The herald and news. [volume] (Newberry S.C.) 1903-1937, 1909-04-06
BASIS OF The APPEAL
IN The JONES CASE
GROUNDS ON WHICH CASE GOES
TO SUPREME COURT.
Papers Given to Attorneys For the
State-Error on Part of Presid-
ing Judge Alleged.
The State.


fight and sensational trial, was on
February 6 convicted of the murder
of his wife last July, with recommen-
dation to mercy, and who on the fol-
lowing Friday was sentenced to life
imprisonment in the State penitenti--
ary, have just been filed with the at
torneys for the State, an extension Of
10 days having been granted that the
appeal might be perfected.
Very great interest will be felt in
the appeal, as the case was not only
sensational, but attracted widespread
interest, because of the many unusual
features entering into it in the way of
evidence, as we'll as the legal tactics
employed by the defendant s counsel
in their efforts to secure his release on
bail, and to defer the trial of the
case, which they failed to do.
The following is the substance Of
the appeal, which covers about Is or
20 pages of typewriter matter:
. The refusal to quash the indict-
ment, and compel the State to elect.
Because it was error to admit the
testimony Of B. G. Gregory and Ar
thur English, relative to Mrs. Jones
acts and conduct towards them as rel
evant and competent, and was entire
ly illogical, if the conversation to-
wards them was excluded as irrele-
want eld incompetent.
Because the illustration in regard
to circumstantial evidence used by the
judge was in reality and substance a
charge upon facts.
Because the evidence as a whole
was insufficient to bring about a con-
viction.
2. Exceptions as to matter Of evi-
dence:
Because his honor erred in allow
ing the witness Ida E. Whitlock to
testify as follows: II have seen on
her body marks of where he struck
her. I saw marks on her body that
Mr.. Jones had made,' when it clearly
appears that the witness was not
speaking from her own knowledge, but
from information that she had receiv-
ed.
Because his honor erred in failing
when requested to do so, to instruct
the witness Ida E. Whitlock to re-
frain from making a statement based
upon hearsay, this failure taking place
especially when the witness said IN
response to the question:
20. Harry with upstairs with
them?'
"a. T suppose he was in his own
bed room. His mother toll me Le
was.'
And allowing other testimony
brought in.
3. Exceptions to the first charge
of his honor, the presiding judge: Be-
cause his honor erred IN charging up
. on malice in his first charge. That
his h"nor ordered the jury to%ine a
verdict out of one Of the four: l, gull
ty of murder; 2, guilty Of murder with
recommendation to mercy; 3, guilty Of
manslaughter; 4, not guilty.
That he distinctly said to the jury,
"You must arrive at one Of them"
He kept the jury in the room the
whole Of one night and the greater
part Of one day.
That he intended that they must
find one Of the verdicts which he
stated, the error being that under the
law Of South Carolina, and under the
act Of the legislature, the jury had
the legal right to make a mistrial.
4. Exceptions to second charge Of
his honor, the presiding judge: That
he urged upon them the Importance of
arriving at verdict and that the
language of the judge was calculated
to influence the jury to be guided by
the judicial anxiety that there should
be no mistrial, rather than upon their
own conception of the difficulties pre-
sented by the facts.
That his honor erred in speaking of
the Hoyt Hayes case.
That he erred in saying he could
not feel that he was doing his duty to
his country if he we're to let the jury
off with mistrial after so short a
deliberation.
That the repeated instances OF the
part Of the judge that the jury should
find verdict indicated to the jury.
That the Judge was satisfied that
the facts presented but little difficult
ties and were legally capable Of hav-
Il