The gold leaf. [volume] (Henderson, N.C.) 1881-1911, 1892-10-06

stock at WATKINS
Hot water Boilers, used
with any Stove, at Watkins
James S. Poythress Not Guilty.
Not guilty is the verdict of the jury
rendered in the case of the State
against James S. Poythress, charged
with manslaughter, which came up
for trial yesterday. The defendant
was represented by Pittman & Shaw
and A. c. Zollicotfer, the State by
Solicitor Woodland. The evidence was
substantially the same as has been
published in these columns. Mr..
Poythress testified in his own beha If
and told about his going to the room
and finding the woman and another
person there. He said he struck a
match at the door and asked who was
there. Not receiving any reply he
told them if they did not speak he
would shoot. Then he fired his pistol
into the wall to scare them, pointing
the weapon in a different directions
from where the persons were the ball
striking at a point higher than his
heard. Then some one ran by him
out into the hall. lie stepped back
and iii doing SO his hand involuntarily
clutched the trigger of the pistol and it
fired. He did not purposely point it in
the direction Of the woman nor did he
Intentionally shoot. He did not know
that the pistol had exploded until he
felt the conclusion and heard the re-
port. The weapon was a hammerless
pistol, self-acting, Smith & Wesson
patent, very easy on the trigger. He
did not know who was in the room,
nor did he know whether they were
white or black.
A short while after this occurred he
was standing on the steps at the foot
of Burwell Hall when DR.. Arch Cheat
ham passed and told him that a woman
had been shot. She had been to tie
drug store and he had just examined
her wound. She said she had been
shot on the street. Mr.. Poythress told
DR.. Cheatham he had fired pistol off
up stairs and perhaps there was some
about the matter. 1t was
possible that he had shot the woman.
He had heard some one in an unoccu-
pied room up stairs in the Hall build
ing, (Which he has charge off, and as
persons had been committing nuisances
there he had gone to investigate and
fired his pistol off to scare them. Dr..
Cheatham was asked to look further
into the matter and ascertain the ma
ture Of the wound, and to give the
woman any needed attention, being
told by Mr.. Poythress that he would
pay the bill. He had no intention of
hurting any one and if such had been
the case he wanted the unfortunate
person to have the best attention pos
slble. These were the facts in the
case, the ante mortem statement of
the woman who was shot differing there
from iii one material point only. She
said when the man went to the door and
struck light she was sitting down by
the bed, and seeing pistol she said he
was going to shoot. Her companion
told her he was not, and the man said
yes he was. and did so and shot her.
But there was the hole in the wall
and the evidence of DR.. Cheatham that
The ball entered the lower part of the
back near the spine and came out in
front. This wound could not have
been produced by the first shot fired by
Poythress. 1t was the ball from the
second shot, accidental and involun-
Iary. that struck the woman, and so
the jury believed.
The speeches of counsel for defense
were able ones, as was that by the
Solicitor. While Mr.. Woodland had
but slim ground to stand on in this case
ne discharged his duty to the State and
made the most out of it possible to do.
Judge Browns charge was eminently
air to both the State and the defendant.
He reviewed the testimony and laid
Town the law in plain simple man
Ter and the jury took the case. They
we're out but a short while before 3;
verdict OF not guilty was returned.
HOW's This?
n fN4fn l-l1