The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1903-06-14

Pines, who knew him last winter. His
Testimony and bearing upon the stand GER
tainly indicated that he had no feeling in
the matter except to come here and tell
the plain, simple truth, without bias OF
passion on either side.
Then we have Mr.. Hocutt; and after
dragging the town they found three men
who said that he owed them some money.
We have brought n B. Broughton Joe J.
Bernard and j. d. Allen, who have known
him all his life and they say that his
character is good. We brought his old
employer, Mr. Dewitt Smith, who investi.
gated his character and had him in his
employ three years He said his character
was good. So did Senator Richardson, Dr.
Griffin Mr. Barnes and other friends who
had known him during all the years he
lived in Johnston county. We brought
also a colored man whose character is
proven by the Governor Of the State, a
Judge of the Supreme Court, former
Congressman and the presidents of the
banks. cotton mill, merchants and farm
ers of Wilson county. They say that he
is a man of remarkably good character,
and he certainly shows it upon the stand
His employers here say the same.
Now. that is the evidence we have pre-
sented to show that there was a fight. Our
theory is that Mr. Haywood was knocked
down Mr.. Robert e. Denny says that he
saw Mr. Haywood after the shooting take
I'D his hat. Mr. Woollcott testifes that
before Mr.. Haywood reached his office he
saw him have on stiff felt hat like this
with rim of dust around it (this was
while the officer had him) The deputy
sheriff, Mr.. Separk, says he
saw him brush the dust off
his hat. Mr.. Separk, who ar
rested him before he put his pistol up,
knows that no fictitious wound could have
been inflicted for he arrested him imme-
diately and took him to his office. He
had him to put his head to one side and
saw a red spot two inches square and i'll
that a raised place as big as his thumb.
Mr.. Victor Boyden saw this intensely red
spot as did Mr.. Whitaker; he saw the red
spot two inches square on the right side
of his facial the rest Of his face pale.
Then he is carried into Jail; it is dark,
and single lamp gives but a dim light.
Old friend Parham (kind-hearted man. we
thank him for his kindness to us during
these three months) did not see the wound
in the dim light that night, but the next
morning when he was ministering to his
prisoners needs he asked, what is tie
matter with your syc?" He says it looked
red here and a dark brown place or bruise
near the eye and the blood had settled
under his right eye. At that time, he
says he had not heard that there had
been any difficulty. Can any one deny
that there had been fight?
Now, that evidence-four witnesses to
the fight, four witnesses to the dust on
the hat, or hat on the ground. and four
witnesses as to the wound Twelve wit
nesses and none of them attacked. If that
does not prove a fight may 1 ask what
testimony would? Who says there was no
fight? The old man who runs the Apex
blind tiger says there was no fight. He
is the man who served a term in Jail.
According to the views of Mr.. Simpson
expressed at the time, there could not be
any fight; and yet Immediately after MAX
ing that statement he said that there
might have been a fight without his seeing
it. If anybody else has said that there
was no fight / have not heard it. If any
body else has denied the fight they have
failed to come to the witness stand. Where
is the States much heralded testimony?
If there was fight then this case can
not be more than manslaughter, and that
there was not a fight it will take very
rash, a very reckless man to deny.
Now, if you Honors please, our theory
is this There was a fight between these
two men; there was a fight at the lower
steps of the post Office Mr. Haywood
was Immediately to the north or immedi-
20 81 fho+ OH oh ~
the parapet to the side of the steps, and
it was there at the steps that the fight
was. Our theory is confirmed by the fact
that at least three-fourths of the wit
nesses for the State and for the defense
put Mr.. Skinner opposite to the south
steps, leaving the sidewalk there Our
theory is that the men met here fortui-
tously. Mr. Haywood was going out Of
the court house with paper in his hand
and met Mr.. Skinner and the alteration
occurred. Mr.. Haywood was struck down,
Mr. Skinner jumped back, clearing for ac-
ton and Mr.. Haywood got his pistol and
shot first That is the whole thing. When
he got into the street Mr.. Skinner showed
a disposition of returning to the fight and
began to turn again; Mr. Haywood fired
and that shot did not take effect. In
time we will show why that shot did not
take effect; that shot did not take effect
for the same reason that Mr.. Haywood
stood there with the smoking pistol IN
his hand ready to fire again if it was ne
The shot fired the second time
was a precautionary shot fired to deter
the man from returning; and three other
shot in that pistol we're not fired because
Mr.. Haywood was determined not to fire
except in case of necessity; and that ne
cessity did not arise. AS l have said be-
fore our theory is consistent with the
and honor of both of these men.
The States theory is discreditable to both.
1t would make one a murderer and the
other coward We deny both state
ments The fact that Mr. Skinner was on
the sidewalk at or near the lower steps
destroys the theory of the State.
Now, if your Honors pleases, we are en-
titled to bail if evidence is to be believed.
This is not a case in any phase of it which
can go to the jury as murder in the first
degree. 1t is plain it seems to me that
the only question that will go to the jury
or be submitted to the jury is as to wheth-
er it is excusable homicide only or man
slaughter; and upon that condition we are
entitled to bail. We are entitled to bail
unless generalization is clearly proven, aid
+ ba ov;aoxao doac not nrovp IL blIt dis