The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1897-01-21
SAID 1T WAS MANSLAUGHTER.
VERDICT RETURNED AGAINST SUI
LIVAN AND 0'NEILL.

The Jury Failed to Recommend
Them to the Mercy of the Court.
This Generally Means Pretty Near
the Full PennItY-sThey Were Not
Sentenced at Once-AttOrney Nor
gan Gives Notice That n New Trial
VIII BE Applied FOr-Some Fea-
lures of the Evidence on Both
sides.
Unless a new trial is granted, or the su-
preme court intervenes Maurice f. Suli-
van and Simon J. ONeill will have to
spend from ten to twenty years in the
state penitentary.
The jury before which their case was
tried brought in a verdict OF manslaughter
without recommendation to the mercy of
the court last night shortly after 10 O'Clock
after having deliberated about five hours.
Judge Falligant did not sentence the de-
PENDANTS last night, but will probably do
so to-day or tomorrow.
The verdict is the same as that brought
in by the jury which tried George Gruver
for the murder of Henry Voight Gruver
was found guilty of voluntary manslaugh-
ter without a accommodation to the mer-
cy of the court, and sentence of fifteen
years in the penitenuary was imposed up
on him.
1t is needless to say the verdict was a
surprise to the defendants and their coun-
sell They had confidently expected an ac-
quittal, or a verdict to say the least, that
would be milder in tone As soon as the
no II
Jr, one of the representatives Of the de-
Tense, notified the court that a new trial
would be applied for.
The testimony in the case was finished
very shortly after court convened yester-
day morning, and the arguments occupied
the time up to o'clock in the afternoon
There is no doubt that the
state made out strong case
Tho shot which caused Pres
ton Brooks death was under the shoulder
and towards the back, which in itself was
a strong circumstance, and which was
mentioned by the court in it's charge to
the jury.
There was much disputed evidence as to
whether ONeill had a stick when he and
Sullivan met Brooks and the other negroes
at South Broad and East Broad streets.
The state made the claim that ONeil be-
gan the attack on Brooks with his stick,
and that as Brooks turned to flee Sullivan
nred the shot which Killed him.
According to the claim of the defense,
Sullivan and O'Neill were going home,
and had taken a circuitous route, going
down McDonough street to East Broad.
for the purpose of avoiding a meeting
with the negroes and any difficulty which
it might bring about 1t was argued that
Brooks took a stick from Jack Young,
who was one of the main witnesses for
the state, and with one blow knocked
oil nd Il, G.,Iag
AS he did so Sullivan drew his pistol, and
the force of the blow which Brooks en-
deaVored to strike turning him partly
around, the shot which was fired by Sui
Ivan entered Brooks body under his left
shoulder. Sullivan, being frightened by
the attack, and fearing further belliger-
ency on the part of the negroes, then
fired five more shots. This is practically
the claim set up by the defense.
The state held that ONeiil with his
stick first made an attack on Brooks
when Sullivan fired, as Brooks turned to
get out of the way. A great many other
points came up, which are immaterial ex-
cept as leading up to the main issue, The
jury evidently took practically the state S
view of the case in making its
verdict The statements of the
two defendants were about the
same, with the exception that ONeill said
he was knocked senseless and did not
know what happened Immediately after
ward, while Sullivan said he shot when
he was attacked.
The arguments for the defense were
made by Messrs. T. S. Morgan, Jr, and
F. nj. Oliver, both of whom put up strong
pleas in behalf of their clients. Mr.. r.
M. Hitch, who served with them, ably
conducted the examination of the Wit
nesses. Solicitor General Osborne made
out strong case for the state, his argu-
ment being brief and to the point, while
1t covered every feature of the case.