Port Tobacco times, and Charles County advertiser. (Port Tobacco, Md.) 1845-1898, 1871-12-08


ed, Walbert was saying something about the
and shed tears caught Norris, but he pass
ed on very fast, jumped the fence and said,
"How, Walbert, what's the matter ?" He
overlook me and said, Eyes; have shot him,
killed him dead l have killed one d-n mig
ger and will kill another, white or black :"
saw him shoot Bell he had the pistol in his
breast was not far from the fence.
Cross examined-They didn't appear to be
angry, nothing like fighting.
DR.. A. j. Smoot, for State, testified: Did
not find the ball jury expressed themselves
satisfied as to cause Of death aud examined
no further.
WITNESSES FOR DEFENCE.
The State here closed its case and Lemuel
Smoot was called for the defence and testi6-
ed: Norris delivered himself up, saying he
had shot q man but didn't know if he was
dead.
Joseph Norris, (son of the prisoner,) for
defence, testified: Saw Bell Saturday before
the election; he called me out and sail he had
taken father for friend of his, but he was a
id rascal. having Republican breakfasts,
pretending he Was Republican that the
HAIRLESS were assisting him to persuade his
SUD to vote the Democratic ticket, and if it
was 50, he would kill him; told father on
Sunday Bell was using threats against him
and would kill him; didn't tell him what the
threats were.
Andrew Boarman, for defence, testified -
Bell was QUE Of the most powerful men in
that part Of the county; his reputation for
quiet was not good.
Doctors B. Neale and F. NJ. Lancaster were
examined for defence, but nothing important
was elected.
The case was here closed on both sides and
the argument commenced before the jury.
About o'clock P. M. the jury retired, and
at IL NJ. on Thursday returned verdict Of
"Guilty Of murder in the first degree"
At the rendition of this verdict the prisoner
appeared entirely unconccrned. Messrs. Stone
and Edelen Immediately gave notice Of their
intention to move for new trial, and shortly
afterwards filed the reasons setting forth, in
the maio. that the jury, in making up their
verdict, had mistaken both the law and the
evidence. His Honor, Judge Ford, notified
the counsel that he would hear the argument
upon the motion next morning friday. At
the meeting of the Court on Friday able and
elaborate arguments were made by Messrs.
Stone and Edeen in support Of, and by Eu-
gene Digses, Esq, in opposition to, the mo-
ton, and on Saturday morning Judge Ford
rendered his decision granting the motion.-
In rendering his opinion Judge Ford express
ed himself as perfectly satisfied that the case
did not come within the true construction of
the act of Assembly Of 1909, now incorporat-
ed in the Code, which defined murder in the
FIRST degree as "any wilful, deliberate and
premeditated killing" in other words, that
the killing in this case lacked that wilful
intent which is necessary to constitute the
grade of murder in the first degree. Lacking
the essential element of intent, the case, His
Honor remarked, was clearly murder in the
second degree. The motion was therefore
granted and the prisoner remanded to jail
An agreement, we understand, has been en-
tered into between counsel, by which the
prisoner will plead guilty Of murder in the
second degree, and it is probable that the
sentence will be pronounced and the prisoner
forwarded to the Penitentiary between this
time and Christmas.