Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1879-07-03

reputation here Forguiet and order It was good.
Cross eranined.--His reputation about Rock
Hill, as to being violent, was not good.
JOSEPH HERNDoN, sworn. knew Church
L. Williford, and was acquainted with his gener-
al character in this community. His reputation
here, as to being quiet and peaceaoie, was gooo'
Cross. eramined.-I knew him here ten, twelve
| or fifteen months From hearsay, his reputation
about Rock Hill, for violent disposition, was oad.
! Capt. J. K. GARDNER, sworn. L Kne" ": ~.
| Williford. was captain OF the Jenkins times
at the time he was member of the company.
considered him quiet. peaceable man.
Cross eramined.-In this community ne was
considered SO far as I know, quiet: / have heard,
before his death, that at Rock Hill he had the
reputation Of being violent.
| DR.. J. B. ALLISON, sworn. ! am resident OF
| Yorkvlle. ] was acquainted with the general
character Of Church l.. Wilford. His reruta-
ton in this community was that he was not dan
gerous or turbulent.
Cross eransined-As to his reputation at Rock
Hill, I have heard both ways. have heard that
| he would resent an insult. DO not know MS
reputation at Rock Hill.
| Rev. THOMAS f. GILBERT, sworn. am pas
tor of the Methodist church at this place. knew
Churchill L. Willif0rd, and was acquainted with
his general character in this community. can't
say that he was violent, dangerous or turbulent,
nor that he was of a perfectly quiet disposition.
| He was Of the general character of young men.
n have never heard anything in this community
to the effect that he was dangerous, violent or
| turbulent.
Cross -eramined.-I have heard, before his
death, that at Rock Hill he had the reputation of
| being violent.
ALLEN JONES, recalled. @. Did you tell de-
fendant that you had heard that Williford had
said he would kill him? A. said whip him.
@. Did You ever tell defendant that deceased
would come into his house and kill him?
1Ohjected to, and objection sustained.
| @. What did you say in conversation with him
on the Saturday morning when you called on
him with the draft? A.. repeated what I had
tol. Imeant to convey that idea. told CASTOR
to be on his guard and be prepared. thought
Church was not afraid to do what he might have
q. Did You, or did you not say, in effect, that
Williford was man that would come into Cas-
toms store and shoot7 A.. I did not say that he
would slipon him. Iconsidered Williford. when
an enemy, bold and open.
Q. His reply to Hyder Rattaree was that he
liford and Church and Wade1 4. That is what
he said was his expression. zs.gggs 5, "a
Cross-e1amhsed. AT the last interview, 'rePeat-
ing those warnings, did.not say, "be on your
guard, and do not let him get the drop on you"
This was said on Thursday evening ofthe picnic.
The testimony closed at 6 o'clock P. M, when
it was agreed by counsel that there should be
three arguments on each side, and at the sugges-
ton of his Honor that two should be made that
evening, his honor announcing tnat No SHoutu
interpose no restrictions upon counsel Va TO
the reasonable length of their arguments.
Mr.. Solicitor CASTOR opened for the State and
J. G. Witherspoon, Esq, argued on behalf Of the
prisoner, and at the close of his argument, at
O'Clock, p. M, Court adjourned until 8 o'clock
On the converting of Court, Saturday morning,
Mr.. Patterson appeared for the State and was
followed by Mr.. Wylie for the prisoner. Court
then adjourned until o'clock, p. M.
On conveniug in the afternoon, I. D. Wither.
spoon, Esq, appeared for the defence, and the ar
gument was closed by w. B. Wilson, Sem, Esq,
The prisoner was ably represented by his coun-
sell and no less eminent was the counsel on the
part Of the State. Seldom, in the Yorkville bar,
Is such an array OF jealous and able counsel
engaged as was presented in this case and sell
dom, even in noted capital cases, have we seen
i every inch of ground 80 stubbornlyy contested.
To say that counsel performed their whole duty
70 the respective sides they represented. would
eminent gentlemen to say that their efforts be-
fore the Jury in all that constitutes legal tact
and eloquence are seldom surpassed in the courts
rHE JUDGES CHARGE. IN a
Mr.. WiIson closed his reply for the State
little aHsf7 o'clock, when his Honor charged the
jury as to the law bearing upon the different de-
grees of hogicide, explaining under which CIR.
cumstances die taking of human life Is sn act OF
! wilful murder; when it is manslaughter, and
when it is excusable homicide.
He instructed jury that Is their duty to try
according to the oath they took jurors, and not
by extraneous circumstances; that II they had
feeling for or against the prisoner, It was their
4 duty to discard It, looking to the evidence alone.
He then read from his notes the material points
of testimony of witnesses for heState and also
portion of the prisoners statement. ~
| He then proceeded to eEplain the law rs appli-
cable to wiIful murdeE Murder is the killing
Of q man against the p&aee of the State with mall
ice aforethought, express or implied. Murder
the crime. and its guilt consists in the taking
away the life of human being with circuRistan-
ces that show knowledge aud consciousness OF
views and designs. The malicious killing, with
Il premeditati0n and determination, Is murder,
whether the design to effect death Is formed on
the instant, or had previously been enteStained.
AS a sane man is q voluntary agen9 acting upon
or from motives, he must be presumed to con-
template and intend the necessary natural. and
probable consequences Ct his own acts. Ifthe in
tent to kill be formed but one minute, that is
enough it is murder.
\ Now comes the~question- pressing neces-
4 sity-of which you from the evidence are to be
the judges. If there IL no pressing necessity to
kill arising out Of an assault and immediate dam
ger to life or serious bodily harm to the person
sns ss tho s
passions had time to cool, the offence is murder.
And again There must be peril to life or limb,
or reasonable ground to suppose such peril ex-
lists from some aggressive act in order that life
may be taken in self defence No past threats
or conduct ofthe deceased will excuse homicide,
without present demonstration sufficient to au-
| thorize the belief that the deadly purpose then
exists and the belief that 1t will be executed, will
| excuse homicide. Does this test satisfy you that
| a homicide was committed? Was there press
ing necessity to killf man is not allowed to
take life except to preserve his own. Was he in
\ imminent danger at the moment of firing? Hso,
khe was justihable; if in no such danger, he was
hot:
sure information of the intention OF the deceased
to attack his person attempt his life on sight,
as to cause him to fully believe it. and got the ad
the deceased, the offence Is murder, because at
the time there was not pressing necessity to kill
| arising out of an assault, and immediate danger
| to the person killing.
In another form ofwords, though the deceased,
on the day Of the homicide, made violent threats
against the person or the life of the prisoner, de-
claring he would beat or kill him on sight, and
at the time was armed, or had gun in his hand
and said he was looking for the prisoner; and
that the prisoner being advised OF these threats,
shot the deceased unawares, or in lying In wait
| for him, charge you that the offence Is murder.
! On the question of mansaughter, his Honor
charged that 1t Is the unlawful killing OF another
| without malice xpressed or implied. 1t may be
either voluntary, or the sndden heat OF q, blow.
| or involuntary In the commission of an unlawful
act. The distinction is the want Of malice. IF
the prisoner, meeting the deceased Unexpectedly,
intercepting him in bis lawful business, or watch
| ing or besieging his door when he might have
| avoided it, the provocation being sudden and un-
expected, the law, in mercy, will not presume
upon the new insult, and the killing win be
nansau ghter. .5,....tt m.
Here a party was defending HIMSELF fearing
| bodily HARM and firing when q more prudent