The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1903-01-23

correspondent stated that some said
"manslaughter," and, after the defense
this morning, more outsiders are OF
this opinion.
Mr.. H. Med. Robinson. of counsel for
defense, addressed the court and jury,
with the Introduction of his sense of
the great responsibility resting on him
and his colleagues. and, above all. on
the jury, before whom the question of
the life of defendant was involved, and
which the state contends he has for
feited by murder in the first degree.
He hen quoted the statute of the legis-
lature of 1893, defining the degrees OF
murder, Chapter IS. Counsel then
dwelt forcibly on the elements races-
sary to make wilful, deliberate murder.
He then adverted to the remarkable
fact that the state failed to put on the
stand the only eye witness just before
the killing, Simeon Council, and a so
failed to introduce Duke and Fowler
the first, who proved, when summoned
by defense, that Hollingsworth present.
ed a pistol at defendant, and the second
and third testified that deceased was
asking them for a pistol. He then re-
ferred in causic terms to the reference
of Mr.. Cook to State VS.. Tansley and
NNON - AA1NO ihS oCloIS liz
statute of the legislature of 1893, Of
which Mr.. Cook was the honored men,
Der. He would follow Mr.. Cook as a
legislator rather than as a paid att0r-
ney of this prosecution. Mr.. Robinson
then quoted from State vs. AzzmaI
Qndiana) and State VS.. Hops, 104th
L. s. Justice Gray, touching the ques-
ton OF drunkenness, not to excuse
crime. but to explain the impossibility
of committing crime by fixed purpose.
malice and elaboration.
Counsel then carefully reviewed the
evidence. going over the location in the
hotel, ana the condition of Utley for
two Or three days before the homicide,
the continued heavy drinking, and the
~CaroUsing in the roOm-all the evil
dence showing that Utley was drunk.
He then carried the jury on through
the departure OF the ~ to
the time when poor drunken Utley"
was left alone in the hotel. He then
produced the pistol of HollingswOrth-
a s~elf-acting, hammerless weapon. and
his theory was that it was a woeful
thing that he had it that night. He
did not understand that weapon nor
did Utley, who believed his life was in
danger. If he acted under that i'm
pulse. l submit that, drunk or sober,
he acted in Self-defenSe. He then ad-
Verted to the evidence of w. r. Kick
er, policeman, that after shooting Ut
ley showed drink but not drunk. Yes,
that tragic death sobered him. All
witnesses swore that just before the
homicide he was trunk. Counsel then
referred to the remarkably intelligent
and prominent men who testified that,
as compared with other men, Utley
when drunk, was incapable Of a fixed
purpose or of elaboration.
He cOntended that in the face of such
overwhelming and i%rrefutable testimony
it was impossible to convict this man
of murder in the first degree. The
only thing, in my view, for the jury to
decide is whether this is a case of justi-
fable homicide or manslaughter.
Mr.. Robinson closed, after two hours,
in a fervent and feeling peroration.
IF you convict this defendant OF MUIR
der in the first degree, this beautiful
court house will be no longer a temple
of justice, but an altar on which this
defendant will be sacrificed"
Ex-Judge Sutton, Of defense, follow
ed, a synopsis of whose argument will
be given in next letter.
The defendant, which had the morn
ing session, is fighting ably, and urging
self-defense.
j. W. Bolton for the state and A. S.
Hall for the defense made arguments
his afternoon. Colonel J. w. Hinsdale
for defense opened, but interrupted by
adjournment and continues tomorrow.
The states contention is still strong of
murder in the first degree. Defense
xpectS nothing higher than man
slaughter and argues also self defense.