The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1898-04-01
SMALL AGAIN CONVICTED.
A THIRD JURY SAYS HE SHOULD
SUFFER THE DEATH PENALTY.


neys Make n Motion for a Mistrial
on the Ground of Illegal Conduct
on the Part of the Solicitor Gener-
aI-Case Will No Doubt Go to the
Supreme Court for the Third Time.
Abe Small has been convicted for the
third time of the murder of Policeman
Jansen Neve, and for the third time the
jurys verdict appears without recon-
mendation to the mercy of the court,
Unless the Supreme Court again inter-
venes this means that Small will have to
suffer the death penalty. Twice after con-
viction the Supreme Court has given him
new lease on life, and each time there
after the jury has said he was guilty of
murder and should be hanged.
The verdict Of the jury was returned
shortly after o'clock yesterday after
noon Judge Falligant did not sentence
the prisoner, but ordered him back to Jail
for the present. Sentence will undoubted-
ly be passed within a day or two, and
then there will be another appeal to the
Supreme Court, in which no doubt the
grounds of error will grow largely out
of the objections made by the defense,
since the Supreme Court. on it's second re-
view of the case, passed upon the charge
which Judge Falligant delivered yester-
day
The arguments were made by Messrs.
George A. Mercer, Jr., and T. P. Ravenel
for the defendant, and by Solicitor Cen
eral w. w. Osborne for the state he hav-
ing the conclusion. The contentious of
the two sides with regard to the evidence
in the case has already been presented In
the Morning News,
There were one or two interesting incl
dents yesterday, however in connection
with the arguments. Objection was made
very strenuously by Mr.. Ravenel to GER.
tain statements on the part of the Solici-
tor General in the course" of his argu-
ment. and in support of his objection Mr..
Ravenel began a legal argument. 1t did
not appear to him that Judge Falligant
was giving attention to his statement of
the case. and putting his book on the ia
bic, and taking his seat. he so stated to
the court Judge Falligant told him he
had been listening, but Mr.. Ravenel did
not proceed.
Just before the time came for Judge Fall
ligant to deliver his charge to the jury,
counsel for the defense entered a motion
Tor mistrial on the ground of illegal
conduct on the part of the Solicitor Gen
eral. The alleged illegal conduct on the
part of the Solicitor General, for which a
mstrial was asked, was the use by him
in his argument to the jury "over the
protest of the prisoner of the following
language;
Here you have an illustration of ex-
actiy what this man did under similar cir
cumstances three days before that-plac-
ed in the same Identical position-pursued
by an officer running armed as he was
on the day of the homicide with perhaps
the same weapon-he says 1t is the same
weapon-pursued by an officer in a vicini.
ty where he could have gotten LOCO men
TO help him If he had opened his mouth
the officer without show of weapon. with
out the slightest reason to believe that his
life was in danger oh, my friend does
not like to hear the details of it. but il
Is the details that makes it so horrible
When he got the man under the light In
full view"
Just here the attorney for the defense
repeated his objection
AS was going on to say, the conten.
ton made by this defendant is that il was
such a singular extraordinary proceeding
that this man should fire on The officers
first; that that was enough to raise a noint
in your minds. Still my friend lust now
when cited him an exactly parallel case
when this man was put in the same posi-
ton, when the officer made no show of
weapon, made no show of force used no
force where this man could not have
thought his life was in danger, he fired
bullet into his head fired at his head
meant to kill him. If he did it one time
why should il be extraordinary that he
did 1t again, second time?"
Prior to the remarks herein stated
said the motion, "the solicitor general. re.
ferring TO the prisoner, called him a burg
lar
Judge Falligant, after a counter showing
made by the solicitor general, showing
that the word burglar was unintentionaIly
used in his argument, and Immediately
Withdrawn before the objection was urged
and the words charged with burglary sub.
stituted, and after the solicitor general
stlll further withdrew the Objectionable
language, that is the word burglar and
substituted charged with burglary, as
stated. overruled the motion and at the
conclusion of Solicitor General Osbornes
argument overruled the motion.
1t seems that during Mr.. Osborne's ar
encounter with Detective HUMPHREYS
when the latter was shot by Small, he
called him a burglar. To this Mr.. RAJ
venel entered objection at that time, but
before he had made his objection Mr.
Osborne changed his language and said
charged with burglary" Mr.. Osborne also
disavowed the use of the word burglar
after the objection had been made. II
was on this ground as has been stated
that the court overruled the motion made
by the defendants attorneys.
Judge Falhgant then delivered his charge
the same charge that he delivered on the
occasion of the second trial The Jury
occupied about an hour and a half in
considering the case and returned the
verdict of guilty without recommendation.
Small manifested little concern of emotion.
as was the case when other juries pro-
nounced him guilty, and he no doubt feels
that some loophoe of escape from death
on The galiows will yet be found for him.
His attorneys will undoubtedly appeal for
new trial and carry ,.e case to the Su-
preme Court for the third time
TO TAKE UP CIVIL BUSINESS.