Reading Time: 3 minutes [437 words]

488 X. AMERICAN STATE TRIALB.

assembly is answerable only for his own act, and not for any
other. On the contrary, if an assembly be unlawful, the act
of any one of the company, to the particular purpose of as-
sembling, is chargeable on all. This ia law, which no law-
yer will dispute; it is a law founded in the security of the
peace of society, and however little considered, by people in
general, it ought now steadily to be kept in mind.

‘Was the assembly of the soldiers lawful ?-—For what did the
soldiers assemble? ‘Was the sentinel insulted and attacked?
Did he call for assistance, and did the party go to assist him?
‘Was it lawful for them so to do? Was the soldiers when
thus lawfally assembled, assaulted, ete., by a great number
of people assembled, ete. Was this last assembly lawful?
‘Waa any thing done by this unlawful assembly, that will, in
law, justify, excuse, or extenuate the offense of killing, so as
to reduce it to manslaughter? Was the killing justifiable, or
rather was it justifiable self-defense? Was it excusable, or
rather was it self-defense, culpable, but, through the benign-
ity of the law, exeusable? or was it felonious? if felonious,
was it with or without malice f*

+ The law laid down, in Foster, 261, 2, being indisputable law, not
denied or controvertad! and being very material in the trial, and
much relied on by the prisoners, is here set down at large: “TI will
mention a case (says the learned Judge), which through the igno-
rance or lenity of juries hath been sometimes brought within the rale
of aceidental death. It is where a blow aimed at one person lighteth
on another and killeth him. This, in a loose way of speaking, may
‘be called accidental with regard to the person who dieth by = blow
not intended against him. But the law considereth this case‘in &
quite different light. If from circumstances it appeareth that the
injury intended to A, be it by poison, blow, or any other means of
death, would have amounted to murder supposing him to have been
Killed by it, it will amount to the same offense if B happeneth to fall
by the same means, Our books say, that in this case the malice
egreditur personam, But to speak more intelligibly, where the
injury intended against A proceeded from a wicked, murderous, or
mischievous motive, the party is answerable for all the consequences
of the action, if death ensnes from it, though it had not its effect
‘upon the person whom he intended to destroy. The malitia I have

ready explained, the beart regardless of social duty deliberately
dent upon mischief, consequently the guilt of the party is just the
same in the one cage as the other, On the other hand, if the blow

Related Posts