Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1884-12-24
The Jury Convict Harry Burns Of
Manslaughter.
A Verdict Rendered i'm Three
Hours and a Quarter.
The Three Murder Trials Come
to an End.

90 large as the otner days Inc prisoner APP
eeared 10 be intensely interested in the pro-
ceedings.
At9 o'clock A. NJ. Mr. Heath. counsel for
the prisoner. opened for the defence He
said | will still little farther show the
principles Of law that are applicable to this
case The first question you will have to
decide, after listening to the evidence on both
sides, and when you have found the prisoner
guilty.. will be, has he committed murder or
manslaughter? II you decide it is a case of
manslaughter then you will go no farther; if
not then you will necessarily be obliged TO
saw whether it Is murder in the first degree or
second. Under the common law there was only
murder and manslaughter, and nearly all
telonIes were punishable with death 1t seems
hardly possible that within $50 years our fore
fathers made even larceny punishable by
death. / think we can say that near
~ all the crimes now punished by
a term in the State prison, were
punishable by death. But it was not
long before our legislatures saw the fitness OF
distinguishing in the degrees of murder The
Law says very wisely that man who commits
viful murder, it is but just that he should
expiate his crime upon the gallows. But it
is not the bare killing that the law Furnishes,
but the manner in which the homicide is done.
Out Of all the circumstances comes the de-
termination of the crime, whether II Il
murder in the first degree. murder in the
second degree or manslaughter. Murder in
the first degree is killing with malice afprt-
thought Malice aforeth0ught is express
malice that exists in the mind of the man
before he Stays. One author says that no
better definition Of malice can be given than
criminal intent. Starting back we come to
express malice Now, gentlemen, the court
in the case of State vs.. Neal has defined
the term of express malice. When
a man having express mali sc with a
sedate and deliberate mind and formed de-
sign dothe kill another" il what the court
say.. Now you have got to say did the
prisoner have that scdate mind and formed
design to kill this man? As we go on the
statute says all other killings that do not
come up to murder in the first degree or
manslaughter, shall be called murder in the
second degree Then there is another princi-
pie OF law right here. II says that man
must have a sedate and unruffied mind, II a
man coolly and deliberately kills his
neighbor. he is guilty of murder in the first
degree. But If there il no intent or deliber-
alton then he Is to be brought in as muir
derer in the second degree. Here comes in
the question of drunkenness. The courts
have held that nebriation is no excuse for
crime and they further say that because a
man may be crazy drunk his crime cannot
be reduced from murder in the first degree
to manslaughter. But If man is brought
in guilty of murder, then drunkenness, If il
existed, should be taken into account and the
law says that if mans brain is completely
mudded with liquor. then he can be brought
mas guilty of murder in the second degree.
Therefore, | say that murder in the first
degree is entirely taken out of this case.
The speaker related the story Of Burns
life and crime.
The prisoner at the bar has had an unfor-
tunrte appetite for intoxicating liquors, For
the last three years, he informs me, he has
not touched spirituous liquors, but has been
partaking of u home made beer. His daily
allowance was gallon, and some DAYS two
gallons, and the result has been that he was
completely water-logged, or rather beer
logged 1t was probably stronger than much
of the lager beer sold in some of the saloons
in the State. and he grstified his appetite by
drinking this sufT The prisoner never was
before the courts for any other crime but
drunkenness. He has never attacked per-
son or committed assault and battery. The
prisoner certainly never said to Mr.. Spear
what that witness testified to. II he did, i,
was the result of his drunkenness. 1t will
be shown that the Monday following the
killing. he intended to depart for Lowell.
Mass. tie got person who will be placed
on the stand to write to the Soldiers Home,
to which he was attached, for \ furlough
The furlough did not arrive as soon as he
expected. and naturally he was somewhat
taken aback. On the forenoon of the murder
he took the revolver with which he did the
shooting, from a trunk, and laid 1t on stand
in front of the window. He intended to
make his nephew in Lowell, present Of
it. During that afternoon and evening
he was somewhat impatient at the destruction
of his plans in going to Lowell. During the
day he tells me, he was drinking beer and
smoking. Along in the evening he went over
to Mr.. Story's store at the end of the
bridge. Coming back party OF
boys began to chat him about the election.
He discussed it with them. The boys followed
him to the house shouting, drag him out,
drag him out" From 3 o'clock until he went
to bed, he was making beer. When Baker
raped upon his door he was in bed, and he
denies emphsticslly that he ever supposed
that Warren Bruce or any other officer was
st the door; or that he ever used the word
Warren" He will detail to you on the
stand an account of the shooting. Mr..
Bnrns does not deny that when he heard the
crashing, he put his hand upon his revolver,
and he is very frank to say that if he had
known there were officers at the door he
would not have shot, and that when Messrs.
Harrington and Bruce entered his room and
he saw they were officers, his hand dropped.
Had the officers made themselves known at
first Burns would hsve never shot Ii Burns
believed that the officers st his door were
house breakers after his property and life.
then he was justified in shooting them and
should be acquitted. The law says that when
man has committed homicide under such
circumstances as these, the jury are to put
themselves in his place and ask il they would
not have acted the same way. Ii he acted
rsshly then you are to bring in a verdict of
msnsiaughter. If Harry Burns believed his
property was in danger, viewed from his
standpoint, he acted in self defense. Ii you
say he acted rsshly then manslsughter must
De your verdict. do not believe that muir
der In the first or second degree will enter
into his case
Harry Burns sworn, testified: | was born
IN Ireland and came to this country in lS4S /;
was IN the army aud was wounded at Spot
sylvania Court House on the Fighting day" {;
nave suffered since the battle from an injury
OF the spine resulting in paralysis; went to
Me National Home, Togus, in 1871; came
20 Augusta TO live in 1879, on the 18th day of
may have lived most of the time at the 'sOld
roft; heard the testimony of Frank Spear |;
ne did arrest mo. I navar told him that I'd