Evening journal., 1919-12-02
PRICE TO DIE
On JANUinY Q
Continued from First Page.

Continued from First Page.
torneys based their entire defense upon
contention that, inasmuch as Zebley
had no warrant, and the crime took
place in The Negro's house. Price had
right 20 resist although not to The
extent OF committing "a murder; that
The defendant could not be found
guilty Of a degree OF homicide higher
than manslaughlen 10 was this conten-
: ton. however. that the court this
morning oyerruled In its charge to the
jury.
The trial started yesterday morning,
/ all Of yesterday being taken up with
{ the hearing of testimony and presenting
i OF and argument on the prayers or
/ both sides. Argument TO the jury
started at 10 o'clock this morning and
was finished at A i5 o'clock. The court
retired, and returned 30 the bench at
noon. then charging the jury. Inc
q Jury went into its room at i2.i0 o'clock
and al 1912 O'Clock announced that 10
/ had reached Us decision. Mr.. Richards
had gone 10 his office. however, ana a
delay was caused until he was sum
moned Il was 1898 o'clock when the
Jury was bought into the room.
/ After the verdict had been returned
|by the Jury, Mr.. Richards and Mr..
Uiles were sked If they had anything
further 20 say. They had not.
The charge Of the court, which os-
tablishes "a ruling as 90 whether "a po-
lice officer can make an arrest without
warrant. II there is reasonable cause
to suspect that the one arrested Is
guilty Of a felony, follows.
.The defendant contends that in no
event can he be convicted Of a higher
crime than manslaughter because the
deceased officer, having no warrant
authorizing him TO take the defendant,
he had no authority under the laws OF
This state 10 arrest him, and was
therefore. a trespasser in the prisoners
home: that the prisoner In such case
had a right TO resist the officer 10 the
evtent of preventing his arrest, and u
in such resistance the officer was
killed without malice on the prisoner s
mart. he would be guilty Of nothing
more than manslaughter.
The state contends that the deceased
officer had authority 10 arrest the de-
fendant and exercised his authority IN
lawful manner that he was seeking
"a arrest the defendant for the COM
mission of felony, 10 wit: larceny
which ne had reasonable grounds 10
susnect the defendant had committed /;
that ne entered the prisoners nome ih
peaceable manner, after KNOCKING on
the door and receiving no response ana
used no more force In attempting 10
make the arrest than was reasonably
necessary 10 accomplish his purpose :
that the deceased was dressed M MS
rolicemans uniform and took the de-
fcpdant by the arm saying, i want YOU
/ which was equivalent 10 sayins, lou
are under arrest
In support OF this contention the
State tnvokes the common law RUE
which makes 1t lawful for peace ON
Ger 40 make an arrest for felony WIN
ont "A warrant The State also cities a
decision In this state in which the
court said a peace officer and a police
man OF this city. as a peace onlcer mas
+, right 20 arrest. even without war
rant. a person concerned IN preach
[ Of the peace. or other crime; or When
i De has a reasonable ground 20 suspect
/ the party Of such offence. ,
The court are Of the op1nion thal
The common law rule above stated
which has been followed In some
states without statutory enactment and
also In Massachusetts,, is the reason
able rule. and the one that would most
enactually protect peace officers, who
are entitled 20 greatest protection ana
The common law rule does not IN
our opinion conflict with any decision
i'm This state when the facts Of the
cases are considered. The cases relied
upon by the defendant 80 support MS
contention that the deceased otilc had
no authority 10 make the arrest be-
cause he had no warrant, are the fol-
lowing:
state vs.. Oliver. State vs.. Ward and
State vs.. List. In none Of those cas's
was 10 shown that the person seeking
to make the arrest had reasonable
grounds 10 believe that a felony had
been committed In one OF the cases the
officer who had been deputized to make
The arrest sought TO deputize another,
and the court held the authority bad.
In another the offence for which the
person was sought 10 be arrested was
not a felony but q misdemeanOr In
the third case IL was held that the law
ful authority 10 arrest was exercised
in an unlawful manner.
So IL appears that the question we
are now discussing is presented to the
court for the first time In this state (;
and we hold that If the officer who was
killed while attempting TO arrest the
defendant had reasonable cause 10 sus-
pect that the defendant had committed
felony he had authority 20 arrest the
defendant without a warrant and the
defendant had no right 10 resist the Of
flcer If the latter was using no greater
force than was reasonably necessary TO
make the arrest.
so we say 10 you that n you believe
from the testimony that Onlcer Zebley,
at the time he attempted TO make the
arrest had good grounds 10 suspect that
the defendant had committed a felony
he had authority 10 make the arrest,
and for that purpose had the right to
enter the prisoners home, afier seeking
admission in a peacable manner, and
use so much force TO effect the arrest
as was reasonably necessary. and under
such circumstances the defendant had
no right 10 resist the officer provided
he had good reason to know he was a
peace officer and was given to under
stand ne was under arrest
John Price Gets Twenty Years.
John Price, brother Of Lemuel, who
pleaded guilty yesterday TO a charge OF
assault with intent TO commit murder
on Ohlcer Harry C. Pierce at the time
Lemuel shot and killed Onlcer Zebley,
was sentenced to twenty years lmpris-