The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1904-10-18
BOTH GUILTY
Continued from First rage.)

f~I&@ @s@ 49, O0A0AA 0AA4
ID. Kerr This able attorney. who had
fought the battle nobly for duty's sake
alone. spoke for about f~ortyfiye minutes
in his usual clear and impressive man.
lner. Colonel Kerr commenced by con-
the people OF Bladen coun-
lty upon the manner in which they hac
the law in this case. anc SAID
that II was the duty Of all civilized peo-
pie to live according to the law After
urging upon the jury TO do their duty
in spite of all feeling, he evoted over
"a half hour to a discussion OF the evi-
idence. He argued that the state had
not made u a case against the defen-
ldants. or either Of them. and that the
evidence was not strong
las that required by law for conviction.
He said the rack Circumstances, nor that
'of the scars. or the one of 'foeggarlice"
was not sufficient By any means to con
|vict Sellars. The circumstances con
Injected with the theery that Brown was
the guilty man were also too meagre,
said. Great stress did the counsellor
lay upon the contention that the evil
|dence showed plainly that only n
man committed n crime and conse-
both the negroes could not be
He called attention to the wide
variance of time as set forth In the
of A. Santse and Nary
iWooten, and ais to the fact that the
Swore that Sellars was barefoot
ed. He then paid his respects to No.
& shoes. and "beggar lice" which he
said were plentiful in the community.
After declaring that others than the
defendants had an opportunity to per-
|petrate the horrible crime he closed
by beautifully describing the respon-
sibility of each juror and el~oQuently
him to meet his duty squarely.
THE JUDGES CHARGE.
Judge Ward consumed over an hour
in his charge to the jury, which
an exceedingly able, clear and instruc-
tive Geliverance.
Asa preface to his charge, the judge
INSTRUCTED the jury hat the fact that
the defendants a not introduced any
Testimony or had not gone themselves.
upon the witness stand. could not be
fused against them. He mex rea his
notes of the testimony to the jury, at
ter which he made the charge. OPEN
ling straight from the shoulder" as.
lit were. with the following remarks.
1.-The court charges that you should
mot allow any feeling of indignation
account of the nature of the homi-
Icide to prejudice o against the pris-
lOners. Under your oaths you should
mot allow feeling to influence you one
WAY or the other. When you entered.
llIlS jury UOA yOu WcIe SWOIU ~ Try
1.-THE case according to the evidence
lalone, and o must not be governed
tby sympathy or indignation. You
must not permit any public sentiment
or public clamor to influence you. To
lido otherwise you will violate your
Ioaths and your consciences."
He charged the jury h a from 10
view point of the evidence could the
defendants be guilty of mansIaughter.
land only from one view point COULD
they be guilty of murder in the Sec
lond degree. The latter was in ase
malice and generalization were found
lacking, unless the defendants slew
Mrs. Packer while perpetrating the
icrime of rape, in which instance they
be guilty of murder in the first
degree as much so as if the two in
Igred!ents mentioned were present.
During the course of the remainder
of his charge Judge Ward instructed
1.-THE jury thai the law did NOT raise
the presumption Of the prisoners
lguilt, out of their innocence, and that.
1.-THE burden was on the state to satisfy
them beyond a reasonable doubt that
1.-THE defendants were guilty. File di-
ERECTED them hat they could convict
Ieither or both of the negroes. or acquit
Ieither or both. out in case they could
account for Mrs. Packers death by
amy reasonable hypothesis other than
lat the hands of either or both Of the
defendants, a verdict Of not guilty
iShould be rendered.
The judge ordered the jury to. eS-
iclude the knife circumstance. as there
twas not sufficient evidence to con-
meet Brown with it's ownership. He
then plainly told the jury of the diff
lferent contentious of the state and
defense.
PRAYERS OF THE DEFENSE.
Judge Ward gave the jury the fol-
flowing prayers asked for by the de-
PENDANTS counsel, though he had COW
)ered the same ground thoroughly in
his charge:
"FIRST-That the evidence IN this
lease is circumstantial. and before the
jury can convict either of the de-
PENDANTS, the evidence must exclude
leyery other reasonable theory and
must find from the evidence that the
lcrime could not have been committed
by any other persons or in any other
manner than that commended for by the
state, before they can convict the de-
PENDANTS.
"SECOND-That each circumstance
lrelied upon by the state must be as
distinctly proved as if the whole case
turned u2on It.
lne jury can con-
Evict upon circumstantial evidence, it
must be clear, convincing and conclu-
tsive. and that n chain of circumstan-
ltial evidence is no stronger than its
weakest n Estate VS.. Carson), and
leach circumstance relied upon by the
state, as a circumstance in this case,
must be fully proven to the satisfac-
ltion of the jury. and all the circum-
stances, when taken together. must
satisfy the jury beyond a reasonable
doubt before the jury can convict.
"FOURTH-That the fact that the
defendants have not taken the stand
jim this trial and have not offered evil
ldence will not be considered to the
prejudice or disadvantage Of the
defendants by the jury"
TWO WE'RE REFUSED.
The first two prayers sought by the
ISefense were not granted by the court.
They were as follows:
"FIRST-The defendants request
I&h 49, - 49,