The Roanoke times. [volume] (Roanoke, Va.) 1890-1895, 1892-01-12


ment" is the verdict in the case of
John Smith, charged with the murder
OF Peter Ailiff on the 23d of July, 1891.
"Will John Smith hang?" is now the
question on the lips of those who are
interested in tho case. If the verdict
is sustained and the penalty of the law
executed, John Smith will be the first
murderer hanged in Roanoke.
The interest in the case yesterday
was greater than any day of the trial.
The courtroom was packed all day and
tho closest atten tion was paid to the
argument of the counsel on both sides.
When the court reassembled after din
ner it was difficult for the jury, lawyers
and court officials to press through the
crowd to their places, and the jam was
oven greater when the jury filed in to
announce the verdict
AT 10 o'clock the court convened.
The counsel for the defense objected to
instructions being given until The close
OF the argument, which was sustained
by the court.
The opening speech was made by Mr..
Sales for the prosecution, and after
pleasant introduction, in which no com
plimented tho jury for their patience
and good attention he asked that they
still bear with him and hear him
through, although he expected to be
lengthy and tedious in his argument.
Mr.. Sales said:
"Whlle have not had the pleasure
of an acquaintance with you gentlemen
OF the jury, being citizen of Virginia,
as am, ! cannot feel that am a com
plete stranger to any jury of Virginians.
This Is an important se-important to
tho commonwealth, important to the
prisoner and the wife who sits by his
side, important to tho connections of
the deceased and murdered man. We
ask for nothing but Justice, but we de-
mand that"
Mr.. Sales went into an elaborate ex-
PLANTATION of the different degrees of
murder, explaining infinitely man
slaughter, murder in the first degree
and justifiable homicide, taking the
ground that if tho prisoner was guilty
Of any offense it was wilful and premed-
1tated murder. He reviewed the testi-
mony at length, and dwelt upon the
threat made by Smith that he would
kill Peter Ailiff before the sun set.
Mr.. Sales speech was an hour and a
half long and was listened to with the
utmost attention by the packed court
room, and was pronounced by all an
able effort.
Mr.. Phlegar began the argument for
the defense at 11:4n o'clock He ridi-
culed the allegation that Mr.. Sales made
that there was no provocation on the
part of Ailiif, and thought there was
good excuse under the circumstances.
lie said that murder in the first degree
must be deliberate, premeditated and
1,at \,
case with Smith because he was over
powered by passion which had com
plete control over his reason.
Mr.. Phlegar gave thorough digest of
the law bearing on tho case, which was
clear and ineligible. The actions of
Smith. he commended, were excusable
on the ground that when he called Peter
A1liff out that Peter came with rocks
In his hands followed by the whole
Allif crowd, that meant personal in
jury to Smith from the outset.
lie made strong argument based
chiefly on the evidence of Miss Chaffin.
Plather and other witnesses, who were
in no way connected with either the
Smiths or Ailiffs. lie showed how the
statements of George Ailiff, the father
of Peter. contradicted those made by
him soon after the shooting occurred.
Capt. w. w. Berkeley, for the defense,
followed Mr.. Phlegar and made an
able and earnest appeal for the pris-
oner's life. He appealed to the iury's
sympathy very forcibly and feelingly bv
referring to tho wife who was in the
bloom of her youth with an infant in
her arms dependent for support ON the
labor of the prisoner. Mr.. Berkeley
dwelt chiefly on the testimony of Mr..
Holland, the father-inlaw of the pris-
oner. who he claimed stood cody and
calmly by and witnessed the whole
affair, and that o too with an eye that
was impartial to his son. in-law, because
at the time he was not ON speaking
terms with him. He made an earnest
appeal to the jury by asking them what
they would do under the circumstances
were they advanced upon by notorious
and bloodthirsty crowd, as he claimed
the Ailiffs were, with missiles Of death
In their hands, and no one to aid him,
not even his father-in.law, forsaken and
set upon by those who by nature should
protect him.
Roy b. Smith, the commonwealth
attorney, then began the closing speech.
He made strong appeal for the pris-
oner's conviction, and said it was duty
the jury owed to society and to the
commonwealth to find the prisoner
guilty. He reviewed the testimony at
length and claimed that in many in
stances whore the testimony was fixed
for the occasion and in the. interest of
the prisoner. The law should be yindi.
Gated. This man had deliberately and
maliciouslY taken the life of one who
had as much right to live as any one.
The deceased was cut down in the
bloom of his youth, strong, athletic
body hurled into eternity with nut a
moments warning, his hearts blood
spilled by his fellowman and the penalty
of this, tho law says Is death.