Sarah v. The State

• Citation: 28 Ga. 576
• Parties: SARAH (a slave). vs. THE STATE.
• Decision Date: 30 June 1859
• Court: Supreme Court of Georgia

28 Ga. 576

SARAH (a slave). vs. THE STATE.

Supreme Court of the State of Georgia

JUNE TERM, 1859.

Indictment for an attempt to poison, in Harris Superior Court. Tried before Judge Worrill, at April Term, 1859.

Sarah, a negro woman slave, the property of Benjamin Williams, was indicted for feloniously, unlawfully andmaliciously furnishing, giving and administering "a certain poison, to-wit, three grains of strychnine and arsenic, knowing them to be deadly poison, to one John Williams, with intent then and there, him the said John Williams wilfully, unlawfully, feloniously and of malice aforethought, then and there to poison, kill and murder."

The defendant pleaded not guilty, and the following is a brief of the evidence:

Evidence for the State.

John Williams testified, that on the 6th October, 1858, he ate breakfast at the house of Benjamin Williams, his father, with the family, took a piece of meat, fried ham, on his plate and ate it, it tasted very bitter, his father also took a mouthful and said it was poisoned; rose from the table and told all to eat no more of it; witness did not suppose it was so; by this time had taken a cup of coffee, Which he found more bitter than the meat; witness rose from the table and left; also took a mouthful of bread, which was also bitter; the other members of the family complained that the victuals had a bitter taste, two were made sick; then a piece of bread, the same witness ate of, was given to a dog, piece as large as his fist, and before the dog finished eating half of it he died, dropped dead in his tracks; immediately after eating, witness became sick at the stomach, not much so; there was a burning sensation, felt weakened and relaxed in his limbs, so much so that he could not stand up, and had no use of himself. Sarah, the prisoner, was the cook, cooked the breakfast that morning, she did not eat anything; his father asked asked her if she drew water that morning, she replied she did not, for she did not have time to do it; does not know where she got the water, heard her say she got the water, out of the well bucket, she cooked breakfast with, but did not draw it.

William Nelson testified that he being informed that Mr. "Williams\' family was poisoned, went over and found "Doctor Fonville there, who had given them medicine, all seemed to be quite sick; saw the dog at the kitchen door, dead; the doctor, after giving the medicine, went to where Sarah, the prisoner was, and beckoned to witness to come to him; told witness she had confessed that she had white powders, and would go and look for them; went with them to the gin house lot, where prisoner took from under the bottom rail of the fence, a paper with white powder in it. The doctor opened the paper and tasted it, showed it to witness, he has kept it ever since, (produced in court, and swore that it was the same paper of powders that prisoner took from under the fence) recollects that she said it was the remainder of the powders.

Dr. Hatchell testified that he had examined the powders produced by Mr. Nelson in court; heard Williams describe his symptoms, thinks they were produced by strychnine, thinks the powders are strychnine, examined them the day the family were poisoned; strychnine is a deadly poison.

James G. Smith testified that about 7th October last, hearing that Williams' family were poisoned, he went over and found several of the family sick, saw the dead dog; did not hear the prisoner confess that she poisoned the family; when interrogated whether she did the poisoning, she would say that Howell was there the night before. Witness asked her what part of the breakfast was poisoned, she replied the bread, meat, coffee and all were poisoned.

Evidence for the Defence.

William Howell testified that he was at the house of Benjamin Williams the night before his family were poisoned, he drew a bucket of water that night and put strychnine and arsenic in it; no one saw him do it, it was about one or two o'clock at night; did not tell Sarahhe was going to put the poison in the bucket. He had given Sarah poison before to put in the bucket, but she would not do it; did not tell her he was going to put the poison in the bucket.

Upon this testimony and under the charge of the court, the jury found the defendant guilty.

Counsel for prisoner moved the Court for a new trial on the following grounds:

First. Because the Court erred in allowing said slave to be tried by a jury taken from the grand jury list, notwithstanding counsel for prisoner consented thereto.

Second. Because the jury after being out sometime, were, by consent of the Solicitor General and counsel for the prisoner, brought into court, and the court, both counsel consenting, read over the testimony as taken down on the trial.

Third. Because the witness Nelson stated portions of prisoner's confessions after he had stated that he had heard that she had been whipped that morning by her master for the offence, counsel for prisoner remarking at the time that at the proper time he would move to withdraw said testimony from the consideration of the jury, but did not make the motion.

Fourth. Because of newly discovered evidence, which was not known to prisoner's counsel until after the trial.

Fifth. Because when the witness, Nelson, was about to state what Dr. Fonville said when he examined the powders, prisoner's counsel objected. The Solicitor General replied that he went into the trial under the impression that Dr. Fonville was in court, but that he had just been informed that he had gone home, six or eight miles off.

The presiding Judge remarked that he would continue the case if he desired it, when counsel for prisoner consented that the witness might state what Dr. Fonville said, remarking that he would admit the evidence rather than have the case continued. "Whereupon the witnessstated that Dr. Fonville tasted the powders and said that it was bitter, and handed them to witness.

Sixth. Because the verdict is against the weight of evidence.

Seventh. Because the sentence pronounced upon the prisoner, by the Court, is more severe than authorized by the evidence.

Eighth. Because after the witness Howell had been examined and confessed that he put the poison in the well bucket, the court suspended the proceedings, and in the presence of the jury, sentenced witness for the crime "of attempting to procure a negro to commit the crime of poisoning." (Howell having been previously convicted, at the same term, of said offence.) The Judge remarking to him that he intended to sentence him to five years imprisonment in the penitentiary, but after bis open and bold confession, he would sentence him for seven years, and if he had the authority he would sentence him for fifty years.

The Court when charging the jury, remarked: "Gentlemen, a word in reference to the testimony of the witness, William Howell, introduced in behalf of the defendant; he has confessed his guilt of the most diabolical crime known to the laws of society, it is for you to attach such credit to his evidence as you in your judgment may think it deserves."

After argument, the Court overruled the motion for a new trial, to which decision counsel for the prisoner excepted, and assigns the same as error. The counsel for prisoner filed the following further exceptions to the rulings and decisions of the court:

That the court erred in reading over to the...