Mineral Point tribune. (Mineral Point, Wis.) 1869-1938, 1894-07-19

beyond reasonable doubt that when the
defendant shot and killed Quirk he did so
pursuant to an Intent then distinctly formed
in Ajss. MIMI to Kill Quirk, YOU cannot law
fully hndi-the defendant guilty oF man
slaughter in the second degree; DOR the de
fendant in such case, II he killed QuirlS from
premedltated design TO kin him, is guilty OF
murder in the first degree.
CHARGE or THE COURT.
Gentlemen Of the Jury;The evidence con-
clusively shows that this defendant killed John
Quirk at the city of Mineral Point. upon the
lTth day Of last March.
The killing of human being without the
authority of law. by poison. shooting. stabbing,
or any other means, or In any other manner, is
either murder manslaughter, or eScusahle or
iustinable homicide, according 10 the facts and
circumstances of each case.
The facts and circumstances of this case do
not bring il within the definition OF excusable
homicide as given in the Revised Statutes, and
it is therefore unnecessary that | should ex.
plain to you what is excusable homicide.
The defendant by his attorneys has, during
this trial, claimed that the killing OF Quirk was
justifiable, because done in self defense, and II
Is therefore necessary and important that
should explain to you the law oil sell defense as
prescribed by our statutes, so far as the same IS
applicable to the facts and circumstances of
this case
The statutes of this state provide, that ii
person kills another, such killing is iustiaable
when committed in thelawful defense OF such
person, when there shall be reasonable ground
to apprehend design upon the part Of his as
sailant to commit a felony, or to do him some
great personal injury. and there shall be rea-
sonabie cause for believing that there Is inn
ninent danger of such design being accom-
plished
You will perceive that this definition of when
man may kill another in self defense consists
of two elements, both of which must concur, in
order to make the killing Of human being
justitiable upon this ground:
First, The person assaulted must have rea-
sonable ground to apprehend u design upon the
rtof his assailant to commit felony upon
him, or to do him some great personal injury.
Second, The person assaulted must have
reasonable cause for believing that there is Inn
minent danger OF such design being accom-
plished.
Consider all the facts and circumstances OF
the killing Of .Quirk as you may find them TO
nection with the law of self defense as just
given, and If you then find beyond reasonable
doubt that the defendent did not kill Quirk in
self defense, 1t will be your duty To find the de-
fendant guilty of some grade OF felonious hom-
icide,
Ii you have reasonable doubt as 10 whether
Quirk was killed in self defense or not, your
verdict must be not guilty.
Gnnffan Il9H ,ft ha Rnptaad Gtatntae 1as9
that the killing of human being when perpc.
trated from premeditated design to effect the
death of the person killed, or OF any human be-
ing, shall be murder in the first degree.
II the killing of Quirk was not iustihable un-
der the law of self defense, and Terrill shot him
with premeditated design to kill him, and hs-
such shooting did kill him, Terrll Is guilty Of
murder In the first degree.
The words ''premeditated design" used In
this statue, do not imply that there must have
been design long formed in the mind OF the
slayer before the killing. in order to bring the
Staying within murder In the first degree. II
the intent TO kill is distinctly formed In the
mind OF the one who says the other before the
firing of the shot that kills. that is '.premedi
tated design within the meaning Of the statue.
A man is presumed to intend the natural and
ordinary consequences of his acts, 80 that, If
one, being armed with a revolver, Intentionally
fires 1t into the vital parts OF man, he is pre-
sumed 70 intend to kill him, as that is the nat
ural and ordinary consequence of such an act.
If you tud from all the evidence in this case,
beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant
shot John Quirk, thereby causing his death,
from premeditated design to effect his death,
then no matter what the provooation was, or
what the surrounding circumstances were, un-
less such shooting is justihable, as explained
in these/ Instructions, he Is guilty Of murder in
the first degree, and you should sofind by your
verdict.
II you are not convinced from the evidence
beyond reasonable doubt. that the defendant
is guilty Of murder in the first degree your YER
dict must be mot guilty. unless you find the
defendant guilty of manslaughter IN the second
degree under the instructions | have given to
you at the request of the defendants attor-
neys.
At 2:l0 p. NJ. the jury re.entered
the court room and handed the
clerk their verdict, "guilty Of mur-
der in the first degree"
Each luryman responded to his
name when called and stated this
to be his verdict. Usual motions
for new trial, etc, by defendants at
torneys were made, and over.ruled
by the court. The prisoner was
asked if he had anything to say, but
made no reponse; without apparent
emotion standing to receive the aw-
full sentence of the Judge, "That he
be punished by imprisonment in the
state prison at Waupun for the pc
riod Of his natural life, all Of that
time at hard labor with the excep.
ticn of one day which shall be
passed in solitary confinement"
Defendants attorneys hope to get
the case promptly before the su-
preme court. Meantime he will be