Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1883-05-11
THE PROUDFIT CASE
Argument Resumed by Assistant AttoT.
ney.Gcneral Weakley On Be-
half OF the State,
Followed by Col. Josiah Patterson and
Col. CAN'T for the Defense
The Closing Address.

The jury in the Proudfit case appeared in
the box yesterday morning, pale, bat deter
mined 10 do their duly. They had recov-
cred from their attack of iurSmen's collie"
tut ar occasional spssmodlc application oil
the hand 10 heir sto5aachs showed fear CT
another attack IRON the enemy.
THE ARGUMENT
vas resumed by Assistazt-Attorrey General
Weakly on behalf OF the State, and pre-
sented the case f.on his standpoint in a
clear, logical ana impressive way. The fol-
loving Is synop=is of mis- argument:
Many wItresses have been introduced by
beth sides As TO the facts Of the killing
There is much apparent conflict in their tes-
limony. No two perFons ever saw the same
Transaction IN the same way. Tue attention
of one witness ia called specially TO one cir
cumstauce, that OF another witness 10 some
other circumstance, and in this way there
appears 10 be contradiction where there is
really none. The jury must look 10 all the
evidence, harmonic it if they can, and, upon
the whole, decide where the truth is. 1t
will be observed by the jury that defendants
are Jointly indicted, while the proof shows
that Adiai Proujf. alone fred the pistol.
II thAy were acting jointly in an unlawful
design, and in he pursuance of nat design
WmbeTg was killed, then Jsmes Proudfit
would be az guilty as II be had fired the
fatal shot. The Code Of Tennessee provides
that all persons present, aiding and abetting,
or re sdy and consenting to aid and abet in
any criminal offense, shall be deemed prin-
cipsl offenders, and punishable as such. Sir
William Russell lays down the doctrine tina.
"it a fact amounting to murder should
be committed IN the prosecution Of some
| unIdwfld purpose, though it were but bare
trespass, all persons who had gone in order
TO give assistance, # need were, for carrying
such unlawful design iaio execution, would
| be guilty Of murder" 1t il, therefore, Insist
| ed by the State that il James and Adl,i
| Proudft went together 10 inaict great bodily
! harm upon or to kill Axel Winberg, or even
TO commit bare trespass upon his premises
| then, if in carry Jag out that unlawful pur-
pose Adlai killed him, it would
be murder in both. The question
| then arises, was -As4ai-t roudht
| luslifsbie in killing Winberg? because If Adj
| lai is guilty then James partakes OF TINT
| guilt upon the principle just announced. II
| Adlsi is innocent then james cannot be con-
| victsti, because he did not FIRE the pietol.
| Tt defense urge that Adlsi PtouGht was a
| pesce-msker, and no sidsr OF James, IN
i lawful purpose. The speaker argued that
| the facts Of the case were otherwise. 1t ia
shown by the proof of number of wit
nesses that the two ProuCits were standing
outside Winberg's door, one upon the north
| side aud the other upon the south side, for at
least three or four minutes. Several of the
| witnesses swear that Hal said 10 Wineerg,
| "Come out" "Come out" Ii is in evidence
| that during that time Adlai did not attempt
| to dissuade james from his purpose, When
| Wiuberg's door was opened james rushed
in. aud in a few moments was elected by
| Win5srg, who, 10 putting James out, was car
| ried by the force OF hIs previous movemen
| TO the edge OF ihs pavement. Here he found
| himself confronted with Adlai, armed with
| a deadly weapon. Winberg thus finding
himself in danger, or, as a reasonable mar,
believing he wan in danger, advanced on
| Adlai. The defense claim that Adisi killed
| Winberg in self defense. The State answers
that if any necessity 10 xiii Wipberg sxis: ed
that Adlai, by his illegal conduct having
br- ught rhst Necessity upon himself, canGol
take advantage Of it. "No man can take
advantage OF hls own wrong" In djsou ssipq
the law of self-defenss, Judge Csruther'
ssys that 2 necessity % kill brought about
by party's own taul, design or oontriv anO.
will be 10 excuse. Bishop, in his work OF
| criminal law. says that a party mus
himself be without fault before he car
involve the Law OF self-defense il
his behalf. This is an elementary
principle supported by every authority, both
ancient aud modern. The speaker pressed
upon the jury that the evidence showed tb,
necessity to kill Winberg, if any existed
was broushs about by Adlai's oWn fault. II,
nd no right to stand before a msn's doc
with arms, and that in threatening attitude
Wpberg had heard him calling him out
and the mere presence Of Adlai before th'
door at that time and under the ciTcum
| stances proven in this case was an overt &C
which would have justified Winberg in kill
ing him. Ii Winbsrg would have right Il
kill Adlsi, by reason OF an overt act OF vic
leuce on Lis psrt, then Adlai could not in
nocently sill Winberg, even if he were il
danger, because, in the language of the Law
books, "he broeght the necessity upon him
self" a msn has a right 10 defend hi
home against all armed invasion. ant
to pursue the tfespassers, if nee;
be, until he ia entirely out o
danger. The right to defsnd home is, il
some respects, superior to the right TO de
; fend ones person; because, in some cases,
party sssslled must retreat; but the hom
is the castle which no man is compelled t
) abandon. Here he may stand aud resis
his opposeTs. Not only may ne eject, bu
he may pursue them until, as q REASONABLE
! man, he seels perfectly safe. When Win
g berg carried James TO the door and threw
him out he saw Adlai. He believed Ada
, would take his life. Then, 10 order to saw
his own life and TO free HE home from thi
t attack upon it, he had the God-giVen righ
TO pursue Adlsi, and il need be to kill him
, 1t Is therefore urged by the State that thes
defendants, having provoked the difficulty
: and being the original sggressors. cannot il
| woke the law of self defense. Bat the de
PENDANTS, by their counsel, will SIS
l that they Eetreated, or rather tbs
! AdIai retreated and abandoned tn
conflict. They admit for the purpose of tn
argument that Adiai was III the wrong .
frat, hui that afterward, in good faith, b
abandoned the oon6icI, by reason of Whic
-, abandonment the right Of telf-dtfeuse re
vived. The testimony of james Hunt an
Jack Harris, besides that Of many other wit
e nesses, ia that when Winberg turned on Ad
! lai, Adlai stepped back slowly, drawing hi
: pistol. When person assaults another an
{ is resisted, if ne wishes to retire honest
from the contest, so that his right Of sell
defense may revive, he must fairly and IN
; equivocally notify the party first assaulte
of his intention. No casual doubtful
conduct will suffice. The Suprem. Court 0
Ohio, IN a leading case, says the abandonment
must be so marked in time, place and cir
, cumslances as to fairly notify the party tina
he IS no longer IN DANGER, an
to make = continuance of the dill
fculty the pursuit OF vengeance rathe
than Tor his own protection. In
California case where the defendant was frs
in fault, and retired slowly from the stree
and into the back part of bar.room, an
there turned upon the person whom he ha
asssiled and killed him, it was held that thi
was no retreat. The evidence shows this
Adlai Proudft disputed doggediy every incl
of the ground, and never notified Winber
by his conduct that he was out of danger
1t has been said by hig q authority that if
person goes into & fight armed, so as to pu
it beyond his ability to fairly notify his ad
versary, then he must take the consequences
! of his wrongful acts. Tne speaker referre
to the good character of the defendants, AM
submitted 10 the jury that good characte
could avail nothing ia a clear Gaze Of guilt
Some Witnesses have testified to Winberg'
bad, turbulent and violent disposition, Will
others have said his character for peac
and 9uietude Was good, and all agree that h
was an honest, hard-working man. Even
bis character were bad, this would not iustif
J The Prouddts in killing him. Under our laI
it is q crime to kill an alien or an oullaS
, Evidence OF he bad character OF the decease
would be OF no avail except to show the ap
prehension under which AdIai Proudi
labored, or who brought on he difficulty. ]
| IL cissr IN The Promo fitz ypra the sporessor.