The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1897-03-27
MAY BE ANOTHER MISTRIAL.
A SECOND DISAGREEMENT PROBA-
BILE IN THE CONNORs CASE.

FalIigant Went Home at Midnight.
Unlike other Murder Cases the
Trial was Concluded in One Day.
The Evidence Very Conflicting.
witnesses For the state swear
Monroe Did Not Have "A Knife, ana
Witnesses For the Defense swear
That He Did-ConnOrs Plea Self
Defense.
1t looks as if there viii be another mis-
trial in the case of Patrick Connors,
charged with the murder of Thomas Mon
roe Christmas day, two years ago.
It was somewhere about o'clock when
the jury retired last night. and after a
long wait of five hours, no word upon
which a hope of a verdict could be based
was received from it. At p o'clock Judge
FaIllgant went home, and the jury was
left out for the night. If this jury does
not agree, it will he the second mistrial
in the case. the first trial having taken
place about a year and a half ago.
Unlike the usual run of murder trials,
that Of Connors did not last two days.
The evidence both for the state and for
the UeIEUSG Was CDiltluItu carly III III
afternoon and the arguments were begun
promptly, and concluded before Z O'Clock.
Very little trouble was found in select
ing a jury. The case was one in when
the details have largely passed out OF the
public mind, and jurors did not seem nara
10 get, though each side came near eX-
hausting its allotted number OF strikes.
The state struck nine and the defense SIX
teen, while eleven went off for cause. The
fna11V made COMPOSED
of John Hallenbach, Frank M. Merritt,
James c. Tyson, John j. Nipson w. z.
Lyon, Jr, Gustave j. Kayton, Joseph b.
Maddox. John r. Bailey, r. II. Nc
Hugh, Robert L. Royal, John Collins and
William H. Fisher.
The states evidence was concluded be-
fore the morning session was over, and
that of the defense did not run far into
the afternoon. The state proved that
Thomas Monroe went into Counihans
bar. down in the Old Fort Christmas day,
two years ago; that he had some words
in there with Patrick Connors, who was
tending the bar; that he was ordered out
and finally put out by Connors, and that
in a difficulty that afterward ensued at
the door of the barroom, the crcum-
stances of which were in great dispute
ConnOrs shot and killed him.
The defendant put up the plea OF SELF
defense and the burden then rested on
him to show the truth Of that plea. Wit
nesses- for the state testified that Con-
nors came to the door and drew a pistol
from his pocket, starting at Monroe, who
was retreatng from him, with stick in
his hand. These witnesses Anderson,
Graham and Slocum, testified that Non
roe had no knife in his hand, as was
claimed by the Defense and that the shot
was fired by Connors while Monroe was
retreating from him.
Jones, Undertake and other witnesses
for the defense. testified that when Con
nors came to the door OF the bar Mon
roe advanced toward him with an up
lifted stick in one hand and knife in
the other, applying to him a vile epithet
and that Connors fired the fatal shot I'M
der these circumstances. Another wit
ness said Monroe was near the stoop Of
the place when he fell, which was used
to show that he must have been advanc-
ing toward it at the time he was shot.
Mr. p. J. O'Connor, in his argument for
the defense, made a careful resume of the
evidence for his client and compared it to
that introduced by the state Monroe
had threa tened and cursed Connors, he
said, and came toward the bar door with
uplifted stick as If 10 carry out his threat.
When Connors heard of these treats he
armed himself Mr.. O'Connor said as he
had a perfect right to do. 1t was under
fear that Monroe was about to do him
a violent bodily injury that he fired the
shot. On the part of the state he argued
that two witnesses had sworn that Mon
roe had no knife, while on the part of the
defense there were four OF five witnesses
who said he did have a knife. He argued
that this fact, together with the defend
ants statement, TO the effect that Monroe
was advancing on him to attack him,
placed the preponderance of the evidence
in the defendants favor, and al the very
least that it was sufficient to create a
serious doubt in the defendants favor.
He held that the evidence neither justified
a verdict of murder nor of voluntary man.
slaughter.
Solicitor General w. w. Osborne started
out with the assertion that il was plain
case Of a mans passions getting the bet
ter of him. He read the law of self de-
Tense. showing how the life of the defend
ant must have been in actual danger in
order for him to take refuge behind the
plea Of self-defense. The danger, he said,
must have been so urgent and pressing
that 1t was absolutely necessary for him
to take Monroes life to save his own. He
denied that this was the case, in the first
place because Monroe was drunk Then
again the only weapon Monroe had. he
said, was stick. He did not have knife
and he was retreating. he said, at the time
the defendant was advancing upon him
The witnesses for the state. two of them
respectable white men, and the third a
negro had seen no knife he said, and the
defendant himself, in his statement, did
not claim that Monroe had a knife. II
SonnorS did not see a knife, how, he asked
could he claim that he shot because Mon
roe was coming at him with a knife The
only conclusion he could draw was that
Connors followed the negro up because
he had cursed him, and shot him down
when he was trying to get away. lie
quoted some supreme court decisions Il
snow that it had been decided in two
cases of homicide where the deceased mad
had stick, in one case having 1t up.
lifted at the time the shot was fired, the
defendant was nevertheless guilty of mur.
der
At the conclusion OF his argument
Judge Falligant delivered his charge. ana
the jury retired to consider the case about
o'clock.
-