State v. Green

• Decision Date: 28 February 1885
• Citation: 92 N.C. 779
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court
• Parties: STATE v. JAMES GREEN.

92 N.C. 779

STATE

v.JAMES GREEN.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

February Term, 1885.

INDICTMENT for burning a gin-house, tried before Shepherd, Judge, and a jury, at Fall Term, 1884, of CUMBERLAND Superior Court.

There was a verdict of guilty, and the defendant appealed from the judgment thereon.

The facts are fully set out in the opinion.

Attorney General and T. H. Sutton, for the State .

Messrs. Z. B. Newton and W. A. Guthrie, for the defendant .

ASHE, J.

The defendant was charged with burning a gin-house, the property of C. A. Martin and another.

The indictment is as follows, to-wit: “The jurors for the State upon their oath present, that James Green and Hardy Williams, late of the county of Cumberland, on the 10th day of October, A. D. 1883, with force and arms, at and in said county, unlawfully, wilfully, maliciously and feloniously, did set fire to, and burn, a certain gin-house then and there in the possession and the property of Cyrus A. Martin and James F. Martin, with intent to destroy the same, and with intent to injure and defraud the said Cyrus A. Martin and James F. Martin, contrary to the form of the statute,” &c.

The gin-house in question was burned on a Wednesday night, about the middle of October, 1883, and was the work of an incendiary, and kerosene oil and spirits of turpentine were used by him.

The defendant was charged with the offence, arrested, indicted and tried. The evidence against him was entirely circumstantial. It was in evidence among other things that J. D. Warrel and Louis Warrel owned a steam gin about one-half of a mile from the scene of the fire, and they were not on friendly terms with the Martins, who owned the gin that was burned. They both ginned cotton for toll. That Austin McArthur and the defendant were in the employment of the Warrels in operating their gin, and the defendant had so been for some years. That, at the time of the fire, the defendant, with his wife, occupied the same house with McArthur and Roxana, his wife, which was about a half or three-quarters of a mile from the scene of the fire, and about the same distance from Warrel's gin. Louis Warrel lived about a mile and a half from Martin's gin, and from J. D. Warrel.

That, on the Wednesday evening of the fire, McArthur and the defendant, about sun-down, accompanied by one Brooks, were returning home from their work at Warrel's gin, the defendant carrying a jug of turpentine, and he was heard to whisper to McArthur something about the jug, when McArthur asked him what he was going to do with it, and defendant replied, “never mind, you will hear of the d--est racket you ever heard of to-night.” He said he got the turpentine from J. D. Warrel's turpentine still. That, when they reached home, the defendant sat on the front steps, seemed frightened, declined to eat supper, went off, and, after staying half an hour, returned and resumed his seat on the steps; and on being asked by McArthur's wife, what was the matter with him, he said, “never mind, you will know to-night by the sky being illuminated.”

Upon the discovery of the fire in the night, McArthur first went to the fire, and was soon followed by the defendant. On their return from the fire there was some conversation about a certain track near the fire which defendant said, was one of the Warrels. Before reaching the house they met their wives and McArthur and his wife discovered the smell of turpentine.

The next day, as McArthur and defendant were on the way to their work, defendant said, “I know who burnt the gin; I have got no money now, but in a few days I will give you some to keep your d_____ mouth shut.” Similar remarks were made by defendant to McArthur at the fire. This evidence was received without objection.

The State then offered to prove by Roxana McArthur, that on the morning after the fire, she heard the defendant ask his wife to lend him some money, and upon her refusal, he said, “never mind, I have no money now, but I will be d_____ if I don't have some soon, and if Arthur (meaning McArthur, who was present) would keep his d_____ mouth shut, he would let him have some.”

This testimony was objected to by the defendant, but admitted by the court, and the defendant excepted. The State proposed to prove that after the defendant was arrested and was on his way to jail, no violence having been used, nor threats made, nor inducements held out to him, upon his being informed of the charge against him, he said, “I don't care what you do, Jem and Lem Warrel have got a plenty of money, and I don't care what the h--l you do, money will keep me right.” This evidence was admitted by the Court after objection by the defendant, and he excepted.

There was then a good deal of other evidence offered by the State, tending to establish the guilt of the defendant, and among other the testimony of one Goddin, who testified that the defendant owed him some money, and about a week after the fire the defendant met him in the road and pulled out of his pocket a handful of silver, which looked like as much as five...