## Facts

- William Drum was indicted for the murder of David Mohigan in Westmoreland County, Pennsylvania.
- The prosecution presented evidence that Drum and Mohigan had prior disputes and that Drum armed himself with a dirk intending to use it.
- During a saloon altercation, Mohigan was allegedly fighting someone else and not attacking Drum when Drum advanced and stabbed Mohigan in the left side, causing death.
- Drum asserted he carried a hunting knife for a planned trip and that Mohigan, larger and aggressive, sought him out and repeatedly struck him inside the saloon.
- Drum claimed he could not escape and reasonably feared serious bodily harm, so he used the knife in self-defense.
- A jury convicted Drum of murder; the conviction was treated as first-degree murder under Pennsylvania’s statute.
- Drum sought review by writ of error, challenging the trial court’s jury instructions on homicide classifications and self-defense.

## Issues

1. Whether the trial court correctly instructed the jury on murder, including the distinction between first- and second-degree murder under Pennsylvania’s statute.
2. When provocation and heat of passion mitigate an unlawful killing from murder to voluntary manslaughter.
3. How “malice aforethought” may be defined and inferred from the circumstances of a killing.
4. What conditions justify homicide in self-defense, including whether the defendant must retreat before using deadly force.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania affirmed the conviction.
- The court held the trial court’s instructions correctly stated Pennsylvania law on malice, degrees of murder, voluntary manslaughter, and self-defense.
- The court approved the explanation that first-degree murder requires a wilful, deliberate, and premeditated intent to kill, even if formed shortly before the act if there was time for reflection.
- The court upheld the self-defense instruction requiring the jury to consider whether Drum was free from fault, reasonably feared death or great bodily harm, and could not safely retreat.

## Legal Principles

- Murder is an unlawful killing with malice aforethought; malice includes not only personal hatred but a general wickedness or reckless disregard for social duty.
- Malice may be express or implied; a jury may infer malice when a defendant intentionally uses a deadly weapon on a vital part of the body absent justification, excuse, or adequate provocation.
- First-degree murder requires a specific intent to kill that is wilful, deliberate (cool reflection), and premeditated (formed before the act with time for choice, even if brief).
- Second-degree murder involves malice but lacks the deliberation and premeditation required for first-degree murder.
- Voluntary manslaughter applies when the defendant kills in the heat of passion upon sudden, sufficient provocation before a reasonable cooling time; insufficient or remote provocation does not mitigate murder.
- Deadly force in self-defense is justified only if the defendant is without fault, reasonably believes in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm, and cannot safely retreat; the defendant must retreat as far as safely possible unless retreat cannot be safely made (including recognized exceptions such as in one’s dwelling).
- In capital cases, the jury’s role is to determine guilt under the law and evidence, not to decide punishment.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed Drum’s murder conviction and adopted a comprehensive statement of Pennsylvania homicide law, detailing how malice may be inferred, how first-degree murder differs from second-degree murder, when heat of passion mitigates to manslaughter, and when self-defense justifies lethal force subject to a duty to retreat when safe.


Commonwealth v. Drum, 58 Pa. 9 (Pa. 1868)