The farmer and mechanic. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 18??-19??, 1903-04-28

cltSecd time and time again, and nave
Termed an opinion one way or anothcr-
JNO. c. KILGO.
Judge winston then proposed that the
rcnIv be read first and then the exhibits
referred to; but plaintiff 5 counsel waived
ibis privilege, and Judge Winston pro-
cceded.
10 first read the issue OF the Public
Trdger Of this place, December 9Th. 1900,
immediately following the first trial Pc
fore a Jury. containing stories Of the trial
and items rejecting public sentiment,
some OF them clipped from other papers
Snnrfal attention was called to editor
ials in the Ledger, one of them critics.
ing the Supreme Court of the State for
granting a new trial, calling IT a 'partl-
san court and also spictly commenting
on the attitude Of some ministers Of the
GosDel toward organized capital. one on
Jury Reform and all sorts of com
ments clipped from papers in different
parts OF the State, favoring the plaintlff
in the suit. Then "a reply to a CORE
spondent who had asked the cost Of the
trial to the county and the inconvenience
it had caused to residents OF the county
by causing other cases to be put off.
The editors reply contained a warm de-
tense of Mr.. Gattis.
Then ''Joshuay's Vision" was read from
the local paper, amid inextinguishable
laughter.
Major Guthrie asked if Judge Winston
had written that piece.
Judge Wniston: Surely the Major
does not think | could write anything as
good as that. don't know of anyone
except perhaps Nath Lunsford or Major
60, 49, ao,1J yrrito anr+L;-~ lilo
that"
Nath Lunsford, who really did write it,
came n a little later.
Further on came a controversy on the
case between the Duran Recorder
and the oxford Ledger.
Then two editorials, one of the 21st Of
February, 1901, were read, which Judge
Winston said they regarded as the most
hurtful of all. The February one gave
the News ard Observer as authority for
been employed by DR.. Kilgo to argue his
case in the Supreme Court, and says III
one place:
The Ex-Governor having but recently
appointed two of the judges to the posi-
lions they now hold, Mr.. Duke considers
him, It is said, a sort of fcur-Ieaved
clover that viii bring him good luck and
possibly save him part of that 100000
Judgment rendered at Oxford
After Judge Winston had finished read
ing from the exhibit Judge A. w. Ora
ham read the counter affidavit of T. ].
Gattis, as follows:
COUNTER AFFIDAVIT AGAINST RE-
MOVAL.
The plaintiff, T. J. Gattis, in opposition
70 tho rn11nrn1 of this ooSn frpno Tho
+. county of Granville for trial in another
county, and in reply to the affidavit of
John G. Kilgo, offered for removal, being
duly sworn makes the following affidavit:
Affiant says hat SO far as he is in
formed and believes there are not prob
able grounds to believe that a fair and
impartial trial Of this case cannot be
obtained in the county Of Granville, and
it is noticeable, and the court should
consider that his c~o-defendant, b.. y
Duke does not join in the affidavit Of
said John G. Kilgo.
Affiant says that he has been personally
present at each trial Of this case in the
said county Of Granville, and has beer
q close observer of tho conduct of each
of the three several trials in said county
two of which were upon issues submitted
to q jury and resulted in atlantis favor
'hN ~ & to h1th oc51I < IL Z NSlE
nothing in the conduct of either trial q
which the defendants had or have any
just cause to complain.
According to atlantis observation
there was very much less public Interest
manifested at the last jury trial than a
tie one which preceded it. At the las
jury trial the court room was not crowd,
ed at any time. and at times during the
trial the audience in the court room
dWindled to less than one-fourth of thu
capacity of the court room, and some.
times during the argument the audience
was much less than one-fOurth the ca.
pacity Of the court room.
Affiant further says that while it i
true that at the first jury trial at which
a verdict was rendered in favor of thu
plaintiff for the sum Of twenty THOUSAND
dollars $3.50, 0O0) there was very consid
cradle public interest manifested in tn,
trial on the part Of the good people o
Oxford and the court house was denSel,
crowded, but the crowd in attendant
was composed very largely Of ladies an
scool boys and girls and a very larg,
array Of witnesses on each side. many 0
whom were non-residents Of Granvill
county, and the ladies and school boy
and girls were not competent to serv
as Jurors.
Affiant further says that it is a matte
of record in this cause and stated b.
the Hon. ". 4. HOke, the presiding judg
at the first jury trial of this case, i
certifying over his signature to the 81
J prene court the case on appeal, as fol
lows, page 7S: This trial was conducte
throughout by attorneys for both partie
upon q dignifed and high plane and t.
conduct Of the audience, in the opiniO,
of the court. was seemly and becoming
At different times in the argument vher
a good point was made on either side
the audience showed intelligent appre
citation, but there was no unseeml
demonstration and nothing to indicate
so far as the court could discern, tina
there was any sympathy with one, NOR
than the other of the parties"
Affiant says it is true that the verde
Of the jury at the last trial was rendere
about midnight when most of the goo
people Of Oxford were asleep in thei
) several homes and some of the counse
: in the case had retired for the nigh
: and soon after the rendition of the yer
dict. when there were about a dozen pec
plG in the rourt hOIGa besides tho iuror-