State v. Trammell

Decision Date13 February 1894
Citation40 S.C. 331,18 S.E. 940
PartiesSTATE v. TRAMMELL.
CourtSouth Carolina Supreme Court

Homicide—Self-Defense—Provoking Quarrel.

1. Accused being, as he thought, insulted by a negro waiter, left the restaurant, and 20 minutes later returned, and remarked that he was going back to see about his supper. The proprietor tried to restrain him, but he went into the kitchen, and cursed the negro, who begged his pardon. In spite of the proprietor's remonstrances, accused continued to curse the negro, and then shot him twice. He asserted that the negro was advancing on him with a carving knife. Held proper to charge that, if he went into that room, and provoked the quarrel, there was no question of self-defense.

2. When only one's own safety is in question, he is hound to avoid bloodshed, if possible, by retreat.

Appeal from general sessions circuit court of Greenville county; J. J. Norton, Judge.

J. Luther Trammell, convicted of manslaughter, appeals. Affirmed.

Earle & Mooney, for appellant

Martin F. Ansel, for the State.

POPE, J. On the 22d day of December, 1892, in the city of Greenville, in this state, J. Luther Trammell gave an order to the proprietor of a restaurant for his supper. When seated in the dining room of suchrestaurant, Eugepe Robinson, who was the sole waiter in such dining room, brought to the said Trammell his supper. The hitter, upon discovering that one of the articles of food he had ordered was not supplied, said to the waiter, "This is not what I ordered;" to which Robinson, the waiter, replied, "You are blamed hard to please;" to which remark Trammell replied, "I don't want to take any insults from a damned negro, " immediately leaving the dining room. He complained to the proprietor, Mr. Logon, who promised to send him his supper over at the Windsor Hotel. Becoming very much engaged with his other customers, Mr. Legon neglected to send the supper over to the hotel. Some time afterwards—15 or 20 minutes—Trammell returned to the restaurant, and said, "I am going back to see about my supper, " to which remark Mr. Legon, the proprietor, said: "Luther, [Mr. Trammell.] for God's sake don't have any trouble here in my place. I have had trouble enough." Although Mr. Trammell said he would not, he still went through the dining room, through the pantry, and into the kitchen of the restaurant. Mr. Legon, the proprietor, caught him by the right arm. When they entered the kitchen the defendant, Trammell, said, cursing Robinson, the waiter, "You have insulted me;" to which Robinson replied, "I beg your pardon." Trammell was much excited. Mr. Legon not only had hold of his arm, but also stood between him and the waiter, and said: "Luther, he has begged your pardon. Now come on, and let us go out" Trammell did not do so, but still cursed the negro. Finally he drew his pistol and emptied the contents of two barrels of the pistol into the body of Eugene Robinson, the waiter, causing his instant death, claiming as his justification that said Eugene was advancing upon him with a large carving knife. At the July...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • State v. Gray
    • United States
    • Oregon Supreme Court
    • January 9, 1905
    ... ... drawing of a deadly weapon with an apparent hostile intent. 1 ... McClain, Crim.Law, § 309; Kerr, Homicide, §§ 178, 179; ... Henry v. State, 79 Ala. 42; State v ... Hudson, 59 Mo. 135; State v. Talmage, 107 Mo ... 543, 17 S.W. 990; State v. Trammell, 40 S.C. 331, 18 ... S.E. 940, 42 Am.St.Rep. 874. There is some language in ... Foutch v. State, 95 Tenn. 711, 34 S.W. 423, 45 ... L.R.A. 687 (the case relied upon by the defendant), which ... would seem to imply that to deny one who provoked a ... difficulty, in which ... ...
  • State v. Corley
    • United States
    • South Carolina Supreme Court
    • February 18, 1895
    ...of necessity to take life in the conduct of Jesse. Was this not fatal error? We think it was. This court, in the case of State v. Trammell, 40 S.C. 333, 18 S.E. 940, "Clearly, one of the foundation rocks upon which the plea of self-defense must be bottomed is that it was necessary for the a......
  • Hamer v. Brown
    • United States
    • South Carolina Supreme Court
    • February 16, 1894
    ... ... Chandler, are the county commissioners of the said county of Williamsburg, having been duly elected as such at the last general election for state and county officers held in said county, and having duly qualified as such county commissioners according to law, and they are now discharging the ... ...

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT