The Montgomery advertiser., 1903-12-05

Blackstone, that in the commission of a murder a man must be of good memory and of sound discretion" Without good memory and sound discretion, and with out premeditation, MT. .Rushton argued, there could be no murder in the first de- gree. His speech was, after closely fol- lowing the evidence, a plea for mercy for, he said, the unfortunate with an ine- briated brain. It was not asked by the defense that the jury should turn loose Ralph Armstrong if 1t believed that his hand held the pistol which gave Allie Armstrong her death wound. But he con- tended that if Ralph Armstrong was inc briated beyond sound discretion, he should not be punished capitally.
 MT. Rushton took up the evidence for the defense to show that Armstrong had been drinking before he left Auburn, and that he had been continuously on that spree until his brain and nature had be- come soddened and steeped in whiskey. He deprecated the plea that had been made by the solicitor for the life blood of the unfortunate defendant. The solici- tor had seen fit to call up the sweet mem- ory of Allie Armstrong, the beautiful girl who had gone down to her death, to help out the calls for vengeance. If the beau tiful and unfortunate girl were before
 
 for mercy for the unfortunate prisoner. would be the most earnest, the most sim cere.
 MT. Fitts Speaks.
 The closing argument for the prose- cution was made by ex-Attorney General w.. c. Fitts, of Mobile. In beginning MT. Fitts said that, he was forced to take notice of the sighting. satirical way in which Mir. Rushton had spoken of the name "F'itts." MT. Fits said that he re- gretted the allusion which compelled him to take personal notice cE 1t. The name had in his person been honored by the people of Alabama for zalf times and that, with Gods help, he would refrain from doing anything that would discredit the name. The first judge of Territorial Alabama, who established the first court of justice in the wilderness bore the name. --',.t'.. .'....
 He drew. an eloquent picture of the or phan girl, beautiful and on the threshold of life, alive and expectant with all its hope and beauty. He pictured the two youths, one a girl, the other a boy, one thoroughly good. and the other thorough ly bad, both of the same name and of the same blood. The one was an orphan girl, to whom the boy fin the death of his father should have been a foster father, her probitor, but he had ruthlessly turn ed upon her and brought her to an un- timely grave.
 Mr. Fitts argued the necessity of the calm, dutiful administration of the law for the protection of society He ans wered the arguments of the defense for mercy, saying they were upon a false and unsubstantial basis, bolstered up with interpretations from Holy Writ.
 The speaker analysed the evidence. He reviewed the statement of Miss Nellie Armstrong in recounting the words of Allie Armstrong in her aunt's room, where she said she had tainted in the front room and that Ralph had revived her, only to shoot her when she threat ened to tell her Aunt Ellen.
 "If the evidence of Miss Nellie Arm strong Is true, the prisoner Is guilty of murder in the first degree" exclaimed MT. Fltts.
 Testimony Compared.
 He reviewed the testimony of Mrs. FL len Delbridge. differing from that of Miss Nellie Armstrong as to what was said In Mrs. Delbridge's room after the shooting.
 And again." said Mr. Fitts, If the statement of Mrs. Dclbridge Is true, tie crime is murder in the first degree. Take either horn of the dilemma, it is murder in the first degree, deserving of the death penalty"
 The speaker analysed the conversation of Allie Armstrong and Ralph Armstrong just previous as told by Nellie Arm strong. The words showed, he said, that Ralph Armstrong was not the whiskey- soaked leg that the defense had attempted to show him They showed that the mind of the witness was alert and active. No matter in what form the conversation had been presented by the witness, the intel ligence, the poise of mind1of the prisoner was shown clearly and unmistakabiy MT. Fitts declared that the prisoner on the night of the murder did not in his conduct or actions display dimmed wits or disordered faculties.
 The word martyr, as applied to Allie Armstrong, caught the attention of Mr. Pitts. Martyr, she was a martyr said MT. Fftts. ito the intense jealousy, the overwhelming caprice of a spoiled boy. If this horrible crime does not cali for the death penalty where will you encoun- ter a case that calls for it."
 Mr. Fitts concluded his argument at noon. Court was then adjourned until 2 p. m. for dinner.
 Upon the reconvening of the court, Judge Denson delivered his charge to the jury. The charge was in writing. It was clear and fprcible. bearing upon all the points at issue in the case. He gave a clear definition of all forms of murder, with an especial explanation of murder in the first degree.
 Definitions of Murder.
 He pointed out that under the law mur- der in the first degree must be preceded by deIiberation. if for an instant only. If the defendant killed Allie Armstrong after a moments deliberation, it was murder in the first degree
 Judge Denson in his charge said that the defense contended that the defendant was in such a state of mind that he could not form criminal design. The whole question at issue, he said, was the status of mind of the defendant. The State had contended that Ralph Armstrong had formed the design of killing Allie Arm strong while sober. and that he had drank the whiskey to nerve himself to the deed. If the jury believed that the evidence has