The Portland daily press., 1900-05-05

BY the offender after the commission Of
his crime.
The court then touched upon our extra
dition treaty with Great Britain under
which Maxwell was taken from under
the shadow Of the British flag and
brought to this country for trial. For
this reason the jury SHOULD see that the
defendant was fairly tried.
Judge Putnam said it Was the provinces
OF the court 70 give the jury Law and CT
the jury 10 accept the law 40 10 was
given them. It was the provinces Of the
Jury to dstermire questions OF fact. and
those alone. He referred TO the fact that
In some sases the questions If fact were
so evidently In favor Of the respondent
that it bscam the duty Of the court
to order a verdict Of not guilty. In this
case the prosecution had already declared
that II sought nothing more than ver-
dict OF granddaughter.
The court then spoke at length ~ 70
the way In which the jury should regard
the man under indictment. He was to
be presumed innocent until proved guilty
and should have the benefit of ell reason
able doubt.
In referring to the question of proof
beyond reasonable doubt, Judge Pct
nam said the prosecution must sustAid
every allegation In Its Indictment in
order to secure conviction. Thsre were
six counts In the indictmsnt Three
alleged that mortal wounds were made
by Maxwell with knife ard three alleae
death by casting into the ssa and b.
drowning. The law authorized the jury
to presume sanity on the respondent
part until evidence to the CONTRARY IL
adduced. A reasonable doubt as to the
respondents sanity ought to be
entertained. II after due consideration
they entertain such doubt the verdict
should be not guilty.
The court then went on to explain the
common law as 1t defines murder and
manslaughter II upon sudden quarrel
two persons light and one 10 killed, this
is granddaughter. So also II q man b
greatly provoked and kill another 1t T.
not murder, for there 10 no previou'
malice, but a. there was no reason for
the killing, 1t Is granddaughter.
The court then went ON TO discuss e.
question OF jurisdiction OF this court.
whether ths offensc was committed on the
high seas. The district attorney olaius
this offenss was committed three ard
half miles from the New Brunswick ooas'
and was in the open Bay OF Bundy. "a
instruct you, gentlemen, that II you are
satisfied that this offense Was committed
more than three miles from the coast, or
on the high seas, you have Jurisdiction In
this case.
The statut also provides that this oct
must have been done wiifully. i have
spoken to you - to ipEauity, There lie
10 conte ntion Of that kind here but
have to instruct you that, as the quss
tion Of intoxioation IL here involved, yoI
are to take into consideration the fact
that drunkenness 10 no defence in the
eyes Of ths law.
Another thing tn al Esust be considered
Ia that what lie known as corpus delicti
must be proven. In this oase you are to-
satisfy yourself that the person said t.
be killed was In fact killed, and did NOT
die from natural causes.
In this oss, there are six different
counts in the indictment. It il enough.
for the government to show to you that
he was killed by the wounds, BY DROWN
ing, by being cast into the sea or BY
combination of any of these. The gov
eminent must satisfy You that the man
was killed and did not die from natural
causes. am requested to instruct ycu
tina. the person is responsible only for
the natural effect OF his acts and he ID
not responsible for the rscklessnsss or
carelt ssnsss Of the deceased. Though the
person alleged to have been killed would
have died afterwards from other causes
II the wounds FASTENED death the party
in fiioting the wounds is liable. II the
wounded man were weakened BY disease
and the wounds would not have proved
mortal to strong man yet II he died
from this result Of the wounds, the per-
son intliOtiug them is responsible.
II Capt. BaIslsy by his own reckless
ness or carelessness jumped or fell into
the sea and Was killed, Maxwell can't be
held responsible whatever his moral guilt
may be. II the wounds did cause Capt.
Baisley to be weak, and II when In the
mizzen rigging the wounds were given
and he was kicked, struck or threatensd,
whether he jumped from weakness Or
terror or to save his life, then the respon-
dent lie guilty Of manslaughter. II the
wounds were delivered on deck and Max
well followed him aft and Capt. Baisley
took refuge In the mizzsn rigging as
place of safety and there. from weakness,
fell into the sea. the killing Is proven and
the respondent is guilty II you are salts
fled of the facts beyond a reasonable
doubt.
DR.. Christie said that the death OF
Capt. BAisley resulted from hemorrhags
and shock OF falling into the cold water.
He said in another place that under other
circumstances the wounds might not have
proven fatal. We are not to consider
other circumstances. but merely those
which you will find In this case.
II you find that this attack Of Max
well WAS to some degree iustifisd you will