The Columbia herald. [volume] (Columbia, Tenn.) 18??-1935, 1901-03-22

than he would sheep killing dog.
Said there would be no more harm in
killing him than there wou d shcp-
pa,d dog but that he would kill him if
he hoped into hell for it the next
minute. At the final and fatal meeting
the same characteristics are discovered;
Thomas still the agressor, even to the
last, when already mortally wounded,
stopped and bleeding, the dying
man turns his pale, drawn face towards
his pursUer until his eyes meet
the ewes of his slayer. and then another
shot is fired into his body and he
staggers and falls, say ing Now, you
have killed me-" The speaker referred
the jury to the dumb but convincing
testimony OF the dead mans clothes to
show that he could not have been in an
aggressive attitude at the time the
shots were fired. The expression on
the defendants face when he ap.
preached his victim that day, said Mr..
Cox, contradicted the statement he
made upon the witness stand All the
witnesses saw that expression and knew
what it meant 1t was that expression
and the knife in his hand, that excited
ola man Howell 1t was that expression
that caused Lee Harlan to exclaim
"please, Mr.. Thomas, don't do that" 1t
was that expression that made Mr.. Wood
try to interfere; and it Was that expression
that gave to Godfrey's face the white
scared look CT doomed man, when he
turned and saw Thomas approaching
him. Men may deny but cannot hide
| their thoughts. Nature writes in large
letters the thoughts of men across their
brows; and the fingers of God spreads a
flaming danger signal there, to mark
mans evil intent, and make him bear
witness against himself
Hon. L P Psdgett
Opened the case for the defense. He re.
gretted the sad occurre ce, as he knew
everyone in the court room did; but
since regrets were of no avail, he was
there to argue the case upon its merits.
2 He called the attention of the Jury to the
difference-the very great difference,
. between killing and numbering He alsc
! reminded them of this fact that # man
a acted upon an honest belief and upon
8 reasonable ground that he was in danger
T. of great bodily harm, the law construed
$ his acts the same as though he was in
: real danger. But Mr. Padgett devoted
e the greater part of his time to the
g second pea-once in jeopardy He
j pressed this haId upon the jury, and ap.
/ parently with some effect, Judging by
}. the absorbing interest with which the
;, jury listened to his eloquence. This
!. right, dear as the right of self defense
J. itself, he said, had been handed
It down to us through sacrifice of life
a and blood and treasure; and such a
r privilege, so dearly bought, so highly
s regarded by the trainers Of our constitu .
e ton, state and national, should not be
: lightly regarded now. He argued that
when a jury had once been selected and
s sworn, the defendant was then on trial,
s then in jeopardy; and unless the State
d makes out its case that time, the con-
d stituticn throws its sacred mantle
e of protection over him, and SAYS
5 he shall not be harrassed or
e prosecuted again. The individual is
s weak and humble, but the State is
t strong; and the State has said that once
? and once only shall man be tried for
d the same offense. II man may be put
g 10 jeopardy once for the killing Of J. ID.
y Godfrey, and the State fail TO convict,
e may he again be tried for the same
r, oifense, calling the man by an
e other name j. G.. Godfrey, for
d instance? And il they fail 10 that. may
e they indict and try him again for the
o same offense, naming the deceased the
e third time as James Gillespie Godfreyi
2; Does the constitution mean no more
+ than that? Upon such fimsy subtsr
lie fuges as that may man be tried over
1t and over againY
Coming to the facts Of the case
y he said he would leave their dis.
n cussion in the main 10 his co-counsel;
/ but he would ask the jury "a
u think Of this What did Thomas. the
sr defendant mean, when he said. ''if that.
IS your game, we'll play it," lie himself
IT and all the witnesses agree that he saiC
t: