The Savannah morning news., 1903-06-26
TRY POTTER AGAIN
SAYS SUPREME COURT IN REVIEW
ING LOWER COURT.
AN IMPROPER REMARK
ASSIGNED AS PRINCIPAL GROUND
OF REVERSAL.

Decision of Court of Last Resort
Was Handed Down Yesterday-In-
accurate Instruction Relative TO
Impeachment Is Also Suggested as
Another Ground for Reversal,
Though 1t Is Not Particularly As
siened-Ends of Justice Require
That Case ShOnId Undergo Another
Investigation. Says supreme Court.
W. J. Potter Will get new trial
The Supreme Court yesterday revers-
ID the decision of the Superior Court
of Chatham county, the principal
ground Of reversal being an improper
remark of the court to a witness. In
accurate instruction in the charge Of
the court relative to impeachment is
also ascribed as grounds for reversal.
The improper remark, 50 called,
which was made by Judge Barrow, was
directed 10 a witness named Willie
Rogers, who. after saying before the
trial that ne had seen Potter cross a
certain field with his bicycle, changed
his testimony on the stand by saying
that Potter had no bicycle. The court
asked the witness if he had changed
his testimony because he was satisfied
that he was wrong. in the first in
stance. and upon the witness answering
in the affirmative, the court commend
ed his action by telling him that he
did exactly right.
After a witness who has admit
tedly made contradictory statements
touching a matter as TO which he is
examined essays to offer a satisfac-
tory explanation in regard thereto"
says the Supreme Court, in the de-
cision, 1T is grave error for the pre-
siding judge, in commenting upon the
propriety of not adhering to previous
statements which the witness claims
he made under an honest mistake of
fact. TO so allude to his explanation
as 10 apparently give it judicial in
dorsement and approval.
That no motion for a mistrial was
made because of the remarks of the
Judge in this connection cannot prop
erly be regarded as precluding the
party prejudged thereby from COM
planning thereof after verdict. in the
event the finding of the jury be adj
verse TO him.
Referring to the courts charge on
the subject of impeachment the decis-
ion reads:
LAS the trial judge not only unwit-
tingly committed error of the nature
above indicated, but gave to the jury
an instruction on the subject of i'm
parchment of witnesses which was far
from accurate, If not misleading as
well, the ends of justice require that
the case should undergo another in
vestigation.'
The decision means that the case
will come to trial, probably, at this
term of the court. The decision not be-
ing based upon the newly discovered
evidence or the insufficiency of the
old, the reversal does not operate as
an acquittal. Had the Supreme Court
held that the evidence did not war
rant the verdict, Potter would have
been released on the charge for which
he was tried.
The case is too familiar TO the readers
of the Mornings News TO require com
Tnent Potter, who was tried with his
son, Swayne, for the murder of Fred
Taylor, the negro servant of Gugie
Bourquin, on the Dean Forest road last
November, was found guilty, the jury
recommending that he be imprisoned
for life. Both he and his son were also
indicted for the murder of Gugie Bour-
quin, who was killed at the same time.
The other Indictments are still pend
ing.
There have been no developments
since the trial Of the Potters, so far
as the public is informed, though il is
rumored that another trial will result
in some further disclosures. The trial
viii be awaited with interest.
Potter was defended by Twiggs &
Oliver, W. W. Sheppard, Esq, and
John z. Myrick. Esq.