Year: 1873

| reads "when perpetrated from q deliberate and
! speak OF Intentional murder as deliberate murder
| and presumed from malice, deiberation and inten-
ture was not to 60 back TO that view. but might be
elucldated BY the other provisions OF the statute.
second degree into murder in the first degree,
| and created new second degree Of murder IN the
second degree, and the draughtsman seemed to
| have desired to intensity In 1t the separation OF
murder in the first degree. 1t is defined to be
when perpetrated ntentlonsliy but without de;
liberation or premeditation." Deberaton and
premeditation were matters Of fact to be decided
by jury and not by the Court; but in deciding on
human nature ia its varied aspects. In this case
the people claimed that the state OF facts comply
| ing with this statute existed. He should briefly
review the facts alleged on either side.


| THE MOTIVES IN THE CASE.


crime, was shown in this case in that the iather's
violent ana bad conduct towards the pris-
1ner one ana all ms family was 50 bad as to lead to
could see that such state OF circumstances
existed as that the idea OF relieving himself by an
there was motive. The prosecution claimed
that through the bad conduct OF the de-
ceased, his persistent threats and letters, .
| state OF mind arose in the prisoner looking to
the relieving OF himself by the death Of the
| circumstances have a double ASPECT, and the
| people claimed that because this man had aban-
violence ana abuse on his wife and the pFisoner
the jury might fairly infer q motive. They went


prtnsr than thai st ana showed that sIbssqSent to
letter from his father; that this letter pre-
sented an obstacle to his visit to Europe, and
| that he thereupOn meditated some means to
relieve himself and hts mother from the mon-
strous attacks Of his father. On sunday It ap-
showed that he had accepted his uncle's oner,
but then goes to say his mothers position is not
his father. From 1t might fairly be inferred that
he had accepted the invitation and this letter had
es @ ea
solved 20 see his father to see whether that 0bsta
Gle might not BE- N so%e way removed SO a6 much
went to his friend, borrowed sl6 and went 70 New
loaded pistol. The evidence Clearly showed that
he went nrst to his fathers house; that It was on on
| the suggestion Of the boarding house keeper he
wrote the note In evidence. 4
THE DELIBERATE PURPOSE.


1t was claimed by the prosecution that all these
were steps in deliberate purpose either to shoot
| his father or obtain = satisfactory settlement OF


MY oy tna pr n1s 70
| to destroy him. 1t was claimed that this was car
rled out by the GOODNESS OF the prisoner, evincing
lull knowledge OF the nature OF the act and It's
| consequences In his sending for policeman and
his statements to the sergeant At the station house
at length. These declarations coupled with the pre-
vous steps, were, 1t was claimed, matters which
| shed light on the Intention OF the prisoner as set
out by the prosecution, especially when coupled
| with the great wrongs to his mother and family,
supposed BY him 70 exist The prisoners counsel
pressed IN opposition the concluding words Of his
letter 10 his uncle MY trip Will determine any
question In regard to my going to Europe or any
| where else. Twin be heartily sorry II shall have
caused you any expense or trouble" 1t was
trip whether he should 60 to Europe or any
where else and II lie failed to arrange. matters


or Fasss %sse the es
ments bearing on the question or the Intent with
resolved to shoot his ather or resolved to shoot
him In the alternative Of his not giving satislac-
tory pledges, In either case there was the deiber-





EXPLANATION OF THE DEFENCE.


On the part OF the defence It was shown that the
n ano Snf his ofs iisnd snd
mother. his expectation Of returning retSrnfng on Tues,
day; that he went to his fathers residence
once with him and return the same night to Sara
toga, and that his knowledge OF the consequences
consistent with such deliberatiOn. 1t was Tor the
jury to decide which OF the two things they were
it was unnatural to announce such purpose as
the prosecution claimed, nor were these declara-
pose alleged by the prosecution, and of which he
might hope TO effect the mllder alternative.
Nevertheless II there were any reasonable doubt
The prosecution were bound to make out the fact
OF deliberation and premeditaticn beyond reason
able doubt but II they were satisfied either OF the
positive intent to kill or OF the alternative resolu-
ton to kill If the lather did not make satisfactory
arrangement, the TACT was made out within the
definition OF murder In the first degree


MURDER IN THE SECOND DEGREE


This ught him to the consideration OF murder
In the second degree. This, under the statute,
was killing with INTENTION but without debera-
tion or premeditatlon. 1t might be swift intent,
was murder in the first degree. Now 1t was MUIR
der in the second degree. 1t required no pre-
meditation at Saratoga, no deliberate setting
when they met something sudden occurring in
his lather's manner Oi action reused up hasty,
sudden, instantaneous determination to kill.
Whatever the deceased's appearance toward the
fore them toward his vile and children was des-
picabe beyond description. According to the EVIL
ceased before them to explain the letters II they
were capable OF explanation.


THE CHARACTER OF THE DECEASED.
The public should be careful to remember, said
Judge Davis. what they are very prone to forget,
and It is what the general public are very apt to
spect to their condition OF character, bad devices,
or their moral or physical nature, % are under under
that Is over the bad Is over you, and
each Of you; stands by your >. bedside Dc
those, too who puiest In their lives. The genius
OF the law protects every person. however humble
man Who NAV be- called to % have his grave laid opea
to show up his character and his pursuits In life,
for the purpose OF creating public sentiment that
he was so pad a man that he ought to die. / say
that this wild notion OF justice has no approval In
the administration OF either truth or law: 1t is
sderaton cr this case the notion that Wal.
worth was not nt to 1--we: The , Judge
sit M' in this Court t'' nor oH' in this jury box.
He determines this question by tnat which you and
do not pOssess-an infinite knowledge and an
Omniscence that reads every soul and inds truth
wherever 1t Is The law upon this subject has
been well expressed by Chef Justice Davies This
opinion was read by the Judge)


TwOFOLD CHARACTER OF THE DEFENCE.


The evidence in the case for the defence might be
specified as OF a twofOld character. First-That
the prisoner at the time OF the alleged crime was
outside Of the law, because he was insane.
Sec0nd-That the act OF shooting his iather was
prOmpted self-defenCe. That, with the exception
OF the just alluded to, as to the character OF
the father which was no law, covered the
points OF the defence. Taking the second frst:-
As to setdelence, its right Is a natural one ana
recognized by law within certain limits. This was
claimed 10 be justilable homicide under our stat
ute. The statute recognizes excusabe or justif-
able homicide. four grades OF granddaughter and
two OF murder. 1t does not recognize distinctly
patricide or matrcide The crime IL likely
to produce horror, but the law only recognizes 1t