The Dallas weekly herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1885, 1878-02-23
the MARION Dill CASE.
The state witnesses Refused 90 Testify
and are Jaii-d-History of .se Case

The state witnesses Refused 90 Testify
and are Jaiird-History of sss Case.
The case Of the State OF Texas Va
Marian Dill and Eljsh Rice, charged
with murder, is an old one, having
been on the docket since 1874. The
iacts OF the case, as ELECTED upon n
former trial, are In substance as fol.
lows: In the year 1874 William Dill,
brother Of the accusea, together with
two other men named Shackelford
and Longley, were indicted, charged
with the Their Of wheat from one Harry
Taylor. Reuben Johnson, a negro
man living on Dill's place, was the
only witness for the state in the case,
and Marian Dill tried to get him TO
swear that on the night the theft WAS
said to have taken place, that William
Dill was at his house, thereby proving
an 0ii5i. This the negro refused To do,
and subsequently Dill was indicted for
the subornAtlon Of witness. To get
the negro out Of the way, il wac de-,
termined To Nil him, and on the night
Of December 20. 1874, Marian Din.
Elijah Rice, and man named Bell.
/ went TO his house, some ten miles from
the city, on Mountain creek, and hung
him 81 n tree.
When found lac was hanging with
his throat cut from ear to ear. Bell,
Who was at the time arrested aud iii.
dicted Nth the parties above named,
turned states evidence during the trial,
several years ago, and stated in sub.
stance that Dill and Rlce did the
hanging. After the hanging, when
they were about to withdraw, Dill re-
marked he might yet be alive and
that he would make cure work oft, at
the same time drawing knife across
the victims throat. The case was
taken from this % the supreme court
where, after n hearing, 1t was remand
Ell back. Bell has since left the eoun.
try and cannot be found.
In the district court, yesterday
morning, during the trial of the case,
there was scene in court, occasioned
by the refusal of Elijah Rice, who had
been Jointly indicted with Dill, but
whose case, AS before stated In THs
/ HERALD, had been sO9c pTosg,tied,
refusing TO answer the questions pat
to him by the prosecution.
/ Colonel Hurf L.. 49,. l.,
the prosecution, asked MIN the follow.
ing questions "W hat il your name ~
/ Aiter hesiLstinR for some time, he
answered, "ltice" "What Il your Civ.
en name ~ After long pause ell
jain" The question was then put
"Where did you live in the year 1874 p
This question the witness refused tc
answer, when the prosecuting attorney
asked the court to order him to an
sWer, which It lid, but the wit.
ness WAS dumh, refusiug "a
speak The court ordered him re.
manded - jaji tor rpfusirg tt
answer aud for sontenp, q! court. h,
this time the court room WAS ia higl
state ~ excitement, aad when Rice
wife was called To the stand, It wal
heightened, while the attorneys tina
thronged Tie bar and spectators ben
forward, eager To hear her answers {,
the questions that were about to b,
put To her. She had answered severa
questions of form and Of minor i'm
pOrtance. when Colonel Ear. Aske,
her. do you know Mr.. Aldridge
The county attorney ." a do
Did yOu moi have converse
ton with Mr.. Aldridge, and 81,
you not ~ that time, in that converse
! ton, make - statement different from
what you are now making ~ Tn
! witness declined Go answer, and whei
commanded Ly tile court to dn 81 -lil
refused To answer that aud all othe
questions. She was committed . Jail
The case was then postponed until thi
morning, when the judge will decid
} whether or not he has right unde
the law TO inilict upon them create
punishment than imprisonment.