University of South Carolina Libraries
m \ ? "siaL ? - Vv.7#s? , Lancaster Enterprise; * ? Jk Vol. XIII. LANCASTER, S. C., WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 14, 1903 N to I WE 1 \ ANN * H f | QUr H 11 FALL m I ?? y r * Of Millins I D 1 FOR FAfcfc I I is- =1=11 yi | Octobe yx jr. I And to invite AX/L 1 fi ' f nrnr? A*>r? 11 tv r 11 lT*\ P ^ au_y jl v./ yj $ lines. We I will b B rnu?- 1?* _o_ !x nauiting you it asking you to ke I w<| are, Res '"Lancaster Mei . ? L T tfc III Pi M ?M?J? ?J| Ill IIII????????????????1?1 jl SEC TO \ OUNCE . I sry and / ress Goods j J AND WINTER ( A ?T~ ? < 1 fcr^eak MM *a am m / B r m \ sr 1, 1903 i the ladies and the public j 1 10 ME and see these j % I w know that you j ^ >e pleased. j C I I rr your patronage and \ ep the good work up, C pectfully, I rcantile Company | EVIDENCE ALL IN. A Review of the Evidence in 1 lie Jim Tillman CaKe by W. W. Dull. With the testimony all heard in the case of James H. Tillman and the arguments about to begiu, it may be interesting to emphasize some of the points that have made themselves con?piciously plain iti the proceedings. In nnitn r?f Iho ? ??> W 1 vuv I UJCV/l IV/ II UI JJUIitics into the trial, iu spite of the dragging in of Senator B. R. Tillniau'8 name, it has been demonoff n f ^ O ^ ? < ?* fl w ^ V> " 1 vv? ?> men of the former Reform or Tillmanite have had no more | in j) a thy with the shooting of Mr. Gonzales than members of th? lactiou that he was tormerly identified with. Look at the example of Mr. Talbird?a reformer and a Srate senator. It was tc be expected that he would tell the truth to the beBt of his ability, to the best of his recollection, and that is what, without doubt, he did. Adams and Howling too, were Tillman's friends?close friends. They are among the strongest witnesses for the State. This is no matter for surprise. Politics does not affect the sauctity of au honest man s oath. What the political views of Mr. Wilson, chief cleric in the otlice of Comptroller General Jones, maybe I donot know. He was a witness sworn for the defense. He was the only eye-witness sworn for the defense whose testimony was not attacked. His testimony was valuable and only valuable in corroborating the thecrv of the State, it streng thened the dying declaration of Mr. Gouzales?it placed Tillman ??*.,vn t.wo to two and a half feet only frot.-* the outside of the side rc?a1lr nrl * l n? d C dirCCtlOH Of his aimed weapon tranpverse. across the sidewaik, Awards the At the bail hearintr. one r Fl. Hall made an airadavit, claiming that ho wa? an eye witness to the ahooting and corroborating in 'evory particular" the account given by Richard Holsonbaek. Such the record shows. Hall was present at the trial last week. He was present when Lorick was on the stand or immediately after. The defense did not swear him. Why? Was the hard lesson of Lorick's testimony enough? And yet Holsonback and Lorick are the only eye-witnesses, except J the prisoner, who in any degree I support the defense. IiolsonI back's character has been attack e:l. Lorick waa not allowed to answer questions imputing that more than once ho had been charged with larceny. The witness Hyatt for the defense swore that he saw a pistol in Mr. Gonzale's hip pocket the day before the shooting: and the one thing about the appearance of Mr. Gonzales that ho wan emphatically aure of was thut he ^t'rl rtf woo r ^ f- * ? uv/b noui lilt UUll'll t. se admits as true that Mr. Gonzales without glasses could not see sulliciently "to walk the streets." Hyatt saw the pistol when Mr. Gonzales was leaning over to spit in a cuspidor?not wearing glasses. At some distance the prisoner saw Mr. Gonzales approaching and "eyeing him intently ." How far away can you tell that a maD wearing glasses is "eyeing" you ? Senators Brown, Talbird, Mrs. Melton, Mr. Lide, August Schiadman and others testify that Mr. (-tiillVulaj nr o n a 1 ~ ~ ' | viuii<i(?>vn nno niillUBt RUinUHl Ui [the two senators and Tillman I when the shot was fired The I course of the bullet proves it. Tillman told Spann Dowling at ! the jail that the bullet would ' shoot straight. J Clark and others swear that Hnteonbaok gave t<> them pfnto ' ments about the shooting that THE OLD RkLmtf \ ^ Absolutely Pure TKERi tS NO SUBST/TJft conflict with his bail, all idavit and statement on the witness staud. Llolt-onback declares that when Tillman was about at . G*r ais street he was at the State house steps and overtook Til'ma/i by the time of the shooting; while Tillman was crossing the street! Witness White did uot, know Mr. Gonzales; his testimony as to the "white feather" thre.tfc is wholly dependent on that^f Flo! eonback. Till mar' swore in hi., t?*sti moify hat he wrote the Wini -b to News and Lleiald ajrticlo in 1&9.) and acknowledged a moment later his own letter of 1892 saying that he did not write it. T; 11 ?.? a., ?r tt vt-_ a. <11 iii u it nnuio (>11A li H . O. . ^ t? Wbold told him that he might expect Mr. Gonzales, if he drew uis pistol, to draw it from his Bide ^ coat pocket. Newbold was Jp"-* the trial but was not sworn, ft his bail ailidayifc Tillman nvo# that he know nothing of Mr. Gou*?v zalos' habit of carrying his hands ;n his coat pockets. , The case tor the defense substantially is that Tillman had , *4 .4 Oj >c<i. | That he was expecting an attack. 1 That he believes from the State's editorials that its editor was in a frame of mind to kill him. That * ' he saw Mr. Gonzales on the out-r ctil A A r f K A fi i^n ttrollr 'V1* " . >? w w ut iuu niyv nam. uinu iU I Gonzales turrujuJto the inside and thrust his hands Yeeper into his pockets in a way Vfaat. he. interpreted and offensive \ . if-.? ^ * That he placed his ha pistol when he saw Mr. GonzAles. That the turn by Mr. Gonzil?s brought him towards Tillman. That Mr. Gonzales' thumb was out when Tillman first saw him and that ho plunged his whole i hand in his pocket. That he fired j heenus * ho believed that he was ! about to be shot. Why should Editor Gonzales ' wis!) to h.'ive killed Tilln ..?? I Tillman was not in his way As a candidate for office he had been defeated and discredited. 11c was in nobody's way. His term of ' office as heutoy?* about to expir^ i would have me bio and sacrifid ' ,.art of ; the editor of The SN?%ty. ft would 1 have meant, speaking from a purely sellish point ol view, at ,, I least serious il not permanent interruption to his career as a news paper editor. Five months previous Tillman's defeat had been effected. Tillman's personality had been dismissed from his paper and from his mind. Tillm O n'a I? H n /? I-' n rv?? b " ^ Iiinu o aiim<i\C) "II UUIl/iaiUO Iifiu been wholly harmless. JElis denunciation Irom the stump had counted for nothing. Everybody in South Carolina knows this. If Mr. Gonzales had shot Tillman, if he were iu the dock today instead of Tillman, his defense might have been insanity, for any jury would have said that an ar' Concluded on Page Eight. /