The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1893-06-24

IcAN J EAx11S1Nf6NNS6 0A1O
Boyd's reiasions With the defendant He
grew eloqusas ever the coaching incident
when on the day Of the tragedy Ma Boyd
had been sssn BY Boyd looking q the pic
turs Of baby on IN advsrtising circular
snd had been 20 hrnfally insulted for her
daring 70 mention 70 Boyd that she hoped
their baby would be - pretty asths picture.
When this incident Vas mentioned the
dsfen1ant, Who had been crying softly dur
ing Mr.. Tiles whole speech. broke down
completely and sobbed - II her heart
would break. Many other wcmen in the
room we're also wiping away team from
their eyes and several men were noticed
struggling 70 keep back tears- When Mr..
Piles had related this instance. he made
m eloquent defense of the defendants
character. speaking Of her - one more
sinnsd against than shining He made
plea for all women, Who, having made .
bad start, were trying to lead .
better life, and incidentally remarked
that each Of these women had been At
some time pure and innocent until ruined
by some man of the description OF Boyd.
The closing portion Of the argument was
in the same strain.
Prosecuting Attorney Miller made .
strong and forcibls argument for the
prosecution. He did mot make any
great effort to condons Boyd's faults.
but insisted upon the jury not losing
sight ofthe fact that . man, no matter
how low. - under the protection OF the
Law. and no person has right to appoint
him or herself his executioner. He made
considerable impression on the jury BY
showing that the defense must either rely
upon the defense Of insanity or
Of seif-defense, - the pleas Of
self-defenss and insanity were a. in
consistent - self-defense and an
alibi. He showed that the insanity of the
defendant had been. in his opinion, not at
oil borne out by the evidence. and ~ the
defendants own statements were not en-
Titled to - much credence - that Of other
witnesses, the plea Of self-defense was not
sustained sufficiently by the testimony to
justify acquittal. He warmly defended
Capt. Hogle and the police and said that
he thought Hogle the one witness who
had told the whole truth, without reserve
and without prejudice.
During the three hours occupied BY the
arguments the court room. though packed
with people to the very doors. was a. quiet
- church. Only once did the opinion
Of the audience manifest itself. and that
was at the close of Mr.. Piles argument.
when burst Of applause came from
the back Of the court room and
ran over the whole audience. Judge
Humes reproved the audience severely for
this unseemly behavior. reminding them
that they we're in court of justice. In
structions were given to tho bailiffs to
arrest any one manifesting any feeling
towards either side and bring him to the
bar to be dealt with as the court might see
fit. No more applause was heard.
When Mr.. Miller's argument was con-
cluded Judge H umes turned toward the
jury and read them the information charg-
ing the defendant with murder in the first
degree. Then read the instructions for
the prosecution. following them by the in
structions offered by tho defense. It will
be noticed that the instructions for the
prosecution are rigid and cover the ground
thoroughly, leaving no possible ground
for misapprehension. The instructions
for the desense are, however. very liberal.
The charge was al follows:
Gentemen Of the Jury: The defendant. Ursula
J. Boyd, who 10 informed against a. Ursuia J.
Unfug, IL accused by the information in this
case OF the crime o! murder in the first degree
The information charges that the defendant,
In King county. state OF Washington, on the "a
day of December. 1892, purposely ana OF her de-
liberate and psemeditatsd malice killed one
Thomas Henderson Boyd. then and there being.
By then and there purp0sely aud OF hor dclib-
crate aud premeditatsd malice shooting and
thereby noftaily wounding the said Thomas
Henderson Boyd with . revolver pistol which
she. the said Ursula J. Boyd, then and there had
and held ia her hand.
The court ,nstructa you that the killing Of a
human being may b either justi6ablc, excusa-
BILE or felouious aud criminal
Tn killing 10 justihable when In tho neces-
sary or apparently necessary defense OF ones
eelf or family. from great bodily harm, threat
ened. attempted or to be committed by force. II
/, excusable when one 10 doing lawful act BY
mere accident unfortunately kills another. Such
killing, when IL 10 neither justifabls nor ex-
cusablc. 10 felonious and criminal and may b
either murder or manslaughser
Felonious homicide In this state 10 either muir.
der ia the drst degree. murder in the SECOND de-
gre6 or granddaughter.
The charge Of murder In the hrst degree In
c,udes within It the lesser charge OF murder In
the second degree and the still leso charge OF
granddaughter
Murder in the first degree 10 defined By the
law oil this state an follow:
"Every person who shall purposely and OF de.
nberatc and premeditated malice. or In the per-
retration or nt,cmp, to perpstrate any rape rob-
berry or burglary. or by administering poison or
causing the came to DO done to kill another
shall he deemed guilty Of murder In the drst
degree"
Murder in the second degree is defined ~
follows.
Every person who shall purposely and ma
lieiously. bat without reconciliation aud de-
liberation, kill another. every such person shall
be deemed guilty OF murder In the second
degree"
Ma slaughter is defined as follows:
Every person who sha.l unlawfuliy kill any
human being without malice, express or i'm
plisd. either voluntarily upon q sudien heat. or
involuntaYiiy. but in the commission OF some
unlawful Get. shall DO Deemed guilty OK man
slaughter"
In bricf, take from murder IN the first degree
the elements Of generalization ana Dell erasion,
AMI the offsnsc is murder In che second degree
Take from murder In the second degree tho ele-
ment OF malice ana the ofiense - granddaughter
You are instructed, gent emcn. that to Justify
you in fin ling the defendant guilty OF murder
la the first degree you must oesieve from the
evidence beyond oil reasonable doubt that the
defendant Killed the deceased, Taoma, Henaer-
con Boyd, without just cause or iegai excuse.
~ explained IN this instruction. in manner
aud form as charged in this Information; thas ~
tbs time the defendant fred the iatai shot she
hal formed the Geliperase AID pfcmeditsted
purpose and intent 70 Kill the deceased, and
that she d red the fatal shot VITA the intention
of esecting INST purposc.
Upon tina question OF intent the court IN
ssFgcis YOU that the iaw prehsmes that every
sane person eontemp ates aud Intends the nat
urai ordinary sua usnAs consequences OF Dts or