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 4th, 1806
Russell and Cutler, Belcher and Armstrong, and Oliver and Monroe, 1807 - 168 páginas
Comentarios de la gente - Escribir un comentario
No encontramos ningún comentario en los lugares habituales.
Otras ediciones - Ver todas
affray afterwards appear asked assault attack attempt August Austin authorities believe blood blow called cane caſe cause Change charge circumstances common conduct consequence consider conversation counsel Court crime danger death deceased defendant Dexter discharged duty evidence excusable expected fact father feel felony fired further gentlemen give given Gore ground guilty hand happened head heard homicide honor indictment injury intention judge Jury justice justifiable killing malice manner manslaughter means meet mentioned mind murder nature necessary necessity never observed occasion offence opinion Parker party passed person pistol present principles prove quarrel question reason received recollect relate rule Selfridge Selfridge's side society standing street struck sudden suppose testimony thing told took trial true turned unlawful violent walk weapon whole wish witnesses wound young
Página 28 - England, that no man is to be brought into jeopardy of his life more than once for the same offence.
Página 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...
Página 121 - ... 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.
Página 143 - Also in many cases where no malice is expressed, the law will imply it : as where a man wilfully poisons another, in such a deliberate act the law presumes malice, though no particular enmity can be proved. And if a man kills another suddenly, without any, or without a considerable provocation, the law implies malice ; for no person, unless of an abandoned heart, would be guilty of such an act upon a slight or no apparent cause.
Página 110 - Thus, if one shoots at A and misses him, but kills B, this is murder, because of the previous felonious intent, which the law transfers from one to the other.
Página 7 - Then the indictment was read, which set forth that the prisoner "not having the fear of God before his eyes, but being moved and seduced by the instigation of the devil...
Página 143 - But if the person so provoked had unfortunately killed the other by beating him in such a manner as showed only an intent to chastise and not to kill him, the law so far considers the provocation of contumelious behaviour as to adjudge it only manslaughter, and not murder.
Página 143 - ... malice. And, if two or more come together to do an unlawful act against the king's peace, of which the probable consequence might be bloodshed, as to beat a man, to commit a riot, or to rob a park : and one of them kills a man ; it is murder in them all, because of the unlawful act, the malitia prcecogitata or evil intended before-hand.
Página 113 - ... exhort him to overcome his prejudices, is like telling a blind man to see. He may be disposed to overcome them, and yet be unable because they are unknown to himself. When prejudice is once known, it is no longer prejudice, it becomes corruption ; but so long as it is not known, the possessor cherishes it without guilt ; he feels indignation for vice, and pays homage to virtue ; and yet does injustice. It is the apprehension that you may thus mistake, that you may call your prejudices principles,...