Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1886-02-18

being rs large as at any time since th
trial commenced, and increasing in siz
until there was not AN inch of spnce lef
The proceedings were opened by Doput
Attorney General Biggs with his addres
to the jury. After disclaiming any pei
sonal feeling in the case and stating tha
he was here simply in pursuance of hi
oath to vindicate an offended law, b
stated that the first question for them :
determine was whether the road wa
blocked 80 as TO be impassable. If the
found il was thon Handy had as mucl
right TO go through that field as you hav
to go down Market street. He then re
viewed the testimony which went to shov
that the road was impossible, and thei
took up the point that if the driving ovel
his field caused the prisoner or his prop
erty any injury the latter had his remedy
by an appeal to justice of the peace
Talley had no right TO take the
law in his own hands. Mr.
Biggs then detailed the conversation
the tragedy, in which Handy had asked
whether he could go through the upper
bars, and Talley had said no, following it
with the talk at the bars the next morn
ing, when Talley told the deceased that if
he took down the bars he would be o
dead man. He next turned his attention to
Lockwood's testimony, which he claimed
overreached the mark. Having proved
that Talley went downto the scene in the
morning with this pistol in his pocket,
you have the evidence that demands from
you verdict of murder in the first
degree. He asked the jury to remember
that it was trying Isaac S. Talley and not
John Wesley Handy. II can't be that the
prisoner stands before you blameless. He
asked for verdict in accordance with the
proof, which was murder in the first
degrees.
Mr.. Biggs spoke 45 minutes. Senator
Gray followed for the defence, beginning
at 3.15 o'clock. He first gave his utten.
tion TO the law bearing on the case. H,
referred to the law in reference to the
impasSability of the road, and asked
whether in case OF obstruction tl,n public
had u right to enter upon the Land any
where. He made the point that the place
of entering must be nearest the point of
obstruction, and in this case it WIS 800
feet from the scene of the tragedy, OF
nearly quarter of mile. He held that
the question where or how to enter
mans farm was not one for the public
alone to decide. Iu regard to obstruc-
tions he held that the road must have
been really impassable, not merely in
convenient. The right in the public to
cross over adjoining land is created so as
to do the least possible harm to the
adjoining owners. The owner has
some say in regard to the matter.
He cannot be put at the mercy
of any traveller who through caprice or
enmity or for annoyance may try to come
through his land. He had right to indi-
cate another point and direct public
travel through that. He also made the
point that even had Handy had a right to
go through the land as he pleased, he
still had no right to go there with gun
to enforce it. A man has perfect right
to arm himself for defence against O
felonious assault. Mr.. Gray spent con-
siderable time in arguing that the burden
of proof is entirely with the prosecution.
He made the proposition that retreating
to the wall Is not absolutely necessary in
order to allow the prisoner to avail him
self of the plea of self-defence il the at
tack is made with deadly weapons and
with manifestly murderous intent. Also
that even If the deceased had technical
legal right to drive his wagon through
the field, and the prisoner was
mistaken about his right to pre-
vent it, still If the deceased had
attempted to enforce his right with
deadly weapon the prisoner had the
right to slay the deceased in order to
prevent his own death or his great bodily
injury. That if the jury believes that
the prisoner was first attacked he was
justified in killing the deceased, if such
killing was reasonably necessary to savs
his life or avert enormous bodily injury.
That the deceased should have entered
the land at the point nearest the place of
obstruction. That the deceased had no
absolute right TO pass over any part of
the land when the prisoner had opened
another way and had notified him of it.
That some regard must be given to the
amount of damage or injury done to the
prisoner by the proposed action of the
deceased. And that the good reputation
of the prisoner for peace and good order,
all other things being equal, is sufficient
to turn the scale in his favor.
Mr.. Gray then opened his address to the
jury at 4.20 O'Clock. After fitting in
PRODUCTION he made the point that it had
been shown that there was deep seated
enmity and hostility in the heart of the
deceased to the prisoner at the bar. He
related how the prisoner had allowed the
deceased and others pass through his
wheat field on Sunday and Monday and
then decided to discontinue it. His
action had nothing niggardly or un-
neighborly in it. 1t was what probably
any member of the jury would do.
Then he alluded to the conversation of
Monday evening" in which Talley said he
would open the lower bars, when Handy
first said it was all right and then, his
evil nature getting the better of him,
said "But am going through the upper
bars, and I'm coming prepared to do it."
But an hour or two after you
find him at Mrs. Saring's house
with the deadly purpose in his heart,
loading his gun with deliberation to fulfil
his devilish purpose. They were busy that
night in their preparations for the
deadly vengeance on the morrow. He
falls upon the hearth in his frenzy and
VOWS that he will pass through those bars
or fall in the attempt. Men do not talk
as the deceased did who are good citizens
or who are fit to be at large. He went
down to those bars. His father went
with him in the morning, as precaution,
are we to suppose? God save you and
us from such peacemakers. Not the peace
maker spoken of in the holy scriptures.
They get to the bars and the first step is
to Jump out of the wagon with gun in
one hand and club in the other. There
wins no fire there to keep warm by, but
merely pile of brush which WINS to have
been burned. That matter is worthy Of
no further consideration. The deceased
then goes to make the prisoner subdue his
will to the will of his assailant. Must n
man surrender his self-respect The law
does not require. The law wns made
by men with hearts in their bosoms. II
was made for the protection of brave
men and not for towards. Talley had
pistol in his pocket, as he had right to
have; it was there for an honest purpose; I;
for self-defence. Hanby's first words
were, "I'm going through there, or kill
the d y s. of b." Talley
addressed the elder man and told him he
wanted him to go through the lower bars.
And then the peacemaker, did he advise
him to go down to the lower bars No.
He says "He must go through here"
This is a complete endorsement. He
backed him up. And then they COM
menced taking down the bars. Talley
would have been justified in shooting the
deceased the moment he sprang out of
the wagon and at him with his gun. The
resistance at the bars stirred the devil in
the blood of this thug and desperate end
he delivered the blows with his club.
Then he seized his gun and aimed it at
the prisoner over the bars. The only
reason that can see for Talley's failure
to shoot him there was that he