The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1898-06-04

srs this case ard there = rot mar On
ssrta cog.d give Us money For IL 1 stand
before goa now With a. cpen oreT % d
serai e.s-- E~n- wao wgIt ss>9os down me
sesascer OF h8< KIN CT tie strssts - ire
eisy * Ssasgse. sgEEs. ~ SSqiAuse-s MAJ
the gec.g God wh2 s1yS 'XeaSeaHce =
rrsne ans 10. / heve, chose Eugene
F~aeley sct tsse instrument 20 carry oaE
bis purpose. 50 with yaa and help Eon
to d. t1a right
J,sfga Jaretss asked the juro-s whether
they preferred Ia go on ard Entsa the trial
or aaJcn-n They repsied: Lets nnisa i
Up TOW.
Prosecuting Attorney McElros then adj
dressed the jury n the closing argument
for the prosecution. He reviewed II gen
e-az way the facts IN the case a. Drought
out IN the evidence and asked the jury
% decide fairy end without bias OF fesS-
ing. He was eloquent when ne came 10
Tsfase an in-anaatton Of the defense saas
ha was uslag the opportunity against
Bradley in me hope of gaining fame by a
possible verdict CT co8vsct-on. he said ne
was there as the jurors were, a public
Officer SWORN 10 do his duty by the peo-
pie and he would do * regardless OF
what his personal feelings might be- He
said: II have the game feeling toward
the prisoner and toward his family that
goes out from every human heart. but
while We may have been moved. do not
let our duty fail victim 10 our emotion"
Judge Jacobs Instructions.
Judge Jacobs then charged the jury.
The charge was a lengthy expounding or
the law and contained instructions which
were looked upon as cut of the ordinary.
Most prominent was one directing that
man IS justified il Staying al intending
1s r1as
Of telephone 10 further immoral designs
is an unlawful intrusion of the home, and
If the father kills the offender for the pur-
pose OF preventing such further invasion,
warnings having gone UNDECIDED. he is
justified in the ect. The full text OF the
instruction - as follows:
Gentlemen OF the jury, the court in
stfucts you that from the earliest estab-
!ishment OF society and OF the family re-
latIon. the father has been charged with
the solemn and sacred duty. as the natural
protector OF his wife and children, of
guarding them with tender care against
any Violence or Injury from any source
whatsoever; MS home and his hearths,one
may De defended by him 10 the extent os
Staying an intending intruder who ruth
lessly intends injury or wrong 10 those
whom nature has placed under his pro-
tect.ng care, and in the growth and deveI-
opment OF modern society IN has come 10
be fact that an unlawful intrusion into
the nome or a father may be made by
means OF the telephone used for the pur-
pose or aIlurlng or decoying away the
Children or a parent for immoral purposes
ana TO commit outTages upon them. and
II you find from the evidence in this case
that the deceased continued 10 ring or call
up the telephone at the house OF the de-
PENDANT on the day OF the shooting after
having been frequently warned not to do
80, and al the same time was endeavoring
20 allure from their fathers house one or
more OF the defendants daughters In or
der TO have criminal intercourse with
them or TO corrupt them, and il you fur
Their find that the defendant was aware OF
the acts and designs of the deceased in
this respect. and If such invasion of his
home was persisted In, and that the de-
ceased could not be prevented from fur
oher invasion OF his home and corrupi.ng
and degrading his daughters and to the
end and for the purpose and to prevent
such willful and malicious invasion of his
nome and 10 prevent deceased from poll
tercourse with his daughters, or either of
them, then In such event the defendant
was justified in killing the deceased.
Another interesting instruction was given
by the court as follows:
IF the jury believe from the evidence
that the deceased had had criminal inter-
course with defendants daughters Pearl
and Ressie but short time prior to the
shooting. and you further find that the de-
PENDANT only knew of these facts Just
pasoi 70 AAS SHVOtsBSs anu iHdt the Ee-
ceased Was then endeayorlng to decoy and
allure the defendants daughters fro m the
parental roof by telepAoning TO defend
ants daughters at defendants home, In
order 10 perpetrate further offenses
against them. and the defendant believed
that unless he forcibly restrained the de-
ceased from his criminal intentions fur
Their crimes and outrages would be perpa-
frated by the deceased against his said
children. then in that event you are In
structed that the defendant had the right
10 act toward the decreased in the same
manner as II deceased had personally in
yaded the home Of the defendant and so
acting he had a right TO arm himself and
go in search Of the defendant in order TO
warn him against any further such intru-
sion upon his rights as a father and if so
armed the defendant. In search Of the d..
ceased for the purpose aforesaid sudden
~ and Unexpectedly came upon the de-
ceased. who then and there assumed a
threatening attitude. ana the defendant
believed from AL the circumstances and
from threats communicated TO him that
his life was in danger or that his person
was subject to great Injury. acting as an
ordinary and prudent man under all the
circumstances would act. shot and kilod
the deceased. then you are instructed that
the defendant is not guilty"