Atlanta tri-weekly journal. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1920-19??, 1923-09-27
COART'S SENTENCE
UPHELD, ATTORNEYS
To ASK REHEAR|NC

Counsel for Major Lee IT. Coart,
former army officer, who was
given a life sentence in the Tai
bot superior court for the murder
ofs A. B. McNiece, Talbot county
school superintendent, were prepar-
ing Tuesday to file motion for a
rehearing, after a decision affirming
the verdict of the lower court, hand
ed down by the Georgia supreme
court at els p. m. Monday. The
motion must be filed at once as the
present term of the high court ends
Saturday.
The former army officer, married
to a member of a prominent GeOr-
gia family, shot and killed the school
official in the latter's office. The
prosecution contended that Coart
took the life of McNiece because of
an abandoned infatuation for Mrs.
McNiece, going to the length of muir
der when she told him that nothing
but death could part her from her
husband"
Counter Charges
The defendant, in an unswOrn
statement to the jury, declared he
had been to McNiece three times
about his notorious conduct with
Mrs. Coart," and that McNieCe adj
mitted his love for Mrs. Coart.
Mrs. McNiece, daughter of Geor
gia minister, testified that Major
Coart had forced his attentions upon
her when she was calling upon Mrs.
Coart, and that she was able to free
herself only after a struggle.
The opinion of the supreme court
is said to be one of the most Volumi-
nous issued in many years. The
case went up on approximately
twenty errors alleged to have been
committed by Judge George p. Mum
70, the trial judge, who oVerruled
COarts motion for a new trial. In
addition there was the claim that
the record sent to the supreme court
was not the same as that in the
superior court, but all these grounds
were overruled. The case has been
in the supreme court almost a year..
and had to be decided this week,
or it would have been affirmed by
operation of law, as the present
term ends Saturday.
Dying Statement Scored
The dying statement of McNiece,
made in an Atlanta hospital, was the
object of attack by the defense, on
the contention that the signer did
not realize that he was at the point
of death, and actually signed the
statement q week before he died.
The state insisted that McNiece sign
ed two identical statements, one
week before he died and the other
only a few hours prior to the time
ne passed away. The supreme court
held that these questions were for
the trial jury to decide.
Coart's defense in the lower courts
had been based for the most part,
on the "unwritten law"
The opinion was written by Chief
Justice Richard 3. Russell and there
was not a single dissent from the
bench of six justices. -Four of the
justices concurred specially being
agreed to the Judgment refusing a
new trial Internationally, but re-
fusing to accede to everything that
was said in the opinion. The spe-
cially concurring justices were Beck,
Hill ana Hines. justice
Gilbert concurred generally with
the opinion of the chief justice.
Justice Russell Comments
Although he wrote the opinion
affirming the verdict against
Coart. Chief Justice Russell did not
subscribe to the theory of the state
that the defendant slew McNiece in
order to possess himself of Mrs.
McNiece. Commenting on this con-
tentiOn, Chief Justice Russell wrote:
According to the states conten-
ton, Coart As supposed to reason as
follows: Mrs. McNiece loves her
husband dearly at the present time,
and repels my advances. L will,
therefore, kill her husband, which
will make me so attractive to Mrs.
McNiece that she will marry me,
her husbands assassin. 10 be
sure, l must first ged rid of my
present wife
''All that can be said of Coart is
that if he did entertain any such
scheme, he should be adiudged non
mentis on the spot.
In the appeal, counsel for Coar'.
argued that under the decisions OF
the supreme court, the testimony Of
Mrs. MCNiece was inadmissable be
cause she was testifying to alleged
facts by which it was sought 20
show Coart guilty of a separate
crime in order to prejudice the jury
to produce verdict OF guilty of
murder"
The high court refused to sane
ton Coart's contention that when
once it became determined, by the
boast of one man, that he intends
to continue intimate relations With
the wife of another the latter can
then and there shoot to kill, not be
ing required to hold back under the
rule of the law that danger of the
commission of acts of intimack must
be urgent, imminent and pressing"
The court held as it has before hel&.
that to justify a husband to kill for
this reasoh1~~the acts of intimacy
must be in progress or about -
haoin