Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1886-03-27
,ose of showing under what state of facts


aspect of the deceased, in case of homi-
eide, towards The person by whom he was
killed. Let me read two citations from The
head notes TO the case OF the People VS..
Sc0ggins, one of the best leading cases of
this or of any other Court, on the subject
Threats made by the deceased or injured
party, if known 10 the defendant at or prior
to the transaction, are admitted, for the
purpose of showing that the circumstances
of the offense were such as to excite the
reasonable fears OF the defendant that his
life was in danger, or that he was in danger
OF serious bodily injury, and thus justify
his act
in case of homicide, where II is doubt
full which party commenced the ARRAY,
threats made by the deceased are admis-
sible on the part of the defendant, although
unknown TO him at the time of the honi-
eide, as facts tending TO illustrate the ques-
ton as TO which was the first assailant."
THE THREATS AND CONDUCT OF CRAFT.
That is a condensed expression of the
law on the subject, which renders it wholly
unnecessary to resort to the Courts of North
Carolina and Alabama for an exposition of
that branch OF the law. Now. let me, in
the shortest possible way, bearing in mind
that your Honor has heard this entire
record read, state TO you what our position
is in reference TO this case-that is, the case
as it is now presented. Craft. the deceased
heard that Sill was married to the daughter
OF the petitioner He must have been in
Sacramento at the time, because his inter
view with L. S. Spauiding began at Sacra-
mento- He talked to Spaulding here and
then went on to Woodland This was on
the % of February, 1886. There he talks
still further TO Spaulding, and talks to w
X. Pond and to S. j. Sill. Whether Pond
or Spaulding communicated fully what oc-
CURED, to SILL perhaps the record does not
altogether disclose; but the gist and essence
of everything that was said to these gentle
men was, on Thursday, the fourth day of
February, i'll the evening" communicated
by Sill TO the petitioner Harlan. OF course
We are not contending here that words will
justify an assault that Islander will justify
homicide; but these are words connected
inextricably with specific threats. What
are those threats? They are threats against
lite-threats specifically against the life of
Sill; threats theoretically, but not speciti-
caily. against the life of Sills wife, the
daughter of the petitioner Harlan;
general threats. sufficiently compre-
hensive to include all of the mem
bers of Mrs. Sills family He will sac
ritice lives, not one life, bat more And
this information is admissible both for the
purpose of characteriZing the attitude of
Craft towards Harlan, and also admissible
because communicated to Harlan and to
illustrate the conduct of these parties on
Sunday, the 7th of February, when this
homicide was committed. Harlan was the
father OF this lady. The foul and horrible
charges made against her related to period
prior 10 her marriage TO Mr.. Sill. At the
time of the interview between Sill and
Craft, Craft had him completely at his mercy
and could have killed him on the spot if
be - made a single motion | shall not.
however, waste my time here by answering
the aSpersiOns which We're unnecessarily
made on the character of Mr.. Sill. The fact
is that on Thursday, the 4th of February,
1856, the petitioner, Harlan, was appraised
of the fact that his daughter had been
charged with virtual prostitution that she
had been charged with having committed
foeticide; that her life had been threat
ened, and that the life of ey cry person con
nected with her or interested in her was
also involved in the comprehensiveness of
the threats which had been made. More
than that. To two of these persons, and
among them Mr.. Sill, the deceased Craft
stated that he had letters to establish the
charges which he had made And pre-
sumptively the father of that lady must
have been pretty anxious to see Mr.. Craft
and ascertain what he meant by his state
ments in reference to those letters But
beyond that Craft not only made these
threats against life, but
HE FIXED ELIMINATING DAY,
He designated a period when certain
thing must be done or he would proceed to
take lives. and that was Sunday, the 9TH of
February, when this homicide was COM
mitted. We do not propose to place Mr..
III arla hn of ind n rar1 To
was the head of family and of mature
years, a man of eminent responsibility.
man whom we may presume was possessed
of a calm and deliberate judgment; and it
was very natural, if such was the fact, that
on Sunday, the eth of February, on a day
when the operations of business usually
cease, that he should desire to interview
Mr. Craft to find out what he meant by his
assertions and by his statement in reference
to these matters. There is not one particle
of evidence here to show that when his eyes
encountered Craft in that Office of the Byrns
Hotel at Woodland, that Craft made sim
gle motion or suggestion which would have
afforded an opportunity for explanation
| say broadly that there is no testimony
here to show what Craft did at the moment
when the eyes of Harlan encountered his.
and no amount of assertion can extract any
such testimony from this record, because it
does not exist. Now then, if your Honor
please, we come down that far. We have
had a recapitulation here of Mr.. Har-
lan's movements. Harlan did not move at
all he stood perfectly still at the Wood
land Bank corner, between the hours of l
and 2, on the 7th of February: lie was
not the moving party. The moving parties
were Craft and Nelson. Harlan stood there
like statue, while they were moving
around and trying to get around him. So
far as the testimony can lead TO
any inference, they were try
ing to get the drop on him.
Craft was at Woodland on Saturday
night. The testimony of Mr.. Ira Il. Doc
little shows that Craft did not sleep at
his fathers house. He slept at the Syrns
Hotel slept there with some gentleman
whose name, | think, was Hamer. He
arose on that Sunday morning at > clock
That is the testimony. And the first thing
We hear OF Mr.. Craft on that day, with
all this antecedent history behind him, is
that he is in the kitchen of the Lindner
building with the witness Nelson. Nelson
locates himself in the back part of this
Lindner building while Harlan is standing
upon the Woodland Bank corner. He sees
Barnes be sees Sill; he sees Mr.. Stephens.
He does not move about. H says nothing.
which has been established here. These
two perSonS-Crait and eiSon-are in the
back part of that building, and yet one of
them, Nelson, is watching every move
ment in the neighborhood of Mr.. Harlan
What is that for? 1t may be very probable
that Harlan desired to see Craft. | hope
be did ! think rs father, as the head of
family, when
HIS DAUGHTER HAD BEEN TRADUCED AND
MALTGYED
AS shamelessly as she had been by Craft,
that he had right to desire to see him, and
more than that, right to tGWilling to
take any consequences which might result
from the Interviews right which would
be conceded to him, l imagine, by the
universal Judgment of mankind, to know
what the facts were to which Mr.. Craft had
alluded to three persons, one OF whom at
least was stranger to Mr. Harlan's family,
so far as any relationship is concerned
either by marriage or otherwise. When
Craft left the I.indner building he went to
his fathers house, and his fathers house
is south of that building, OH the same
street-south of the Woodland Bank. If he
went there directly, and if Harlan was
looking for him for the purpose of killing
him, he had to pass him. He must have
adopted a circuituous route to reach his
fathers house, and he left his friend Nelson
behind him in the Lindner building
Twenty minutes later-fifteen or twenty
minutes later-Nelson joined Craft at the