Democratic Northwest. [volume] (Napoleon, Ohio) 1869-1894, 1884-02-14

leVluencei no presumption OF eithel
larises from the fact of killing.
To constitute deliberation and pre-
meditation the intention 10 do the aci
must have been formed in the mind
the purpose TO kill must have been
thought Of and deliberated upon before
the act was done. The purpose to kill
must have been not only deliberated
upon, but the conclusion to kill arrived
at from such deliberation and premedi.
tation before the act was done. The
time for deliberation and premeditation
may be very short.
The word deliberate" means to con.
slider, to weigh, to reflect upon. The
word generalization" means to design
or plan before hand. Therefore an act
to be deliberate and premeditated must
have been reflected upon and weighed
in the mind, and the design or plan
formed before the act was done. The
act need not have been reflected upon
or weighed in the mind, or the purpose
to do it formed, for any length of time
before 1t Is done. If the design to do the
act is formed, and it is considered and
reflected upon i'm the mind of the dOer
any length of time, however short, be-
fore it is actually done, it is sufficient.
lDeliberation and generalization may be
evidenced by preparations made to do
the act. The slayer preparing himself
with deadly weapon when he after
wards used to do the act of killing, such
weapon as would i'm its use cause death.
The fact of two persons being killed AT
about the same time by the same means
may be evidence of design planned
beforehand, and are to be considered
by you as bearing upon this question,
with any other facts proved in the case
from which you can arrive at conclus-
ion. Therefore examine the testimony
carefully, and if it proves beyond reas-
enable doubt that the defendant killed
Isabella E. Williams in Henry county,
ONO, about the time stated in the in
dlctment; that he did it purposely and
OF deliberate and premeditated malice,
you will be warranted in finding the de-
fendant guilty of murder in the first de-
gree, as he stands charged in the indict-
ment, and you will not be required to
inquire further. If, however, anv one
of the material allegations to which
your attention has been called has not
been proven beyond a reasonable doubt
you will not be warranted in finding
the defendant guilty of murder in the
first degree.
If the defendant is not guilty of MUIR
der in the first degree, you will INQUIRE
If he is guilty of murder in the second
degree. The statue defines murder in
the second degree to be as follows:
whoever purposely and maliciously
kills another is guilty of murder in the
second degree, and shall be imprisoned
in the penitentiary during life.'
In Order to find the defendant guilty
of murder in the second degree you
must be satisfied from the evidence be-
yond a reasonable doubt, 1st, that the
defendant killed Isabella E. Williams
in Henry county, Ohio; End, that the
killing was done purposely: Sd. that it
was done maliciously. The only differ
ence between murder in the second and
murder in the first degree is. that in
murder In the first degree, the act that
causes the death must be done with de-
liberation and premeditation, while, in
murder In the second degree, it is only
necessary that it be done purposely and
mallclously; all the other ingredients
are the same. 1 have defined what is
understood by purpose and malice, and
TO those definitions you will look in de-
termining from the evidence if the de-
fendant is guilty of murder in the Sec
ond degree. If you are not satisfied
from the evidence beyond a reasonable
doubt that the defendant is guilty of
murder in the second degree, you will
next inquire if the defendant is guilty
of manslaughter.
| Manslaughter, so far as applicable to
this case, is defined by the statute as
follows: "Whoever unlawfully kills
another is guilty of manslaughter, and
shall be imprisoned in the penitentiary
not more than twenty years nor less
than one year."
To find the defendant guilty of man
slaughter you must be satisfied from
the evidence beyond reasonable doubt:
lst, that the defendant killed Isabella
E. Williams in Henry county, Ohio,
about the time alleged if the indict-
ment; End, that he killed her unlaw-
fully and Intentionally, in a sudden
quarrel, or unintentionally, while en-
gagged in an unlawful act. To consti-
tute manslaughter the slayer need only
to kill another unlawfully; but if it is
proved that one person has killed an
ether, and no circumstances of justifi-
cation or excuse are shown, the law will
presume that the killing was unlawful,
and the slayer will at least be guilty of
manslaughter. Therefore, if in this
case it has been proved beyond reas-
enable doubt that the defendant killed
Isabella E. Williams, you will find that
he did it unlawfully at least, unless the
facts and circumstances attending the
killing as shown in the testimony es-
tablishing the fact of the killing are suf-
ficient to overthrow and rebut the pre-
sumption of unlawfulness raised by the
killing alone.
The distinction between murder in
the second degree and manslaughter is
that to constitute murder in the
second degree the slayer must kill
another both purposely and malicious
ly.. Both ingredients exist and attend
and characterize the act that causes the
death; whereas, to constitute the crime
of manslaughter, the slayer need only
kill another unlawfully. If the slayer
kills another Intentionally and unlaw-
fully, but without malice, he is guilty
of manslaughter only. AS, for instance,
the slayer without malice, during the
heat and passion of a sudden quarrel,
Intentionally kills his opposing COM
batant, or if the slayer unlawfully and
maliciously, but unintentionally, kills
another, he is guilty of manslaughter
only. As, for instance, the slayer is
engaged in the commission of some un-
lawful act, such as burglary, he unlaw-
fully and unintentionally kills, one of
tho two observation-disclosures and mall