The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1895-09-19
IT is MANSLAUGHTER.
Verdict Against Carter for Kill
ing Charlie Ling.
4 SURPRISE TO THE PRISONER.
Closing Arguments Deal With the Plea
OF self DefenSe-Chfnesc Con-
Eui Interested.

"a fhe M the decisive Hofez were read
,ss defense sclt assured that a favcrsbls
re~ssrt would oe rendered. Carter main
sssre9 h.s corapoxure under the trying or
ssaL bat a. be tapped 3 table with the
snxers OF his right hand II was evident
.hsf ne felt that which his face cd not
.hov HIS vile tried 20 De brave, bat
s1srs triekied down her cheeks. and her
5sf1e daughter. realizing that some IN
sxnectea blow had fallen commenced cry
izs also.
.As morning sfeuographer Gay vas asked
fsy questions ss 10 the possibility OF
zsras CT similar sound being m.ssuterpret-
- an the trial 80 far as testimony was
eoscerued was a. al end.
r Ronald rasen enc opening address
for tba state. and IN hls preliminary re-
marks said inat the present case aad been
one Hhe!c both sl1e1 rad acted wiki fair
nsxs throughout auE where UNPLEASANT
resses had nos occurred. After speaking
81 arettia.re against the Chinese ne took
10 ire evidence Of Carter and Young 70
TIE effect taar Carter had not called tho
Chiuamaa names. while Witnesses Peter
sau and Hansen SAID oaths were eX-
changed Mr. Ronald contended that the
chinaman was or his own ground inside
ta4 galley and that Carter had no right
tAefs II was also Carriers duty 20 have
.etreated, even Il the Cninaman was out
slde. 80 long as there was any avenue OF
escape. IN closing Mr. Ronald said that
the flght would not have been brought on
/. car,sr hal attended 70 MS own business.
lie vas aggressive from the beginning.
and could not Invoke the law of self-ee-
fsnse.
Case for the Defense.
A. O Mcbride followed for the defense.
ana Immediately picked up the statement
oF Ronald that the case had been fairly
tried and sad That when Mr.. Ronald
stood before the jury urging a verdict OF
murder IL the first degree he knew he
vas wrorl. Ths case was not being tried
on prejudice. bat on facts and law. Then
he raked the prosecution for trying 10
make CAPITAL odt Of the bruises on tire
ch.namzns hand. when II had not been
attempted 90 show that they were made
Al the time OF the fight. IL the prosecu-
ton had done SIS duty IL would have
brought out all the facts. Coming down
10 the fight, he said that no white man
liked the idea OF being called a -
by a p.g-talIed Chlnaman. Under the cir
essnstanees Carter held his temper better
than nineiy-e.gbt out OF loo men,
Where Is the testimony, l want TO
know" said Mr. Mcbride "to show that
the tight took place in the galley2 Where
is the evidence 70 show that this defend
ant was aggressive In all these points
Mr.. Ronald misrepresented the testimony.
and yet talks Of fairness. The Chlnaman
had right in the galley OF course che
had He ought to have stayed there in
stead Of coming AZ Carter with a knife
II he had done hat. this trouble would
not have occurred I tell you that when
a steamboat hires murderous Chinaman
II should put him In a galley with no
door"
Carter Not the Aggres-or.
A, the opening Of the afternoon session
Af. Gay made the closing argument for
the eefense. he commented on the TAR
ness with which Judge Graves had ruled
during the trial and then proceeded TO dis
eass the evidence OF all the witnesses. both
FOR the prosecution and defense. lie said
tia, be took Issue with Mr.. Ronald as 20
iAe has of the witnesses for the defense.
Never In his life had he seen trial where
al witnesses were more conscientious ana
tried 20 tell the truth without color one
way or the other. The incidents UP TO the
time Of the light ware rapidly passed over.
ard then Mr. Gay pointed out that when
Carter let the table he took no weapon,
ara even after the Chinaman made the
first attack Carter made no effort 10 stab
him. although in position to do 50.
II that fight occurred in the galley, as
Mr.. Ronald says IL did" continued Mr..
Gay, "why did ..ot the states witnesses
see Il through the hole one foot eleven
inches Vide that was before them and led
sato the kitchen7 I have made no EFFORT
70 raise race prejudice in this case. neither
have tried to keep man on THIS jury
uho was prejudiced against Cinnamon.
a. say. however, that there Is no class or
people more cruel and heartiess than these
Chinese cooks, who think they own the
whole side OF 4 boat"
NJ. GAYS description OF the death strug-
&c was very dramatic. and held the jury
and audience almost spellbound. lie asked
The state why IL had not called one or TWO
eat Of the many bystanders who heard
Young's testimony AZ the coroners IN
quest or preliminary examination. IL il
wanted 90 impeach him. Why did not
the states witnesses swear that Young
was inside the gangway II Mr.. Ronald
statements We're based on facts
Why Carter Went To the Galley.
Prosecuting Attorney HASTE began by
enameTating the murder cases recently
tired ana then Jumped into the argument
By declaring that As a rule ne wanted 20
harmonic evidence and believe toat VII
nessas adhered 50 a truthful statement OK
facts In the present case, however, ne
vas AFRAID he could not do it,. He hauled
Mr Cav over ths Goals for talking about
net using race IRE iud.ce. and Their immeQl-
ately calling Cinnamon uncompllmentaFy
names
"That proposition about the hat CON
uHuEd Nj HASTE. lis ridiculous. II YOU
know anything ABOUT steamboats, you WI
know thar those men were apt 10 wear
thelr has AZ the table. Did You no''ce
how careful the Fefense was 10 Keep oht
Of thar galley II VAS dangerous GROUND.
because the Chgnauau belonged there
Go rot believe myself that Carter went OUT
there &, kl,l Isrg but 7 50 believe NJ was
eut 81 tsnlnsr and ala 60 20 the Sai4fY 10
chaS.sa him ft was after tn-S 'aat ne
eeterw ned to XII MS man.
NJ haste made a great deal or iRe i4..'
IA ceres rdt feN OF The galley stove.
arguing fhst teis showed taat tne "SH'
tack pla>e in the galley lle r.diculed
s.steme-. hv Mr. Mcbride that the boat
night Save given lurch ana sFn' -A'
ret re;ffrr IN closing Mr.. HASTE Was
especially har3 IN y oung. one * me &C.
fsase's p~'~.taa} witnesses. an1 c'a-'Ht
'Aat 70 mas altered bis testimony 20 sHlt
he condition ~ affairs.
Tho Charge TO the Jury.
Judge Graves Immediately instructed
re 9c-v Is II fNe diuerf0: degrees 90
hemicfss art rnase lis definitions 50 clear
ard interesting that ne held the undivided
Attent-~ ~ very person iu the room
n the course of his charge 70 the jury
Judge Graves stated shat mere words cla
net fGstlf,- an assault. n TIE defendant
Killed inadvertently while trying - dis
arm the Cainauar 10 WAS not guilty. or
y Re acted u- ter the belief that ne was in
danger o. gTcat bodily harm or death he
vas justified Continuing nc said that
hsa n O place where he had right 20 Re
Ga not have IL retreat. but might repei
AeFee VIII frrct- Self-6eferSe did rot tn-
.a1e tire right = attack. seif-defense was
offensive s1ot an offensive act. ard =