The judges when summing up the evidence to the jury, and giving their opinions of the constructions of law upon the evidence apply themselves to the removing of those bad impressions, which may possibly have been made upon the jury by the misconstruction of scripture passages. Says one of them—“In the course of this year you doubtless have heard much of the law given to the _Jews_ respecting homicide, as well as of the precept given to Noah, that _whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed_. Whence it has been inferred, that whosoever _voluntarily_ kills another, whatever the inducement or provocation may be, is a _murderer_, and as such ought to be put to death.—But surely not only the avenger of blood, and he who killed a thief breaking up a house in the night, were exceptions to that general precept, but also he who killed another in his own defence. Even the Jewish doctors allowed this, and that justly; because the right of self defence is founded in the law of nature.” It appears upon the trial, that the facts related above, under the fifth of March are well attested. There are no less than _thirty-eight_ witnesses to prove a design to attack the soldiers. Six of whom the council for the king have produced. Nigh _thirty_ witnesses have sworn to words of provocation uttered against the prisoners, as daring them to fire, and threatening to kill them; and _twenty-five_ have witnessed to _ice_, _snow-balls_, _sticks_, &c. being thrown at them, ten, of whom are witnesses for the crown.—There is evidence that Patrick Carr, one of the deceased, repeatedly declared and confirmed the same but a few hours before he died—that he went with a design against the soldiers; that he thought they were abused and would have fired before; that he forgave and did not blame the man, whoever he was that shot him; that he blamed himself for going to the riot, and might have known better, for he had seen soldiers called to quell riots, but never saw any bear half so much before. The jury withdrew for about two hours and a half. Upon comparing the evidence, they cannot be convinced that the soldiers were not too hasty in firing. Was there evidence of all having fired, they would convict all of manslaughter; but it is agreed on all hands, that no more than seven guns were fired, consequently one is innocent, and they choose that the guilty shall escape rather than one innocent person be convicted.[106] They return into court and agree, that as to Wemms, Hartegan, M‘Cauley, White, Warren, and Carrol, they are not guilty, on which they are immediately discharged. As to Killroy and Montgomery, they agree that they are not guilty of murder, but of manslaughter. Both pray the benefit of clergy, which is allowed; each is burnt in the hand in open court, and discharged. [Dec. 5.] The trial has been long, but the issue of it, as well as of that of the captain’s, may be brought in proof of the integrity of Boston juries, venturing to give upright verdicts in