The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1903-10-14

lines or Gn61r QeIenC6 lot ulm. Lucy
started upon a third, but early adjourn
ment prevented it's complete develop
ment. At the outset additional en-
phasis was given to the original provo.
cation for the deed of the accused.
The great mass of condemnatory edlto-
rials written by MI. Gonzales regard
ing him is alraedy in evidence. These
utterances had been made part of the
case of the defense no less than a part
of the case of the prosecution. The
additions made to them today seemed
to be inspired by a two-fold purpose.
The suggestion that James 81. Tiliman
and B. r. Tillman were linked togeth-
or in apprehension by Mr.. Gonzales
was one inference put toward, and the
other was that the younger Tillman
drew his political strength from the
ranks of the gamblers, blind tigers and
the factory vote. The import of such
testimony may be inferred when the
ayocations of the Jurors before whom
the case is being tried is remembered.
But the reading of the editorials did
not consume much time, and was an
incident rather than a feature OF the
proceedings
The burden Of the labor to which
the defence devoted itself was the ia
PRODUCTION Of witnesses to prove that
Mr.. Gonzales made threats Of personal
violence against Mr.. Tillman. 1t is
understood that the normal order Of
procedure would have been the intro
duction Of testimony to deny the
threats said to have been made by Mr..
Tillman himself, followed by the proof
Of threats made by Mr.. Gonzales. But
this sequence could not be observed by
reason Of the absence of certain witness
es. However, that is detail Of prac-
tice rather than matter for public
consideration. AS the event proved,
the defence devoted itself to bringing
toward men to prove that from various
reasons James 81. Tillman was. or at
least might have been. justified in ap-
pretending that n. G. Gonzales con-
templated personal attack upon him.
A half dozen or SO men we're put on
the stand to establish this conclusion.
The testimony they gave all bore the
same significance, and while the law
yers for the State attacked them Wig
orously and at times showed discrep-
ancies in their words and conduct, the
sum total Of impression at the end OF
the struggle leaned to the conclusion
that, whether threats had been made
or not, Mr.. Tillman had been repeat
edly informed that they had been.
The following purports to be no
more than general summary: Theo-
dore D. Mitchell, formerly detective
for the Southern Railway, swore that
he protested to Mr.. Gonzales on q
street car on one occasion against the
editorial attacks made upon Mr.. Till
man. He swore Mr. Gonzales said be
could slap Mr.. Tillman's face and that
he (Mr. Tillman) would not resent it,
and that Mr.. Gonzales further de-
clared that eff ever he (Mr. Tillman)
batted his eye at him he would fill
him SO full of lead be would never be
able to tote it off,
The witness said he subsequently
told Mr.. Tillman of this conversation.
In the Cross examination the State
brought out the fact that that was pos
sibly che one and Only conversation
Mr.. Mitchell had ever had with Mr..
Gonzales; that the language imputed
to Mr.. Gonzales was not such as he
might have been expected to use
that Mr.. Mitchell shortly after the
homicide, spoke to A[r. A. E. Con
zaies in reprehension of Mr. Tillman' Is
act; that he made no mention of the
conversation with MI. N. G. Gonzales,
save to Mr.. Tillman and certain Mr..
Cotton, in Columbia, until many
months after the tragedy.
The second @'threat'' witness for the
defence was MIR. A. J. Flowers, 6
young man from Darlington, who was
one time street car conductor in Co.
lumbia. He swore that in the summe,
of 1902 Mr.. Gonzales and several Other
persons boarded car on which he was
working. Daring the trip that en-
sued Mr.. Flowers declared that he
beard Mr.. Gonzales say that if he die
not succeed in defeating Jim Tillmar
that he (Tillman) would never be
seated. as he (Gonzales} would kill the
rascal. In letter from Mr.. Flowers
to Mr.. Tiilman this language waE
somewhat varied. Mr.. + lowers die
not mention what he had heard tc
anyone TIL comparatively recently.
He was q soldier under Col. Tillman.
The State attacked hlun 6ercely in
cross examination.
Mr.. P. ". Hughes, a farmer, who
was originally from the Graniteville
section, followed. He claimed to have
known Mr.. Gonzales slightly for years.
He testified TO conversation in the
street at Columbia with Mr.. Gonzales
in the presence of several other men.
In response to protests against his
editorial utterances against Mr.. Till.
man, Mr.. Gonzales declared, accord
ing to Mr.. Hughes, that that blacklee
gambler (Mr. Tillman) would get jus.
tice after the election, even if it had
to be administered with lead.
Mr.. Angus Blalock heard the
Hughes Gonzales conversation just re-
ferred to, and he substantiated the
former wituess's account of it in es-
sential details.
Then came Mr.. v. B. Cheshire, a
printer, of Anderson. S. C. MI. Che
shire swore to conversation he had
with a Mr.. Geer, a travelling repre-
sentative of the State neucnsror Tho