The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1903-10-14

plncned when be took his seat in the
box Wednesday morning. All eyes
were turned on his haggard features
and every man, woman and child in
the court room was mentally measur.
ing his condition and specializing on
| what his strength might or might not
be. When it was announced that he
thought himself well enough to stand
the strain Of the hearing for few
hours anyhow, there was great sigh
OF relief throughout the entire court
room for the suspense In this matter
has been very bothersome, as well as
expensive to al concerned.
THE CASE RESUMED.
The defense began with motion
to rule out the testimony OF Vedder
Zimmerman, Frances Weston Smith,
George King and Dr.. Lankett. These
people all testified to seeing pistol
in the possession Of the defendant
several days prior to the shooting.
Judge Gary declined to rule out
this testimony.
The next move was to introduce an
editorial, June %, 1901. It was en-
titled "a Plea for Sporting States:
man." The editorial was concerning
a visit Of Tillman to a cock-fght held
in Sumter county, prior to date Of
editorial. 1t was charged that he:
lost $1,000 on the fight, which is al
legged was>d in large measure to
MS habit that enables him very fre-
quently to see double and dtshheer+efQls-
be saw more sand in the craw Of his
chicken than it really possessed.
A second editorial from the State Of
Oct. 26, 1898, under the head Presto
-Change," came next. 1t dealt in
part with TiIman's record as COM
mander Of the First South Carolina.
1t was charged In this editorial that
Tillman when lieutenant colonel Of
the regiment took the part Of the
privates and advocated the disband-
ment Of the regiment, and as soon as
he succeeded to the colonelency he
sides with the officers and went to un-5
do what he had formerly done. 1t
charged practically that he deserted
his men when be was made the head
of'the regiment.
Next number Of editorial ]:
paragraphs rejecting on Tillman
were read from the State. Some
Of these paragraphs referred to
articles reprinted from the New
York World and New York Sun. It
was asked to introduce these clip
pings in evidence because theJ appear
ed in the State and the references in
the editorial paragraphs were to them.
The state objected to this and after
argument the court allowed the clip
pings and editorials to be admlJted.
The Argument, while short, was In
teresting. Mr.. Nelson argued that
the defense had right to snow that
deceased bore ilI-will toward the en-
tise Tillman family, and that it was
right and just to put IN The evidence.
A WAR OF WORDS.
Mr. B.llinger objected because Of the
political coloring tnst was being given
the case.
Mr.. Nelson rose quietly in his place
were in slow, measured voice, replied
that any statement from any source
whatever, charging him with endeaV-
uring to make the case political one
was false.
Mr. Bellinger arose again and said
that while ne did not mean any re-
hecuion in the sense that Mr.. Nelson
seemed to take it. be did think that
il was the intention to give slight
political coloring to the case. He said
be was willing to reiterate his state
ment Or the outside Of the court
house.
Mr.. Nelson was in no way excited.
BE rose to reply as calmly as before.
He said that the explanation OF Mr..
lBellipger was as tisfactory as his
original statement. He said he saw
no reason to change his original state
msnt.
Matters began to look little
squally at this juncture and Judge
Gary took a hand. He said that the
matter must be dropped, and recogniz-
ed Mr.. Crawford. The gentleman
eloQuently addressed himself to the
question that editorials or articles re-
fecting on Senator Tillman could not
be used in the case OF the state vs..
James Il. Tillman. he urged that
only snch writings as reflected direct
ly on the defendant were competent
evidence.
Col. Johnston replied for the de-
fense and was eloquent and interest
ing indeed. Before be finished the
court announced that it had made up
its mind. he instructed the editorials
to be read, and told the jury to give
them such weight as they, the jury
men, thought they deserved.
One of the editorials, as well as the
clipping denounced the two Tillmans,
Ben and jim, in the most drastic
terms. 1t referred to the Tillman
McLaurin scrap in the senate and
the incident Of Jim Tillman's with
drawal Of the invitation to Roosevelt
to present the jenkins sword at
Charleston. These writings called a
spade a spade all the way through and
we're the most scathing in thought,
word and expression.
Other editorials were read in which
it was charged that Jim Tillman's
vote was not Of a very high character.
1t was charged that his supporters
were mainly blind tiger keepers gam
blers, Saudhillers and mill operatives.
1t was considered good work for the
defense to get these editorials in eVi-
dence. There are four mill opera
tives on the jury and several sand
hillerS.
WITNESSES ON TIE STAND.
T. D. Mitchell, who was living in
Columbia last year testified that he
had a speaking acquaintance with
Ir ~ tho 1act