The eastern clarion. [volume] (Paulding, Miss.) 1837-1863, 1861-03-29

OF equity set up IN the cross bill that the
debt Of the plaintiffs in execution was
contracted for goods and money supplied
TO the widow for the use Of the estate, i
not taken INTO consideration. That ques-
ton viii probably arise if that ground of
relief in the cross bill is prosecuted in the
further progress of the case.
The decree dissolving the Injunction is
reversed, and the cause remanded for fur
ther proceeding. and tlaa aeararluinnsss. r.s.
qulred TO answer the cross bill within
sixty days.
Caleb slave
rh. Is; State. t'ai7-
This was an indictment for murder,
tried in the Circuit Court of Lowndes.
upon which the plaintiff in error, a slave.
was convicted. A motion was made for
q new trial. upon the following grounds,
to-wit: l. Because the verdict of the
jury was contrary to the law and the
evidence. 2. Because the Court erred in
permitting certain witness to give his
opinion as to the instrument with which
the wound upon the body Of the deceased
was inflicted and 8. Because the jury
were exposed to improper influences by
the misconduct Of the officers placed in
charge of them. Which motion being
overruled the prisoner excepted, and
prosecutes his writ Of error.
The exceptions to the judgment are
based upon the same grounds relied on
in support of the motion for a new trial.
We shall reverse the order pursued by
counsel in assigning the cause for new
trial.
1t is insisted that the judgment should
be reversed and new trial granted be-
cause the jury retired from the court
room, to a room at hotel in the town
Of Columbus. throughthe public streets.
at night, to consider of their verdict,
without the consent Of the court or the
counsel for the defendant.
AffidAvits were read in support of the
motion. From the evidence thus fur
niAhed it is clear that the conduct of the
bailifs, in charge of the jury, was unau-
thorized and illegal, and should have
been severely repreheuded by the pre-.
siding judge. But it is@ettled that it j.
not every improper or illegal act of the
oficer in charge Of the jury, or Of the
jury themselves which will constitute
Just cause for setting aside the verdict
SO Miss. Rep. $50.
not whether the baillffs, in charge of the
Jury, in conducting the jury through b
-treets of the town toa room at the ho
ell, were guilty. simply Of . violation oil
duty but whether by such improper
conduct on their part, the jury were ex.
POSED to influences, which might have
affected the purity Of their verdict. Il
hey were so exposed, according to the
Il III -E 4.
court unless it were also afirmat veIy
shown that such influences failei OF
sffect, their verdict would be suspected
and should therefore be set aside. Here
without noticing the evidence in detail,
il is only necessary to say, that it appesyS
with sufficient certainty, that the jory
were not subjected 70 improper influgnces,
Or placed by the conduct Of the officers,
IN such a situation, as it was at all prob
able that such influences could be brought
TO bear upon them.
This exception therefore Is unsuppor-
ted and untenable.
2. Il u next contended that the court
effal in permitting Charles Nelson, q
witness examined on behalfof the pros
ecution h sfatn hia opinion "a the Jury
IVIiloi 8 wound icdnd ln fne tiAlsl ~
| the deceased was inflicted
This witness on his examination before
the jury having described the locality
where the deceased's body was found
its position upon the ground, the condi
lion of the clothes and other connected
circumstances, stated that The was vel
acquainted with the difference in appear
aimee between gun-shot wounds and
wounds made with knife or sharp in
stument. That his knowledge was de
rived from experience and observation
| That he had frequently seen gun-shol
Wounds and wounds made with knit
on the body Of men. That in gun shot
wounds the edges we're depressed il
wounds made with knife the edges
we're usually smooth and the lips of th,
wound protruded. That he examined
the wound on the body Of the deceased
He saw butone wound on the body o
deceased, that was just below the breast
bone, in the pit of the stomach directly
in front. The wound appeared To- bt
about Ii inches long and about I Of an
inch wide. That he had seen as much as
a dozen gun shot wounds and about tn,
same number of cuts with a sharp instru
ment on the human body. Had seeI
the wounds on two persons in Mexics
who were said to have been shot in fv'
| or six places and had seen the wound
on another person who was said to hav'
been cut with knife in FIVE or six pla
ces. and had seen cuts made by medica
men in lancing swellings on the humai
BODY. That all the knowledge he ha,
in relation to the character of wound
is derived from having seen these PEI
sons, and from experience and observI
ton. That gun shot wounds are roug
and cuts smooth. The body Of the d.
ceased was in 9 state of putrefaction an
he had never seen q wound when tn
body was in a state Of putretaction before.
Having testified as to these facts tn
witness was asked by counsel for the pros
ecution to state TO the jury whether th
wound he had described, on the body I
the deceased had the appearance OF
gun shot or pistol shot wound, or, of ha1
ing been made with . knife or sharp II
strument. Which question was oblecte
%, but the objection was oVerruled an
the witness permitted 20 answer II
witness stated in reply to said questlo
i that the wound below the breast Dor
/ of the deceased (the wound he had d
scribed) was made with knife"
AS a witness is called for. the purpo'
> /
rule. he is not permitted to express b
opiuion upon a particular question whetl
,.r such question arise upon q fact state
! or a combination Of facts admitted
proved. Notwithstanding this Is q
: general rule there are some classes OF "
: nesses who may deliver their opiniO
For example ION questions Of scienC
kill or trade, or others Of the like kin
r L. fanII al
r.aS rot only testify 70 facts, but are p'
mifted to give theis opinions 70 evldenS
Thus the opinions Of rled1cai--it tssee Z
] constantly admitted as 70 the cause
disease or death. or the consequences
= wounds &C.. and also as 70 other subie.
1 Of professional skill. Bosooe cr. ev. le
; l67. Greenleaf eV. sect 40. Jones !
! Finch 81 Miss. Rep. 40l.
4 There was not g particle Of eviden
: before the court, except the statamel
! Of the with IS himself which tended
prove that he possessed the knowled
: or skin requhite TO enable any one
q form an intelligent opinion on the 81
9 ject about which he deposed. The v
!. ness was not offered as q person skill
y in the science Of medicine or surge
q And he did not himself pretend 70 a
a knowledge in either Of these branches
I. science. He states his entire knowled
2 and experience in regard to woun
made, upon the human body. BY gun sh
and BY sharp edged instruments. Fro
"a his own statements il 10 most manif'
D. that he was not embraced in any class
ie witnesses made exceptions 70 the gene
er rule above laid down.
% The court therefore erred In perm
g ting the question 10 be propounded
- this witness and his answer 10 60. to I
Q Jury as evidence. And the error hS
a. Committed may have had an importa
g. effect upon the verdict. For withc
y proof that the mortal wound was infiiet
D. by means OF knife or some sharp edr
. weapon as no knife or sharp edged "
= pom was found near the corpse Of the I
ceased, the jury may have doubted, !
= der all the circumstances proved, whe
a er the deceased fell BY his own hand
q that Of an assassin, For this error I
y Judgment must be reversed.
n 3. The last exception which We ah
notice points to the error alleged 70 he
y been committed BY the court in 6vorr
10 ing the motion for q new trial. Z
Ie ground assumed. and which was maiE
D. relied on Tor q reversal Of the iudgmel
v is that the verdict was not warranted
% the evidence in the cause.
e When this cause was before us on
% former occasion, the only question D
n sented by the record was the same gu
+ ton which we are now considering.
le were then we'll satisfied that the eVider
2, did not justify the verdict, and, con
/ rn,awt1., e..