The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1899-07-14
REFUSED TO INTERFERE
Negro Wife Murderer Must Pay
the Penalty.
HE is BOOKED TO HANG
The Supreme Court Finds No Merit In
the Appeal of Brooks Coun-
sci for a New
Trial
Special Dispatch to the STANDARD.

special DlSpatCn TO the STANDARD.
Helena, July 13.--Wiliam c. Brooks,
the negro who shot and killed his wife,
Jennie Brooks, in Billings, will have to
| pay the penalty of his crime upon the
| gallows, the supreme court to-day hav-
| ing refused to interfere with the judg
ment of the lower court
The court considers the case in an ex-
haustive opinion by Associate Justice
Hunt, dealing with each of the nine
| points presented by Brooks counsel for
| reversal, but fails to see any valid
reason why it should grant the new
| trial asked. A brief summary of the
| evidence presented a Brooks trial
shows that he and his wife had been
| living apart for some time when, in
| November last year, between 4 and
| o'clock in the morning, the cry of muir
der was heard near the Brooks resi-
dence in Billings. Brooks was seen
| running across the street after his wife.
He fired a shot as he reached the gate
| Of the house where she lived and fol-
| lowed her into. the middle of the street,
| where he overlook her, and a struggle
| for the possession of the weapon took
place. He pushed away from her and
| fired another shot, asking her If she
was shot. She ran away from him and
| fell dead. The defendant then made A
| bluff at killing himself, firing several
shots at himself. Then he ran to where
his wife lay dying and, placing the gun
against her ear. fired again, saying:
Nov you are dead" He said some
thing about giving himself up, supple
menting it with another attempt at sui
eide but lodging from the bullet.
| The latter, when he gave himself up,
told the officers they could just as We'll
| All, 1T, ny,l ct,rin n i'm lG he
was ready to die. He handed the Off
GERS a bunch of keys, telling them to
take charge of his place of business and
sell his effects. Prior to the killing he
and his wife had had scuffie in the
house during which Brooks applied var
ious vile epithets to his wife and she
struck him with a stick and he fired
shot that did not take effect
Brooks plea was insanity. He did
not take the stand in his own behaf.
One of Brooks witnesses, man by the
name of Scott, told the jury a story
about Brooks getting up in the colored
| church during service and wanting to
take up a collection for outside churcn
work regardless of the fact that the
| church needed funds itself, intending
thereby to show to the jury the man
was of unsound mind.
Dr. Rinehart testified as an expert on
insanity, saying in reply to hypothet-
ical question that there were evidences
of insanity in Brooks actions, but ar
| terwards admitted on rebuttal that per
haps he was not very bad of mentally.
| One of the errors assigned was the re-
fusal of the lower court to permit a
witness to tell whether defendant had
ever delivered any discourse IN the
African Methodist church. Defendant 5
counsel maintained that this was FOR
| the purpose of showing that his chen,
was a devoted Christian. We think
that the court properly excluded this
testimony" said the supreme court
Defendant had a right to put MS
character in issue, but 1t was not com
petent to prove good character pg
showing that the defendant had
preached at divers times. If the object
was to show insanity, that object was
not disclosed by the question or state
ment of counsel"
| The court disposes of another con-
tention relative to the refusal 10 alloW
introduction of evidence as tc defend
ant charging his wife with intidelity
by holding the evidence in the manner
in which the question was put to De
immaterial, as counsel did not state
it's object was to prove insanity, ana
the evidence showed that just before
he killed his wife he called her a leWd
woman and asked what man had been
at the house at midnight several days
before the killing. The supreme court
| also fails to see wherein the lower
| court committed error in the lnstruc-
ton upon the law of justlhable ana
excusable homicide The court does
not, however, approve of part or an
, instruction as to killing without NAL
ice and aforethought, and the heat
| of passion as not being very clear
| definition of the heat of passion as
laid down in the courts decision In the
case of the state VS.. Sloan.
The court also declines to entertain
the claim of Brooks counsel that there
: was ground for reversal in the discoV-
cry of new evidence.
, Another allegation was misconduct
of the jury in arriving at verdict. A.
G.. Redding the foreman of the jury,
made affidavit that after reaching the
Jury room one juror proposed that
wbateyer Way tWo-thirds of the jury
voted on the first and informal ballot
the balance of the jury should vote on
| tba tirst formal ballot The informal