The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1903-10-11


No one, not even the near relatives
OF the deceased, felt a keener regret at
what had happened than the defendant
himself. Nothing but the direst necessity
could have forced him to commit this
deed. Both were prominent young men,
not only in their own right were they
SO, but on account OF the sires that gave
them birth. And it was prominent place.
If he We're to select the most Prominent
place in the commonwealth-that place
III front of the postoffce would be the
one selected. These two miles square of
this city were the most precious miles
in the entire commonwealth Who Sc
lected the place? Was it the defend
ant? Did he make any assault? The evi-
dence is that this prominent place was
selected by someone else. If there was
any disrespect for the place for the
city, for law and order, who, pray, was
guilty of it? 1t was not the defendant
The jury remembered how it was at
the beginning of this trial, how much
prejudice, how much rancor, how terrible
it was. Let the defendant tell how terri
Bile it was.
Mr.. Daniel objected that no such thing
was brought out in the evidence.
The judge said counsel had no right
to speak of anything except what &C.
CURED at the trial.
Mr. Jones said he was referring to the
cross-examination of Mr.. Simms and the
bitterness engendered by this trial. The
Jury knew what violent attacks had b1en
made on Mr.. Simms, and he wanted 10
say that this day was one of triumph for
Mr.. Simms, as it was to be, he believed
for the defendant.
| After paying high tribute to Mr.. Dan
lei personally, Mr.. Jones said he had never
| before saw the State of North Carolina
come down so from its high pedestal in
the conduct of a case as in this one. A
most irreproachable man, Mr.. Simms, had
been violently attacked, and Mr. SchmitZ
who had esta b. ished most excellent CHAR
aeter. He had never seen a better one
proved. 1t is true he might not be per-
feet. Then look at Hocutt. He might
not be a paragon, but there was no bet
ter evidence of the rancor that there
was In this case than the attack made
on Mr.. Hocutt. If every mans charac-
ter was to be attacked because when
boy he had stolen pistol and some to-
bacco, where, Capt. Day, would he the
boys that grew up in your day? Why, a
boy of the age of Is or so had no charac-
ter, hardly. 1t is wonder they did not
show he had stolen a watermelon. Ard
those little boyish peecadiloes had been
brought up now he was married man
with children. Had not his honor been
Mortified at this exhibition?
Judge PEBBLES II can't pass on that
/ have nothing to do with it,
Then Nj. Jones took up the three
grades of homicide. The Legislature o.
1898 had divided murder into two de
grees. Previous to that there had been
only one degree of murder. Mr.. Jones
then explained to the jury that murder
in the first degree must be premeditat d
and deliberate, wilful, killing. There must
be some thought beforehand. The State
says there was nothing of that; it was
murder in the second degree and that
was a homicide or killing where there
was no generalization, no provocation, no
element of self-defense 1t is, sudden
thing, a thing that occurred then and
there. He quoted the State against Cole
to illustrate murder in the second degree
The Supreme court said that old man
Cole, the negro had not thought before
hand when he shot the section mast..r
on the train who was trying to force
them to leave the first-class car. An
other case of second degree murder was
the Wilson case, where a lot of men
had tried to scare Jones to make him
leave town, and In the melee had killed
him. But they had not gone to his room
with the animus to kill.
Mr.. Jones next took up the difference
between negative and positive evidence
He challenged any one of the counse.
for the State to get up and say to the
jury that there had been no fight. Inc
minute anyone of ,hem should say that,
the jury would lose all respect for him
Then Mr.. Jones took up, one by one, the
witnesses for the State, Logan Terrell
and George Wilson, both negative wit
nesses. The autopsy showed the bullet
ranged Backward; so Mr.. Skinner would
have had to go off backward and side
ways from Mr. Haywood to be shot in
that way. I. B. Austin's evidence could
not show anything as to how Mr.. Skin
ner could have been shot he was if he
was going away from Mr. Haywood. V. C.
Tompkins really saw nothing at ALL Jo-
seph Virgins testimony was of no conse
quence. Neal Freeman saw Mr.. Skinner
going toward the Henry building Mr.
Simpsons testimony was not SO much out
of the way. He heard the pistol and saw
MI SOIUS mo Tue street., DuL
did not try to place Mr.. Skinner so that
he could have received the fatal bali in
the street. Mr.. Moring looked after it
was all over. Branch Hopkins placed
MI. Skinner going toward Johnson's drug
store with his back toward Mr.. Haywood.
The same with Edward Murray and John
S. Johnson, and A. Fl. Green and W. F..
Warren, w. 3. Allen, A. r. Rowland,
Thos. H. Woods. Sauls, 200, gives no tes-
tlmony worth considering in this case
John Harrington also puts Mr. SINNERS
back toward Mr. Haywood Jones Full
Ter did say that Mr.. Skinner was going
off the sidewalk at the time of the first
shot, with his back to Mr.. Haywood. That
was impossible. Mr.. Fuller was bound TO
be mistaken. The evidence of the wound
itself shows that. All OF these were neg
alive witnesses, put on 10 say there had
been no fight. And yet their last witness
denied the testimony of the twenty others
That last witness had proved to every
body's satisfaction that there was a
fight. 1t was convincing. 1t was crushing
When the State abandoned the charge
of murder in the first degree it prarti-
cally abandoned the charge of murder in
the second degree. But they try 70 show