Every act committed by Furbush, his every movement—from the time he left the ship with a pistol loaded with seven or eight shots—showed plainly his culpability. He seemed to make trouble for everybody. He was a "bad American," and was going to let them know it. As to his condition, which, to my mind, is the most important fact to be considered, take the statements made by the various people who saw him that night. It has been intimated that the accused was drugged. I am carrying no brief for the "Trenches," but I do argue it does not seem reasonable that two men would have been doped with the first drink they had. From what 1 have read and heard, men are drugged to get money from them. The purpose of drugging is not io start a fight, but to obtain money. Neither the accused nor his companion displayed any wealth. Only 60 instead of 80 cents were tendered for their drink.
I think the whole case rests upon what the Court believes was the 1c-cused's condition when the fatal shot was fired: whether he was so drank as not to know the consequences of his act. If his Honour is convinced that this was the true state of affairs, I believe Furbush should be convicted of manslaughter in the second degree.
If it is thought that the prisoner had the least knowledge of what he was doing—it appears to me that he had. in that he went into the cafe with a pistol, knowing that he had no right to carry one and said he knew how to use ity if the Court believes that during the time he nurtured hatred for anybody while he was pulling the weapon out of his pocket: if from the moment his face changed it gave him sufficient time to decide that he did not want to kill Hazel-ton: and if the accused then knew what he was doing—he is guilty of murder in the first degree.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.