The Laurens advertiser. (Laurens, S.C.) 1885-1973, 1903-10-07

the prisoner, Representative H. spann
Bowling of Bamberg, who roomed next
to Tillman at the Caldwell, was in his
room that morning and with him during
the day. Assoon as he heard of the trag-
edy he went to the Jail and expressed
trouble. Then at his request he went
to ascertain the condition of the
man lying so sorely stricken, and
returning with his report was told
by Tillman; IF hit him where
man.. The ball 1 used won't change
its course" In connection with this,
remember Senator Talbird's testimony
as follows:
%. Do you know or not, did Mr.. Till
man ever say why he did not shoot
again? A. Well. sir. abou that he
gave two reasons when / went around
to the Jail. One was, he aid that he
did not shoot again because he was
afraid of hitting me; the other was.
h a when l threw up my hands and
said, This thing must STOP he did
not shoot again."
The other picture is about the same
time as this. The wounded man Is be-
ing carried to the hospital in an ambu-
lance; he is accompanied by none Of
his family nor his friends, only a ply
stefan who knew him but slightly. 1t
is DR.. Jas. III. Mcintosh who portrays
this scene:
20. On the way did he ask you any
questions about his condition? A. Yes.
sir; on the way to the hospital he
looked around the ambulance and saw
there was no one else in 1T. and he said
to me: Doctor, 1 want you to tell me
frankly whether l am mortally wound
ed or not 1 replied to him: Yes.
Mr.. Gonzales, 1 am afraid you are
mortally We unded,' and he simply said:
Yes, 1 think the fellow got me- and
with that he covered up his face"
1t was after this knowledge that he
was on the border Of eternity, after
these moments Of undisturbed relec-
ton as he looked death in the face.
that he gave his second account Of the
shooting to such men as DIR. j. w.
Babcock and August Kohn. Prepared
to meet his God. he said he had sent
his slayer no message, that so far as
he was concerned 1t was all ended five
months before.
This in the main is the case against
j. II. Tillman.
The Defense.
What the defense will be is, of
curse, impossible to conjecture. 70
break down the evidence of the prose-
cution Is an accepted mode of pro-
cedure which will prove impossible In
tits case. Ii Is useless 20 impeuch the
veracity of such persons as Senators
Thomas Talbird n George w. Brown,
| vi i III ~. IhellOll, ~. il. lLluC
and the other eye-witnesses-all Of
whom are persons of unusual intelli-
gence and the highest repute. To prove
by witnesses their equals In c)rlrac-
ter and intelligence that IL G..
Gonzales was about to assau'/ ]. H.
Tillman when Tillman shot Gonzales
is necessary for the making Of a case
of self-defense. Can 1t be made? There
is no other legal provocation for the
killing which Tillman can plead, unless
it be that he knew Gonzales had
threatened his life or that he had sent
the defendant a warning message. The
implication OF the defendants state
ments up to this time has been that
some such justification o be at
tempted. The difficulty of proving 1t
cannot be underestimated even by the
defendants own counsel.
Already one witness for the defense
has testified and she told of alleged
remarks the deceased made in her
presence concerning the prisoner. Miss
Roper, a trained nurse who repeated
n conversation in a death chamber.
simply said that Mr.. Gonzales said he
had made Mr.. Tillman show the white
feather twice. that Col. Tillma had
challenged him to two duels which he
did not acknowledge and that Col.
Tillman had no more resentment than
to come in the hotel lobby and offe
him q cigar, which he refused" The
is not the semblance of a threa'
that nor did Miss Roper say MI.
zales had made one. Her test
in fact, had no bearing at all c'PeSl
killing, since she merely repea The
opinion OF Jim Tillman which Mi;
Zales had expressed to her, th'llZeS,
opinion he so often expressed or all
paper.
The "Higher Law" i cast
This is the legal case. The.
evidence in the court at Lex.
every copy of rhe State published dun
ing the year 1902. IT was during six
of those twelve months that N. g. Cor
zales as editor of The State 80 p
sistently assailed the public record ,
the then lieutenant governor. Thes
editorials have been read to the jury
and the Jurors Will nave the right to
inspect them for themselves. Can any
thing be found therein to JUSTIFY the
defendant in believing that N. G. Con
Zales would assault him on sightI III
not, is there yet anything said In those
editorials which tended to destroy the
good reputation which the endan
may claim to hav had? Did those edi-
~torials unjustly and untruly attack his
character? The prosecution has put the
editorials In evidence in orCer that the
jurors may see for themselves what
they contain-whether they be scurril-
Gus. unfounded. reckless d!atribes OF
whether they be specific, dehnite
charges sustained by ample n un-
shakable proof: charges approved and
reiterated by a majority of the South
Carolina newspapers; charges against
the second highest officer of the com
monwealth aspiring to the highest office.
not charges aaainst q private citizen
nor one not a candidate for public con-
hdence. And 1T remains to be estab-
lished that these charges were prompt
ed by PERSONAL hostility and not by q
high and noble sense Of an EDITORS
responsibility to the people.