The Daily bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Hawaii]) 1882-1895, 1889-01-19

]
have been wearing wooden over
coat by this time.'' lie spoke so
loud that l had to ask him not to
disturb other patients.
Crossed-examined by Mr.. Whit
ing That remark was made about
week after Magonev came to hos
pital He was not suffering more
pain than was to be expected from
nature of injuries. Dressing with
carbolic acid does not cause Irrlta-
ton, that is, until suppuration be-
gins it began in this case about ten
days after admission.
Thomas Maloney, sworn: Was an
inmate ofQueen' Hospital when Ma
goney was there. Remember when
Flohr and Magoney's brother were
there. Conversation was so loud
that l told them to go out of the
hospital. | have hail private conver-
sations with Magoney. Heard his
reference to "wooden overcoat," do
not remember other conversations of
that kind.
V. V. Ashford, sworn: l went
down to premises where shooting
occurred. This is approximately
correct plan. i did not measure
distance from door to verandah
step, it is about five or six feet.
Found blood on iamb OF door and
mark of quite pool of blood on
floor, not rs if rubbed on but as if
it had spurted there. Don't remem-
her whether step TO verandah was
high or low step. Magoney's bed
room door is perhaps thirty feet
from Robertson's, but the rooms
themselves are no more than fifteen
feet apart Saw cartridge belt hang
ing where Robertson said it was.
Forget whether l saw the gun or
not. Go juror, as Il matter Of
, opinion | don't think two barrels
=, could 90 off at short distance and
sound like one discharge.
, Cross-eXamlned: Have in my ex-
perience fired two barrels together.
Never mistook two for one at short
distance. My impression is that |
did not examine outside Of door.
, Defense rests.
-, Mr.. Neumann addressed the jury
for the defense, beginning at 3:42
7 p. III. He claimed that the evidence
i. showed that Magoney had brought
I his injury upon himself by his vio-
, l1nce, his threats against Capt. Rob-
, ertson and, so far as the latter be-
lieved, his attempt to execute those
r threats. There were conflicting
statements in the testimony for the
!. prosecution, which made the case
better for the defendant. Among
:, all the other witnesses for the prose-
cution hone had supported the state
ment of Magoney that Capt. Rob-
, ertson committed or attempted an
, assault upon him with an axe han
! die. Mr.. Eckhardts S evidence show
, ed that Magoney was man of vio-
! lent temper, and that it had been his
: intention, according to his own
words, to do serious injury to the
. Captain and perhaps take his life.
, Reasonable ground was established
! for believing that Robertson was in
, actual bodily fear, and it did not re-
, quire that man should be coward
q to defend himself rs Robertson had.
+ The defense had nothing to do with
the witnesses for the prosecution,
@ but not one of these would testify
that more than one shot had been
fired, except DIR. McKibbin who said
> that from the nature of the wound
@ there must have been two shots
y fired. There was 10 surgeon whose
I diagnosis or opinion on ii patho.
7 logical question he would more
\ readily accept than that of DR.. Nc
q Kibbin, but in the cunning matter
4 he considered the theory of two
. shots was irreconcilablc with the
n evidence Of eyewitnesses. There
q were two cunning men on the jury
= who perhaps could explain how shots
from single discharge could have
i penetrated Magoney's foot, his shoul-
. der and his cheek NJ that short
d range. Perhaps Magoney was in
g the act of STOPPING to mount the
= verandah and being small man the
9 ioS'o wac iStuSSo oO 40 w uNluliG vi
G the wounds described. Counsel
! commented upon the testimony in
4 detail, TO show that Magoney
v brought the damage upon himself
# by his criminal conduct, and that
q Robertson was fully justified in
shooting him to protect himseli
against what he feared was TO be q
j, dangerous and serious assault. The
4 contradictions of and inconsisten.
4 cies in Magoney's own evidence
. were such as should take it alto,
q gether out of their consideration
Il He testified that he never set foot
Il upon the floor of that house after he
). was put out, or walked out as he
IS said himself; yet it was clearly
a proved that he was in the act Of
" stepping upon the verandah wheI
g shot. That was why he Counsel
II had asked about the blood: it wa,
II shown to be on the yeTandah and on
/ the door jambs, and was undoubt,
n edly Magoney's. After being warn
/ ed off the premises on account o
| his violent conduct, it would hav,
A. a., ,,;,.Lt 20 Ia, l,1 loaf Ia,