The eastern clarion. [volume] (Paulding, Miss.) 1837-1863, 1859-09-07
M. SLOT,
Thomas NJ Lynes and Thomas Lynes Pens in FL
Tor. vs., the State If Mississippi.

Thomas NJ. L-ynes and Ih0mas LyneS, Petfs in Err
ToF vs., the State If Mississippi.
Writ of Error to the Circuit Court Of Jones County
The pets IN error were indicted for the murder Of
one Landrum, with James Hishtower and Lemuel
Lynes. The said HlEhtOwer Is principal. Thomas
VI. Lyncs for aiding and Ghetting the murder at the
time. and Thomas and Lemuel Lynes a. accessories
before the fact 10y melting and procuring the com
mission of the otiense.
The record before Us relates only To the .iu al
Thomas VI. ami Thomas Lynes. WIS were convicted
and sentenced after mCtia. fur a new triad mad
and oyerrued. to Il. hanged.
BIZ c. exceptions appears IN the record present
ing the testimony and all the proceedings on the trI-
al ami II J. assigned for error here
lst That the Court erred in admitting certain cop
ieS OF deeds which were not proves, aud certified f6r
record according To law
M "l91'ugn although properly taken IN the Court
below and although il Should have been sustained
ana NE deeds excluded for want of autbsuIstipn t.
alhl u'n 70 record. ami thereby g. make them ey.
ldence, . not material here As The same fact vss
proven 10y the coHiessIqn 81; Thomas Lyncs ly other
81 Il "a nest assigned for error thst th, ,,,r, az,
mttod the confession at Thomas Iyne. W. tbi,,i.
there was no error IN this under the circumsrancqs
before rs.
81 The Court erred IN admitting the statements q,
Hight0otr, mad" 70 witness susan T. Ian irrrp ann
dantS.
The 4th and 81 assignments may bc emoraou,, I'm
der tins general head.
The ground Of error Is well .,Acu 1t u well set
uek that even after t,C piracy has been cstai-
shed, admissions of co-cOns praDrS are inadmlSsi-
hle % effect their associates unless made during the
progress IN furtherance of, IN the prosecution
of the unlawful design. about which thoy have con
spred. The confession Of High,oNcrs far a. il was
introduced 10 ESTABLISH the n.ct that he the per
petrator Of tie yIIu,e competent. hut far n Il
tended 20 duplicate others was lnrumpetent. and
should have been excluded from the Jury
In eases purely crcumstautIal. II il Impossible for
this Court to determine what Influence this teStlmo-
NY may have produced upon the mind of the Jury.
We deem t safe oa6rai rule 70 leave 10 the Jury
disputed questions Of tact aud therefore whom evil
dence has been improperly admitted which may
have materially operated Ia producing conviction.
even m cases whore minds might incline to sts-
tain the verdict upon the testimony which was legal
the will be reversed that the more approprate
tribunal pronounce upon the real facts N dis
pute And only IN eases where the Illegal testimony
could not have changed the result will tins Court re
fuse 10 aside the verdict and judgment and sw-r
a trla.
We do not intend 10 sAP.-s. auy mtimation a. to
what should ha tho verdict OF the Jury cfhuut
tss aae.. sEss We only intend to say that tins ey
idence ought to have been excluded. and IL Will De
for the Jury WHOM tins will he hereafter sub
mittcd 10 say whether the evidence which shall Le
adduced bCfoc them. satisfies their MINIS OF
the guilt Of the accused beyond reasonable doult
The eth assignment II Frru-, the refusal Of the
Court give the Is % al 4th 9Th and 9Th iu-tru.-
tons asked f., tN'rf IN Error
The hrst Of these Instructions, also the thirl
fourth and sixth should have heeu gwen, The &c
ond and ffIh we're properly refused
Letth iudgmentbe reversed c,s,se leHl1l,ded and
eHirt De More aWae'gY~ HIRRIS.