Fort Worth gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1891-1898, 1895-12-12

right Of self-defense that the danger
should In fact exist; that II may be
apparent and not real; that In deter
mining whether there wac reason TO
believe that danger did exist. the APP
pearances must be viewed from the
standpoint OF the defendant, and from
no other standpoint"
BY the time a judge gets through
with long contested murder trial.
in which he has been compelled to pass
on questions OF evidence ana other
wise guard the proceedings to pro-
vent injustice. he has but little time
to prepare n perfect charge on so many
complicated questions OF law. The
statute expressly requires him In tho
charge to "dstinctly set forth the law
applicable to the case" If he commits
error in doing 30, II makes no difference
how immaterlal II may be. II II lie es-
cepted to and presented by bill of ex-
ceptlons ON repeal the case must be re-
versed by the court of appeals The
law Is mandatory that In such case
the conviction must be Get aside with.
out inquiry ms to the effect OF such
error upon the Jury. To say that u IL
shameful to permit such laws to exist
in civilized government IL no argu-
ment, nor can abuse OF the courts
change them. II Is n compliment to
the honesty and purity of the Judges
clarlng the law as 1t IN. Obedience
10 the law by them under all circum-
stances guarantees security to the peo-
Pile Let the laws be changed In obedi-
ence to public demands, or TO conform
to principle and Justice, rather than
TO remain the creatures OF maudlin
sentiment to repulsive civilization, and
complaints in the future that murder
ers are less punished in Texas than
thieves will be no longer heard, To
accomplish this, the executive respect
fully begs to suggest:
l. That the law or murder be changed
so that when person OF sound mind
and discretion unlawfully and with
malice aforethought kills n human be-
ing In this state he shall be guilty OF
and on conviction punished FOR the
first or second degrees of that offence,
according to the facts developed In
the trial.
2. Qualify the law OF self-defense SO
that when a person takes the life of
another and relies on tho appearance
of danger" for protection. the jury. not
the defendant, must determine from all
the evidence whether the appearance"
were sufficient 10 Justify n prudent
man In believing the danger" In fact
existed at the time the killing occurred.
3. Make every slayer who provokes
the attack which results In the homl-
tsitt VI W voluntarily N'lhbEfH III tue
combat knowing that 1t would or
might result IN death or serious bodily
injury to hls adversary or to himself,
guilty OF murder In the first or second
degree, according to the facts OF the
case
T. Repeal the chapter OF the penal
code relating to "manslaughter," and
remove that word from every other
section OF the statute that contains
IT,
by repeating this law no substantial
right of the citizen need be abridged.
II he is guilty of that olrense his pro-
scrlbed punishment is confinement in
the penitentinry anyway. While II Is
not termed In the code, INA nslaught-
err is neither more nor less than de-
gree OF murder. but such affords q loop
hole for criminals in evadlng punish
ment. 1t Is a mesh-work OF technlcnll-
ties and complicated impedments In
the pathway OF Justice wherein muir
derers tread with shameless indiffer-
ence over the lifeless forms OF their
innocent victims.
All needful rules and safeguards for
the preservation OF the Inherent, inal.
ienable and just right of self-defense
should be retained TO protect the up
right citizen; yet this law and all 9TH
er obstruciions to the sound admins
tration of the judicial system In the
full protection OF the murderer can and
of right should be forever removed
from our code.