Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1895-03-13

dargersof losing hts own life or suffering
serious bodily Injury from said Parsons;
facts did not take from the prisoner
the right 20 defend himself.
g. III the jury believe from the evil
dence that the prisoner did not intend to
are the last shot, but that said shot was
caused by Parsons SELLING the prisoner 5
pistol or attempting TO wrest IL from
the prisoner, they are Instructed tnat
they cannot convict the prisoner by rea-
son Of the firing OF said last shot.
FOR THE COMMONWEALTH.
Following are the instructions asked for
| on behalf OF the Commonwealth:
!. That murder IS the unlawful killing
OF another with malice which may be ex,
pressed or implied. and IS Distinguishes
in Virginia as murder IN the htst anu
murder in the second degree.
2 Every homicide in Virginia Is pre-
sumed By law 20 be murder In the Sc
cond degree. In order 10 elevate the q
fence to murder in the first degree tne
burden Of proof is upon the common
wealth. and to reduce the offence 70
mGnslaughter the burden OF PROOF Is upon
the prisoner -,..,,.,
3. To constitute murder the p,rf.,so pr.sonSr S,,
must have been melted TO the killlnS ~
malice. and the killing must nave pt,n
a wlful. deliberate, and premeditateq a.t
on the part Of the prisoners that IL "
saw he must have Will, deliberatei' anu
nrerneditated that he should Kill the de-
| ceased or do him some serious D9uiIS u
| Jury. the necessary result OF NhlIh ILL
be his DEATH and from when nc ne ~
Rut II Is not necessary that the lhtsnt "
! kill. to make such intent Wlltul, ue'aD 10,
rate. and premeditated. should eAist thss
! particular length OF time prior I.sssarv W
| actual killing, for II Is only me-. -,
that such intention shouiu S. IN cnyomis-
istence for the first time or the coiii,1 coilia,,s
! sion Of the act or at any time pteN i.So tSo
| thereto but on this trial or ths CaSV -tsr s
| accused cannot b. conVictsu Ol 1.d . de
! offence than murder in the seco"u
That on a charge OF murder ,i,iiing niaiiSe
| is pregIned from the fact OF tne hi.,,t,s' l,,s'
Where the killing is proven, anu raIiia-
ttnn the burden Of disproving mahce -
thrown upon the accusru' ,,,t, 10 1ytlfuI
THAT whenever the killing Is wiiiu, ~ u,
deliberated, and premedfsateu ,b9s fect '''e
e ''' ,rbaf tho rtile Of law is that hlIii
sbou he taken TO intend that wnicn ne
dreg or that which Is the
consequence OF his act a.o,rd given with
a deadly weapon in the previous poS-
session Of the slayer without ary ryrlma.
upon very. slight pt3yoGa,'Vn, pso, ,iron - the ac-
cuscd the necessity OF proving eA'e'u
ating circumstances. .to, "a n
s That TO sustain provoeatlon ssov,n so a
defence to homicide, IL nusi ,ie w ~ The
that the prisoner. at the tune on rov,eT S,T
ssfal shots. was deprived Of the p1NfeLI
of self-control by the proYocation Nhts ~ y y
he had received; and III ueClu'us the
c,,esfion whether this was or was not sile
60 regard must be had 10 the cna-
racter OF the prOvocatlOn, 10 tne ns,t'At natNt :.
of the act by which death "1s sod -
TO the time II any Whicn eIaI. ,,,btch
tween the prOVOcation ana thc ~ -
c,used the death: to the prisoner c%on- %
duct during the interval ana lnlnleulIlu,Is li',,
after the shooting. and 10 an tns ~ ~ ti
stances tending 10 snow 'ns sta,el .hnts
q THAT If the jury believes IIviH "a u,
evidence that the prisoner, i n. A.a.,ai 1ooj
man intended TO shoot the W. n
II. c. Parsons. made an sss"Ie ,he ianoi
! Of his coat or collared him lot ue pui
posc Of provoking him into sho91,"k, ,bo ~ :
attacking him (Goodmanl ln OIie,e,t OiuSt for
he GOadman) might have ptttfNt III III
ehootiny tho said Parsons. ana thst Wy
sid P3rsans. being go pr0VoNen' uIi uI
throw his hand backward as 10 9Iaw sn,
a pistol. and that the sald 90 bYiui5,at f,..,l
tbereupon shot and killed the sall Tar
sD,e tbe said Goodman Is guilty OF mlr
no That no provocation whatever can
render homicide jusunable or eNt" 90 ia
cusable: the least n can REFUGE u 10 -
manslaughter. II a man XIII another sur sur
denly. without any, or without a a.i'n, cWn
siderable provocati0n, the laM lriP hnf
malice. and the homicide is murder out
n the provocation were graf anu anu SUI IN
as musi have greatly provoked nun, w
Killing Is manslaughter only But Worus
Of reproach, how greyious soeN,,t, , nsrson. ,ge
a uroV0cdtiOn sufficient 70 lr,e thf Pr'a"'N
killing from the guilt Of murder. o,.,,onco
II. If the jury believe from the eVlufnicSi uI.fFniCS
that the prisoner, I. \. Goodman ,i kiilea
he deceased. H. c. Parsons, by reason
of the letter written by Parsons 10 me
Chesapeake and Ohio Company. d9teI
June Z 1894, suggesting accusatlous
against Goodman in cqnnoe.,on 96iway conductor, T
then they win take into consideration
the nature. the manner ara the means
/ OF the retaliation by GOODMAN ior 'nGJ
n thew believe that the retaliation or pun,
jshment so given by the sall
Goodman was beyond proportion TO IN, me
,,rovocation Of the said letter. they VIII
consider IL rather the effect Of malignity
tban of human frailty. and that the CRIME
committed by Goodman amounts 70 HiuI-
der. Notwithstanding such proVoS.a5elo,m, IN,
I2 That in every case OF homlcidr upon
DrOv0cq ton. how great speVer thls pro
Vocation may have been, If the homlclde
be committed deliberately ana upon re-
Venge after the provocauon ana tne
lapse OF a sufficient time for passion 70
cool and reason 20 interpose, such homl-
eide will be murder; for IN all posslbie
cases. deliberate homicide upon principe
of revenge is murder No man under the
protection Of the law is to be the aVei'Ber
Of his own wrongs.
l3. The jury are lhsructeu thdt @ iio
I words of reprOach or accusation, spoken
ar written no matter how grieVous So
ever they may be, viii afford sufficient
provocation to free the party killing from
the guilt Of murder, and that II th.y
believe from the evidence that T. a.
Goodman killed H. G. Parsons win q
/ deadly weapon by reason OF the cohtehts
| OF the letter OF June I, 1884, written py
| the said Parsons to the Chesapeake anu
! Ohio Railway Company, the SAID Good
| man is guilty Of murder, MISUNDERSTANDING
/ any provoCatiOn contained IN sali lettsr'
H. ON a trial for murder the hecessltS'
whether real or apparent 10 the accused.
! rciied on TO Justify the killing must not
! rise out Of the prisoners own miscun,,
! duct; il being the law that a man sIali
not in any ease Justify the kililns OF @ @an-
/ other by plea Of such necessity, uhiesS
! he be without fault in bringing that ne
| cessity on himself. IT..
n me Court instructs the jury that
man is not justifable In shooting another
| when there IS mere Apprehension " IN, lt,i
| mediate danger. no matter now slhceIe
! such appre hensiOn may be, nut theIs
| must be an honest ana reasohhpls Delct ,t
| Of such danger; that IS 10 say. the acS
! done or circumstance existing must De OF
! such A character as 10 afford reasonable
| ground for believing there IS a design 10
! commit a felony, or 10 90 SOM seiio i
| bodily harm. and there Is imminent Jan
| ger IL such daslgn being carried lnto Iiii,
| mediate execution. and there must De an
| overt act Indicative OF such design.
THE ARGUMENT.
The Hon. Greenlee d. Letcher then
ouened the argument for the prosecution
| He congratulated the jury upon the near
ness Of the end OF the case. One duty yet
remained, and with that neither the law
yers nor the Judge had anything 10 10
| The act OF the prisoner had brought sor-
row into two families and among a VIDE
/ circle Of friends. The jury should not
! allow sympathy to cloud It's judicial Judg-
/ ment. No prisoner has ever had better
I array OF counsel. amDnS them Judge
/ Duke. who has no superior among the
| lawyers Of Virginia for legal learnlns'
| eoquence. and literary ability. The
| SPEAKER then followed with glowing
/ tribute to the other lawyers OF the de-
| fence.
! MIR. Letcher said that another jury had
sentenced the prisoner to eighteen years
| In the psnltentiary Colonel Parrish here
/ interrupted the speaker. and said he
/ thought it an Outrage" to bring In that
matter. The Judge said II was not In
/ evidence The letter of Colonel Parsons
was then read by Mr. Letcher)
HIS DUTY.
| II was not simply the right, but II was
! the duty OF Colonel Parsons to write that
letter He simply asked the rlllroad 10
/ investigate the chargts. Thomas Jefferson
| was the first patentee OF the Natural
| Bridge Hotel. ana In the same room IN
which the speaker saw the ad body OF
! Colonel Parsons laid, Jefferson slept when
| ever he visited the bridge. The letter was
| a privileg d communication-not published