
    
      State vs. Weaver.
    
    VNDICTMENT for the murder of a negro man named Lewis,. the property of Smith, not guilty pleaded; and the trial now came on.
   El per curiam.

Hay wood, justice only in court.

I» his charge to the jury. — The nature of the evidence is such as makes it necessary you should have clear ideas respecting the requisites to constitute several denominations of homicide; that is to say, justifiable homicide, manslaughter and .murder ; .for upon this evidence it has been contended for the state that the offence of the. prisoner amounts to murder, by the counsel for. -the prisoner, that iris but manslaughter at most, if not justifiable homicide. So far as the evidence can relate to these offences,justifiable homicide may be defined thus : where the pérson killed, attempts.^ to kill the slayer, and he kills'in his own defence,it is justifiable. Manslaughter is where some great provocation is given, that is calculated to excite the resentment of a reasonable man to' such a degree as to take away the proper exercise of his reason', he kills the aggressor; as if the aggressor spits in his face, pulls ' his nose, kicks him, or the like,- or where blows pass ; in all these cases the blood is heated and the passions j-oused or excited; and the killing under such circumstances, is attributed to human frailty,- and not to a wickedness of heart. Murder is where the homi- '. cide with malice aforethought, which means not whstis.com»-' manly understood, but a doing the act under such circumstances" as shews the heart to be exceedingly malignant and cruel, above what is ordinarily found amongst mankind ; & the wickedness of/ heart is' collected either from the express words and conduct of the party, or from the manner in which the deed is done~in the " first instance, by threatening expressions, former grounds, or schemes to do him mischief, as by lying in wait for him and the like; in the latter instance^ by the excessiveness of punishment, or dangerous'weapon, or means made use of to punish ; as if for a slight offence which deserved only moderate correction, any. man shonld -take up his servant and beat him so excessively as to cause his death; if in such a case for such an offence,, he should beat out his brains with an axe, shoot him with a gun, or - kill him with a sword ; from all these circumstances, it is allow-.,, cd that the k .art is exceedingly depraved and ciuel, and that the killing has not proceeded from the frailty of human nature, and therefore the offence is deemed murder. This is the law with respect to a freeman who is killed, but with respect to a slave it is somewhat different; for if a free servant refuses to obey the' commands of his master, and the master endeavour to exact obedience by force, and the servant offers to resist by force m such a case, and the master kills, it is not murder, nor even manslaughter, bat justifiable } much more is it justifiable if the slave actually uses force and combats with the master . — If therefore you shall be of opinion upon examining the evidence, that the deceased actually attempted to kill the prisoner, who was a temporary master, having hired him for a,year, and that the prisoner killed In his own defence, he is justifiable ; if you find the deceased actually used force and was resisting by force when he was killed, the, prisoner is justifiable ; or if he offered to resist by force when he was killed, the prisoner is justifiable. If none of these circumstances are to be found in the case, and you are of ©pinion that the killing with the pistol ivas with malice aforethought, as before explained, then the prisoner is guilty oí murder.

There was verdict for the prisoner of not guilty.  