The weekly North-Carolina standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 186?-1869, 1866-02-21
Trial of Mrs. BaIl--The Argument.
TBY OUR OWN REPORTER
SATuRpAy Feb. 17tb. /

SATURDAY, Feb. 18th, 1866. Z
The Court met at 10 o'clock, to hear the argu-
mcnt of Counsel, in the trinl of Mrs. Elizabeth
Ball.
The Judge Advocate declined the privilege of
the opening address, and the case for the defence
was argued by J. P. Jordan, Esq., who occupied
some half hour in his remarks. He reviewed the
evidence offered for the prosecution, especially
that of the principal witness, Vim. d. Hendrirx,
which he declared doubtful aud unsatisfactory,
even if there had been no counter testimony 70
show its falsity. He contended that upo1 Heu1<
rick's evidence, ADMITTING = IA. lctsd,
doubts as to the g5ilf e Che mid arise,
--auat the ruls in sue1 Il - asf-
the benefit ofthe doubt NJ tSd <o'
show wherein the testimoney Of Hendr|ck hid
been contradcted by other witnesses, showing that
he had sworn falsely, because he had sworn to have
ing seen what it was impossible for him to see un-
der the circumstances.
We may sum MP the substance of Mr.. Jordan's
argument as follows The deceased having pre-
viously made threats of violence, went to Mrs.
Balls KIN wing that the clothes he claimed were
not there; that being warned not to come to the
house he continued to advance and being armed
his actions were of character to cause Mrs. Ball
ed us to the authority of the notes which Hend-
rick Bald he came to read; all which he cited the
recorded evidence to show were facts. He then
proceeded to show that the prisoner, under the
circumstances, could not be convicted either of
murder or manslaughter, because she had acted
only in defence Other life, her house and her fam-
ly, and read authorities to sustain his position.
Mr. Jordan then asked, If Jim Thomas, going
to Mrs. Balls as he did, after the threats It was
proved that he made, armed with a gun adyan-
lQ.ISp n q he upd moi tn
in, had killed Mrs. Ball, would it not have been
murder? LII would, then her killing him could
not possibly be murder on her part; or, If it could
be reduced to mansanghter, then her killing him
was not manslaughter on her part The constit-
ucIts of murder could not be on both sides, and
according to all the evidence in the case fine had
killed her, it would have been murder
Mr. Jordan closed his remarks with feeling
and manly appeal to the court in behalf Of help
less woman whose husband was, from affection,
unable to afford her or his children any protec-
ton, assaulted by strong and desperate man,
and reduced to the extremity of defending herself
in the manner the prisoner had done.
The Judge Advocate occupied not more than
five minutes in his reply. He admitted the ap-
parently bad character Of the witness, Hendricks,
and also that the conduct of the deceased showed
malice. He contendcd, however, that Hendricks
evidence ought not to be entirely thrown aside,
although his character was shown to be bad, I'M
less 1t could be shown that he had motive to
insrepresent the facts in this case. He did not
think that it had been shown that Mrs. Ball had
sufficient reason to apprehend danger from Jim's
visit to her house. He contended that Captain
Evans in issuing the order for the restoration Of
the clothes was acting under competent author
iity-that the order genuine, and whether is
sued under civil or military authority it was le-
gal, and in the execution of this order, Jim was
Killed. He would not criticize the propriety, how
ever, of Captain Evans sending the order by such
amessenger.
The arguments here closed. The Court will
make up its verdict by Monday, and submit it,
with all the papers in the case, to Gen. Ruger, for
approval or dsapproval. The decision will prob
ably be promulgated during the present week. y