Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1891-09-16
SUPERIOR COURT.
Continued from 81 page. ]

testimony OF several Wuuc,scs LII VIZ prev
enee Of Pollard, the dancers and musicians.
we're liable TO arrest - violatois Of that lsv
snA Pollard a. constable might have taken
a,d is was his duty to take them into Gus
tody.
fhs accused was therefore properly pres
sns on the platform il he vas there IS al
oficer-endeavoring to ssceYtsin the names
o. the persons VIII, were violating the Law.
He WAS doing his du.y il attempting to AZ
rest the offenders -srd, il forcibly resisted,
mi hs have used force 10 srress them; bur
Il he attempted BY force to compel them 10
give their names only, he WAS 10 the wrong
and such force - he used, II any, might
properly be repelled by force, II Necessary
[, il in evidence by some Of the Witnesses
for the state that Pollard vas attempting to
arrest Thibedeau. the fiddler, ard any in
reference BIZ Kelly or his ASSOCIATES to pre-
vent it would have been unlawful, and P.l-
lard would have been justified in using such
means as were necessary to fec. the arrest.
Was Pollard in ia ct in the line Of his du y
as an officer or not? He says be dema1dsd
the name of Thibedeau. the fiddler; eu:
several Wit 4esses testify that be taxed
about arresting him. Was hat in fact his
purpose? He says he had hold Of Thib.-
tesu and tia. he told him be should arrest
him unless be gave him his name. Pollard
does not seem quite clear as to his real in
teption-wheth-r Il was his purpose to ar
rest him or not, but ether witnesses testif,
to Offering 10 be responsible for the appear
apce Of Th;bedeau Or any others al curt
VIVA. does that indicate? What need OF
such fsr if no arrest was attempted. But
Pol ard had no authority to accept bail for
their appearance at court. Now, IL you
.h,l conclude upon all the evidence thai
Pollard was in fact attempting to arrest tn =
fodder and was STACKED and beaten when
so attempting, then the law you'd
not req lire nor allow him to retreat,
while It would be the duty Of
ordinsry persons to withdraw instesd OF re
.,rtirg 70 THE u'e Of pistol, it is the duty
of an officer in the performance of his duty
not to yield hnt to stand firm and il 1t
tackled ard beaten 70 repel force by force
suitable in kind q, .uffi ;ient in d. gree for
the purpose. In TO other respect do the
rules goversiog self defense differ ia the
csse Of an officer from tina! Of outer per-
sous; in his case the dagger must be as
imminent ard the necessity as desperate
before he would be justified in shooting his
s.taiisnt as in the case Of other persons
bu be would not be required 10 re,rsa.
No- the prsctiee of carrying pistol by
officers or o,ntrs 10 not to be commended
A BILLY 10 not 90 dangerous sr is considered
sufi GENTLY effective. The law does no,
encourage the carrying of pistols, snd We
have statute against carryios them and
other dangerous weapons, unle IS the person
carrying them has just cause to fear an
assault II Pollard, therefore, hsd just
reason to believe that he might be in dan
ger Of being assaulted while doing n more
than bis duty required of him, on the day
of the shooting, then be 1aiPropsrly armed
sith pistol.
II you find from all the evidence in the
case that the accused was notin real Danger
Of hi. HE or great bodily harm from Kelly
or from Kelly ard his a9eto's or thst he
could readily have avoided the danger, il i.
threatened. By retreetir g-providiug be was
not'sttempiiag an arrest or uiing pr per
means to prevent Il yioistion Of lsw-ti en-
hi. shooting OF Kelly was unjuslifsble and
your verdict must be guilty OF assault and
b,ttety" II on the other band you are
satisfied hat his DAGGER Of life or great
bodily harm VAS crest and could not be
hFulttI Wy TeWcA VI II hOibk HIS W o-
an fficer e was so attacked and pressed
by X -iiy with Others. that he could nct
otbervi,s d tend himself and prevent great
bodily jiry, or II that fact is left in doub;
In your mIld,, your verdict must be 'nov
guilty.
The j,ry after being gu. about half an
hour re,u-red vim verdict of not guilty
Sac v, George W Williams. appellant.
L. T Carleton for ts.e, f W. White
hou-e for respondent. This is \ c"mpisin'
f1r Drunkenness in Chelses, s-d comes nv
apresl from the court in Che,sei. Verdict,
gui ty. Sentenced to pay q foe Of SO ard
co.'s. Ora ctmplsi' t for = similar of
fierce he PLEADED mole contendre, and SEN
tence wss suspen led.
Hsnry Files, OF JIG # r.cn, pleaded mole
cnnte n IRE for he |, gal drisiog Of = h ,rse
Dc the b # July 1890 he hired 8 horse
ia Hsllovell to 60 to Jefferson, but went
ms cad TO Lew sio~, thence to Portland,
pu the tesm in livery stable, ard vent to
CAPE Eijzsbeth ard g. cured q chance tU
work The horse vas recovered in Nv
we ks by the nwner The respondent WAS
spprehended recently by the officers. Th-
c. urt imposed q sentence Of S75 or four
months in jail
VIM C. Hussey, iudicted for cheating b.
fslse pretesces, the selling of team o.
which there was a mortgage. withdrew bis
plea of not guilty and piesded noln cor
te"dre. and was sentenced to paw foe OF
$50 or be imprisoned 60 days in jsil.
The case of ]. c. Tsfford, Lite hfield, in.
dicted for cheating by false pretences, was
Continued until the Decembs T term.
A demurrer VISA fled in q liquor case
agsinst Charles CAbana Of Watefville, the
plea Of nut guilty beirg Withdrawn.