The farmer and mechanic. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 18??-19??, 1912-05-21

Serve Sentence
Among the decisions handed down
by the Supreme Court are those IN
three criminal cases. State V. Laugh
ter. from Henderson county, is Tor
wife murder. The verdict OF murder
i'm the second degree is affirmed by
the Supreme Court, Associate justice
Walker writing the opinion for the
court. The only question in r ap-
peal in this case relates to the com
potency of the dying OF
the wife as to the cause of her deatn.
1t appears that she went to a neigh
bor's house, very badly bruised about
her body. and she told these neigh
bors tina she had demonstrated with
her husband about drinking ana ne
had cotton a stick and come PACK
and beaten her, that he had killed
her: that she knew she was going to
die. There was also testimony aDout
the nature of the bruises, etc. JUS
tice Walker states: The exception to
the hearSay rule in favor OF dying
declarations rests solely upon the
STOuUO Oh UcCcSSlly LIZ puCAS VIM
for if they were not admitted as evil
dence it would be impossible to con-
Wet in q case of homicide, the
knowledge of the facts, In many cases,
being confined to the party slain and
the perpetrators Of the crime; but as
h exception can only be sustained
upon the ground of necessity, the
declaration is admissible only in in
dictInents for homicide and Is re-
stricted to the act of killing and the
circumstances Immediately attending
the act and forming a part OF the
res gestae." The rule for the adm4S-
sion Of such testimony has been thus
stated: Il. At the time the declara-
ton was made, the de~clarant should
ave been in actual danger Of death.
2 He should have a full apprehension
Of his danger. 3. Death should have
ensued." The dying declarations
were properly admitted in this case
and the judgment given is affirmed.
State v. Taylor, from Burke, is an
Indictment for burning a barn. En-
ror is assigned hat the trial Judge
refused to instruct the jury that there
was not sufficient evidence to warrant
a conviction, and to return a verdict
Of not guilty. The evidence disclosed
that there was bad feelings between
the OWner of the barn and the de-
PENDANT; that Taylor, the defendant
tried to get a man named Blue tt
burn the barn; that Blue stopped a
TaylOr's house one night and mex
morning discovered hat some one ha(
worn his shoes during the night; tn
shoes were muddy, the vanps mashed
down and strings broken and tract
made by the shoes led to the barr
which was burned. The shoes wer'
too small for the defendant Taylor
and mex day he was limping and sai'
he had a sprained ankle. h Su
preme Court, in an opinion written b,
Chief Justice Clark, states there wa
sufficient evidence to go to the jur
and the judgment against Taylor i
upheld.
State v. Davis. from Henderso
county, is an unusual case. Davi
was indicted for refusing to work
DAD after notice. 1t appears hat tn
county commissioners ordered a ne,
road opened and an appeal was ia
ken to the Superior court, bonds 70
costs and so forth being given. Pend
ing this appeal, the overseer sum
moned Davis to work his roa an
he refused. Justice Hoke, writin
the opinion for the court. states thu
IAN appeal properly taken from a
order directing the laying out Of
highway has the force and effect c
Nacating the judgment or order, an
that pending such appeal the cas-
does not come within the provision {
the law looking to the proper mair
tenance and working Of the road
John A. Woodie ". Town of Mort
Wilkesboro is a most unusual cas-
The town own it's waterworks an
has a stand-pipe in the town, I'M
which water is pumped. There W;
no gauge at the pumping station
indicate to the pumper when tt
~stand-pipe was full Of water. 50 as
prevent dangerous overflow. II
plaintiff was driving his horses ar
wagon by the pumping station al
alleges that the overflow was SO gre
that it frightened his horses, caus'
them to run away, threw him out,
we'll as his da6ghter who was wi
him, damaged the wagon and great
injured the plaintiff. The jury ga