Jefferson v. Adams

Booth, Chief Justice, charged the jury.—The case has been unreasonably protracted by the introduction into it, especially into the argument, of matters having no relation to the issue joined. All these matters are to be discarded from your consideration, which must be confined to the issue, whether the defendants committed a tresspass by breaking and entering plaintiff’s house, and if they did, what are the damages 1 This is the general issue on the plea of not guilty. There is a plea of justification, but it has not been sustained by any evidence, nor relied on in the argument. The plaintiff kept a public tavern, and persons presenting themselves in a proper manner had the right to enter such a place; but they have no right to enter by violence or for the. purpose of breaking the peace; or, having entered lawfully, if they are afterwards guilty of unlawful conduct, this makes them trespassers from the beginning. *323 Layton, Houston and Smithers, for plaintiff. Bates and Frame, for defendants. The question then for the jury is, whether from credible testimony given by witnesses in the cause, the jury are satisfied that these defendants entered the plaintiff’s house unlawfully, and in reference to the violence which would inculpate all of the defendants, the rule is, that any one present, aiding and abetting, or giving active countenance to others committing a breach of the peace or a trespass, is also guilty of a breach of the peace or trespass. It was not denied that in actions of trespass for wilful injuries the jury might, if they thought the case required it, give damages by way of punishment, and beyond a mere compensation of the actual /injury. It was for the jury to say whether there were circumstances of aggravation in this case, which ought in their judgment, to require a departure from the general rule of compensatory damages; and which called on them to add any thing by way of public example or punishment. As to the proceedings in the criminal court, they were not evidence, and could not have been given in evidence in this case, and were not to enter into the consideration of the jury in deciding it either as to the propriety of a verdict against the defendants, or for the amount of the damages. The indictment was between other parties; the State and these defendants, and not this plaintiff and the defendants; the verdict was rendered upon other testimony than that given in this case; even upon the testimony of the plaintiff himself and his wife; and the punishment, if any such has been inflicted, had reference to the public peace and not to this plaintiff’s wrongs. It -would obviously, therefore, be improper that these proceedings in the criminal court should enter into the present case for any purpose. Verdict for plaintiff, $50. -