The news & observer., 1905-09-20
Digests of Decisions
Handed Down.
W. R. MURRAY LOSES
Sentence of Lower Court to Punish
ment for MansIaughter On Roads
Affirmed. Still No Opinion in Nc.
Gown Case. Other Cases OF
Only Legal Interest.

The Supreme Court yesterday made
known its decision in nine cases ar
gued at the present term, opinions be-
ing handed down in seven instances.
and the other two cases going off per
crriam.'
OF Statewide interest was the
opinion i'm the case of State VS. Muir
ray. from Durham. affirming the low
or court in which the defendant was
found guilty of manslaughter and
sentenced to two years on the roads.
Murray, it will be remembered, was
tried for the killing of his uncle of
the same name. the facts attending the
homicide being most peculiar. The
deceased and the defendant engaged
i'm a fight, the latter closing in on his
opponent in the face of a pistol, with
which his unc'a fired at him three
times. The men clinched, and in the
struggle the pistol was discharged
with fatal effect upon the man who
had Grs. drawn it. The contention
of the State was that the defendant
had disarmcd and then shot his op-
ponent; while the defense contended
that the fourth shot was the result of
a struggle for the possession of the
weanon. and that their client should
not be held responsible for the death
of the deceased.
During the argument last week the
members of the bench had.a deal of
fun at the expense of the Attorney
General. who had, prepared a most
careful and elaborate brief in the
case. He was forced to stand and
smile under punishment. while the
court prodded him with all manner Of
violent deductions from his argument
In the light of yesterdays opinion. the
gratified niMh of his legal opponents,
however, seems to have been prema-
ture.
There was again disappointment
that no opinion was handed down in
the case In re Nc Gown.
other cases decided were of no spe-
cial news interest. Digests of opin-
ions follow:
State VS.. W. r. Murray, appellant,
from Durham. Fuller and Fuller:
Manning and FOushee; Boone and
Reade: Winston and Bryant and j.
q. Biggs for defendant, appellant:
Attorney General and Argo and
Shaffer for the State. Clark, c. j.
No error.
Indictment for murder. Prisoner
and deceased were engaged in a strug-
gle. deceased having pistol which
testimony of nine witnesses tending to
show that prisoner diSarmed deceased
and that the fourth shot, which caused
death of deceased, was fired while the
weapon was in the hands of defend
ant. The defendant introduced as wit
nesses sixteen persons who testified
that they were eye-witnesseS of the
struggle but that they could not say
who fired the fourth and fatal shot,
one of these testifying that at the
time of the last shot both deceased
and defendant appeared to have hold
of the weapon. On these facts the
court below charged the jury in part
as follows: THE law says that 1t is
your duty to give to positive testimony
greater weight than you give to mega
tive testimony. The testimony of those
witnesses who Swore positively that
they saw the pistol in the hand of the
prisoner and that he fired the fatal
shot while the pistol was in his hand,
Is what the law terms positive teStl-
mony They swore positively that they
saw the existence of a fact. The tes-
timony of the witnesses who said that
they saw the prisoner and the de-
ceased i'm a struggle at the time when
the last shot was fired, but they did
not see the pistol and did not know
i'm whose hand the pistol was, is what
the law terms negative testimony.
The jury returned verdict OF man