
    Quick v. The State.
    There was no error in denying the motion for a new trial, either on the general grounds or because of the alleged newly discovered evidence.
    August 1, 1892.
    Criminal law. Murder. Evidence. Before Judge Boynton. Pike superior court. October term, 1891.
    Quick was convicted of murder and sentenced to death. He moved for a new trial on the grounds that the verdict is contrary to law and evidence, and for newly discovered testimony. The motion was overruled. The evidence shows that George and Oscar Coggins, brothers, drove in a buggy to the house of their uncle, D. M. Coggins, in the evening just after dark, and George called him out and quarreled at him for having him (George) summoned as 'a witness in Mrs. Terrell’s divorce case. She is D. M. Coggins’ daughter. She lived with him, and so did the defendant, who was his employee. As the conversation outside proceeded these two and the wife of D. M. Coggins came out. More words followed, Mrs. Terrell taking part, during which Geoi’ge alighted from the buggy with a whip in his hand. According to the testimony of Oscar, I). M. said to George, “If you don’t leave here and go on home, I will whip you,” whereupon George stepped out of the buggy and said, “ Here Hncle Hoc, here I am; whip me,” and H. M. said, “Bring me my stick”; and here the defendant ran up to George and stabbed him in the left breast with a pocket-knife. Oscar, thinking George had only been knocked down, jumped from the buggy and caught hold of the defendant, who thereupon again used his knife, cutting Oscar in the neck and stabbing^ him in the breast. Oscar put George in the buggy and drove off. George died in a few minutes. The defendant’s contention is, that Geoi’ge was partly under the influence of liquor and was cursing; that as he jumped out of the buggy he went towards H. M. Coggins menacingly, striking out with the whip; and that defendant, who had been standing on the piazza, not wishing to see them hit the old man, but with no intention of hurting any one, went out and put himself between them; whereupon the two brothers seized him by the throat and were choking him when he got out his knife and cut them. It appears that George and the defendant some time previously had quarreled about George’s dog which defendant shot. Oscar was the only witness introduced by the State who saw the killing. H. M. Coggins and his wife and-daughter were introduced by the defence.
   Judgment affirmed.

The newly discovered testimony is contained in the affidavit of Mrs. Martha E. Cooper, stating that she was sitting in a wagon on the street on the day of the trial, but after Oscar Coggins had testified, and near two gentlemen with whom he was talking; and that she heard him say to them that he did not see the defendant cut George as he had testified when on the stand, but that he wanted the defendant hung, and for this reason swore like he did. Her character is supported by affidavits of five persons. Oscar Coggins made an affidavit in direct conflict with that of Mrs. Cooper.

Stewart & Daniel and E. E. DuPree, for plaintiff in error.

W. A. Little, attorney-general, and J. H. Turner, solicitor-general, by Harrison & Peeples, contra.  