Daily Republican., 1883-05-08
arrest him heard Mr.. Rehfuss call

GeOrge Elliott sworn, and testitie
that he heard Raymond call Rehfuss
liar, and heard them both call eac
other names. Saw Raymond take hole
Of Rehtuss by the coat and shake him
Another witness was examined, who's
evidence was similar TO that previuusl
given.
Mr.. Harrington said that from tn
evidence produced by the State, it lla,
been clearly shown that in This who'll
matter Mr.. Raymond was not to blame
The witnesses had testified that Reh
fuss was himself acting in a disorderly
manner, and that Raymond took hole
of him to make the arrest, but after
wards fearing that he might exceed hi,
Authority went 10 the hall and swOrt
OUT Il warrant, under which Rrhflss
WAS arrested, tried and fined hy the
Mayor. He would therefore ask tn,
Conrt to iDstrnct the jury to render a
verdict NJ not guilty.
The Court declined to so instruct the
jury, and Mr.. Harrington opened fol
the defense.
Edgar Spencer was sworn, and testi.
fled that he was too far OIL 10 hear what
was said, but saw Mr. Raymond and
Rehfuss on the corner Raymond had
bundle, which he handed TO boy
and took hold OF l:ehfuss. The witness
then walked over and heard i.ehtuss
tell Raymond that he could not take
him he started down the street with
him, when Rehfuss wife and daughter
came toward them crying, and he let
= \, al. L., ~
home.
John q. Adams was sworn, but as he
did not see the commencement of the
disturbance his testimony was objected
to by Mr.. Davis, and the objection sus-
tained by the Court Joseph Tatnall
and severa others testified to the good
character of Mr.. Raymond, and said
that he had always been considered a
quiet, peaceable man. Some Of these
witnesses had known Mr. Raymond for
the past twenty years.
Mr.. Davis made short address to the
jury, and then ask ed the Court to in
struCt them that these men met az in.
dividuals, and after Raymond became
involved in an alteration with Reh-
fuss, he could not claim his authority
aS an officer to arrest him, and also,
that no mere words will justify any one
in laying hands on another.
MIR. Harrington followed with an
able and eloquent argument for the de-
Tense, and closed by asking the Court
to instruct the jury that evidence show
ing good character was of the greatest
importance, and should be taken into
consideration by the jury.
Mr.. Davis m ade the closing argument
for the State, and contended that Ray
exceeded his authority in lay
his hands on Rehfuss in q violent man
ner.
The Chief Justice in charging the
jury reviewed the evidence, and said
that although it had been shown that
words had passed between these men,
ii was an established fact in law thar
no words would justify a person in lay
ing hands on another the Court may
in some cases consider the words used
AZ II provocation for an assault, and re-
nit part of the fine, but in no cas-
would they instruct a jury to render
verdict of not guilty on that account
An assault will justify the one assault
ed in resisting it, hut in this case th-
witnesses on both sides had testified
that the officer had seized the pl,intitl, |
and shook him. If the jury believed
the evidence produced by the pro-rcu-
ion, they must rcndera verdict Of gull
y, but if on the other hand they had |
any doubts in the matter, they must
give tie defendant the benefit and rem
Ter verdict of not guilty.
The attention of the Chief JuSticr be-
ng called 10 the matter by Mr.. Har-
'ingron, he instructed the jury that
rStimuny for character should always
,e given due consideration by jury.
The jury retired, and, after a short alb.
enCe, returned with verdict Of not
guilty AT 5.Oj O'Clock the Grand Jury
nlne in with number Of bills, and
.iter making their report were dis
har2cd until this morning. A few
Minutes before & O'Clock, Court adj
lrned until 10 o'clock this morning.
=. II