The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1903-10-16

rendered 70 meet the wishes Of he con-
cours Of relatives n friends. He SAID
h stood as a representative IF the -aW
ard order and ne wanted the RESPONSE
DiIity where it belongs. The duty 10
him was painful one. He represented
the prosecution, because he happened
to De the solicitor in another district.
He and MS associates had no apologies
10 make for their course. They might
nave made mistakes. il alone remains
for III counsel Onthe other side to be
u~.lialliable He said I'VE may have made
errors but l want to say 10 o these
attacks AVE not been made for the
purpose Of euIightening the jury in the
case. With two exceptions the counsel
for the defense have spent One-half OF
then time in arguments and attacks Ga
the counsel for the state. You know
VIA these attacks are made for, 20
prejudice you against the counsel for
the prosecution, in order that what they
might do would be d~iseFedited.
He referred 70 the attack on account
Of putting Miss Pace on the stand.
The defense could have secured her if
they wanted to. as one of their counsel
knew of the facts. No effort was made
10 get Miss PAGES deposition while 9TH
ers were being taken there. This was
held back so as TO hold up counsel for
the prosecution TO ridicule and create
the impression that these attorneys
We're u set of hired mercenaries. He
added: If you acquit this man, l Will
ave nothing TO say. but if you find he
had no right to lake the life of that
man and you acquit him. then you will
do violence to your conscience and your
OATH" Did you hear the court say the
burden of proof Is on the defendant?
There is no reasonable doubt in this
case. When the defendant admitted
the killing Of Ludlow Skinner, then the
presumption of the law is that the de-
endan is guilty of murder in the sec
Ond degree and the burden of the proof
IS upon the defendant to show that it
is not. The law knows no man and you
should mete out unerring justice. Now
remember the burden of proof is on the
part of the defendant. He must salts
fy the jury that he was compelled to
take the life of Ludlow Skinner.
Among all the multitude of witnesses
for the defense there are only nine upon
whom the defendant relies TO sustain
him. MIR. Daniels read the testimony
of r. n. Simms and discussed it. max
ing prominent the fact that the deceas-
ed died 80 feet away from Haywood;
that the first shot was fired after the
deceased had first sprung away and had
started across the sidewalk away from
the defendant. He argued that from
Schmitz evidence there was nothing to
show that the defendants life vas in
danger. Willis Briggs testimony vas
road ana discussed Skinner uac 1aaU
ing the sidewalk when Briggs turned at
the first shot. Skinner. at the time
Briggs turned, was looking at the de-
PENDANT. which caused Briggs to loo
to the defendant and then the second
shot was fired. Schmitz has proved a
good character in Baltimore, but he
talked too much and the testimony of
Captain Clark, Peck and Ostin contra
dicted him. He claimed that Schmitz
and Hocutt's testimony had been COM
pletely shattered.
Mr.. Daniels took the testimony of all
the leading witnesses for the defense
and on this made his argument, de-
ciaring that none OF them showed any
thing justifying the plea of self de-
Tense His argument was heard with
the closest attention and was exceed
ingly strong, sustaining his high repu-
tation.
Thomas NJ. Argo. the leading counsel
for the defense one of the foremost
criminal lawyers in the state followed
Daniels. He began his argument.
which is the last in this memorable
case. He declared he would go right
into the bowels of the case and added,
L am here to fight for human liberty
and to resent unfair and g~rOundless ac-
cUsation, and there is TO be with me no
mIncing of words" He said he would
speak of the methods adopted by he
prosecution, in order to uncover its
motives. The prosecution charges there
is a concerted scheme on the part of
the defense to divert the minds of the
Jury. He denied such a motive. h
prosecution insisted up to the last mo-
ment on a verdict of murder in the first
degree. They knew it vas not that
crime when they drew the bill. eff 1
am not most mistaken men, the judge
Will not even charge o that there is
any probability of murder IN the sec
ond degree They admit that Hay
Woo was felled by a blow. They knew
the evidence of the habeaS orpus pro-
ceeding. yet they come here and asked
for a special yenire and try Haywood
for murder in the first degree. They
did not mol pross the charge of murder
in the first degree. Why did they put
the county to the expense of a special
venire. unless to put Haywood at a dis
advantage. What is the duty of the
state in asking for a verdict in such
cases? Who is the prosecutor here?
The state did not enter a complaint.
1t is represented by a special officer.
The state only asks a righteous verdict.
It was the duty of the state to intro
duc every bit of evidence which would
throw light on the case. IN fairness to
the jury. He referred to what he de-
clared was the withholding of Miss
Mattye PAGES evidence.
tor " n,xi,