Daily capital journal. (Salem, Oregon) 1903-1919, 1909-08-17
SUPREME COURT
RENDERS OPINIONS
WaISWorths, Who Killed Man.
kinS, Get New Trial
Murderer of Wolfe
Must Serve.

After serving nearly two years in
the penitentiary of life sentence fol
the killing of James F. Mankin in
Jackson county, Chas. II. Walsworth
and Norval Walsworth were granted
new trial, in an opinion handed
down by the supreme court today
and written by Justice Mcbride.
The killing OF Mankin was a cul-
mination OF a series OF disagree
ments with The Walworths in Jack
SON county over property. The
Walswoith family resided in a house
belonging to the Mankins, who were
trying TO make the walsworths va
cate the premises. Mankin called
one day for the purpose OF talking
the matter over with Chas. Walls
worth and the two men quarreled.
While they were Qnarreling the
Mankin son Carroll approached them
with a walking stick in his hand
and Walsworth, thinking II a gun,
ran into his house and securing his
rife came out and opened fre on
the Mankins. Tho Mankin daughter
was witness TO the occurrence and
ran back to the Mnpkin home, where
che also got guns, and gave them to
her father and brother. and then the
deadly conflict took place. Before
the elder Walsworth reached his
house In quest Of a gun his SON
called 10 him and tried to explain
that the younger Mankln did not
have a gun and tried to allay his
fears and avert trouble. but the
father did not heed him. The boy
then ran into the house and secured
rife. and after going ont the back
door saw Mankin ard shot him.
II was contonded during the trial
that the elder walSworth ran for his
gun and as he stepped into the door
with IL in his hands II accidentally
went on, and after laying It on a bed
near at hand he came 70 the door
and threw up his hands as a sign
of submission and peace. but was
nhot by Mankin in the head. and at
this juncture IL was alleged that the
Walsworth boy began shooting withe
Intention OF protecting his mother.
who was then in the house. and
James Mankin wa shot dead while
the Mankin boy was not mortally
wounded. Young walsworth also
received gunshot wound in the
face
In the bill Of exceptions filed with
the supreme court II is alleged by
counsel for the defendants that the
court made an error by not instruct
ing the Jury 10 the effect that young
Wal worth had the right TO protect
his mother when under the impress |
at N they we"o IN immediate danger
OF being killed. Justice Mcbride |
holds that the lower court did err
In not instructing the Jury accord
ingly' which was about the only er-
ror he could find, but which was
sumo ent TO grant the defendants
new trial, and II Is so ordered.
The Walsworths- father and son
are now confined in the peniten-
uarN having been refused a stay
OF execution on acconnt of the de-
lay Ia submitting the brief.
Edward Hugh Martin. who was
tried and convicted OF manslaughter
by killing Nathan Wolf in Portland
In 1908. will be compelled 70 serve
his hfteen-year sentence for the
crime, The judgment OF the lower |
court being affirmd In an opinion
written by Justice Slater.
Nathan Wolf, tho deceased in this
case. was a pawnbr1ksr in Portland |
and was found one morning beaten
up In a horrible manner. Evidence
ended TO point towards young Mar
Iin and on trial he was found guilty
lt manslauBhter The appeal sent
mp by Martins counsel was brief
acre being very few exceptions TAX
IN to the proceedings OF the trial
'ourt One exception which was
ieait with by Justice Slater in parti- /
'ular Ha3 that there was no intent
% assault and no intent 10 kill al
eyed nor was the time OF the death
u Wolf stated. Iiasmuch as these
would probably hold ten
'oie In charge OF murder In the
irst degree they were not neces-
AIRY In the charge OF manslaughter.
seven other opinions were handed
lown by the supreme court OF more
y less Importance, they being prin-
'paiiy cases IN equity. as follows:
20 eph NJ Rogers, plaintiff and
'Spohdent vs., Portland Lumber