The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1903-10-16
FRIDAY. OCTOBER ls, 1908.
TWO NOTABLE TRIALS,

TWO NOTABLE lRIALS,
The two notable trials which have at
tracted so much attention, the one IN
Carolina, have at last come to Close
end the verdict in each case was an &C
uuttal. In some respects the cases were
similar The charge was homicide, ana
rho accused were both men of promi-
uence and influence. The plea In each
case was the same, the "hip-pocket'
plea, as 1t is termed in slang. HAYWOOD,
Of Raleigh, pleaded that he thought his
life was in peril, and that he shot In self
defense, and so did Tilman, of South
Carolina, In the Haywood case there
was a personal encounter, In which
blow was passed, and as 1T afterwards
turned out, Skinner, Haywoods antaGo-
mist was armed. Judge PEBBLES charged
4be, Jury that as the prosecution admitted
that Skinner struck Haywood. and as
there was nothing to show that the &C.
PENDANT had provoked the blow. the
charge of murder in the second degree
was eliminated" That, continued the
Judge, reduced the charge to manslaugh-
ter, or excusabe homicide, and he con-
cluded:
"The defendant claims his witnesses
say Skinner was reaching for his PISTOL
The State says the burden ought to be
removed because Of the blow. The blow
did not excuse the killing, but 1t does
away with malice. II you believe the
killing was done in anger and passion.
and from reasonable fear that Hay
woods life was in danger. or he was
about to suffer bodily harm. it is man
slaughter, but II you believe the defend
ant did the killing under the apprehen-
sion that his life was in danger, or he
was liable to great bodily injury, 1t Is
excusabe homicide, and the defendant
should be acquitted.
The judge further charged:
Much has been said about the DELHI
crate manner in which the defendant did
the shooting. This has nothing to do with
the case. Because man acts coolly. 1t
does not debar him from the benefit Of
the law. A brave man is really IN a
better position to know when his life Is
in danger than the coward, who posi-
bly, might shoot when there was no ne
cessity."
Taken altogether. the judges charge
was almost equivalent to an instruction
for acquittal, and, under the c!rcum-
stances any other verdict Would doubt
less have heenaa syeat surprise to both
sides. - ;"
In the Tillman case there was no per.
sonal encounter. Gonzales was walking
along the street when Tillman drew a
NTH al, INF lint
ed fatal wound Yet Tillman pleaded
that he thought Gonzales was about to
shoot him, and that he fired to save his
own life, This fear. as was afterwards
shown was groundless, even If it cX-
listed for Gonzales was unarmed. TIL
man introduced witnesses to prove. how
ever, that Gonzales had made threats
against him, and as he fired he exclaimed
II got your message!" whatever that
may have meant He also swore on his
own account that Gonzales thrust his
hands in his overcoat pockets in threat.
enng manner, which he interpreted as a
motion TO draw pistol.
II is. hard to believe that the members
of the jury gave such a fiimsy plea as
this their serious consideration. Tina,
was the defense OF Conductor Goodman
who killed II. C. Parsons at Clifton Forge
several years ago, and as Parsons was
unarmed. the jury would not entertain
It On such a preteXt any man may Stay
his enemy al WILL and yet 60 scot free
The court instructed the jury in the Till
man case that TO sustain the plea of self
defense, the defendant must satisfy the
fury by a preponderance of evidence, be
yond a reasonable doubt of four things
That he was without fault in bringing
on the difficulty; that he believed at III,
time that 1t was necessary 10 take III,
life Of his adversary TO save his owr
life, or TO save himself from serious bod
lily harm. that man of ordinary Arm
ness, prudence and courage. in a llk,
situation, would have come 10 the sam,
conclusion. and that he had no probable
means OF escape.
II is inconceiyable that the jury coult
have believed that the "preponderaI:c
OF the evidence sustained TIE defend
ants plea. in visw OF DE fact that Con
sales made no assault upon Tiilman, am
that he could not have intended TO s!a.
him. or 10 do him Serious bodily harm.
Dc he was. going about his business, wit
no weapon whatever upon his person
Tillsnan was acquitted for other rea
sons best known TO the jury, II wa
shown that Gonzales had repeatedly de
nounced him In the most offensive man
ner through the columns OF his news
paper, and the jury may have felt tina
Tllman had been bounded beyond tn
powers Of endurance. But admitting tina