The Dallas weekly herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1885, 1878-03-02
THE DILL CASE.
the Jury ,unabie 70 AGre~, standing
Eievea 80 "ne sor Can ssctten. o. ssts-
charged. and = seal Nusa~r Stands
UapuntstAeo-Aw word 60 Strangers.

Uopunfseeo-A word 60 StPnngera.
The interest In the Dill case Is In.
creasing ~ the trial progresses, as was
evidenced Friday morning by the
crowd that thronged the district court
room. Tue rehearsal of the dstaiis Of
the case within the past few days hss
made the murder OF the negro, Reubeu
johnson, green 10 the memory of the
people, who are watching the case
with increasing aud undated interest.
The witness, Rice, having finished
giving ip his testimony, yesterday
morning Colonel z. q. Bower, who
was the prosecuting attorney at .be
time of the committing of the murder,
was introduced upon the stand to re
but the evidence of Rice, who, during
Bowers term of office, had made
sort o. confession to him
In the details of the case, Rice's
statement to Kim at the time, aud HE
statement Thursday, were different.
but In the main were the same. Mrs
Dill, wife of the defendant, was next
introduced by the defense, evidently
to prove an slibi for the accused. Her
statement confiicted no little with her
statements upon former trial, which
had been reduced to writing aud en-
bodied in u statement of facts. The
main point in her testimony was tibet
the defendant mad not left home the
night the murder Is ailsgeH 10 have
been committed. Ms. G.gasrsn, n
-narFied daughter OF Mrs Dill aud n
trl.c lighter OF the Defendant, then
lOok the stand, testifying that tue de-.
'endsnt had not LETT home on the
eight of the murder
Her testimony coufiieted with that
IF her mothers in many respects.
With this witness the examination
Of the witnesses ceased, when County
Attorney Aldridge opened with an
able speech. He was followed by
Colonel Willard for the defense, who
occupied the remainder of the eveniu z
IN most effective argument. Tue ar
gument of the case viii he resumed
this morning. 10y Colonel Hurt for the
prosecution and Judge Thurmsnd fDr
the defense.
The court room was crowded again
Saturday to hear the conclusion IF
the argument In this ease. ] NJ.
Thurmond, for the defense, spoke for
nearly three hours IN his usual rantin.
police court style of eloguence, devot
Ing good portion Of his speech in
villifyiug THE HERALD's reporter,
stating that biased articles OF the tes-
timouy OF witnesses had appeared in
that paper.
THE remarks made concerning the
reporter are characteristic OF the man
who uttered them, and we would not
notice them save that there may have
been persons present who do not know
BIN. In his TRADE against THE HER
AIDS reporter he for.ets tis place,
aud che statement made by him
that the reporter misrepresented the
case is totally false. The reporter
merely followed the testimony OF wit
nesses without prejudice, and he
leaves his statements as published
In The HERALD to the judg
ment of those members OF the
bar and others who heard the trial.
What the cause Of his TRADE IL We
know not, unless it be that the report
er has on several occasions refused TO
run matter In THE HERALD for him,
landing Thurmand rs gentlem an
and an able and profound att
torney. One instance comes dis
tlnctly to mind, when he asked him &c
put In complimentary notice of his
handling of case. The article was
not published, and the next day he
asked Mr.. J. B. Roberts, editor Of the
Morning Call, IL he could get 1t put in
THE HERALD, when MIR. Roberts
told him he could IL he would give
him the money to pay for 1t al
an advertisement, which be did,
when the article, less fulsome than be
originally wanted, was published. In
gathering the testimony in the Dill
case, the reporter has but discharged
mis- duty to THE HERALD and the read.
ing public, and be dismisses Thur
msnd without further remarks.-RE.
PORTER
Thurmond was followed by Colonel
Hurt, for the prosecution. who made
most able and mastery speech every
word of winch was calculated to carry
conviction of the defendants guilt tc
every mind. With the ending OF Col
onel Hurts speech the argument o.
counsel closed and the case went tc
the jury about half-past two pm
Judge Hunt charged the jury. wher
the defense asked for additional
charges, which the court refused Il
give. The prosecution did not ask fo
additional chsrges. The jury retired
out GOULD not agree, and after finding
the jury could not agree they were dis
charged last night about ten o'clock
| They stood eleven for conviction ant
punishment in the penitentiary fol
life and one for sequittai. The follow
ing are the names Of the jurymen
w. &. Sickels, n. II. Harper,
WI. Clark, b. n. Bryan,
/ L. &. Marsh, R. E. Bel,
| N. r. WiuBeford, J. Nj. Nieks,
jackson Bell, w. H. Terry,
ii. b. Bamen, J. @. Rapey.
| n. X. Winneford was for scquit tins
the prisoner. Before the discharge o
the jury, Mr.. Aldridge, the county a,
torney, urged upon the court the ne
eessity OF holding the jury until yer
! dict Of some sort was obtained. Il
cited the fact that this case had al
ready cost the county many thou
sands OF dollars; that the wituesss
; lived great ways apart, one OF WHOM
resided in Missouri that he had Be
indicted 10 order to obtain bis testl
mony, and had had . reward offere
for his apprehension by the governor
. and had obtained . requisition on tn
governor OF the Choctaw Nation 10
bis delivery; that the sheriff and dept
ties OF this county had ridden nearl