The Columbian. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1866-1910, 1886-12-17


whispered something in Wells ear. Mr..
Adams came and called Wells out.
Mr.. Buckalew then offered the reporters
notes Of Hosler's testimony taken at the |
habeas corpus hearing, which were read to
the jury.
DR. |. WILLITrs. / am physician, been
In practice 90 years. was called to see
Hughes about 10 o'clock Sunday morning
after the killing. noticed confusion Of
the face, his eye was dscolored, he CON-
planned Of great deal of tenderness in
the left breast, there was some congestion
there, 1t was an internal injury. Such an
injury could be produced by the blow of
knee.
JAMES Il SCHUYLER. have hardware
store in Bloom. Hughes came in on Satur.
day TO buy some iron and steel. We were
talking about Wells, aud he asked me,
shave you any bilys." told him he
didn't want one, he needed revolver for
such fellows, and he bought one, We
were conversing about the fuss of the even
ing previous. He got a self-cocking re-
volver. (Revolver in evidence shown wit
ness) That is the one.
PHILIP CRoaAN | went to Longs hotel on
Saturday. heard Wells say, 81 done the
son OF b up last night and I'll do him
up again il he comes up here" don't
know how Wells got dynamite, he needed
none In the work he had. | am foreman,
employed on the road by Bridgens.
WIN NJ. HuGHEs. | am the defendant.
The pain have is about AS if you would
hold coal of fire in your eye. have had
1t about 10 years, | dare not lift anything,
have taken 100 grains Of quinine day for
three successive days. When l came out
from supper on Friday evening learned
these parties were there and went into the
sample room to avoid them; afterwards
went into the water closet, no one was
there. When | came out Hoser was fac
ing Wells and Meyers was there Wells
said here is the son of a - and struck at
me and l warded of the blow, and ran to-
ward the dining room, to get cane saw
there, then | ran back to the bar room, |
tripped and fell and Wells fell upon me
and struck me some blows and then some
one took him off. heard the testimony of
the boy Yost, it was exactly true to the
very letter. | fired the first shot after got
the first blow. when | was ON my knee and
elbow. | thought it would intimidate him,
then l thought he meant to kill me and l
fired, think, four shots.
Cross examinaton.-I did not have my
revolver out when | crossed from Stewards
store to the hotel. Wells struck me first
Long said to me, "Look out for Wells, he
is going for you" took out my revolver
and showed was armed. From the time
of the assault saw no possible way to es-
cape. Defts. rest
The Court then stated that they had
formed decided opinion after the close OF
the Commonwealth's testimony, which, IL
anything, was strengthened by the defend
ants testimony and tina. 1t now remained
for the Commonwealth to say whether they
would ask for conviction.
District Attorney Billmeyer then said
to the Cou rt that after mature deliberation
he was willing to submit the case without
argument, and that the verdict should be
not guilty on the ground of self defense
Judge Green then charged the jury as
follows:
Gentlemen Of the jury: As al.eady in
timated IN your hearing, we do not think
that the Commonwealth y ould be justified,
under the testimony she has produced, in
asking a verdict against this defendant for
any offense; for the reason that the uncon-
tradicted evidence plainly shows that what
he did was done 10 selfdefeIse against the
ruffianly assault Of Desperate Self
preservation is recognized as being the first
law of nature. A man has right to pro-
tect himself from attack; he is not bound
to run away when he is assailed; he may
stand his ground and may defend himself,
even though it may be necessary to deal
blow for blow the law does not intend to
make the citizen "a coward. There is, per-
haps, this slight exception to the rule that
one may stand his ground, that before he
takes life there must be no other way of es-
cape from the danger to himself. Ont of
regard to human life, the law says that no
man shall take the life of another, even in
defending himself against attack, unless
there appears no other method of avoiding
the imminent danger to his own persona
lhdl lllRHl nave mere IOr
your determination, II the testimony had
been other than it is whether this defend
ant was in such imminent danger, either OF
loss OF life or great bodily harm, as justi-
fed him in defending himself by taking the
life OF his assailant; but, looking at the
circumstances as developed on the trial,
you will see that Hughes, at the time the
shots were fired, was not in a position to
escape; If he had fired upon the first ap-
proach of Wells, then it might be asked
whether he could not have avoided the
danger by fleeing; but the testimony is
that Hughes did retreat till he reached the
middle of the street, that there he was
knocked down by blow, and that Wells
was over him aud further retreat mpossi
BILE, that he was absolutely in the hands of
his adversary. The only question, then, is
whether Hughes was in such immediate
danger to life or limb as to justify his acts,
The facts all look one way: and the ques-
iion is not whether he actually was in such
danger, but whether he had reasonable
ground to think that he was Men under
such circumstances think quickly and act
quickly, and are not to be held to the same
degree of prudence as man who is in
situation to calculate coolly his chances of
escape, of rescue, or of holding out against
the blows of his assailant until help may
reach him. In this case, the question
whether Hughes could have remained
there in the road suffering the beating llat
he was receiving from The hands of his
powerful antagonis' until assistance could
have arrived from the hotel might, under
different state of the testimony, have be-
come important; but we have the strange
fact that no help did come from that hotel,
though Wells was boardcr there and his
purpose known to nearly every inmate, and
he was seen going out of the hotel:with his
fists clenched,passing through the bar room
where a number OF persons sat, looking
around as If for his intended victim; pass
ing before window, his angry countenance
observed, as though he meant mischief;
and yet not soul went out Of that hotel
to see what was going on, or for the purpose
of Interfering. ..and the only thing that did
arouse them was the pistolshot it is doubt
ful whether, il that shot had not been fired,
there would have been any interference at
all on the part Of the inmates Of that hotel
for the purpose Of preventing this beating
that Wells seemed determined to inllict
upon Hughes; having threatened at differ
ent times, not only with bodily injury, but
I