15 So. 352 (Ala. 1894), McNeill v. State

Citation:15 So. 352, 102 Ala. 121
Opinion Judge:McCLELLAN, J.
Party Name:MCNEILL v. STATE.
Attorney:Saml. B. Browne and Henry Tonsmeire, for appellant. Wm. L. Martin, Atty. Gen., for the State.
Case Date:April 11, 1894
Court:Supreme Court of Alabama

Page 352

15 So. 352 (Ala. 1894)

102 Ala. 121




Supreme Court of Alabama

April 11, 1894

Appeal from city court of Mobile; O. J. Semmes, Judge.

William McNeill was convicted of murder in the first degree, and appeals. Affirmed.

The evidence for the state, as shown by the bill of exceptions, tended to show that on the morning of September 3, 1893, Catherine McNeill, the wife of defendant, was found dead in her bed in Mobile county, with a wound made by an axe on the right side of her head, just above the right ear, and that an axe was found on the bed near her body. The evidence further tended to show that the deceased went to bed about 11 o'clock on the night of the 2d of September, 1893; that there was sleeping in the same room with the deceased, but in a different bed, the niece and nephew of deceased, 14 and 12 years of age, respectively; that deceased took nothing to her room with her when she went to her room that night, except her baby and hat; that, some time before day, the niece awoke, and saw the defendant leaving the room hastily, and heard him run down the stairs leading from the room; that the niece immediately went back to sleep, and heard or saw nothing more until she was awakened in the morning. It was further shown by the evidence for the state that the deceased was washing for one Marvary, who had married defendant's sister, and that, on the evening before the killing, said Marvary and his wife came to the premises of deceased, and Marvary's wife asked deceased for one of Marvary's shirts, which had been left with her; that the deceased refused to give it to her, and a quarrel ensued, and, after the police were called, Marvary and his wife left the premises; that, after Marvary and his wife had gone some distance, they separated, his wife going home, and he going back to the room of deceased, where he knocked several times, and, failing to get any response, he went away; that he met defendant a short distance from the house, and had a conversation with him about some accusations made by defendant as to Marvary's relations with defendant's wife; that Marvary denied these accusations, and, after cursing defendant, went on home, arriving about 12 o'clock, and spent the rest of the night of his home. It was also in evidence that defendant had told the chief of police, and had stated on his preliminary trial, "that he was at home on the evening on which the quarrel above referred to between Marvary and his wife took place; that he started for Spring Hill shortly after Marvary and wife left the place. He proceeded a short distance, when he became suspicious, and returned to the place where his wife was; that, finding the door locked, he...

To continue reading