The aegis & intelligencer. [volume] (Bel Air, Md.) 1864-1923, 1899-06-30
THE TUCkER-.IoRNsoN CASE

The Court of Appeals, before ad.
journing, last week, filed an opinion
in the case of Eli Tucker, OF Hartford
county, against the State, use of
Benjamin I. johnson. The suit was
for $4,000 damages, claimed by the
widow and heirs of Uriah Johnson,
who was shot and killed by Tucker, a;
Bynum station, III April. 1898.
The only dissenting opinion filed
was by Chief Judge McSherry, who
dissented from the views of Judges
Boyd, Fowler, Pearee and Schumacher
The case was removed to the Court
of Common Pleas of Baltimore city,
where verdict of 81, COO damages
was given in favor of the Johnson
heirs. The Court of Appe us sffi rmed
the Judgment of the lower court. The
difference of opinion between the
judges was on the burden OF proof
and Justification for the killing. The
majority opinion says;
"Since the passage Of the statute which now
constitutes That article OF me COCe, says
Judge Boyd in his opinion, factions for alleged
negligence causing death have been very fire.
uuent. but this is the first time this court has
been called upon TO review Il case i'll which the
death which Is the foundation Of The nit, was
oCcaSioned b. the dischiIIg e OF Il louded pistol
at the person killed.
Tie appellant had store at Bynuni Station,
on the Baltimore and Ichigh Railroad, ia Hur-
ford county. on which was tue CilIcr Of The
railroad gent. Andrew kryEuidS the brother
in-inw ana clerk Of the appellant, was the set.
irtn Al y Ii
was engaged III the caaning business ~! sew
cral car l. lids OF empty cl"S in cuuC.! Tor hiI,i,
had heen 1T the station some days. Reg noid>
had demanded dcmurrage on the cGusa Il had
refused to let Johnson unload until WIS paid.
TucSer, ct the request of Reynolds, akcd IL
Johnson about il. Attera di. agreement, il WAS
| in evidence that while johnson sEd II cu!uTcG
mHn were u"lOading Il car johnson attacked
Rey nods Us he was passing 10y and beat rilil
severely On the head with Il club. Some ore
called Tucker, who was in the store, and he
went out. nav ug Il pistol IN his possession.
Tucker fired his pistol twice-oue all slrlNine
on the side OF the car and the o:her striking
Johnson. and resulting III his death 4 few day :
Chief Judge McShcrry. in his dissentuu.
opinion, agrees with the n! jofitS except rs e
the burden of proof. alt il rrCs utCd hy TIC
Instructions he said that lit the Jury lind that
| the defendant fired the pistol toward Criaf
| johnson and snot ana kill d him, then
| the burden is upon the defendant to satisfy The
| jury 10y pr ponderating proof of any justlica
| ton or legal excuse tor the shooting.
Thus " said Judge McShc Try, in explicit
| terms and unequivOcaliy, the burden of prov.
| ing the character OF the act o killing is at thu
| outset of the case pnt on the defendant To
| Grc"iHdte himself, whilst, ais read the statute
and understand the rules OF evidence. that
specific burden is placed on the plaintiff to "a,
| cWipGts the defendant, On the latter cannot bt
| made liable at all. Tic question Is not whether
the plain liz has furnished or com pitt d with the
| burden of proof but whether he is req ired Il
| furnish it, If he is, then the court ought Il
have told the iury as matter OF law ftat The
burden YVES on the plaintiff