Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1891-09-16
sUPsnIoR counr. snr1. 1nnaa
Hon o. .. Han Prsstdlas.

l. 7. cAsLEfoS, eaausy sssorney.
ri Q T. S1Eyxxs, .hsfiH.
2. 4. SHALL, steac g.aphef.
Il 1uasDAr. Sept. Is.
i State " Pollard The respondent /
, shss case vas found to be abseos tsis morn
lag. ssc !. .ss sscsrtsiasd that be had gon
TO Riverside 10 attend rssimsnial reunion
nader the Impression that toe ss:al essid r
On without his presssee. 4 messenger ~
despstchsd for him, sid 81 noon count ID
4 jaurned unil 30, when the rssposdsr
assin appeared in cssft.
| tn iaiss changed tie iary ~ fol,s -
4 Gents msn Of the jury. TIE PRISONER
John T. Pollard. il chsfgtd in this indics
isasas viih the crime of commstinE q
'sssui siih inssnt to kill. The county IT.
tosrsy ID his c'o,ing address, 70 the Jury
sA'sd that be should not insist upon ths
eBarse Of intent to KILL - he believed
,he evidence dbl no. warrant . conviction
usder it- So ghar the charge, ~ IL rem aims
!. disssssd Of the more heinous prs OF
intent - kill Under IN Indictment Of
tnis description the jury may ind either
inst the respondent 10 not sniisy, or guilty
Of assault AID battery. II you do NOS fad
HIM guilty. under the rules Of sv which |
saan dvs you governing the fscts in this
csss, then your general verdict would be
nos guilty. But IL you shoali fad that
there sss culpspiliiy 90 his part. and that
be acted In violston Of isw, your verdict
] would be gSil.y Of assault and battery,
thsowins the harden upon the court to
administer such punishment - the fscis
proved in tie case would variant.
| Iossmuch - the testimony In this case
has been given twice before you. substan-
italy the same in each case, 1t must be very
| fresh in your minds and will save me
f'omtbe necessity Of attending to II In detail.
| fou will remember the testimony a. it wss
given On the part Of the government and
ths respondent. Now with the fscss ffesh
IN your minds ~ detailed to you by the
witnesses upon ths stand, you ere to de-
tefmins whether Pollard 10 or is not guilty
Of assault and battery upon Kelly. l shall
ny and state to You - correctly and clearly
a. can the legal principles involved. be-
cause ~hst your verdict will be depends
very largely, - / perceive, upon the in
| sructions which shsil give you touching
the law Of the case.
IL 10 for the prosecution to satisfy the
Jury beyond Reasonable doubt not only that
he accused shot the complainant. buI also
that the shooting Was without lxwful excuse.
IL ,hst question Is left 10 doub: the accused
l. entitled to An scQuit.Al.
III 10 commended In his behalf that he was
isufed in shooting - = proper measure Of
self protection. TO defend himself from
great bodily harm, or from being killed by
the complainant and several associates.
This 10 the main question for you to pass
upon. Was Pollard in such imminent
peril As 10 life or limb from Kelly as to
Istify the shooting in the manner alleged?
The law, in it's regard for human life,
undertakes to define the boundary line be-
yond which one cannot pass even in self
defense and be guiitles,. The force US ed
by the person first assaulted, in his defence,
must be no greater than is necessary to re,
pei the assaiiant, to disarm him, or to pre-
vent injury to himself Ii 8 man were
about to strike you, Mr.. Foreman, with his
fist. you not being at fault, you would be
justified ia striking him. in knocking
him down, before. the blow, II
necs sssry to protect yourself, for
the law is not so unreasonable - to com
pei enc to wait until he 10 struck and pos
slbly rendered helpless before be may de-
fend himself; bat you would not be justi-
fed in Draining your asssilsnt with club. |
s.abbing him with = knife or shooting him |
With pistol to prevent his striking you |
with his fist. The life of person must be |
j peril and he must be in reasonable fear |
Of death or great bodily irj Try before the
law will allow him to Shoot his assailsnt;
aad before shooting to kill or wound his
Sssailant he must retreat II reasonably pos
sible for him to do so without danger to |
himself. II, however, he be an officer in |
the proper discharge Of his duties this rule
does not apply, and | will refer to this
again when considefir g that defence set up
by the accused. l an now considering the
rules applicable to persons generally not
officers or not acting - such.
The judgmen. of the party charged with
the assau,. 10 not conclusive as to the
necessity for il He may or may not hSve
been in such jeopardy IS 10 warrant the
use Of pistol. although he may have
thought 80. 1t is 70: you to say upon eli
the evidence whether or not his fear was
! eXsonabls; were the circumstances such
as would naturally cause . person Of Or
binary intelligence and courage - the
neut peril Of life or limb; II NOT then the
was Go: justhAble. Was be SO
beset, while without Fault on his
own part, BY Kelly, either alone or
with the aid AID assistance Of 1850
yho egg on aud assist or encourage
IS to render retreat impossible or hazard
ous? was be in great danger Of being
killed, mutilated or manned with little
g.. Thaso I
lions for you to settle. You have heard
Nj the evidence--much Of it twice. Put
ourseif in the place Of Pollard on that 5lh
,f July recall the class Of men he was
iealing with. Were they or not furious
with hate and excited BY drink2 Had Kelly
aud his associates made threats against
hey have testified, or were they angsy,
ooisserous and eager to fight Is testified by
Pollard aud Horpe3
II he vas in such . situation - to
rive just and reasonable cause to appre-
bend that Kelly-or Kelly and others to-
1shsr-might kill or greatly iDjare him, or
Vas being beaten by them and he could no.
withdraw, then he would be justified
n shooting Kelley or any Of his assAilants to
iefend himself. and you verdict must be
yer threatened, for be would not be jus,i-
1, in shooting after the beating had been
lone, however severe it might have been,
'or person is not permitted to take the
sw into his own hands, and mete out pun
shment for his wrongs. His pe,iis and the
necessity for his act are both questions for
our determination.
II WAS claimed by the accused that he
rss an Officers constable Of the town Of
irslow. and was acting in the strict line of
lis duties Is such when attacked, and h .
counsel claims for him the protection and
Of the law in respect to such
iificers The fact that h , was constable
II he town Of Winslow Is shown and also
ha. he was psesent at PETIT. e's pond on COM
liant Of townsmen and at their request to
AXE means to pat q stop to the vioistion of
he Sunday laws If there were people
assembled there, dancing to hs music of
'lolin on that Slnday. 10 appears from the
Eront;n,al 80, fou,th p.1o 7 | .