Trial of Thomas O. Selfridge, Attorney at Law, Before the Hon. Isaac Parker, Esquire, for Killing Charles Austin, on the Public Exchange, in Boston, August 4, 1806
Russell and Cutler, Belcher and Armstrong, and Oliver and Munroe, 1807 - Electronic books - 168 pages
What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
Other editions - View all
affray afterwards appear assault attack attempt attended Austin authorities believe blood blow called cane caſe cause Change charge circumstances common consequence conversation counsel Court crime danger death deceased defendant Dexter discharged doubt duty evidence examined excuse expected fact father feelings felony fired further gentlemen give given Gore Government ground guilty hand happened head heard homicide indictment injury intention judge Jury justice justify killing malice manner manslaughter means meet mentioned mind murder muſt nature necessary necessity never observed occasion offence opinion Parker party passed person pistol present principles prove quarrel question reason received recollect relate rule ſaid Selfridge Selfridge's side society ſome standing street struck ſuch sudden suppose testimony thing told took trial true turned violent walk weapon whole witnesses wound young
Page 2 - Co. of the said district, have deposited in this office the title of a book, the right whereof they claim as proprietors, in the words following, to wit : " Tadeuskund, the Last King of the Lenape. An Historical Tale." In conformity to the Act of the Congress of the United States...
Page 44 - In the case of justifiable self-defence the injured party may repel force by force in defence of his person, habitation or property against one who manifestly intendeth and endeavoureth by violence or surprise to commit a known felony upon either. In these cases he is not obliged to retreat, but may pursue his adversary till he findeth himself out of danger, and if in a conflict between them he happeneth to kill, such killing is justifiable : Fost.
Page 28 - England, that no man is to be brought into jeopardy of his life more than once for the same offence.
Page 146 - This takes in the case of deliberate duelling, where both parties meet avowedly with an intent to murder : thinking it their duty as gentlemen, and claiming it as their right, to wanton with their own lives and those of their fellow-creatures; without any warrant or authority from any power either divine or human, but in direct contradiction to the laws both of God and man : and therefore the law has justly fixed the crime and punishment of murder on them and on their seconds also.
Page 125 - The party assaulted must therefore flee as far as he conveniently can, either by reason of some wall, ditch, or other impediment ; or as far as the fierceness of the assault will permit him : for it may be so fierce as not to allow him to yield a step, without manifest danger of his life, or enormous bodily harm ; and then in his defence he may kill his assailant instantly. And this is the doctrine of universal justice, as well as of the municipal law.
Page 146 - As, when a park-keeper tied a boy that was stealing wood, to a horse's tail, and dragged him along the park; when a master corrected his servant with an iron bar; and a schoolmaster stamped on his scholar's belly; so that each of the sufferers died; these were justly held to be .murders, because the correction being excessive, and such as could not proceed but from a bad heart, it was equivalent to a deliberate act of slaughter...
Page 160 - ... and using violent menaces against his life as he advances. Having approached near enough in the same attitude, A., who has a club in his hand, strikes B. over the head before, or at the instant the pistol is discharged, and of the wound B. dies. It turns out that the pistol was loaded with powder only, and that the real design of B. was only to terrify A.
Page 146 - Also, If even upon a sudden provocation one beats another in a cruel and unusual manner, so that he dies, though he did not intend his death, yet he is guilty of murder by express malice: that is, by an express evil design, the genuine sense of malitia.
Page 18 - Law, says, in the case of justifiable self-defence, the injured party may repel force with force, in defence of his person, habitation, or property, against one who manifestly intendeth and endeavoreth, with violence or surprise, to commit a known felony upon either. In these cases, he is not obliged to retreat, but may pursue his adversary, till he findeth himself out of danger, and if in a conflict between them he happeneth to kill, such killing is justifiable.
Page 160 - When from the nature of the attack, there is reasonable ground to believe that there is a design to destroy his life, or commit any felony upon his person, the killing the assailant will be excusable homicide, although it should afterwards appear that no felony was intended.