The farmer and mechanic. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 18??-19??, 1903-06-16
speeches by Counsel for De-
tense and Prosecution
i'm Famous Case.

rr..4r. we 4ft4lll III oPNNOiiN' vi al GA
....,a., of the lawyers in the famous
e,.. ease. as furnished US by the
t-. We regret that we were unable
.r-.-r from them the speeches of
'..- Cant. W. H. Day for the defense,
'. 1|..r.tor Walter Z. Daniel for the
'....ut. n-EdItor.l
MR.. POU'S SPEECH.
.-. Houors please when this hearing
.l. finding Of the grand jury raised
,-..-1mutIon which the defendant was
r..ar.a3 to meet because that finding of
w.. Grand Jury embraces a count charging
.rs+al felony. Under that indictment
.I.r. might have been three different
..5.. of crime and there might be a YER
Eft that there had been no crime. The
r,4.orrr had to overcome the presumption
.Ear there was a charge pending against
him af capital felony. We nave introduced
audience and the State has introduced evi-
5enac in reply and upon the introduction
of that evidence the presumption has pass
81 away. or perhaps more accurately has
t.., offset by the presumption of inno-
.enro. After evidence is introduced a bill
If Indictment ceases to raise a presump-
+fan and on the contrary the presumption
o+ innocence which the law throws around
every tILiLtu Idh6o Us DioSN' ~ uPN1A
tbi, hearing before your Honors the de-
rsudant stands charged with crime. He
is surrounded by the presumption of in
norpnrc and the evidence Is before the
rorrt and the question to be evolved from
that evidence is whether this case is one
which admits of bail.
What is a bailable case if your Honors
rlca~e? Every case is bailable as a mat.
fer Of right, unless the charge IS a capital
felony. and every case is bailable where
the charge is Il capital felony unless it is
clear and evident from the proofs, or the
presumption is great that the defendant is
guilty of a capital felony. Under the
State W. Herndon there can be no dis
rute as to that being the law. Every
charge Of the State is bailable except a
capital charge per Sc. Every case Is bail
able unless it appears strongly from the
evidence. or the presumption IS great that
the defendant is guilty of the capital
felony.
Now. we have heard evidence since last
Thursday. We have put on but a molty
of our evidence. Not the half of 1t, and
yet we feel confident if your Honors please,
that we are noe only entitled to bail but
that we have gone well nigh toward
achieving an acquittal. But returning to
the question: DclOIC lllS cOUlI NulCf 10
one of bail. The prisoner is entitled to
bail as a matter of course unless tins
evidence show clearly and strongly that he
Is guilty of a capital felony. A capital
felony can only be under the circum-
stances of this case, if the act was muir
der and was committed deliberately and
with reconciliation. r say surrounding
tins case because the words used IN the
statute poison, lying in wait, etc." have
no applications. So these are conditions
that can have no application in this case.
Murder in the first degree exists only when
a homicide is committed with premedlta-
ton and in addition has all the other Gle
meuts of murder. Deliberatlon and pre-
meditation are both n%egatived by the evil
dence. The burden is upon the prosecu-
ton; they nave assumed the burden By
Cndcavoring to make out Il case. Tney
felt called upon to put on evidence. They
put it on. And yet where IS there a
~fcIntjIIa Of evidence that he did the shoot
ing with reconciliation or Elaboration? OF
all the hundreds of witnesses put upon
tine stand only one testified as to anything
about elaboration, and that is the neglo
from Apex; and his testimony Is so pre-
postcrous that l will not take up your
time arguing it. Suffice it to say that If
he has told the truth nobody else in thus
case has; and MI. Register, Mr.. Russ and
Mr.. Glenn are greatly mistaken when
they say just a few moments elapsed from
the time Mr.. Haywood left the court
house till the shot was fired. Now take II
most strongly against the defendant.
Where Is anything to prove elaboration
and generalization. Take Mr.. Simpson; he
Is the piece de resistance Of the State; he
Is their bright shining star with Mr..
GWaItney. Upon his testimony they found
their case. What is this testimony? II
Naf1cS according to the day OF the week
and according to whatever presence he
may be in. At the boarding house 1T was
one thing; at the clerks office 1t was
another thing, and upon the witness stand
ID was still another thing. And upon the
train coming from RidgeWay talking with
Lr. Whitaker it was still another thing.
But where is the evidence in this tcetI
monT, taking 1t at the very utmost against
liz that indicates delberatlon or premedl-
("'I"u2 ! think on the contrary that his
evidence Is not at all inconsistent with
our theory. | shall not indulge II any
words Of v~ituDeration; l dislike the spec
"''t "l any man having such things
proved against him as Mr.. Simpson has.
IT. is q sad thing that such men sometimes
iHI' tHf Legislature. &c 49,
"h|ie bulk OF the testimony? II MI.
'"aIlncE saw what he says he saw he
"4@' have seen through the projection
y Tine Wake county court housc-right
through the brick wall, and then after
5'''ng through the wall he saw something
|"'h dld not exist. He says he looked
.",'Hgh, saw Mr.. Haywood, with the pls-
' ID h|7 hand and saw Mr.. Haywood put
aug II cigar. He looked through this
1'.''.hg where 1t IS impossible for a mans
~ 20 look and then saw something which
I' not exist. To account for Mr.. Gwalt-
O. statement we would have to believe
'~ 's eyes are equipped with Rcont-
49," E'Et and he was INDUCING in a pipe
'..'ln. Anything else would make me say
."9.AIas about that man which would
ro',l harsh. We have his statement,
me next day, and the next day, and
."ii 0e saw nothing. but Mr.. Skinner
lung. Now he says he saw more and
t, '' "a" things which he then said he
LOU seen. We have Gwaltney swear
7 'N'1 he saw what did not exist, and
IS IL where hc could not have seen
''' Z existed, and we havc him now
In, ''s his statement to Jones and Hin