The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-03-22
JURY CELEBRATES UPON
 THE FATE OF JESSE CONNORS

@.4 S~ = '~ ~ gently admitted to the bar He is clerk in the Probate Office and has more than local reputation as an orator. HIS trst jury effort showed that MT. ] Stoddards reputation for elequence was we'll deserved. It Is not often [ that a young lawyer has his first CT fort so well received and so generally l complimsnted, nor does 1t happen often in such cases that the impressions and the compliments were so well justi- fled.
 To make out their ease MT. stoddsrd pointed out it was necessary for the State to show that the killing was murder, they must show that 1t was willful and premeditatcd. That they had failed to show. The jury had learned from the evidence that the blows which took the life of Ciem Mount were struck in the heat of pas sion. They were struck, Mr Stoddard argued, after Connors had been sorely cut and wounded. Mir Stoddard argued that the State had failed to make out the desperate threats alleged to have been made by Connors. Threats had been introduced. but they were of a mild nature as when Connors said he was going to whip q man before he went to Texas; he was going to whip a man before night.
 In a closing flight Of eloquence, he pictured the desolatc state of he pris- oner and the widowed mother who sat at his side. The prisoner was the most pitiful figure that the jury would ever be called upon to see Wounded des- perately in the fight he had lain week after week recovering his strength, without friends and without help. and he sat in this trial with no friend and no support except that from the aged mother, who. less than five years ago was widowed by a shotgun in the hand of an assassin.
 Frank Rricken argued strongly that under the circumstances as brought out from the witness stand the prisoner could not be convicted of any crime graver than manslaughter in the first degree. Connors did not waylay Mount nor did he kill him in cold blood. The jury should remember that the killing was a fight between two hot-blooded boys who met in Brantley to settle a business difference and got into fight Ii had not been shown, 1t could not be shown, that the killing was wilful and premeditated. and, therefore. the yer diet should bo manslaughter in the first degree.
 MT. Bricken went deeply into an dUdtyStS or the ENiQentG. f1t ueNOltu himself particularly to the evidence relating to the first part of the difficult ty. It was shown clearly said MT. Bricken, that Mount expected trouble, -~and as soon as the difficulty began snstched his open knife from his pock- ct With this knife he slashed Con- nors on the neck and Mir. Bficken con tended had it not been for the felt brim of the hat it would have been a fatal eA l. @v,~ 1r,p- vein. And again he was stabbed in the first part of the fight by Mount twice in the region of the heart Nor did Clem Mount run. argued MT. Bricken, until MT. Gilchrist had pulled Jesse Connors away and called out Run Clemmie, run. Then in the heat of passion. bloody and wounded, Connors followed Mount down to the store and engaged in the fatal encounter. Out of this there could not come the crime of murder, Mir. Bricken argued
 Solicitor C. R. Bricken made a strong plea for the highest penalty of the law.
 There is only one penalty. only one punishment, for this terrible act" declared Col. Bricken, "only one punishment for running down lit tie Clemmie Mount and cutting him to the heart, Is for this court. speaking
 
 defendant shall be hanged by the neck until he is dead" Since the inscribed tablets were handed down to Moses the law of humanity has been Thou shalt not murder" Did this man mur- der Clemment Mount? Gentlemen, there is no doubt of it in your mind.
 ''The man who sheddeth mans blood shall have his blood shed. Jesse Connors had shed the blood of Clemmie Mount and his blood is to be shed by man to pay the forfeit. Show him the mercy he showed Glenn mic Mount.
 From legal stand point. Col. Brick en said he had never heard such gush and moonshine as the young lawyers for the defense had argued to the jury. They did it probably because their client stood before the court stripped of evefy vestige of self defense. They had for d client a man who had no answer whatever to make to the charge of murder. He alluded to the argu- ment based on the presence of Jesse Connors mother. saying:
 But he didn't tell you that the de- fenhants father was killei by the de- fendant's uncle. He didn't tell you that the defendants father had him self once to answer to the charge of murder. He didn't tell you that the whole family Is of bad stock
 Frank Bricken objected to this ar gument as being on matters out of the record and the court ruled out the argument, ruling out at the same time q part of the argument made for the defendant by Messrs. Frank Bricken and Stoddard.
 One by one the solicitor took up the long chain of threats made by Jesse Connors. He counted them off one by one and commented upon each of them.
 And then he declared to the jury
 They ask you for a verdict of man. A verdict of manslaughter would be an insult to your intell- gence.'
 In closing Col. Bricken said. Tt will be glad day for me. it will be a glad day for you, when we can say There | has not been a murder in Crcnshaw | County in twelve months. It will be d glad day for us when 1t can be no | longer said There has been twelve | in Crenshaw since last June" | When that day comes. it will come | through the petit jurors of the county. |
 At 1 p m. the jury retired to decide l upon tho verdict.
 Tea was cultivated in China 2.700 |
 N=