The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1893-06-24
BOURQUN'S ACQUITTED.
4 Verdict After The Jury Had Been
Twice Charged.

| The Disagreement on the Law OF
Justiheation-Judge Fallagant Dis
| pels the Cloud on This Point and
Verdict Then Reached In a Few Min
utes-A Day Of Fine Speeches.
|. Gugie Bourquin and his son, Guillomain,
no longer rest under the imputation Of
murder. They were acquitted in the SUI
perior court last night few minutes
before II O'Clock. The jury was in its
room a little less than hours in reaching
the verdict, and many people left the
court house under the impression that
there would be no agreement before
morning.
The last day of the trial was the most
interesting on account of the speeches
All day the courtroom was crowded
Many of the spectators were prominent
| business men of the city, and the seats
within the bar were occupied by leading
attorneys, r. r. Richards, Esq. spoke
for the defense until after IL o'clock. His
argument was studied and logical effort,
based upon the evidence, to prove that
MIR. Bourquin and his son had acted
wholly in self defense in shooting Farrell
Mr.. Richards called attention to the fact
that Farrell had ill-feeling toward Mr..
! Gugle Bourquin for years, and on more
than one occasion had threatened his life.
EVIDENCE NOT TO BE REPUDIATED.
The attorney told the jury it could not
repudiate the evidenceof Prof. Taliaferro,
a prominent and leading citizen who had
no motive to speak anything but the truth.
The people who have known Mr.. Bour-
quin for years, said Mr.. Richards, knew
him to be man of high integrity and
honor, who would not have taken Far
rells life only in defense of his own and
to prevent the numbering of his son. He
asked the jury to pay no attention TO Far
rells dying statement, as he was man
without religion.
Mr. Saussy followed Mr.. Richards in a
brilliant argument for his clients. He
spoke from IL o'clock until o'clock, and
from o'clock until few minutes before
O'Clock He sifted the evidence and
made out strong case of self-defense
from his standpoint Mr.. Saussy appeal
ed to the iurymen to put themselves in
the position of Mr.. Bourquin and his son
and see if they would not have acted as
the defendants.
THE FIRST LAW OF NATURE.
"Self preservation is the first law
of nature" said Mr.. Saussy, "and
there is not human being who will not
act in accordance with this law when
necessity demands it." The attorney
pealing to the jury to acquit Mr.. Bour-
quin and his son of the charge which
hang over them, because they had tried
TO save themselves from the attack of an
enemy who was only awaiting an oppor-
tunity to wreak vengeance.
In summing up for the state, Solicitor
General Fraser made the speech of his
life. For nearly two hours he arraigned
the accused in scorching terms, brand
ing the killing of Farrell as murder, and
appealing to the jury for the verdict of
guilty against Mr.. Bourquin and his SON.
Under the evidence said Solicitor
Fraser, "the only reduction you can make
in the crime is to call it manslaughter."
THE PROOF OF MALICE.
| Referring to the killing of Farrells
| dog after he had been shot, the solicitor
said the act showed the wantonness of
Mr.. Bourquin and his son in wreaking
| vengeance on the poor dumb brutes when
| they, attracted by the reports, ran to the
scene expecting to meet their master.
| That act alone, said Solicitor Fraser,
| showed that murder was in their hearts.
ut would be a sad commentary" said
| he. that because man happens to be
rich and influential in his community he
can kill lowly person simply because he
! happened to trespass upon his land over
an imaginary line. If that is law advise
| everybody to shake the dust of Georgia
| from their feet and seek homes in other
states. If that is law | would prefer to
| go away from Georgia to the deep re-
cesses of Africa where civilization is
unknown and men are eaten by canni-
balls.
! POSITION DOES NOT COUNT.
| Gas long as l am the prosecuting officer
| of this court it will make no difference to
me whether his station is high or lowly
when he commits crime and puts him
self in the pale of the law. Take the
! dying statement when he knew he had to
make his account with his God ana tell
me if it is not the truth; every word of
that dying statement is borne out by the
evidence even of the defendants them
selves"
Solicitor Fraser concluded his effort,
which was pyrotechnic display of elo-
| quence, with an appeal to the jury to con-
Wet the accused of either murder or
manslaughter.
THE JUDGES CHARGE.
Judge Falligant charged the jury for
nearly half an hour. He clearly defined
the different grades of homicide, which
might be applied to the case, and also
gave the law of 1ustihable homicide. The
Judge was very emphatic at times, and
alphabetically reviewed the evidence in
order to aid the jury to clearly under
stand under what circumstances a man
could claim Justification for killing
another.
The charge was looked upon by the de-
PENDANTS and their friends as favorable to
an acquittal and everybody ex-
pected an early verdict of
not guilty, but, when couple of hours
passed without any intimation of an
agreement, many began to predict mis-
1 trial.
THE JURY RECHARGED.
AT 10 O'Clock, the jury asked for re-
charge on the law of justification, as to
whether man would have the right to
shoot another who had, few seconds be-
fore, fred at him. and was trying to es-
capel Judge Falligant told the jury that,
If the facts, as claimed by the defense,
were true, MIR. Bourquin and his son were
both justified under the law, the father,
in shooting Farrell to prevent him from
killing his son, and the son, In shooting
| Farrell, If he thought the latter had shot
his father
This settled the case, and in the fifteen
minutes after getting back TO their room
the jurymen agreed on an acquittal.
| When the verdict was announced the
! friends of the defendants crowded around
them and for several minutes they were
! kept busy shaking hands and making
necessary congratulations.
HOW THE JURY STOOD.
On the first ballot the jury stood seven