38 _ ~ {FEDERAL nnroarnn.
defendant, and after7 o’clock at night, ordered the defendant- to wash
his clothes, it was a petty act of tyranny which the; defendant was not
obliged to obey; and if the mate assaulted him because the defendant
refused towash his clothes at that time, the defendant would be justified
in resisting that assault;_ but he would not be justified in using a deadly
weaponunless, under the rule I have already given you, the assault was
of that character as to satisfy him that he was in danger of serious bodily
harm tohimself.
In weighing this evidence you will take into consideration all the facts
, likely to iniiuence the testimony of the witnesses as defining and fixing
the amount of credibility you should attach to the testimony of each.
If you believe from the evidence that the steward, Crowley, has bad
° feeling against this defendant, you will attach to just such bad feeling,
and the. prejudice which would naturally arise from it, such weight as
_ you think it ought to have in estimating the credibility of the testimony
` of Crowley; _You will also consider, in estimating the value of the tes-
timony of the defendant himself, all the interest that he has in this case
because he is the defendant. You should not allow the evidence of other
assaults madeupon the defendantby the steward, Crowley, to influence
your minds, except in so far as it would tend to throw light upon his
. motives, and to enable you to say whether or not he was telling the truth -
of this transaction.
If,. on reviewing all the evidence, you have a reasonable doubt, (which
doubt should arise from the evidence or from the want of evidence. and
should be such a doubt as a sensible man could give a good reason for,)
either as to the truth of the testimony of the witness Crowley for the
' prosecution, or as to the comparative weight of evidence, or whether the
defendantacted in self—defense,—you should give the defendant the ben-
efit of that doubt, and acquit him. He comes before you with the pre-
sumption of innocence in his favor. That presumption has the weight
of evidence that he is innocent unless it is removed by the evidence which
has been offered on the part of the government. If you believe that the
· government’s testimony shows that this was an assault made with a dan-
gerous weapon, and not in the defendant’s self-defense, or otherwise jus-
tifiable, it will be your duty to convict the defendant, and your verdict
in that case would be: "We, the jury, ind the defendant guilty." If
you believe that the government fails to make out its case because of the
want of credibility in the testimony of its witnesses, or if you believe
that the defendant was justified in the assault, and that he made it in
his own self-defense, it will be your duty to acquit the defendant; and
if you have a reasonable doubt from the evidence as to what is your duty
g in the premises, it is your duty to acquit the defendant; and if you End
the defendant is not guilty, you will say so by your verdict in these
words: "We, the jury, Gnd-the defendant not guilty." As you believe
so you must find. ,
The prisoner was acquitted. ~ `