
    Rice B. Pierce v. Edmund Myrick,
    From Halifax.
    In trespass for killing a slave, an outrage by the. slave less than a threat- ' eoed felony, will justify the killing.
    In such an action, evidence of the slave’s good character is admissible, to repel the presumption of his improper conduct..
    In trespass, where not guilty, and a justification are pleaded, and the Jury find the first issue for the Defendant, the rejection of admissible testimony pertinent to the latter only, is not ground for a new trial.
    Trespass for killing the negro of the Plaintiff. The Defendant picad Not Guilty, and a Justification,
    On the trial, before Dahiei, Judge,' after giving in evidence circumstances from which the killing by the Defendant might be interred, the Plaintiff offered evidence of the peaceable and submissive character of the slave, in order to rebut the presumption of such ill conduct in him, us would justify the Defendant in killing him, if the Jury should infer tiiat he was killed by the Defendant. This evidence was objected to by the Defendant, and rejected by the Judge.
    His Honor instructed the Jury, that if thecircumstan-ces in proof before thorn, rendered it probable to their minds, that the Defendant killed the negro, they should find fur the Plaintiff, unless they collected from those circumstances, a reasonable inference that the slave was killed by the Defendant, to defend his person or property from some threatened- felpny. s
    The entry of the verdict was, <£ the Jury find ail the issues in favor of the Defendant, and the Defendant not guilty.”
    A rule for a new trial being discharged, the Piaiutiff appealed.
    No Counsel appeared for the Plaintiff.£adger, for the Defendant, submitted the case without argument.
   Henderson, Judge.

The Plaintiff has certainly nt> ground to complain of the charge of the Judge, for it left ° „ , n ° the Deiendant very narrow grounds, on which to rest his justification — too narrow, in the case of an outrage attempted by a slave1.

As to the evidence of tiie genera! good character, and orderly deportment of tiie slave offered by the Plaintiff, and rejected by the. Judge, 1 think it should have been received, to repel tiie presumption, relied on by the Defendant as a justification, it was relevant, as it tended in the absence of positive prool, to throw light upon the subject, and aid the Jury in arriving at the most probable conclusion, as to the circumstances under which the act was committed by the Defendant, if in fact it was committed by him. But the Plaintiff is not entitled to a new trial on that ground, because the Jury having found the Defendant not guilty, the justification could not have been passed on by them. Although they have found all the issues in favor of the Deiendant, (which is a very improper way of entering a verdict, as the facts in issue should be either affirmed or disaffirmed,) yet they also find the Defendant not guilty. We cannot impute to the, Jury the absurdity of saying, that the Deiendant was justified in an act, which they at the same time say he did not commit.

Per Curiam. — Judgment affirmed.  