Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1883-10-27
TIE WLEY PISTOL CASE.

"A Lost Warrant Blocks PROCEEDINGS sus
Finally Turns Up-The Rights of Peace
able Citizenship and of Police Officers
Taken All in All Very Interesting
Criminal Trial.
The case of Fred. Rawley for assault
upon Officer Hendy of the police force
with a dangerous weapon with in
tent to do great bodily harm was
in hearing before Judge Wilkin all day
yesterday, the district court being crowded
with attendance; but considerable time
was lost by the non promotion of the orig
inal warrant sworn out against Rawley for
felony in threatening the life OF one Sim
mons, under which the officer was in
directly acting at the order of the chief
of police at the time of endeavoring to
s'run in" the prisoner and when the latter
drew his pistol and threatened to ''shoot
his head off,
| On this account the trial did not get I'M
der full Roadway until afternoon, when the
docum ent which had been mislaid was
produced. The examination of the several
witnesses went to show that acting under
this warrant issued by the municipal court
Chief Clark ordered his force to run in"
to the city hall said Rawiey if encountered
on their respective beats.
One evening last July. Officer Eendy
dropped on gang of young fellows near
the Sixth street bridge, and thinking Raw
| ley to be one of them made inquiry, but
his fellows denied that he was present.
However, he stepped up to the supposed
Rawley AID placed his hand upon his
shoulder and asked him II he was Rawley,
which he denied, ard ne then asked him 70
go with him to the city hall. On
this he testiGss Rawley ciutched him by
the throat and drawing q revolver with
| its chambers filed, threatened to shoot
'his head Off" The other fellows scat
tered and he summoned another officer to
his assistance and they two claim to have
made his arrest ct great danger to their
lives.
The defense seek to establish the fact
that Rawley was entitled to the rights of
peaceable citizen, that no warrant was
read or shown him, that he was not told
why the officer wanted him, and that he
had a right to resist under Minnesota and
other decisions, etc. They also seek to
establish the fact that he, Rawley, had
been on drunken spree for three days
and nights without proper food, and
was so much under the influence
of 1ntoxication, that he did not know what
he was doing when he drew the weapon GU
the officer, to which intoxicated state he
Rawley testified on the stand, his me nory
being defective as to the whole affray ex-
cept as to being olutched by the arm by the
officer.
The summing up of the case by county
attorney Egan brought out the fact that
the prisoner was by profession a railway
brakeman. Ee claimed that ne knew he
was guilty of crime in threatening to
shoot Simmons and had fortified himself by
liquor up to point of desperation fearing
arrest, and had bscome desperate through
the influence of drink, bat not non conlpus
ne,atis on account of it. He claimed that
policeman'5 laying his hand upon a
mans shoulder and asking him to como to
the city hail in obedience to orders to'ran in
man by his chief, who had a warrant ont
for him for felony, did not justify the
prisoner in drawing this weapon, as it
would if the policeman had roughly han
died him without provocatiop, and had
given him no intimatiou why his peaceful
citizenship should be disturbed by such
authority.
He secuted the idea that with such an
| OFu0F from MS Cj1iGl Il pOiiN6uiEn ItU5b
have warrant to bring il Il criminal, and
admitting the necessity, if asked, of po-
Iiceman telling an accused person aOhy ar
rested, stated that the prisoner did not
ask, but at once used this violence and
threat, and he then brought up the de-
fences plea that he was too much under
tho influence of liquor to know what he
was about. This man, he said, had
| cclf r.
of cowardice to brava6o and
desperation and he and his friends could
thank God that he was not arrsigned here
for murder instead Of this Lighter Of
fence.
He then made plea for the police,
standing on the swatch towers for the
public safety and patroling their beats in
all weathers, taking their lives in their
hands for $40 month to protect public
!; peace, property and life. This case in
itself was trivial com pared with the re-
suits which would accrue if not rightly de-
cided by the jury. This crowded court
room would disseminate the intelligence
by an adverse verdict to the prosecution
far and wide and des perate and lawless
class would in consequence take courage
to make the calling of these officers more
dangerous and the results to
peace and good order in
the city of st. Paul would be
most disastrous. In such case he would
not stand in the boots of any st. Paul Pc
liceman, which force was composed Of
honest artizans in the main and had
never been proved to his knowledge to be
else than gentlemenly in their profession,
for ST. 900 a year. He had no malice
against the accused and no man Oh the
jury had any, but By the quiet tip on the
shoulder by a mildly hammered officer
this prisoner was not called upon to draw
a weapon with hail trigger,
which with slight pressure
would have sent that officer into eternity
for doing his duty.
The defense made a powerful argument,
which was mainly based on the rights of q
private citizen over the collective rights of
the general public, and cited law showing
that an officer had no right to arrest a
man under certain circumstances of which
it was claimed this was one, or a jury to
find man guilty of tntentito commit a
crime when his mind was 80 far over
come by intoxicants to becloud his intel
lect and befog his reason.
| As the counsel for the defense rested his