Barnes v. State

• Decision Date: 01 January 1874
• Citation: Barnes v. State, 41 Tex. 342 (Tex. 1874)
• Parties: BARNES v. THE STATE.
• Court: Texas Supreme Court

41 Tex. 342

BARNES

v.THE STATE.

Supreme Court of Texas.

1874.

APPEAL from Harrison. Tried below before the Hon. M. D. Ector.

Mrs. Barnes was charged with the murder of her husband, in the county of Harrison, on the 4th day of February, A. D. 1874.

On the morning of the day on which the murder was committed, Barnes was seen quite drunk in a grocery, in company with a negro about five feet seven inches high, who was sober. Barnes being unable to walk, was carried to his home by this negro, assisted by one of the witnesses. On reaching Barnes' home, he “fell in, or was put in,” and was left by the witness lying on the floor, helplessly drunk, being unable to stand. After getting Barnes into his house, the negro said to the witness, “You can go now; I will take care of him,” whereupon the witness departed, leaving Barnes, his wife, and the negro shut up in the room, and its only occupants. This occurred before noon on the day of the murder. Though more than one witness saw the negro with Barnes in the morning of the murder, none of those who saw him seem to have known him.

About noon, William Wilson, who occupied a sleeping room adjoining the house occupied by Barnes and his wife, had occasion to enter his sleeping room, when he heard what he termed “a rumpus” in the room occupied by Barnes. This witness heard Mrs. Barnes cry out “Murder! Murder!” and at the same time another voice said, “Oh, hush!” After hearing this, the witness listened, and heard what he termed a heavy “thud” and muffled conversation in the Barnes house, but could not distinguish the words. Wilson after this left his room and went to his place of business, some sixty yards distant, where, seeing a policeman named Young, he informed him of the difficulty, and advised him to go to the house. Young went to within thirty yards of the house, and continued to watch it for some time, during which he observed Mrs. Barnes come out “more than three times” with a basket and pick up chips. No one else came out of the house during the period it was watched by Young, which was more than half an hour.

Frank Poe, a negro, testified that on the day of the murder he was passing the Barnes house. When at the distance of thirty yards from it, he heard sounds of strife proceeding from the house. The noise was loud and violent, but he could not distinguish the words. He advanced toward the door, and heard a woman's voice say, “Put down that axe,” and afterwards a man's voice say, “Oh, oh,” after which all was still and the witness left. Some time during the evening of the same day, a number of witnesses who had learned that Barnes had been murdered visited his house; but there is nothing in the record to disclose when, how, or by whom the murder was first discovered. On entering the house they found Barnes still lying on the floor at the place where he had been left by those who took him to his house. His head was nearly severed from the body, a pool of coagulated blood was seen on the floor, and an axe, on the blade of which was also found coagulated blood. In the floor, under Barnes' neck, was found a cut or mark, which seemed to have been made with an axe. Mrs. Barnes was sitting in a chair, in the same room, the fixtures and furniture of which were found in disorder. Her person bore marks of violence, her eyes were much bruised, the sight of one, which was bloody, being much endangered. Her neck and side also bore marks of violence, which, in the opinion of one witness, could only have been inflicted by a strong man. The body of Barnes was cold. On the bed clothing was found the mark of a bloody hand, and the bloody mark of a man's thumb on the door.

William Wilson, who was among the witnesses who entered the room, exclaimed on seeing the dead man, “Great God, what is this?” to which Mrs. Barnes replied, ““It was that negro.” Being asked “what negro?” she said, “That man Henry Jones or Jones Henry that was here this morning.” She stated that he had attempted to ravish her, and had then murdered her husband. At this point she was advised to see a lawyer, and to say nothing more about the matter until she could obtain his advice.

The defendant offered to prove on the trial, by one Friday Sharp, that he knew a black negro about five feet seven inches high named Henry Smith, who, on the evening of the day on which Barnes was killed, called upon the witness to borrow money, and stated that he was compelled to leave the country, and that he had not since been seen. The objection of the District Attorney to this evidence was sustained, and defendant excepted.

Mrs. Barnes was found guilty of manslaughter, and her punishment assessed at three years' imprisonment in the State penitentiary.

W. S. Coleman, for appellant.

George Clark, Attorney General, for the State.

MOORE, ASSOCIATE JUSTICE.

To justify a conviction upon circumstantial evidence alone, the facts relied upon must be absolutely incompatible with the innocence of the accused, and incapable of explanation upon any other reasonable hypothesis than that of guilt.

Whatever suspicion may be aroused against appellant by some of the facts disclosed in the record, and although her conduct may not have been entirely consistent in all respects with what we may think it should have been, if the theory of her counsel furnishes the correct explanation of the transaction, still, when all the facts as now presented are calmly and dispassionately considered, we are clearly of the opinion they are insufficient to warrant, beyond all reasonable doubt, the belief that appellant is guilty of the offense of which she has been convicted. Indeed, whatever conclusion may be justified by a more full and satisfactory development of the facts and circumstances connected with and throwing light upon the transaction, which may probably result from another trial, the evidence as set forth in the record is less capable of explanation and more incompatible with the supposition of appellant's guilt than her innocence.

The deceased was carried home “before noon” of the day on which he was killed (a nearer approximation of the time is unfortunately not given) in a helpless state of intoxication. He was so drunk that he could not stand up; was put in or fell into his house; and was left by the witness who assisted in carrying him home lying flat on the floor, with both doors of the house closed. There were in the house with him when left by this witness appellant and a negro, who had been seen with him several times during the morning, and who had assisted in carrying him home.

Who this negro was, where he lived, when he left the house, what became of him, or what connection or acquaintance he had with appellant or her husband, is not shown.

Two witnesses testify to hearing in the house what one of them calls a “rumpus” and the other “sounds of strife,” which he says were loud and violent, though at the distance he was from the house at first he could not distinguish any words; but when he went nearer he heard some one in a woman's voice say, “Put down that axe,” and then in a man's voice the words, “““Oh!” “Oh!” The other witness says he heard appellant cry out, “Murder!” “““Murder!” and at the same time a voice saying, “Oh, hush!” and shortly afterwards a heavy thud, which, from other evidence, we think, was most probably the sound produced by the striking of the axe upon the floor when the death blow was given. This “rumpus” was heard by the witness while in his sleeping-room, where he went, he says, “about twelve o'clock noon.” The time when the “sounds of strife” were heard by the other witness is not stated. It is therefore only a matter of inference that the testimony of these witnesses has reference to the same transaction. Unless, however, the strife heard by the one was before the other went to his sleeping-room, it would seem most probable to be the same, as another witness, we may infer from his testimony, would also have...