Evening star., 1898-06-08


circumstances that there appeared to the
defendant at the time ways and means suf-
fcient and availa Bile, and which were, in
fact, sufficient and available, to enable the
defendant to escape from such assault and
its consequences without a resort To force,
and that the defendant yet resorted to force
resulting in the killing of the deceased. the
defendant should be convicted.
Matter of Doubts.
''Fifth-'rhe defendant should not be con-
victed unless the jury is satisfied from the
evidence of his guilt beyond a reasonable
doubt. By reasonable doubt, however, is
not meant every doubt. 1t is not cap
tious doubt: it is doubt which must grow
out of the evidence and imparts such a
condition Of mind resulting from a consid-
Grafton of the evidence before the jury al
makes it impossible for the jury as reason
able men TO arrive at Il satisfactory con-
clGsion, and it is not Il consciousness that
u conclusion arrived at may possibly be
erroneous. but arises cut of such a state of
mind as deprNes the jury of the ability to
reach Il conclusion that is satisfactory.
Accordingly, the jury is instructed that
If the evidence be to the minds of the jury
of such a convincing character that the
jurors would unhesit1tingly be governed
Dy ii in their own weighty and important
matters of life, they may be said to have
no reasonable doubt Notwithstanding the
VI certainty which attends all human evil
dence; and, accordingly, if. after an i'm
partial comparison and considera ton of all
the evidence, the jury can say that it has
an abiding conviction of the defendants
guilt, such as the jury would be willing to
act upon in the more weighty and import
ant matters relating to their own affairs,
they have no reasonable doubt and should
convict the defendant.
Opinion of Others.
Sixth - Further defining reasonable
dc ubt the court inStrlcts the iury that in
order to convict the defendant it is not
necessary that the jury should be salts
fled that its verdict would receive the ap-
probation of others than themselves ac-
quainted with the testimony, or fear that
it would receive criticism at the hands of
such. reasonable doubt is not a doubt
which might be entertained by any one
not member of the jury, nor Is it such d
doubt as might be suggested by others
than members of the jury upon considera-
ton of the evidence. If the jurors were
called upon to act upon their Individual
judgments as to the guilt of the defendant,
and are so satisfied from the evidence of
such guilt as that they would act upon
the assumption of its being established,
they have no reasonable doubt and should
convict the defendant.
Duty of Jury.
"seventh-If, upon consideration of all
of the guilt of the defendant, you should
acquit him, but if upon such consideration
you have such doubt, 1t is your duty to
convict him. A reasonable doubt Is what
the term indicates; 1t is a doubt based on
1eason, and which is reasonable in view
of all the evidence. 1t is not a captious
doubt nor a doubt suggested by the in
genuity of counsel or jury and unwarranted
by the testimony, nor is it a doubt born of
inclination
fendant to escape conviction, prompted
by sympathy for him or those connected
with him. If on an impartial comparison
and considerat ton of all the evidence, no
matter how conflicting and even irreconcil-
able in some respects you may find it, you
have an abiding conviction of the guilt of
the defendant, such a conviction you
would be willing to act upon in the more
your own affairs, you have no reasonable
doubt, and should find the defendant guilty.
"Eighth-If the jury find from the evil
dence that any witness in the case, wheth-
e. for the prosecution or for the defense
and including the defendant himself, has
testified falsely to fact in respect of
which such witness cannot be presumed
liable to mistake. the jury may, in its dis
cretion, wholly disregard the testimony of
such witness. and every such, in the case
Defense Offers Further Testimony.
Mr.. Worthington, after Mr.. Davis had
jected to certain parts of all the prayers
of the prosecution. Before entering upon
this subject he said, he would offer the
defendants prayers.
Mr.. Worthington further digressed by
stating that last night he had received a
letter from a gentleman well known in
this city, who stated that about sixteen
months ago he had been in Pawnbroker
Crosses store, when man who seemed to
be half-witted entered and bought re-
Volver. lie was about to depart, when the
writer of the letter remarked that the pur-
chaser's name had not been taken, as re-
quired by law. Thereupon, the letter
stated, the pawnbroker's clerk went
through the pretense of taking the mans
name.
Now said Mr.. Worthington, Il had
not placed much stress upon the revolver
in the case, but as Mr.. Davis has seemed
to regard 1t vital, very vital, for what
reason / do not know, I'd like to have the
privilege of introducing further evidence
upon this point. The writer of the letter,
Mr.. Polkinhorn. is in the court"
Il object, decidedly object" interrupted
Mr.. Davis.
He claimed that the evidence Is of no
value, because the evidence already in
shows that Canty bought the weapon three
to three and half years ago, and that
since then the personnel of the store has
changed, and that the fact that upon the
occasion. sixteen months ago, now under
discussion. an employe forgot to take the
purchasers name is indication of gen.
eral practice.
Mr.. Worthington suggested that Mr..
Polkinghorn, accompanied by one of coun-
sci for defense, be permitted to go to
Crosses and TO see If he can identify Mr..
Middaugh. who now has charge of the
store, the present sixteen months
ago. If he so identified Mr.. Middaugh, then
defense would offer Mr.. Polkinhorn's evf-
dence. The court agreed, and the intended
witness. accompanied by Counsel Thomp-
son, left the room.
Prayers by Defendants Counsel.
Mr.. Worthngton then read the defend
ants prayers. as follows:
"First-The jury are instructed that the
defendant is presumed to be innocent of the
offense for which he is on trial. and that
he is entitled to verdict of not guilty, un-
less upon all the evidence the jury are sat
isfied of his guilt beyond a reasonable
doubt
''Second-If the jury find from the evil
dence that Rye by his words and acts prior
to the day he was killed, and on that day
Immediately before the shooting, caused
the defendant at the time of the shooting
to believe in good faith, and upon reason
able ground, that he, Rye, was about to
make a deadly assault upon the defendant,
then the Jury are instructed that the de-