi-
ouslv communicated on behalf OF the ac-
cu.cd TO deceased, armed with deadly
weapon with the purpose OF having an
afTray or difficulty if deceased did not
withdraw or apologize for an insult preyl-
ou,lv given accused by deceased, ana upon
meeting deceased killed him, they must
find the accused guilty OF murder IN the
second degree, since the accused can't
i.nlcod ,elJ-dcfcnce for killing under such
circumstances.
Fifth. That ii the jury believe from the
evidence that the prisoner came to the
place Of combat and invited or induced or
/ had deceased brought out to meet him Tor
fine purpose OF engaging with him in an
encounter with firearms, the result OF
which encounter was the death OF deceased
from piStol-shot wound inflicted 10y
tbe prisoner. such killing is murder, ana II
matters not which party to the combat ac'
tuallv in point OF time fired the frst sho'
Sixth. That the words OF insult or re-
proach, if acted upon by one not IN the hel
Of passion, or alter sufficient time for cool
ing has elapsed, are no excuse or luS'iica
tion for homicide, and do not serve 10 re
ducc tbe homicide from murder TO man
slaughter.
seventh. The Court further instruct
the iurv that all malicious killing Is m'I
der. and that in the case OF homicide maj
ice i evidenced by deliberate selection ant
Use OF deadly weapon, by preconcer'e
hoetlo meeting notified or threatened u
; the SLAYER. or by his acting on preViou
ouorrel or grudge, and no proyocatlon o
words or gesture, however abusive threa
, onino or insulting, can reduce the KILN
, TO manslaughter.
EIGHTH. That the law presumes ever
man innocent until proved guilty.
ninth. That the burden of proof Is
. the Commonwealth.
g Tenth. That the prisoner must nave u
horetit of every reasonable DOUBT.
/, Eleventh. Twelfth, and Thirteenth. I'M
y nerson attacked with deadly weapon
l.. onotbcr. or threatened with deadly atIa'
b through no wrongful act OF his own n Il.
Ia,ond himself to the extent OF taking II
Il necessary, and such killing Is lus'illao
homicide. 1870, ,oroa ,
n Eourteenth. A man may repel force
:; ,orce in defence OF his person or propeI'
% hut tho force or violence used must not
l. excessive, but only sufficient to repei
IL attack and free the party attacked ii'
:, :, imminent danger.
:. Fifteenth. That II the jury Sil'i' 80
{. any rational doubt as to any important Il
. ,,o.ossarv 20 convict the accused OF
e, nGence whatever, they are bound TO g
l. accused the benefit Of that doubt.
sixteenth. If upon the whole eVlue'
J.. IN the case there be any rational hypoth'
ia consistent with the conclusion that
'.: homicide was excusable or iustlfable,
he he accused cannot be convicted
Re The defence excepted to all the ins'r
rs ,ons from one to seven inclusive
y. THE PRIVATE COUNSEL
at Major Lee, the leading counsel ior
% so,once msyed the court to require
he commemorative Attorney to make
rs concluding argument in this case; lie
,ected to that part being either allowed
NJ hinton or Mr.. Taylor, whom ne ~