River Falls journal. [volume] (River Falls, Pierce County, Wis.) 1872-2019, 1906-12-20

prosecution L had grave doubts as t.
the suffice ncy of the testimony tt
sustain verdict against any of the
defendants. Since the trial / have
read and closely analysed the states
testimony. After mature consider.
alton am convinced that the Su.
preme Court would not sustain 3
conviction in this case.
If Isaac would not have been com
pletely justified in killing any of the
defendants at the time he fired the
shots, then these defendants must be
discharged, for the act of Isaac in
shooting as he did was of such a
deadly nature that if, he were not
justified, these defendants had the
right to kill him in elf-defense.
Isaac and Hamill had no shad-
ow of right to interfere with or ar
rest any of these defendants. The
whole difficulty was brought about
by their wrongful act in attempting
this arrest.
In order that person may sue
cessfully plead that his acts were
justifable on the ground of self-de-
tense, he must not be the aggressor,
he must not bring on or encourage
the difficulty or produce the occasion
which makes it necessary for him to
commit the homicide or inf1ict the
injury. The rule thus announced
has this modification: In case the
original aggressor, during the pro-
gress ofthe affray which he has be-
gun, gives up the fight, and in good
faith retreats, and SO informs his en-
envy, and, Notwithstanding such re-
treat and notification, the enemy fol-
lows him up and attempts to kill him
or do him great bodily injury, he
may then justify killing his en-
envy on the ground of self-defense,
Notwithstanding he was first in the
wrong. (See exhaustive note where
multitude of authorities are review
ed, As L. R. A., 6S7.)
The defendants in this case, ac-
cording to the states testimony
surrounded Isaac and Hamill and
took from them some revolvers
which they threw into the lake. In
doing this under the circumstances
the defendants were committing no
wrong. 1t then appears that Isaac
and Hamill were allowed to sepa-
rate themselves from the Italians, and
that they then started to walk up the
railroad track. The testimony of
the states witnesses as to the distance
they proceeded varies from 40 or 90
to 200 feet. There are some gener-
al statements of the states witnesses
that the Italians followed up Isaac
and Hamill, striking at them with
their shovels. But when this evil
dence is brought up on cross exam
iuation from general to specific
statement, it appears that the defend
ants, twenty one in number, and
perhaps others of the crew, were
following along the track after Isaac
and Hamill, holding their shovels in
horizontal position with arms ex-
tended downward, punching or
thrusting at Isaac and Hamill. 1t
appears that the Italians, and also
Isaac and Hamill, were walking.
They could not have been running
or walking very rapidly for substan-
| TALLY all of the states witnesses tes-
| tify that when Isaac turned around,
and at the time he drew his revolt
yer, he stepped back some steps,
thus indicating widening of the
space between him and the Italians
before the shots were fired. 1t seems
somewhat improbable that these
events occurred precisely as above
narrated, but such is fair statement
ofthe testimony for the state.
1t appearing without dispute that
Isaac and Hamill were the original
wrong-doers, the. law required them,
before they had the right of self-de-
Tense, to retreat, to notify the Ital-
ians that they were retreating and
had given up the attempted arrest
and they were bound to adopt every
possible means of escape open to
them. before they could justify the
taking of the lives of any of these
defendants. In the parlance of the
common law, they must ssretreat to
the wall'' before using such deadly
means of self-defense.
i What are the facts in this case
1t appears without dispute from the
states testimony that Isaac and
Hamill were completely within the
power of the Italian crew at the
time the revolvers were taken from
them. 1t appears without dispute
that the revolvers were cast aside by
the defendants and were not used OF
threatened to be used by any of the
Italians during the affray. It must
have been apparent to Isaac and
Hamill that the defendants did not
intend to turn these weapons upor
them. In fact, it appeared that each
mans hands were. occupied with
ordinary working tools. It does not
appear that any one of the defend
ants raised his shovel, or any
other weapon, over his shoulder fol
the purpose of striking, up to The
time Isaac drew his revolver. Ham
i'll, who walked by the side of The