The Ketchum keystone. [volume] (Ketchum, Idaho) 1885-1899, 1885-10-17
SEI.F.DEEENSE.
when and How n Man Can Slny
Another and Have the Law ON
His Side.

"Now that the Wepler case is at
an end," said a wcll-known judge
to a reporter one day recently, sit
would be interesting to show what
constitutes the right of self-defense
as laid down in law books. The
right of self-defense is founded on
the law of nature, and is not super
seeded by the laws of society. 1t is
a right which everyone brings into
society, and retains in society,
except so far as the laws of society
have curtailed it. Every man has
a right to defend himself against
an attack threatening him with
death or serious bodily harm, and
his innocence will be presumed
until his guilt is established beyond
a reasonable doubt. The right is
based on necessity, and arises where
one manifestly intends and cndeav-
ors, by violence or surprise, to
commit a known felony on the per-
son, habitation or property of
another. 1t is defense against
present unlawful attack as where
an assault is made with deadly
weapon, or where one is assaulted
in his habitation, or where a forci-
BILE felony is attempted. The law
of self-dcfense does not require one,
whose life has been threatened, to
seek the protection of the law; nor
is he obliged first to call on the
authorities. The omission to seek
protection from the authorities does
not deprive him of the protection
of the law, or of his rights of
Scll-uclcllsc.
"The right of self-dcfense is not
limited to the actual danger threat
ened. The danger of death or
great bodily harm must be either
real, or be honestly believed at the
time to be imminent and on sulli-
cient grounds. a reasonable appre
hension of danger is sufficient ; and
a reasonable ground for belief that
there is a design to destroy life, to
rob, or commit a felony; reason
able and well-grounded belief, a
belief arising from appearances that
the danger is actual and imminent.
Guilt must depend on the circum-
stances as they appeared to him.
Apparent danger is a mixed ques-
ton of law and fact. A man is
justified in acting for his defense
according to the circumstances as
they appear to him.
"The law Of self-defense does
not require one whose life has been
threatened to leave his house or to
secrete himself to avoid his foe.
When a person without fault-in a
place where he has a right to be
is violently assailed, he may, with
out retreating, repel force by force,
in the reasonable exercise of his
right of self-defense. He is not
Obliged to retreat or go to the wall
from an assailant armed with a
deadly weapon, and if he is driven
to the wall so that he must be
killed or sustain great bodily harm,
and, therefore, kills his assailant
it is excusable homicide. He is
not obliged to retreat, but may
pursue until he is out of danger,
and may kill to get out of danger;
but when the attack is not felon-
ious the rule of law is different.
"a man is not required to do
everything in his power to avoid
the necessity of Staying his assail-
ant. Where there is no escape,
after retreating as far as possible,
killing will be justifiable, so where
retreat is impossible or perilous, or
would increase the danger, or where
further retreat is prevented by some
impediment, or was as far as the
fierceness of the assault permitted.
But if the assaulted party is in
fault, he is bound to retreat as far
as he can safely do so; he is
required to decline to combat in
good faith, and if he uses all the
means in his power to escape, even
killing in self-defcnse is lawful.
But if man seeks to bring on a
difficulty and Stays his adversary
he cannot avail himself Of the plea
of sclf-defense. That a party has
hoon strnck gives him no right to