The Livingston enterprise. [volume] (Livingston, Mont.) 1883-1914, 1891-10-31
PRICE 10 CENTS,

court sustained the position taken hv
the defense and Ferguson was calleS
and testified in substance as follows.
Was present when Dilworth was shot.
Dilworth rode towards Demers and wit,
ness. and was sitting erect on his horse.
when he was shot by Demers he was
holding his horses bride in one hand
with his right hand behind his coat.
When he came to Demers he said.
What are you doing with that gum"
II DeMers had not stepped to one side
Dllworth S horse would have run against
him; he made five or six attempts to run
against Demers, who as often stepped
one side; Dilworth reached out his hand
IN an attempt to grab Demers' gun.
Witness testified that this continued
about ten minutes before Demers shot
him. Dilworth was three or four feet
| from Demers when he was shot.
Ferguson also testified that during
the time Dilworth was attempting to
ride over Demers he (Dilworth) reached
for his revolver, which witness saw ex-
tending about one inch below the end
of his scabbard.
In rehuttal of this evidence the scab-
bard was placed in evidence and denti-
HS>t 10 cCiOHs, iIiS W b1lNOItIl, tie Gnu Oh
which was closed. clearly showing that
the evidence of witness relating to the
exposed portion of the revolver was in
correct.
This closed the evidence for the state
and an adjournment was taken until 10
o'clock Thursday morning when John
L. Smith, Esq, presented the case for
the defense. followed by introduction of
evidence for defendant. Godfrey De-
mers, defendant in the case, took the
stand and testified IN his own behalf.
He stated that he filed upon a piece of
land which he had had surveyed by Fred.
erick Hess; that he went in company
with Lee Ferguson, upon the land on
the evening of July 9th, having pre-
viously got Hess to notify Dilworth that
he had filed upon the land After put
ting up tent witness and Ferguson re-
tired for the night; witness got up in the
morning and after breakfast went over
to where man was cutting hay; found
the man with the mower to be James
Warner and told him that he (witness)
had filed upon the land, but Warner
could keep on cutting until line had
been run. After running line Demers
found that Warner was cutting on his
land and told him he did not want any
trouble. but he had better not cut any
more upon the land. Warner asked De
mers Why he did not go and see Dill
worth, and witness replied that Dill
worth would probably be angry and he
(Warner) had better tell him: that if he
got mad and meant war he had better
come loaded. Warner took his team
and started for the house, but soon re-
turned accompanied with Dilworth.
Warner resumed cutting hay and Dill
worth rode over to where witness and
Ferguson were making boundary lines
with willows. Dilworth's horse came
faster than a lope. Demers' testimony
was then to the effect that Dilworth. in
the face of loaded Winchester rifle in
his hands, five times attempted to Jump
his (Dilworth's) horse upon HIM, at the
same time reaching back as if to draw
his revolver, and that the fifth time, in
self defense, witness fred his rifle, and
that the fatal shot was given. He
further stated that the reason he did
not go to Dilworth after he fell was that
he did not know that he was dead; that
George Dilworth threatened to shoot
him when ne came up, and fearing there
might be further trouble he cautiously
drove to Red Lodge and gave himself
up. A very rigid cross examination fail
ed to break Demers testimony on any
material point.
The defense called several witnesses
to testify respecting Mr.. Dilworth's
character, which was to the effect that
his general reputation was bad for get
ting angry and being dangerous with
gun. Witnesses also testified to the
doclle nature of Demers, as to his fling
on the land in dispute, and especially in
rebuttal Of the states testimony in refer
ence to threats made by defendant.
Evidence was also introduced to rebut
the testimony of George Dilworth, to
the effect that from the position occu-
pied by George Dilworth as testified to
it would have been impossible for him
to have seen the shooting, as the view
would have been obscured by interven-
ing brush and timber Another depart
ure from the routine of evidence was
the introduction of an affidavit of Daniel
jackson. Prior to the commencement
of the trial defendants attorney moved
for continuance of the case, basing the
motion upon the absence of this witness
from the county, who at the time of the
killing was employed at the home of
Mr.. Dilworth, and whose evidence was
material to the defense. This motion
was overruled upon agreement of
County Attorney Joy admitting that
witness, if present, would testify
to facts set out in affidavit for
continuance. The affidavit of jackson
was to the effect that he was at Dill
worth's July 10th; that Dilworth came
into the house and armed himself stat
ing that "Frenchy" Vas upon his land
and that he would 60 over and get him
off quicker thrn HI would burn a
feather The affidavit also stated that
Jackson had conversation with County
Attorney Joy on the 25th of September,
in which JOY, after hearing what Jack
son would testify to, advised him in the
interest OF the states case, to get out of
the country. In rebuttal of this affida-
Wit A. r. Joy was sworn and testified
that jackson was in his office on the
25th of September and informed him
that he had valuable testimony for the
state. He then asked Mr.. Joy for loan
If 81. Joy asked what his testimony
vas and he said that he had found the
revolver that Mr. Dilworth carried at
the time he was killed. Mr.. Joy, know
ng this to be false, as at the time the
revolver was indirectly in the custody of
the state, unceremoniously dismissed
Jackson without the 81, remarking that
The state did not need that kind OF evi-
lence.
This closed the evidence for the de-
ense and an adjournment was taken un-
il 10 o'clock yesterday morning, when
he arguments OF attorneys were begun.
Yesterday morning II. J. Miller, as as
ociate counsel for the state, opened the
rgument, and in brief but forcible
lanner reviewed the evidence in the
ase. He was followed by A. j. Camp
ell and John Il. Smith for the defense,
'hich consumed the entire time until
ae dinner hour, when an adjournment
as taken until o'clock, when the case
as closed by County Attorney A. r.
Oy.
After receiving the instructions OF the
)urt the jury retired at 4:3O o'clock in
large of Bailiffs Mitchell and Sheffield,
nd court adjourned.
The jury were out but short time
hen the announcement was made that
verdict had been reached, and at $50
'urt was again convened to permit the
rOrs to return into court. As it had