
    WILLIAMS v. THE STATE.
    May 4, 1896.
    Indictment for assault. Before Judge Harris. Eloyd -superior court. January term, 1896.
    William Williams was indicted for an assault upon Mrs. Mary Arwood. He was found guilty, and his motion for new trial was overruled. The motion was upon the grounds that the verdict was contrary to law and evidence. Upon the trial Mrs. Arwood testified: I was at my father’s home On the evening of November 26, 1895, in the back room with Mrs. Whitfield, when, some one at the back door called,. ■“Miss Mary.” He called three times. I got up and went out to the back porch. I saw Bill Williams standing in the back yard near the porch. He looked dreadful. He-showed the old scratch in his face. I said to him, “Bill, you scared me.” He said, “Well, Miss Mary, if I scared you I will leave.” I said, “No, if you have got anything to say to me, say it.” He said, no, he would leave. I told him to say what he had to say. Then he said, if he-were to say what he had to say, the white people and black people would be after him with shotguns. I said, “If you say anything you ought not to say to- me, I would shoot you myself.” Then I started in the house, and he said, “G Mary, don’t go.” I said, “You call me Mary? get out of this' yard.” Then he said, “I will go out as I came in, I will walk out.” There are about six hou-ses occupied by families within 100 yards of where I live. One of them is-about 30 steps from our house; one other is just across the street. I married in Birmingham. Don’t know where-my husband is now. — Mrs. Whitfield testified, corroborating Mrs. Arwood as to the conversation between Mrs. Ar-wood and defendant, except that according to Mrs. Whitfield’s version, when defendant said, “O Mary, come back,” Mrs.-Arwood said, “You call me Mary?” defendant replied, “O excuse me, Miss Mary, I did not mean to- say it” ; and Mrs. Arwood then told him to get out of the yard, and defendant said he would get out when he pleased. Mrs. Whitfield Testified also, that after Mrs. Arwood told defendant if he said anything to her he ought not to say she would shoot him herself, Mrs. Whitfield started to look for a gun she knew was'kept in the house, but it was gone. Mrs. Hammock, mother of Mrs. Arwood, testified: Thafi evening I left home a little while before the negro went to our house. On the road I saw defendant come meeting-me.- He looked like he was drunk. When he got to m'e he said: “Miss Hammock, Mass Mary' is your -daughter;. would you object to my having -a private talk with your daughter? I think more of her than I do of anybody.” I walked off from him, and he kept repeating this. I walked on, and the last thing I heard him say was, “Say, Miss Hammock.” Our house where Mary was was between where Bill lived with his wife and children. I knew Bill; he had been living in "West Home a long time. I did not go back to my home then, because I thought if he did anyr thing it would be some time when he met her alone away from home.
   Atkinson, J.

Where, upon the trial of an indictment for an as- • sault, there was no evidence either of an intention or an attempt upon the part of the accused to commit a violent injury upon the- person alleged to have been assaulted, a verdict of guilty is contrary to law. Judgment reversed.

Seaborn WrigM, for plaintiff in error.

W. J. Nunnally, soUoitor-gmeral, contra.  