Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1885-06-24
PUT YOURSELF N HIS PLACE.

Joseph Shelton was beating his wife
The 15-year-old son of the pair attempted
to restrain his father and prevent injury to
his mother. Failing in this by reason of
the superior strength of the man, the boy
fired upon and killed his father. To who
ever reads the San Andreas dispatch the
question instantly presents itself, "Was
the boy justified? ~ The act of the lad
shows deliberation. He did what the law
and affection demanded; he demonstrated.
This failing, he attempted by physical
force to save his mother from injury That
proving ineffective, and evidently believ-
ing the heating likely to endanger life,
he told his sisters to stand aside that they
might not take harm, and then he deliber-
ate!y blew out his fathers brains. We have
no information as to the severity of the
beating the man was giving his wife. We
may assume that it was severe and endan-
gered her life. Certainly l5-year-old
boy may have believed ii very dangerous
to life. The effect upon the son justifes
this conclusion. But the man had no right
to beat his wife at all. He had sworn to
guard and protect her. OF all others he
should have been the last to strike her.
Any severe beating is dangerous; even a
light blow delivered upon certain parts
may kill, and when administered in
some places upon the person is almost
certain to kill. "Thou shalt not murder"
But was this murder? Does the recital
We have disclose any malice or passion
upon the part Of the lad? Suppose any
other than his father had asSailed the boys
mother with blows and refused to desist.
Is there man living who has spark of
manhoodin him who would not shoot down
his physical superior when assaulting the
woman who bore him? What Jury in the
land can be impaneled to convict man
for killing one who was brutally beating
the wife of his bosom? What Jury is
there that would not justify an adult son
in defending his mother under like circum-
stances? How much more readily would
a jury Justify mere lad? How does the
fact that the assaiant is the father of the
slayer alter the case? Men kill those who
insult their wives and juries refuse to con-
Wet. 1t is a chivalry that is indorsed by
the mass of men despite the law. Forced
to the wall, one may take life to defend
himself, his wife and the members of his
family. Here now /, the person who should
have protected the wife abandoning his trust
and obligation and becoming her assailant.
Did the Office Of protector then devolve
upon the boyish son Having the ability
to prevent his father killing his mother
and failing to use it, what would we say of
even a mere boy who would stand idly by
and refuse to prevent an act by one parent
upon the other at all likely to result in
death, or even in permanent injury?
Who OF US, il put in that boys place,
would have acted differently? These are
questions that present themselves TO every
reader Of the sud story. For ourself, con-
WINGED that the boy believed his mother
to be in imminent danger, we would hold
the lad blameless, while pitying him as an
unwilling parrieide One of mature iudg-
ment would have sought to SO wound as to
disable the assailant, but who shall say
that this unfortunate boy of fifteen in
tended to make his shot fatal? In any
light in which viewed the lad will be safe
from punishment; no jury will convict
him of any crime in the premises
No ONE will blame the members of the
Grand Army of the Republic for express
ing their Indignation over the preparations
for their reception in Portland, Maine. A
special police force was sworn in, and this
the old soldiers feel to be a gratuitous in-
suit. On Monday they telegraphed to the
authorities at Portland: