Iowa County democrat. [volume] (Mineral Point, Wis.) 1877-1938, 1882-03-24

mad threatened his life.
If you should think that the
proof fails to establish that the de-
ceased belonged to the mob, and
fails to establish that the deceased
(QuaiD intended anything more
than mere personal contest with
out weapon, then you inquire had
he (Noble) right as a reasonable
man to suppose that his life or per-
son was in great and eminent
danger.
| Did he (Noble) use usual and or.
binary caution to ascertain whether
he was in danger.
If he did not he was in fault, and
If his shooting was from lack of
usual and ordinary caution, that is
if he would not have thought it
necessary to shoot to protect him.
self if he had used such caution, the
killing is manslaughter-in the
fourth degree.
| IL the appearances as proved were
that the deceased Quail was one of
a mob backed up by Gregg and De-
laney, and his attack upon the de-
tendant Noble could only be reason
ably accounted for upon the theory
that he (QuaiD was the leader to
carry out the threats that had been
made against the accused to be
aided by those standing behind, and
from these appearances he (Noble)
as a reasonable man was justified in
believing that his life was in danger
from the attack made by deceased
Quail, his (Nobles) acting upon such
appearances would be within the
law of self defense.
But to bring it within the law Of
self defense, the appearances must
have been such that retreat would
Increase instead OF lessening the
LANCER. Because it was the duty of
defendant TO have retreated if he
could have done SO without greater
hanger to his life.
The above are the instructions re-
,ating to murder and manslaughter.
The remaining instructions related
solely to the law of self defense end
were taken from our statute. and the
settled elementary principles of
criminal Jurisprudence.
The killing of human being is
justlliable when committed in the
lawful defense of ones person under
such circumstances that there shall
be reasonable ground to apprehend
q design by the person killed to do
him some great personal injury, and
there shall be reasonable cause for
believing that there is iminent
danger Of such design being accom-
plished.
In this case did the deceased
Quail make an assault upon the ac-
cused Noble.
If he did, was Noble justified as a
reasonable man in believing that the
assault was made upon him with
the intent to kill or do him some
great bodily harm. If as reason
able man he was justified in think
ing that the intent existed by means
of the assault to kill him or to do
him some great bodily harm
Then as a reasonable man was he
justified in believing under the cir
cumstances that their was iminent
danger Of the design to kill him or
to do him some great bodily harm,
being accomplished.
If you think that as reasonable
man. the accused Noble, was justified
in believing, and really did believe
that he was attacked for the pur-
pose of taking his life, and was justi-
fled in believing as a reasonable
man and did believe that his life
was in danger from the assault upon
him, and the threatening appear
ances and that because of this
threatened danger he shot and
killed to save his own life, YOU
should acquist him even though it
turned out that the danger was APP
parent and not real.
1t is terrible thing to take hui
man life.
1t is a terrible state of society
when life is hot secure from vio-
lence.
The killing of human being in
wolves terrible necessity even when
done Ill self defense. The law of
self defense is sacred one and is
necessary for individual protection,
and for the protection of society.
But if improperly applied it be-
becomes an evil and loosens the re-
straints of law and does injustice to
the public. Juries should be very
careful in weighing the claim of
self defense in killing a human be-
ing.
A clear case of self defense de
mands an aequittal as peremptorily
as the demand of any other personal
right
If YOU do not find it self defense
you will determine what offence the
killing is-whether murder or man.
"A reasonable doubt OF the de-
PENDANTS guilt of any offence de-
mands that it be resolved in favor
of the accused.
The above is the whole Of the
charge. Any man that will claim
that it anywhere favors the accused
is not only very poor lawyer; but
a man who would hail the storms
OF thunder and fire of Sodom and
Gommorrah upon the people as
genial blessings if they only accom-
plished his object of personal spite
or political advancement.
NJ. Nj. CoTHREN.