The Savannah morning news., 1901-07-09
HIS PLEA DEFENSE.
Continued from Tenth Page.

Continued from Tenth Page.
mics, and that the homicide had not
happened in anything like the way they
described. He displayed an undershirt
and oVershirt. and showed where the
knife OF Scott is alleged TO have gone
through similar cut on his coat was
shown the jury, together with a scar on
his person. alleged to have been made
by the weapon which he claims his father
in-law had The clothing was offered in
evidence by the defense. In his first
statement of the homicide johnson made
no reference TO the wound on his side.
Foreman Lucas OF the coroner's jury
was the first witness for the defense. He
transcribed the testimony a the inquest
and swore that the testimony delivered
to the court officials had been given in
the manner in which 1t appeared on the
records. Witness Gill had made no ref
erence at that time to Johnson having
knucks The defense introduced the other
witnesses who told of SCOTS actions to-
wards johnson. The old man was not
given very envable reputation. and it
was shown that he was frequently drunk
and upon such occasions quarTelsome. He
had threatened the life of his son-in-law
more than once, and had been engaged
in several alterations with him. The de-
fendant's witnesses 10 the killing testi-
fed that Scott was lighting johnson when
the cutting occurred.
Mrs. T. j. Harrison was put on the
stand by the state in rebuttal. She proved
a positive witness, and Judge Twiggs
could do nothing with her on the cross
examination. She was sure that Scott
was not cursing when he was at the
house. She saw Johnson arrive and saw
Scott pat him on the shoulder and heard
him say Hello old boy, / heard that you
got your arm hurt, Mrs. Harrison saw
johnson come out of the house a little
while afterwards with two rocks in his
hands. She said willie don't hit Mr..
Scott. Willie don't hit Mr.. Scott John
son don't hit MT Scott" The witness
stuck to her statement and counsel was
unable TO either get her ratified or make
her change her words. Her testimony
was damaging.
Mrs. John Scott, wife of the dead man was
also put on by the state in rebuttal. Her
testimony was damaging throughout and
the defense found no comfort in the Ian
guage she used She did not suffer from
stage-fright and was always ready with
an answer for Judge Twiggs. The wit
ness stoutly denied that she had told
Judge Twiggs that her husband had ours
ed her and called her the keeper of a
resignation" house. The witness used
this expression several times and caused
considerable laughter. Mrs. Scott cor
roborated the statement made by Mrs
Harrison, and although pressed hard by
counsel for the defense did not bulge
from her first statement on the stand
Scott and johnson walked in the house
together and Johnson went upstairs He
told his wife not to get his dinner until
after he got up. Scott did not curse
Johnson's wife. He cursed me for work.
ING S.n hard for 7
stoop and Scott came out behind me and
went across to the corner.
Il saw Johnson come down stairs and
ne went out dn the yard and got two
bricks. told him not to follow Scott,
because he had gone. He said he was
going to kill him If he hanged for it the
next minute. tried to keep him from go
ing, but he followed Scott"
The witness denied knowing ANYTHING
about any of the alleged acts of violence
on the part of Scott towards Johnson and
mentioned In the prisoners statement.
She did recall one occasion when both
were drunk. Johnson knocked his
father-in-law in the face and Scott re-
tahated by cutting a button-hole in
Johnson's coat. She denied that the
other acts of violence ever occurred.
Mrs. Scott was quite positive that her
husband had never attempted to kill
Johnsons child She was sure that she
had not told Judge Twlggs, or Mr.. Oliver
that he had been guilty of any of the acts
which johnson claimed could be proven
by her. On the contrary, she was posi-
tive that these things had never occurred
She accused Judge Twiggs of going to her
home and trying TO get her tangled up.
She admitted, however, that upon that
occasion counsel had stated that all he
desired was the truth and facts OF the
case.
Other witnesses in rebuttal will be in
PRODUCED by both sides this morning, and
the state will endeavor to show that John
son did not complain of the wound 10 his
side when he surrendered at police head
quarters