The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1902-10-03

Raleigh. y. c., Sept. 3O.-The supreme
court of North Carolina, today handed
down an opinion in the famous Nellie
Cropsey case, in which Jim Wilcox is
charged with the murder Of Nellie
Cropsey, in Elizabeth City, last No
vember. The court gives Wilcox a new
trial.
The case is a familiar one to the pub
Hcs Nellie CrOpseF, a beautiful young
white girl DISAPPEARED at night from
her home in Elizabeth City. She had
last been seen with Jim Wilcox. a
young man at on, time her sweet
heart. Suspicion feii on him, but he
was not arrested. ~Thirty-seven day.
afterwards her body was found in
Pasquotank river, and Wilcox was ar
rested. He was tried, and sentenced
to be hanged. He stoutly declared his
innocence and an appeal to the supreme
court was taken.
In granting a new trial. the supreme
court says the evidence was entirely
circumstantial; that the jury does not
seem to have given The necessary eau
tlous and vigilant uttention to the evil
dence or to the I~cesentation OF the
prisoners case b. counsel. 1t says
that the conduct o. the spectators in
and about the court. were sufficient to
prejudice the jury. No sue demon
strations." reads the opinion, were
ever witnessed in cur state before"
1t further says that the trial
was not conducted in proper form of
law n gives a new trial to Wilcox,
~ "a
such demonstrations of lawlessness and
intimidation as were present on the
former occasion.
The next term OF court begins in
P~aSquotank county on November 18th
and the case Will be heard again at
that time.
The following special to The Messenc
ger gives the full text of the opinion
of the court:
Leading opinion for the court is
written by Justice Montgomery, and
tsare is a concurring opinion by JUS
tiEs Clark. The opinion in full is, mo
person ought to be taken or dtsseized
of his household liberties or privileges
or outlawed or exiled or in any manner
deprived of his life, liberty or property,
but by law of the land. And hat pro-
vision Of u state constitution applies
as well TO procedure and manner of
trial in our courts of justice, as it does
to great principles Of law which under
lie our society. Under law of LAND all
persons charged with crime are as
much entitled to fair and unprejudiced
trial as they are 10 the protection of
their persons. Their property or their
reputation. They have the right
under the SAM constitution to
have counsel for defence and any
willful interrupted of such coun-
sci while conducting such defense in
= a.
not only unlawful as obstructing and
preventing fair trial, but is deserving
OF condemnation of all good citizens.
In this caSe prisoner was arranged on
indictment for murder and was con-
victed of that crime in first degree, evil
dence was entirely circumstantial and
while that charactoc of evidence may.
in its very nature produce high degree
OF moral certaint. in its application.
yet it IS never to De forgotten that it
requires greatest e gree Of caution and
vigilance in its a. ~plication. In read
ing record in this ,ase il hardly seems
possible jury could have given that
cautious and Vigilant attention to evil
dence Which law require of them. or to
presentation of prisoners case to them
by his counsel which Importance Of
case demanded.
In their immediate presence one
hundred people in a deliberate pur-
pose 10 prejudice the rights of the
prisoner committed great wrong against
commonwealth and contempt of court.
Or outside of our house great impro-
p~rieties took place for the purpose of
prejudicing prisoner with jury. No such
demonstrations were ever witnessed in
cur state before M for honor of COM
konwealth sue. ought not to be re-
LStated. In ST.. 'ment of case, by his
honor he said: tfter evidence was all
III, and while o. Of couns was max
ing closing a rument for prisoner.
about 100 peo1 e. being o one
fourth Ct those present in court ROOM
as if by concert left room. Soon there
after while san counsel was address
ing jury fire s.arm was given near
court house. WI i caused a number OF
other persons I "a the court room
fact that thes.. demonstrations were
made for purpc-A of breaking the torce
Of counSel's ar .ment.
But court do not find that jury was
influenced theI- y. There is no motion
made by the ! Soner to set aside the
verdict in &C equence of said con-
duct.
Sufficient u was made here by
couns for z. oner for failure to make
motion for trial in court below tc
Justify attic general in conse- ting
To o consider motlCl as
having been ..ltered at proper time
which he did. In such case as this 1T Is
not indispensable that finding by MS
honor that the jury had beer influenced
bv the conduct of offenders should
have been made. Disorderiy proceed
ings assumed such proportions rs =
warrant this court in declaring trla
was not conducted according to law OF
land. Propriety of our rt1ing Is
strengthened by circumstances tina
contempt proceedings were nos com.
menced against those offending, anC
hat no motion was made to set vsrd1c,
aside and for new trial after such un-
heard of demonstrations. Counsel fol
prisoner in his argument here in re
sponse TO question, stated that II yer
dict had been set aside prisoner would
have met violent death on instant
prisoner must not only be tried &C
cordinp to forms of law. these form:
being included in expression law O
land but his trial must be unatteno