The farmer and mechanic. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 18??-19??, 1903-06-16
Conditions in Sending in Estimates in the
Contest

their place with the rest and operate with
their own natural force as a part OF the
total mass of probatiVe matter"
Here it is admitted that a biz has been
found by the grand jury. 1t is presumed
that the grand jury acted correctly. 1t
is subject, however. to be shown to the
contrary, and that may be established by
facts contrary to the inferred facts by
contrary testimony. This is a rcbuttal.
We assume in our opposition to the ac-
ton of the grand jury that the court viii
presume that they acted correctly; but OK
parte. You have heard evidence. The
policy of the law is against exparte trials;
the law of the land demand that every
man shall be heard and every man shall
have an opportunity to face his accuser
and his witnesses with his own witnesses.
| presume that you acted correctly, says
the court, but your judgment may be er-
r%oneous. You may not have G1cltcd all
the evidence from the witnesses; they may
have been interested witnesses, and may
have suppressed some facts and stated
only those facts that warranted your aC-
ton. Then I, says the courts, make from
the fact that you found this bill the
simple assumption of the fact that you
dtbGu toi1cCtiy, puI udt Is SlLipig a III lllel
facie presumption which the law asserts
in limine: and if the defendant attacks
your proceedings say to him, l assume
that they are right. but the defendant
may proceed to show that they are not
right. He says, / have shown that the
grand jury did not act properly IN this
matter. Then this assumed fact is merged
in the great mass of evidence adduced,
ta~l l. 80. f~.1o
cumstance.
Such then is the effect and weight Of
that presumption, nothing more.
Now then the only question here is
whether this defendant is guilty Of muir
der in the first degree or whether there is
any evidence Of premeditation which would
induce a reasonably prudent and fair man
to find him guilty of murder III the first
degree. In other words, is the doubt not
in his favor; can there be a doubt that if
he were found guilty Of murder in the
first degree upon this evidence, that if a
jury should find him guilty on this evi-
dcnce, you would not allow that verdict
to stand, would your Honors do it? Not
for a moment. There is not a ~scintilla Of
evidence OF preneditation. There is not d
particle of evidence here that there was
reconciliation or elaboration in this mat
ter. None. 1t Is unnecessary for me to
define to your Honors what Fermentation
Is because you have had it before you at
the last three terms of court, in three most
important cases. Your Honors have
qualified the rule in these later cases
which was laid down in Dowden's case.
The dellberatlOn or the purpose, the fixed
purpose, the cool and determined purpose
IN the language Of the decision in Thomas
case and the other cases must precede the
fata1 act. The courts say in these cases
that it is Il perversion of terms to apply
the term deliberate to any act which is
done on 4 sudden impulse. Fosters case
I130-6T2, Bishops case 131-736. Coles ease.
at the present term. The defendant coolIy
and calmly determined to kill the man,
otherwise the Judges say, in the last ca Sc.
he Is not guilty. The act must have
been committed in cold blood. That is the