The true northerner., 1901-02-01
b rnard Case Affirmed.


Bernard the conviction has been
affirmed by the supreme court. This
was the case wherein the respond
ent was convicted of shooting and
attempting to murder Under-Sheriff
Britton, at South Haven, while Sheriff
Thomas and himself were attempting to
serve process upon him for the detention
of his boat, the pleasure steamer Louise.
After a recital of the circumstances
that preceded and led up to the shooting,
the court says; He must have known
that they were not there for the purpose
of offering him any personal violence.
When the sheriff attempted to explain
the situation he would not listen, but
at once rushed to the tool box where his
revolver was kept and, according to the
peoples witnesses, fired the first shot,
wounding Britton. He fired directly at
him with apparent intent to kill. 1t Is
shown by the testimony that shots were
fired by the officers, but the whole testi-
mony, aside from the respondents, tends
to show that he ired the first one. 1t
is also shown b the peoples testimony
that at the time of the first arrest of the
respondent, prior to that titne"-on the
char.e OF resisting an officer -"he made
threats that he would kill any officer
who attempted to seize his boat"
The respondent claim ~ that the sher-
III fired the first shot aLd that he only
acted i'm self-defense. The respondent
also admitted that IA, left South Haven
AID Ied To the state of Virginia.
The court reviews the charge of the
circuit Judge and says that the law was
correctly given to the jury and that the
question of who fired the first shot was
a question of fact that was settled 10y
the verdict rendered
Two questions were raised by the de-
fense, in the supreme court.
1st-That the writ was not fair on its
face.
2d-That the respondent was defend
ing his castle
The court first discusses the second
proposition and says: The claim that
the boat was a dwelling house finds no
warrant i'm the record. The boat was a
common carrier for hire. The fact that
respondent slept at night on a seat of
the boat could not change its character
and transform it to dwelling house,
"The boat had no sleeping apartment
and, so far as the record shows, no place
for meals, but was a small boat used in
carrying passengers for hire. The pub
lie were invited to come there and it
cannot be regarded, in any sense, as a
dwelling house or castle of the respond
ent which he had the right to defend
from intrusion. He was not assaulted
in his dwelling house. The officers were
there simply for the purpose of serving
process and, according to the testimony
of the people, without any reasonable or
justitiable excuse, the respondent fired
upon Mr.. Britton."
"In view of the above facts, we think
it not important TO discuss the first
question raised by respondents counsel.
Whether the process was fair on its face
or not is of no Importance. Respondent
could not take the law into his own
hands and, with so little excuse as he
has shown, assault another with deadly
weapon
The conviction must be affirmed"
The decision fully sustains Sheriff
Thomas action in this matter and ex-
onerates him and Mr.. Britton from even
shadow of criticism for the course they
pursued in attempting to perform the
duty imposed upon them 10y the law
when they were commanded to serve the
process issued out of the circuit court
against the boat and its owners.