The Twin City star. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1910-19??, 1917-03-31
both official and private affairs.

At this time when segregation Ord1-
suances are directed against the colored
people to such large extent for self.
ish motives and contrary to law the
coIored people the country over who
know Of Judge Jeffries' stand for the
equal protection Of all citizens alike
without regard to race. color or previ-
GUS condition Of servitude feel that In
such a man the race has one Of its
best friends. It is the duty of every
citizen who believes In law and order,
who believes In justice and equality
before the law. to do bis share In con.
tinuing In office such capable and fair
minded man as Judge Jeffries.
His charge to the jury in the Levi
Pruitt case was as follows:
Gentlemen Of the Jury-The defendant
on tho sd day Of February, A. D. 1916, at
the city Of Detroit. county Of Wayne.
state Of Michigan, feloniously. wilfully
and with malice aforethought did kill and
murder one Charles Nielands. contrary to
the form Of the statute. [The court here
defined murder and its several degrees
and also the crime of manslaughter.l Con-
tinuing. he said: Now. gentlemen Of the
jury, you are the sole judges of the facts
in this case. and 1t 10 for you to deter
mine what weight and credit shall be
given to the testimony adduced In this
case. I want to make this observation,
gentlemen, In this case: The administra-
ton Of the law is presumed and 10 to be
impartial. Every man stands equal before
the law, and every man ought to be equal
before the court and the Jury. The purity
Of the law Ia not only In its proper con-
ception Of right and wrong and proving
the line of demarcation between right and
wrong. but lies also In its just admins
tration. 1t has been said that "justice n
blind" The meaning Of that proverb IL
that justice can see nothing except Justice
and I am calling your attention to these
few general principles because ! want you
to preserve. II you can. In this case the
purity unsullied Of the administration Of
the law.
We are all human. and We all more or
less have prejudices. and perhaps the dis
tinction between a learned and unlearned
man Is not only what he knows Of the
general affairs of mankind, but It 10 his
ability to disarm himself Of the prejudices
that are natural in ordinary human ma
ture. The defendant In this case 10 Q
black man, but he IL q human being. He
has the powers and privileges Of white
man, and he stands before the law with
his burdens the same az Q white man and
entitled to the same uses and the same
rules and the same procedure In adjudi-
eating his rights a. that Of q white man.
/ say this because. we are all human, and
We all have our pre1udices and want
you, gentlemen, to place yourself In his
position and then consider II this defend
ant were white man instead Of q black
man. think you should put yourself In
this position: that this defendant 10 sim
ply a man. neither black nor white. In this
court, and In relation to the administra-
ton Of law in this court he should be 30
treated.
want to talk to you about this case.
not to review the testimony but to point
out to you what consider tho issue in
volved and to carry you along In that way
with the hope Of disarming you Of any
prejudice you may have against this de-
fendant on account Of his color. ! know
you are sworn in this matter to render a
true and just verdict, and what I say has
no reflection upon any gentleman but ]
make this statement more In reference to
a general reflection upon the human race.
which has not arisen. perhaps, In our per-
sonal attitude to the high ideals Of the
law. as before stated.
The defense in this case IL that the de-
That IL q proper defense, and II is q de-
fense which. II proved to you-and you
have right and It IL your duty to care
fully weigh all of the testimony-and II
you believe tho testimony in behalf Of the
defendant, that tho act Of shooting was In
self defense. you have tho right, and ]
say It 10 your duty to acquit this defend
ant.
charge you that Il was tho duty Of this
AAAA l~lYSl- - -.
deceased II hs reasonably could do 90.
He would bs only justified in taking this
life In order to save his own life or to
save himself from great bodily harm.
Now, gentlemen Of the Jury, II you be-
lieve In this case that this defendant had
an opportunity to retreat without fear of
his own life or without fear Of great bod
lily harm, then you may convict him; and
II you believe this situation existed be-
yond reasonable doubt you should con-
vict this defendant. ....-. O..
think, however, gentlemen Of tho Jury.
that ought to say to you that II you DO
convict this defendant that tho greatest
crime you could convict him Of would be
granddaughter. considered from the theory
and Of all the evidence adduced by the
prosecution.
However. II you believe this defendant.
story that he was approached by the de-
ceased In the manner which has been tes-
titled to by himself and other witnesses
and that Nielands was the aggressor and
had hatred in his heart for colored men:
that he went out for the defendant In the
manner in which II has been testified to:
that he was large man; that he was an
ugly man and that he had q blackjack or
weapon which under the law Of this state
he was prohibited from carrying as a con-
cealed weapon, and that the assault took
place az Il IL said It took place. In sub
stance, and that defendant retreated as
far as he could with safety to himself and
that he retreated az far as he could re.
treat to his homo and that he shot this
man in defense of his person or In defense
Of his life, then II IL your duty, gentlemen
Of the Jury, to acquit this man.
Now. gentlemen, you are not to Judge
this defendants actions at the time Of the
assault In your calm and deliberate mo-
ments: you are to place yourself In the
position. as It were, Of the defendant him
self at the time Of the trouble and ask
yourselves what you would have done, or
what the ordinary man would have done.
considering the weakness Of human ma
ture. with the temperaments and conflict
Ing Arn0tiona that man have. with his edu-