Newspapers / Asheville Citizen (Asheville, N.C.) / March 28, 1886, edition 1 / Page 1
Part of Asheville Citizen (Asheville, N.C.) / About this page
This page has errors
The date, title, or page description is wrong
This page has harmful content
This page contains sensitive or offensive material
f DAILY EDITION; .1 XDITORS AND PROPRIETORS. citizen job! b.t, WEST BIDE PUBLIC 6QUi RE. BILL HEADS, LETTERHEADS, . P0STEE3, BLANKS, Ac And J iVrkf mil ktndt don, withg. - romfme44 nd'mt toy frias razee X Year, fce.o a Mosu; I v i I Weekly, 1 Year, xo 6 Mo., 75 VOL IrNO 296 - : : ASHEVILLE, N. .;; SUNDAY MORNING, MARCH 1886. PRICE: AGENTS f 1 FJ.ff TJSTNG RA TBS LOW. POWELL. & SNIDER'S COLIJMN . j i"f . VS IT. ft: '? : t. DEST, KEUTUCKV CM mm mm I ON mi 9 5 t3 ON m -1: ' CSS ' pm,"i ." .""Sffi oc3 1 i ist-propf Oats, 0 a , . ion Sets, Early Hose, Burbanks, Peerless ' "V '-r fr-. Slpisis7vR icoMeal Mm "AVliolesali? ; : ' or OsSsfl ' If H A3c BRAN Minn JOYCE Mil-trial: V.' SIXTEENTH DAY'S PRO- r CEEDINGS. ; ARGUMENT CONTINUED. ' Friday, Hueh 16tiuv7 ' CaptrMEl Carter Xaddressed the jury in behalf of the defenst: The time has now arrived when I must say- Jhe hist word for the pris oners. 1 regret this task did not fall to others, for with the worry I have undergone,' I "am jh3Kially' unable to do well the part assipiea me. I z. consult niy "iWra feelings, .Jl, would be willing to allow this argument to stob here: vou havedoubtless reaeh ed a. deeisidn lready Yet this urv' not banLUor-w6r4ofeaiouj.vt tromme tuay tendw, " rtnwe ,'any doubt, that may. remain in jour minds, it is my duty, to add it. , . I came to.lhis' cas oon viuoed a great and foul wrong ha- been done these men. '1 do not-wish to mis lead you, I could not mislead tins intelligent jury. ' - . - Youee this case enveloped, in al most impenetrable cioudd from the beginnine. Snice the very hour of the tire,, the -stream' of eircumst ince andjispicion has been "polluted;"? " JHow do they startf They go to tkc burning and instead of looking around the house, in the garden and mellow ground they go' to the mountains, and laurel patch to hunt tracks; there they find tracks they run them until they are run in the ground and in confusion Why not look arond the house for tracks and see if this was accident or murder. If they had weighed this matter as intelligent men, if in search of the guilty instead of Bill Jones and son, they would haveiven' us great as sistance.. jThe State argues this as if we were defending the. guilty man, and it was pur duty to prove anaccidenC "Wedo no such thing; we are authorized to do nothing of the kind. We admit for sake of ar gument, a grievous niurder; it i3 the State's duty to prove thesa men arc guilt'. Had we admitted acaseoi murder, the court would still tell youj you must determina whether it was murder or accident. 1 liope it may prove to have been an acci dent, but whether it was or not, our Views could have no effect. You niust determine Ui is u pon the evi dence offered bv State. Had you cor there to look for '.rylffikirtitfo, as Kiijsiesttizenfl, without rew ard or hope; of reward, or atd oi detective hoping lor bi fees, you would have caieiully examined the condition of ' affairs; would have weighed well all the attending cir cumstances; the reversed position of old man .Joyce, the change ot posi tion of shovel,' &c, and then have determined whetlier it was not the result of accident. , . If you had thought the old man died in a struggle, in defense of -life, you, as honest men, would have looked for a reason and for the guilty. Col Lusk argued the men went there to kill Mary Rice, and had to kill others; but as Mr. Douglas Carter savs, thev went with a determina' tion to kill the whole family; if Bill Jones was so afraid of a prosecution; as to kill Mary Rice, he woul J have gone to kill her, and not expect to ea capedetection by the Joyces. Can any one doubt he went there as Douglas Carter says, and I argue with him, to kill the whole family? True, a gigantic crime, but if they went to kill Rice, they went to kill the whole fnnilv. If ihev went to kill the family, wouldn't they have attack ed the strongest first? Wouldn't hey have killed old man Joyce first ? After ' dispatching him, it would be easy to manage the others. Can there beany doubt here? You may send any two criminals to commit any deed of violence, and first assault will be on stongest party attacked.- State says the old man had a struggle, sezied the shovel, fought for deaf life, and fell with his head - where his feet ought to have been; ' Why that struggle? ; There was silver and gojd in that household, - Luther a witness, a few - days before, paid ; him money. Dont let the Solicitor say the old man hid his money out and therefore it was not-found in the .ashes.- " No money fourid in the ashes,.' they; were 'sifted : Dont you see a clue to. this - matter ? IVAi-il-f rvio fetti 1 Jim met rri irr KitA thought the robbers watched around the old man to learn where was the money after getting it and in struggle- killed hinv.. ; Robbers could not afford to burn up the house first, 'that, would defeat their object. .-.Robbers had ,to arouse the old man, and in the struggle he was stricken down.' If-; there , is any reasonable hypothesis consistent . with the innocenseof these men ryou - xnust take Jt and acquit. . Robbery;- is? reas onable, if so you must decide thjsv.case forjirisbners,," Col. : pafgOed :lhat the shiqyei stood iftjttec-j'-jhc.Vpld man took his shoveland fowght for his life. ; I concede' IbrV the - sake ' of the argument there was "fighU It was r a I say if that be eo: ilien Bill Jones and his eon are not guilty. ; If you view - this" case .froin a Treasonable standpoint, you will, say that- the parties who did the killing, went to kill all, and to rob.. Is my thecjy reasonable? CoJ.-Heyt said.?. that near the three :rcl:iuts", thrs was evidence that tht pped he thought, to divide their booty ? PflPT'lOO aroused the old w4"n; jtpbk-WVinpnejri 1 Ubul iOu and then killed' him: ; ' V'-i J' IT lit bUV7 UttlTf ITU fc TT ' J" 1U VUOj and say that Bill Jones went there to rob? He was no. pauper orbeg gar, owned a good farm, good house; not inlneed of money. - Will any one, even among thbse who come here to laugh at unjust, reflections upon the ladies 6f the stricken fam ily, dare say that .Bui J ones , went there to rob ; for money ?. Why should Bill and Frank divided, the booty T , They; lived at tne . ame place, and, according to btate, wore going home together, and could di vide afterwards. .Testimony,' how ever, is that frpm.above three chest" nuts, on the mountain, tracks di vid-ed.'goiiig'downnd-'U the;;" moun tain, down to Hay woodtthers eTse ivhe showing that the'murterert belonged to 4ifferentamilies.T hw accounts ' for division of jxboty'; just before their 9ep,aVatlau.i;UDQnV get'tuafTjRESeif: eminittea this murder,. stoe Tthe phoney at the house and afterrfafds divided it; and say whether defendants could have been the guilty part'. .' -The Solicitor will argue, if thooe men could go and murder, they would rob ; hut he can not convince you that these men. raised as they were and have been one scarcely 21 years of age. could go' ' and- commit such a deed for robbery.- New in crime, don't you know they were seized with indescribable terror, the very minute after committing the mur der, it-they did itjf and seeing the blood dripping from their victims, can it be possible that they slopped to hunt for money' or. booty? that they stopped at chestnuts to look at the fire," or divide booty? Never, never n tney nacr Deen steepeu in crime since childhood, had been used to sight of blood" and bloody victims, they might have hunted for money, but being unused to such, these men could not , hav stopped. If you can find reasonable hypoth- tses consistent witn innocence oi these men, your duty, as I have said is to acquit. Is hot the view I have stated a reasonable and more than probable one? Think a mbment. Suppose after these men are in their graves, some one back in the moun tains in Haywood, or elsewheve, makes a dying confession of mur dering Joyces;, for their money, in connection with others, who also confess, and deliver up clothingand other property of the family. Would you feel that the confessions of these parties in tne mountains were falser Could you say that the testimony of the jail birds, and others' testifying in tins case,"1iad so firmly' establish ed the guilt of the defendants a to disprove the truth of the supposed confessions? Would you not realize that you had given to shadows of suspicion the weight and force of substantial proof? Heaven help you, gentlemen, to escape su.-n an unhappy dilemma. State charged that Bill Jones had a motive to commit this crime. Now as to motive: All acts follow motive. There . must be motive for every piece of human conduct; sometimes acts are out of proportion to motive, owing to disordered mindf &c, but whether motive be great or small, the act must be shown to have fol lowed the motive, or proof of motive is worthless. State admits the weak ness of this feature of the case. They antr Dill TAnno orcia crk o irnoorl iwr the Rice matter, that he and Frank determined to kill her to prevent her testifying against his son. Tes timony shows Jones had been satis fied with Rice matter long before the killing.- x "' Col. Lusk asked if Jones was sat isfied by Jonathan Morgan, why did he run to Tiny Howard, and others, while as a fact, he -saw Tiny and others before his last talk with Mor gan, whm he became satisfied. : Douglass Carter; says, no matter what nature of offense was, the question is, how did Jones regard it. ., I accept this. Col. Lusk said, offense was a pen itentiary offense, but he does notv tell you that Jones so knew : or thought. The ''proof is,' he did hot.' .Then Jones must be treated as having regarded the matter a small affair. - Again ; why should Jones destroy Mary Rice, who knew riot the boy and could'nt identify him, and leave Jona than Morgan who knew the fact, and Coller Morgan, who knew the boy? Jones could'nt have5 thoughts that - to destroy thi.s ' woman, would . be to "de; stroy the evidence, fs this not so? Jonathan swears he told Jones that he, Jonathan, could not identify the; boy, but did not tell him Collier could. No evidence, J that '. Jones; knew Collier could identify the boy he never heard that Cdllief could, nd; consequently, when Jonathan Morgan assured ' him he could not and would not f identify him,he was satisfied. - ; v" ' State was surprised at Bill- Jones' statement on the staiid, admitting" all it had been charged he had' said to Stated witnesses about this mat', ter; that he was uneasy, was aroused angry,; &c. Why. surprised? Jones told the truth and it" cannot hurt him. He heard from, Wit3aniler, on the 27th February ihrougb Tay lor.thatifthe tfoy could be identified; the case could be made out, and if got Jnto court, it might ruin his (Jones') family-. .Could; the toy be identified?,; That was the only ques tion. The very next day; he: went to Jonathan Morgan nd was sol emnly assured that the boy eould not be j identjfiedTiTMs , -satisfied Jones' and the " trouble ;w as; at' an end. I defy State - to show ; that Jones ever said . one word against this woman, after this last talk with J OhatnanT morgan -it wag some month from this : last" talk - to' the murder. , Why should h bejex cited?. GentlcEaan, Jones told you tha truth on the stand. Everyword uttered by Jones, was between 18th aild 28th 6t Pebruarvi- videnoA of the fahiily is Jones did -not: hear of this trouble mrr eeveral days ' after the 18thr;Soithat,yotf'Bee;,the whole difficulty was embraced withhi less than ten dayst The- iVruth ' is, the only feat Jos 6s ever had'waaf on the 27th when ITaylot' brought word from Candler and that was removed on the next day when he saw Jona than Morgan BuVSays the: State, Jones was afraid th affair . would bringdisgraci -on his familv; cDid he not know ?thfl ."'disgrace, had rewy : peialiei them"- Kumpr had eaf ried it far and wide. r-Jone is Cgg8efl-.-4f &ader,xbnt- jiobody accuses him of beini?tQoL:All the disgrace ws inflicted that could be; a trial would lwve. viiwficat' d ;h s sou, whom he .believed iun-Kien!, Jones knew it; knew . that killing Mary Rice would not help things; But State says, wet-k before deed, Joins said t. Taylor, lyou need hot be uivapy, don't think the case will have to go to court.' What else could he have said ? He had infor- m-itioii! that the way could not be identified jhe could not have thouhtl nI,-s W .business, the case could g 3 to court. Heotthei; fir8t hllk'. loiX U6f elr fwn a message though that very man that very day from Mary. Rice that she would not carry the case to court; all she desired was that the boy should be corrected. She .did not say what amount ol correction, did not demand he should han up and cowhide the boy, but such cor rection as he . thought proper, that? was - all . she.- demanded. Yet, you are told that, rather than correct the boy, Jones would go and kill this whole family. It is not true, it cannot be true. It is con trary to all human experience. But they say he made threats. Did he me.tn to say to Joyce's -sonm-law. Taylor, "I mean to kill Mary Rice?'' Do men on murder bent, proclaim it to the world? It cannot be. Bill Joaes made no threats; he only meant, in all that he said to Tiny Howard, James Rutherford and Tay lor, that Mary Rice could not testify again3t his son, for that she had told stories on his family, and could not become a witness in court Perhaps he was not right as a mat ter; of law," but that is what he though'fe. ' In spying th'at Mary Rice had a grudge against tits family and told stories off them before, he wan t ed to break off the sharp edge of the report against his son, and thereby render it as harmless as possible. Was it not natural he should haye desired to satisfy his neighbors of the malice, and enmity of the wo man who circulated the damaging reports against his son? He want ed to maintain the respect of his neighbor"-. ' ' Law books don't place very great importance on threats. (Reads from Wharton on Homicide, chapter xx, nam graphs 531,693.) Witnesses who snatch fragments from conversations are not to be be lieved, unless they show the con nection in which the fragments stand. What words mean, depends on their relation to other words used in the eame conversation. Let me show 7 Jones -y h-xve said ''She shall never testify agaiust me, hut suppose he added, ''because she is a liar, a bad character, and I can break down her testimony." The first words might, standing 'alone, mean something, but when they are seen in the light of the other words, they become : harmless. A man makes a threat to-day, and regents to-morrow. Attach all the import ance to threats you may. let them grow as large, as lofty as Pisgah, yet if Jones repented, for Heaven's sake, give . him credit for it. 'Let not el oquence of counsel, clouds ;of suspi ion, prevent him from having the benefit of his repentance. J Ie tells the court and you, that after the conversations in which it is claimed he. made threap ho saw Jona than Morgan, aud became v satisfied and never afttrv. arls uttered one wor J that .looked likorar threat- ; Can h6 have no credifor this? - Men may make" threabV, and 1 MfterwnTds not only repent, but do acts of kindness to those threatened: We see this every day' "-Bat -poor Bill Jones can not be allowe 1 to changtj his mind. If Jones desired to kill the woman Jie would h'avo sought a more fi vorable oppoi tunity ., Men ii nused to crime would: not kill a -whole family when thy ; only had enmity against one. The human heart does not turn black in the twinkling of an eye." It grows corrupt by slower degrees. - A - man "engaged" in pur suits of honest endeavor, with most pleasant and elevating surroundings cannot at once bring himself to commit such a'' crime? - And; even if a father could do this, could he go to a young and innocent son, whom he was' led in tho patlis of virtue and recti tude-'-could . he approach him, and persuade him tojoin .in this bloody . work? Imagination : is fl igh iy, it can go 'to bounds of uni verse and come back in a twinkling, but you cannot by - any flight of yourj imaginations: conceive how Jones, would have looked, and talked to his son when asking him to join in such terrible work as this. ; ;T ; Without . a motive, defendants could not have done much. His Honor will tell you a motiye must be shown; and, ; proving that does not help to shoy th? corpus tlelicti. That must behnwn by indepeod ent proof. . The Stattj bUmU out expecting to show: 1st; That thefcoUse was burned down . and; the:- Tlfople killed by violent inchni. ? w ' - ; ' Hd: The defnUjti Kad a saffi- tcient tmtlv tlo; It3 - oarnw iwy nw w oppona nitV to d;P; -VI J -; fth That iJlfy-yid It. I have sai 1 .ferjt little as to the corpus delicti; i i Is ;n-t ft matter of detenflf. t!t. burden i on the State. I haver argued ha view that the crime if an v. was the work of robbers..; 1 have argued to show there was u-a otive enough, not enough even U.lku the , life of a prteeyedVljf .jkead'Jrtrn horse. 1 shall argoe that these defen dants had no opportunity to killlhe deceasBdi 'MtirAtdL do itJmiiZ,-- ' sThe Stalay- thatHia: was raining and while Jevefybody ; else was in doors, these menswent to the nHMiutain, ostensibly to work at boards, staid up there. until dusk, slipped around'i mile to Joyce's killed the family and returned home by the board pile, through the boN t mi over the crooked path. Jtiilson Morgan . worked all day, John Thrash traveled around all poetic language, is 'busted.' Judson allowed, to earn brca but these men. must not Frank was at work at Rhodes'- place until 12; it rained, and Frank started home. Wot. and others proposed, to go and carry Frank's dinner and help him work, but they met him, and all returned. Do you believe there was any pur pose before this to go to the board pile that day and comknit murder? They all expected to work at, Rhodes' place all day. ,Wm. and othere started to ioin Frank,- and Tut tor the rain that brought Frank back before the others got to that place. they would not have seen the board pile that day at all. Bill Jones did notsuggest going to board pile, it was not hi3 matter, it .was Frank's: and so Frank asked his father and Burgin to go with him and help get out the board timber. Do you be lieve there was any thought of mur der before this, or up to this lime? All idea of previous preparation or premeditation is exploded by these plain facts. All the family testify that Burgin was along and went to toe board pile, yet State argues be lot along. .Don t let any one say -these ladies w.l not tell the troth, ; "Because they are connected. Counsel's attempt to prove Burgin not along that day, utterly disre gards and sets aside the testimony of these go-d women. Gentlemen may try to turn back time and deny us the benefit of our own honest ev idence to establish our innocence, but in Heaven's name, they can not they shall not succeed. If we fol low flights of oratory of counsel, lis ten to the diction and license of ar gument, we will get away from the merits of this case. This is a bui nesscase. They endeavor to prove Burgin was not there, because he said he went up60 yards, and Frank said they went up vu yards above board pile . Burgin was not there, and therefore this alibi falls to the ground. Counsel could appeal to the Apostles to prove truth of dis crepancies, but they give us no ben efit of discrepancies. When r.thev wish to reconcile and sustain per juries and inconsistencies of jail birds, they marshal the four good apostles; but a discrepancy on our part, immaterial though it be, it is absolute proof of guilt. - Burgin says' he was there and was bare footed, witnesses say they saw no bare-foot tracks. They were not looking for' hare-foot tracks; they had seen no" bare-footed people at burning.- Burgin savs he handled maul, bolted some 15 cuts. Frank says bolted "8 or 10. . And on this discrepancy the truth fully : inconsistent. apostles are. again sent; to t the ; rear; our "witnesses must be mistaken, - because was -not reasonable for them fo remember inci dents of that, particular evening. JBut forfact these views are argued by learn ed counsel, 1 would have treated this as all bosh. ; Borgih was there, all re membered "it, went barefooted he swore he had on no shoes. . . - - Burgin was- there. Had he gone to; help- kill.' the Joyces, his . feet would .have blooded from board pile the inound at every step over the rough hand of those mountains. Had they left him at board pile while they were gone to the murder he would have died in that hell of loneliness and - darkness. Burgin would!! not .have remained there for a '.thousand ; worlds, and had he gone with his father and Frank, their guilt would not now be a matter ofdoubt.Yousaw gentlemen, that Bur. gin is only removed a step from idiocy. He showed it in every look, and in every word ; and yet, in his simplicity, you saw the evidence of his truthful, ness. Bill Jones, intelligent, shrewed, experienced, would not have carried Burgin along if he had gone ' there to kill never L He certainly carried him along j all swear if. ; If he did commit murder, and Burgin was with - him, I would advise tny clients to submit , at once, and be hanged ; for if acquitted now, Burgin wilt soon tell all he knows and convict :;the '.defendants in the near future when they shall be put on trial for killing the other's. You know, gentXernen, these men are" only on trial now; for the alleged'murder of . Mary Rice. AFTERNOON SESSION. Court met pucraaat to Capt Outer resumed his argument la Lrciiau ui me aerenae: ' I think I was at the board nil arith Burgin Jona when we adjourned: the owm was mere wimout nna l was orff ine that Hoiria waa there, akinninv off hia atMea; But aaya it too early to begin tbe aUaninir praxat. btate inaisto tii people at uie board pile, went from tha pila oyer to Joyce's, eame back by the pile and went home. Does it not aeem nuuveiousiy strange, If thev determined to commit u urder. thev would sea to th piUatall? Why go within milea of Joyce a, epena nair day. Barely it would be found out they were there. Why so A. il I 1 n vara .... w torn Doara pue f w ny juu tneae peo ple the day ;they were there; why be in vicinity; why go by Moigan'a, where they would be aeen by the whole Monran (amity; why g with jwch publicity, &. ii cowaraiy, ?ecre muraer part or tne purpose ? 1mC i it not aeem if these peo tla iyintx m nltwrl thui. h wumM hm etre.np meonc roao, , up toe Ta"m4 on iSps tiea, Tiarned epos hard ground aqd reacbod the hoese inU&ia way 7 1 itnotmam-lftualy airaogj,if Uwy had uturOer m lUr iuidca tlwy oTiould have gone to ttio board pile at all T W by not have aoaf trudef loverul luIiiT It ouia not baruioiH wtin the tlieory worked up by the deicctive. ilo nuint nave iImui tnere on a traiuy iUv, luive Uiem at the board pile, have litem t;oiu up; if uuta.) theae, their cm fall?; fur u n .t uvery link is cuuti'li-io, ilia case Lie urtt Unk id uiiasiii'; that n WAd sacli a rainy day the ieoj I-j were not at w i n.. JuJjun .Morgan wike I ail djy. t hey itun must have tb?ui at the l ard ib-, and carry them buck to thu pilf; then absence ol tracks w unni crt atc auuthr taBi .iu link. Tne detective uli necesiy of having tracks leading from the board pile; with out ihtwe, thts' case falls. 1 a ill show the detective forged tracks. Kotv what tracks were itoing from pile? Clin Starues aud James Miller, both good men, looked fur tracts. Went from the gap to tbe pile, uiatie a circle around; the only tracks tbey taw u ere the tracks of two men going up the hoi lu wand return ing tha-aiue way. Both wiine b swore Bouie thing. How tho counsel toiled to make wiuieas tuy thedu tracks were going in direction oi Joyce's, wueu m fact they were gjiug aiiuost directly tiouth while Joyce's wad alui wt West IroJi the pile. Thecie eopitt wut to work, and got home bv duak. i'Ue burden id uotonua to bhow uu we did not go lrom the pile, but burden on tl:e SmU- to diiow we did. The prisoners concede thv-y were at the board pile, and admit uia'ting tracks go-1 iug abu ivtuiuuui, admit making tracks up tne lioliow to tne true lroiu which tbe cu id were goiteu. Tliese tracks were made by these men in going utter cuts; il not, why divi not the State show it. If any -doubt, why did not Cling warned go bacK ana circle around again aud see it these" tracks weui be youd the tree where tuey g t the Cuts if the !tate cannot hh-w traced made from the u .arlpile to Joyee'd tne cade falld. Jii'.s uiutiis id a m ot i.uporunt link iu liiis clxain; aud then another link is gone, aiid this, all guur; the detective tried to put tr.xcks a ilio s-ilt liill-aida. wad one of the triiks ol liia trade lie liitd to aply. But they nay tracks Were seen al Hie Spring, at the i:Lealuuid at the gap, some going toward liay wotl, othera elsewhere, but no tracks from there. Tracks they found were not tracks they made. Same witness aa the brogan track at the Spring was the larger of the two; after tracks got away from Spring, the brogan got shorter, t tiey tay reter Miller run oil on a cold trail; he took measure ot tho tracka lie followed, gave JJeavt r a part ' of measure he took; and yet the State forgot to put Deaver on the dtand to sho a' Miller had tied. Tlvy j may aruu to-you Miller iievl, but would nut pit Deaver up to show it Mt. liutherlord also had a int-aaurc, but wbeu he was ou the dtand and asked where wa his measure said it was at home, didn't kna it- was needed; ol course he knew it was not needed. 11 Deaver thought that measure would help bim, don't you know it would have been here? The projsejatiou.powerlul enough to employ an able array of counsel, would have had the measure be-rj it it could have helped the cade, biaie otight to have . had that measure her ; it ought not .to luive withheld anything which might throw light; ought to have asked Air. Curtis if tracks in band res.'iub'e track at the Bpiing. They preferred to ask Curtis it iracks he saw a m Jittb alter warJd reseuibkd th tracks at lheping; why not ask him if tracks made in the sand resembled tracks at the bpiing? Bat they, say the impression ol irackb made in 8 id aui mind best agency to detect Ira; kr by. This id pretty imagery ideal i.ratury,. but not facts, not s.ich facts as "would justify the bunging of men upon. What peculiarity in track at i-pring? No marked peculiarity at all all swear 1 hi.4. soma, wanted to niake it appear one traci- lonked like a long heeled boot, and a dotible-aoled boot but you all knjw many people, wear such boots. All this identity ol tiaeka is the result of ditor ted vision No man ought to have at tempted to awear to identity of tracks. Wrong to yo.i-i have done a. The S ale lo aot want yoa totmderstand the track tttnz td HaywooJ. Deaver forgot to have track! pointing toward Ilaywocd put down cn this map. . Hope you will re buke sucb attempts of axleteciive, employ ed by the governor or'others, who will i.ot bring all the ciicumstances, for or against the parties charged, and act honest men. Why did not the State put Jim KntheiforJ up. . lie saw anotner uava, tna nc propos- id to Bill Jon ft to follow it; yet, ne was not put up ; if other tracks were rhown looking suspicious it would be ruinojft to this case. The ccunsel ... argued that Jones led Kutherford away from the tract(, .hut Kutherford said nothing' of the' kind, b.it the contraiy. Let as have a ir thing about this, and let no effort be made to warp the evidence. " . '' Having s'.own the resemblance of tracks, State then was compelled to have an early fire, if jt cant get this, on this rainy day, all falls tat the ground. . They muot hjve an early fire... There were:fires in he Joyce cove higher" up, tut they wee log-heapi, which witnessea test fy ' were burning tht nieht." State introdace me witnesaea & ( burning ; but the lived miles away ; one say the fire was at 7 o'clock and others "at 8,&C..;.v.-: '- '-'"--';":. ; They must have an early burning, or an important link falls out of the chain. Now we introduce VS wit nesses,; aM i ing within an average diotanee of t miles, and every one put the tiro' late t night. Thene u(m neighbors, donbU 1 number, can Bee ad welt as othera living milesotf, with ridge8 between. A link is missing. The State's connsef appeals to Deaver to belpj Deaver does best he can -"can't yon argue the link all right?f Therefore, they insist that the fire burn ed alt night; but, this' argument is unjust to State's witnessed -who eaw it earlier. Hominy witnessea and other, 8ay they raw the bright burning ar 9 o'clock, and if it had been the hotue, yoa knom the home would ba been cutaawnrd before otu witneaaej aould nave soar it. . Tote fair with your witnefsea, Deaver; aceeoe the truth as it is, and Bay the fir ws late at night True, it wilt be eoaemSav " that the prisoners at the beard ptke or " Burgin with them, or Frank mad trm& A farrow are of, agnUaoit and destroy a the usefulneae of ai alibi. Q tlemen, come up and admit you catt not ' get aroand the testimony of McEJwr, Hampton, Luther and Mac Andaraort. , Thev eay these nartiea mavjttA ' seen it unttt late. Got Davidaoa ap-pae ciated this feature, and argnnl-'aa. rhu witneene may have Been the fire. Ther have to show an eail h. t tbe men went from and the hoard pile and home eaily. They ; are obliged b prove that the men at ttio board pile did thia deed, for if thev did noa. th tu.t'. caee fa 11a. I am tired of the track imvi. neaa, am aorry a rretmi tahlt- rnt!kniM came in here aod rwoi been hw reaeraDie tracics ttto u i b uiu, W btii life ia at stake. Wo Yrri. l -FlL be permitted ;ia a 3.70.4, itn -alf Kanaacuos, out sot where- human- liieid . InyolyedV-'1 h,,:- ' -.. : -AVe eay tits .fire o-'d fate al.ttlffbC. ' khereCoraii iaimriui.) whefi uirauU'' If Mrs. Jon and (aoi'y are t bjejfc.-liev-. edi tbry got home by dusk. . Tftii i jm bdaweed the : vnmuni'ty,' alV et talking about it, acd,tho people uaturalt uau uir lu'DUd nxea u current cxeure. l'ul ihtt elate eaa these neonle urn mU. taken, ibvy 4,pig-traek." each other. Now i Would like lot some ono to uatent anmn thing to-' change tho expression, when dusk isrnoani,., Mrs. Joaes said dusk; all knew what that meant. And thn family all simply use the'elmpliei't word.to con vey aapuea oi tne tune, unmeet familiar expression to designate it. Annimeut against this shows the poverty of tho case. None date to impeach the charac ter of Mrs. Jones and daughter?, who am known; but they endeavor to have them set aside, and because they are related. ana upon testimony or jail birds. These ladiep say these men got home at dusk, read the newspapers, went to bed. If you believe their testimony yoa are bound to acquit. 1 am not begging lot tbtm on reasmaLle- doubt. I declare to vou the onlv thinw n& rarth in this case is bare suspicion. 1 rue, they bring in M rs Jones remark to Mrs Mor gan and tbe remark of Miss Lula to TVlc- Afee, brcught in here un gallantly, and these idle remarks and expected to break down their solemn statements under oath. If Jones committed this deed, they did it late in night ' They ceuld not have done it and gone three miles and gotten home at the time proven they did. What are the sus picions against the Jones'? only that Jones nan an unpleasantness with Alarv Kice- some time before this. , The State relies on the fact that Frank was seen going over and trying t put out the tracks. Toolrauch iuipoitance is at tached to the efforts of a timid man t do that which may remove circumstance which might - direct suspicion t them. Innocent neoDle tfien leave home because some circumstances poiut to to them, arc suspicious and le jr cuare. (Refers tv Boone. ""Briggs and Metcalf.) w no knows what motive frank, a voung man of good character, and knowing Jud Morgan, an enemy, was on his track, lia 1 1 and he may have acted the fool and gone and tried to put out his tracks : hut I do n it believe it. I deny that he did it, the ev. dence proves he did not. The boos are full of instances I have discribed: (Read 3 Wharton on Hoinicid.-s Chapter 20 ) What I have read may apply wi li special force to the conduct of W. If. and Frank Jones, the law books .treat -such circum stances almost with 'contempt ; yet in all this ose, all suspicion against them hi in volved in tie circumstances of rubbing hands, ind sighing, &c., which some thought su picious, others not ced as usual habits. And these things are brought in here seri ously, as most irrpoitant evidence of guilt, I reject it an with con:empt, and belie v -ieve. t. it you will. If this fire took place 1. te at night, makts no oiffercnce about those tracks Had Frank been guilty, md his counsel the able engineers wc were said to be he could have come in, said, "es, 'I did go up there; I st.rtd to- J yce'n, then con- . eluded to return home; 1 ui-de lhxc Hacks Monday nurning." 11 w easi y for him to have saij this, and .ustained ni i self? But not having been there; he pre e-ied to stand upon .the t uth. while i. his inno cence, knowing it wo .ld be tharg d. We put witn sses on sta..d tho ing a ties could n -t be re.ogniztd at distance, and shnweJit by repu able gentlemen; b..t the counsel for the State show d unia-rueod in sayin-f th y lecognized "old man Enoch,", so.nc Ooo ards off. No witness Raul any. thing of the so t. said nothing about 600 yards. I Cxd Walton's ttblin.ony which show.-. t!)cy were near footlo instead of at railrocd v .en recog lijcd Enoch Morgan. The couusel i their zeal ti.l iu testimony -not given by witnesses, and you have to be careful in reine.nberin what witnessc-i testify jud- a.d Salile said they siw Frank bar they-were just mistaken It they don t seeall things, it .throws suspi cion on what they pro 'ess. to ee. Kill ones went to Joyce s Saturday morning y way of the bottom. and iurrow. Jud went along Saturday 1elore Joi es di.t, kaw-lhem Sunday, but Saw no disturban. o in the tracks between S. turday and Sunday, bat between SuntLiy an 1 Monday. Ju i Mid . not see Jones' tracks made on. Satuid.y, but he had said Frank made sonu, th?re, fore he was there Monday. Now if UW wa there -Saturd iy, Fr.nk' weat iksr ' Monday; vice versa; Of Jud hss told a st-v-i ry. - -". If Jud U so near-sighted and interested he culd not sie Bill Jone's track maile in Saturday, when you see him anJ his coii--: duct on" stand and t therwis -, notwirh standing his personal gjod ci act r, hi testimony, where life ard death is involved . must be taken with tnuhy grains of allow s" ance. . '''..-.' ' : ."...-,'.'-'.. "".' Jack Mint j started out to awear a tie, but had not the courage to stick ie it Who put him up to it? He lives witb Jud Morgan; Jud had to be sustained;' and Jack bad to be put up to awear a ie A man who would put a (nan . up- to do , such work, I care nut how gJ- a chit-, acler he pan prov i base enough to wear twntytive'Ji?. Now who put ' ?'iot up to do thU swearing? This viwiauapicioh upon all such testimony. ' vff our testimony that jJpU c Mld.n t : f. others at that distau -e, is not '. , v - did net the S:at so vt a,nd ; 4. . i i tried again, ail .tuay r c 5 r reoognrse anotfier trout H r , :ain. The Ur jwd detective i better t-han t t d i thU; h-t ? testimony juU lo jfjiuuM ten. .They say litee re-jog. j :.es g in acros the bottom Mnre. Kiee saw Jones leave - a'l '-nrf from biahom- to , r Lk. ?w biai , . -. w " V ; tl ) tlwublful Urct.Uitanj, c y-- 14 l -.luior.y, a i i boj it -1 1 iv. t lj J a reasoniile d nibt. " " . ; j lia.i much t9 say about early break- CONTlSVin t V.M'RTH HAOE.
Asheville Citizen (Asheville, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
March 28, 1886, edition 1
1
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75