Martin vs. The State. a bad case, and deponent replied, he is going to call for a new trial, I believe. But I didn't think worth while, according to the evidence in the case. Deponent further remarked then that they, meaning the Martins, must be bad men anyhow, for he had heard that they had beat a man pretty nigh to death last spring. But deponent did not mean to imply that the verdict was influenced by the Peace case at all, for he does not know or believe that any of the other jurors were influenced by it; for himself, he was sure he was not in making up a verdict against said Green Martin. The Peace case was mentioned in the jury room, and this deponent thinks he mentioned it. But he does not believe it had any effect on the verdict, and he is confident his own verdict was made up before he alluded to said case. REUBEN OSBORN. Sworn to and subscribed before me this March 19th, 1858 L. A. JERNIGAN, Cl'k. GEORGIA, WASHINGTON COUNTY. Personally appeared before me Mr. Edward S. Langmade, Beverly Evans, Robert Harman, S. B. Jones and Iverson L. Harris, who were the Attorneys at Law of Green Martin, and to whom solely the defence of Green Martin was confided, who stood charged by indictment with the murder of his negro boy Alfred, who being duly sworn, depose and say that they had no knowledge or information before or at the trial of said Martin, of the materiality of the testimony of Doctor Nathan Tucker, as shown by his affidavit, nor any intimation or conjecture of the said Green Martin having labored under any mental delusion at any time until since the trial, and that with all the diligence, and vigilance, and care which they severally employed as his attorneys since their respective employments in his behalf, they had not acquired any knowledge, or information, or intimation, which could or did lead them to look for ground of defence in the monomania of defendant until since the trial Martin vs. The State. of said Green Martin; and that had they have known or heard of the character of the testimony of Dr. Nathan Tucker, they would have placed the defence of their client upon the ground of mental delusion, and taken prompt steps to procure the testimony of said Tucker. E. S. LANGMADE, R. P. HARMAN, B. D. EVANS, S. B. JONES, IVERSON L. HARRIS. The foregoing affidavit was signed and sworn to before me this 18th March, 1858. L. A. JERNIGAN, Cl❜k. GEORGIA, WASHINGTON COUNTY. Before me personally came Nathan Tucker, who being duly sworn, deposeth and saith that deponent is a practicing physician, residing in the neighborhood of Green Martin, of said county, who, on an indictment for the murder of a boy named Alfred, the slave of the said Green, was tried and found guilty at the present term of the Superior Court of said county as this deponent has been informed and believes; that deponent has been for more than twenty years the family physician of the said Green Martin, holding frequent intercourse with him, and well acquainted with him; that until within a few years past the said Green Martin was in the enjoyment of good health, was a sober, orderly and peaceable man, a good citizen, a good neighbor, and by common repute, and in the opinion of this deponent, a kind and humane master; that some years since said Green Martin's health failed; that he became, and ever since has been laboring under a complication of diseases, to-wit, a chronic derangement of the liver and hydrocele, and has been under the treatment of this deponent. That one special effect of the diseased condition of said Green Martin, as before described, was to produce a longing for stimulants, a predispo Martin vs. The State. sition to indulge in the use of ardent spirits; that under the influence of this morbid craving, said Green Martin has contracted the habit of drinking intemperately, and witness states distinctly it is his firm conviction that this habit has been superinduced by disease, and not the diseased condition, in which he is and has been, by intemperance. Deponent, as a doctor of medicine, expresses the opinion that the combined effect of disease and intemperance upon the said Martin has been to weaken, and in a good degree to derange the mind of said Martin; that deponent has had abundant evidence that he has, for two or three years, labored and still labors under a decided monomania, the special mental delusion being an abiding impression on his mind that his slaves entertained a design to poison him, and are perseveringly endeavoring to carry it into effect; and deponent has never been able to discover in the conduct and bearing of the said slaves the least foundation for such apprehension; believes it to be a mental delusion; that said Martin has long been keeping a strict watch upon his slaves-made frequent searches for poison, that he has several times brought to deponent substances found about the premises, and consulted deponent as to their properties, which deponent in every instance found to be free from poisonous qualities, and entirely harmless; that said Martin has been particularly suspicious of a female slave of his own, the mother of the boy Alfred, of whose murder he has been convicted; that under this impression, as this deponent has been creditably informed and believes, said Martin actually kept one of his female slaves in close confinement, though deponent did not actually see her in such confinement; deponent has been wholly unable, by any effort he could make, to divest the mind of said Martin of the delusion under which he was laboring. Deponent further gives it as his deliberate conviction that at the time the boy Alfred came to his death, and for some time previous and since, the said Martin was and has been insane on the subject of the fidelity of his slaves, their disposition Martin vs. The State. to take his life by poison, and his safety in their hands; deponent never, for obvious reasons, communicated his opinion on this subject to said Martin or to his family, and does not believe it was known to said Martin or to his counsel at the time of his trial. NATHAN TUCKER. Sworn to and subscribed before me this 17th March, 1858. JAMES F. SMITH, J. P. After full argument of the grounds of new trial, his Honor the Judge overruled the motion for a new trial in this cause on all the grounds for the following reasons: The three first because upon a careful review of the testimony, the facts sustain the verdict upon the plainest and clearest principles of law. The 4th because the fact commented on by the counsel of the State was in evidence by two of the witnesses, and characterized by one of them as riding, and because the counsel for the State was not in conclusion, but might be answered and was answered by counsel for the defendant who had the conclusion, and the testimony was that Godfry Martin sat in the saddle; it showed the defendant present, and that when the riding was over he ordered the boy to carry the saddle into the house. The 5th because the Court did give the law in charge to the jury as it was asked for and in the very words of the authority cited, but only refused to give the law as applicable to particular facts, and gave it in charge as applicable to all the facts in evidence. The 6th because it is not only the right, but the duty of the Court to direct the jury as to the regularity and form of their verdict, and to see that its own minutes and records clearly express what is done in the Court. The 7th because upon reading the deposition of the juror Osborn, the Court believes him to be an upright and conscientious juror, and that in giving the verdict he was un Martin vs. The State. biased and unprejudiced, and was governed solely by the law and the evidence. The 8th because that the whole testimony showed that defendant was not acting under the alleged delusion, but was punishing his little slave for insolence. To this decision of the Court the defendant, by his counsel, excepted. JENKINS & HARRIS for the prisoner. ATTORNEY GENERAL for the State. By the Court.-LUMPKIN, J. delivering the opinion. Green Martin having been convicted of murder at the March Term, 1858, of the Superior Court of Washington county, moved for a new trial, on eight grounds, as will appear in the Reporter's statement. The first three grounds may be considered together, namely, that the verdict was contrary to law, to the evidence and weight of evidence. The meaning of this is, that the facts in the record, did not justify the jury in finding the defendant guilty of murder. That if he was guilty of any offence, it was involuntary manslaughter. This case is rather peculiar in several respects. No one doubts, that the boy Alfred came to his death at the hands of Green Martin and his son Godfrey, or one of them. At 12 o'clock on the 19th of May, 1857, he was well. The father and son commenced punishing him for some insolence offered to the son, which was kept up at longer or shorter intervals, until late in the afternoon, covering a period of three hours or more, when the boy expired. And the post mortem examination showed that the neck was dislocated, and that there were various bruises on the body and limbs of the boy. The last injury inflicted, as seen and testified to by one of the daughters of the defendant, was a |