The St. Louis Republic. [volume] (St. Louis, Mo.) 1888-1919, 1903-10-14
LAWYERS Try 10 Make 1t Appear
That He Could Believe Con
Zales Would Attack Him.
ARGUMENTS WILL END TO-DAY
Prosecution Declares That There
Has Been Too Much Personal
Feeling and Sentiment In
jected Into the Pro
ceedingS..

Lsxia-tou. :. G, oct. E-The jury in
the trial os James II. Tillman listened TO
arguments 10y counsel throughout the day
when court convened to-day an un-
usually large crowd was present. and by
the tiuc tine adjournment was taken to-
rf-rr r.. room WIS IFrk"i, the audience
~i-..uIiaG many women
Contrary tn .hr programme agreed up
ON. the arguments i' IA" jury wcr" not
closed to-day. colonel Croft Of tho de-
Tense and General E~gIInEsr for the State
will conclude their arguments tomorrow.
Colonel Croft, Iaviug one hOur yet re
naming and General BeIliuger nearly two
hours. Thus tie clsc will not go 20 the
jury before tile middle Of the day. as il
viii take some time for the court TO de-
liver the charge after the attorneys have
finished.
Requests by counsel Tor Instructions 10
the jury were read and argued to-day. M
State desires the jury Dee instructed thai
the doctrine Of self-dpfguse requires that
II there Is any reasonably safe WAY Of
escaping. a man must use ii and not take
life: that in order g rstablish the plea
Of seif-defense the ju must he satisfied
by the p-reponderanCe vT evidence that the
person making the plea was not at fault
In bringing on the difficulty. and that he
believed he was in danger OF serious
bodily harm: and, further. that 4 person
OF ordinary prudence would have believed
the same. The State further aFSs that the
jury be instructed that previous threats do
not Justify the taking Of life. unless there
icide.
WHAT DEFENSE ASKS.
h defense asks that the aury be in
structed that the question 10 be deter
mined IS whether or not any person Of
ordinary prudence and reason would have
done as the defendant did: also that a
man may act upon circumstances as they
appear TO him. account being taken OF
any threats that mCy have been COM
muuiCated TO him.. together with the ac-
tons Of the person making them when
met.
Colonel Nelson. for the defense. said the
case had been transferred 10 Lexington
because Of conditions adverse to the de-
PENDANT in Richland County.
Referring TO the liberty OF the press. he
cited the libel law and decisions 10 show
the extent OF this liberty. He then spoke
Of the attitude OF newspapers against the
defendant and critically reviewed the
course OF the late editor.
Colonel Andrew Crawford. for the Stale. |
followed. saying there had been too much
personal feeling end too much sentiment
Injected into the case. Replying To the |
defense. he commended that GOnZales's
mind was clear when he made his dying |
He dwelt at length on the
evidence Of a witness FOR the State who
testified that TIllmau said Good morn
ing 10 Gonzales when they met. He re- /
viewed tie testimony relating 20 threats
with a view 10 showing that the defend
ant was not justified in shooting. Colonel
Crawford commended that Gonzales was
not armed and that he made no demon
SIratou. /
Colonel Croft. who closed for the de-
Tense. was the last attorney to address 4
the jury to-day. He has entered upon n
general summing up Of the case. Mr..
Croft said The turning point IN the case
* whether a mar may act in self-defenSe /
upon the circumstances as they appear 10
him.