Whether, if the defendant had killed the plaintiff and this action was an indictment for the homicide, the charge requested would be proper (4 Bl. Com. 184, 185; 2 Bish. Cr. Law, s. 548, et seq.) need not be considered; but that the plaintiff was not entitled to the charge in the present action is elementary law. It was one of the defendant’s “ natural, essential, and inherent ” rights to do whatever apparently was reasonably necessary to be done, to repel the plaintiff’s attack. Dole v. Erskine, 35 N. H. 503; Towle v. Blake, 48 N. H. 92; Aldrich v. Wright, 53 N. H. 398. Whether his acts were within the requirements of reasonable necessity, under the circumstances, was a question of fact, which presumably was properly submitted to the jury for decision.

Exception overruled.