The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1903-02-25
BAIL REFUSED ]. 4. TILLhAH.
Chief Justice Pope bets on the
Evidence.
MANY EFIOlV7s MADE.

man, charged with the murder or n.
G. Gonzales and now confined in the
Riehland county Jail.
The hearing Was resumed In the
sunreme court room, having been ad-
io1zned from Newberry on the 18th
aigS., at 10 c'lcock and continued IN
4 til nearly 5 with an intermission from
1.35 until 2.40 p. m.
The prosecution was represented by
Solicitor J.sW. Thurmond, ex-Attorney
General G. D. Bellinger and Judge
.Andsew Crawford.
The defense vas represented by Con-
gressman-elect G. ". Croft Of Aiken
and ex-Solicitor P. Fl. Nelson Of Co.
lumbia. Ex-Judge 0. W. Buchanan,
Messrs. c.. Z. Blease Of NeWberry and
5 G. r. Rembert of Richland, Of counsel
for the defense, were also present but
mot actively participating. During
most Of the dae about 100 spectators
Wsre in the room, the number at times
increasing. Mr.. B. 3. Tillman, Jr..,
q son of Senator Tillman, was spec
tater.
At the opening Col. Croft read q
waiver of his legal right to be present
by the defendant, Col. Tillman, who
did not in person appear.
The reading of the a6idavits consum-
ed one hour and half. Mr.. Crawford
reading those of the prosecution and
Nj. Nelson those of the defense.
Mr.. NELSON OPENS.
At n.30 the argument was opened by
Nj. Nelson for the defense. He was
followed by Messrs. CRAWFORD, .Thur-
mond and Bellinger for the State. Al
ter the recess Mr.. Croft closed the
case for the defense.
Nr. Nelson clearly and rapidly dis
cussed the evidence, taking up afi-
dayits seriatim and disposing Of their
hearing from the point of view Of the
defense. He stressed the reply of the
defense in the large number Of afh-
dayiSs sustaining the character of the
a6ant Holsonbacke against the effort
of the State TO impeach it. Reaching
the affidavit Of the afiant White, he
was interrupted by Justice Pope, who
said that argument as TO thas affidavit
was not necessary. he then proceeded
TO anaiyze the States afidavits, point
ing ont what he regarded their discre-,
paneies and weaknesses and arguing
self-defense based on the afidavits OF
the State. He then took up the legal
aspect Of the application. Mr.. Nelson's
case was brief, concise and lucid ez-
position Of the case for the defense,
without especial effort at oratorical
effect.
FOR THE PROSECUTION.
judge Crawford drew the courts
attention. TO the alleged threat: l
have made him show the white feather
several times already and If he crosses
nv path will make him do it again. !"
He argued forcibly that this in connec-
ton with the previous conduct Of Mr.
Gonzales constituted no threat what
ever. Mr.. Gonzales had never attack
ed Tillman, had never drawn weapon
upon him, had never made any
demonstration of violence towards him
-ss had never made him show the
white feather" and so had given Mr..
Tillman no cause to fear bodily harm
from him. Having never made him
show the white feather" the language
even If true meant nothing. AS Till
mans life and limb had been safe un-
der the so-calied white feather per-
formance of the past, why did Tillman
kill Gonzales for simply doing that
which caused him the humiliation Of
showing the white feather?" There
had been no personal encounter and
the white feather" must have been
only ii political sense, the result Of
the editorial attacks which ended last
Sentember Mr., Crawford then
argued that having assisted materially
in defeating Mr.. Tillman for COVER
nor. Gonzales had no motive to
threaten Tillman as to try to take his
life. Tillman was the Vanquished ;
Gonzales the victor. He could under
stand why Tillman should desire re-
venge and so could understand his
declaring, according to the affidavit of
o. D. Black: "By God. I am going
to kill him. and the intimation con-
tained in his language to Hon. W. B.
Cause. Tillman made threats; Con
zales made none. Tillman wanted
blood Gonzales did not. Tillman
armed himself for the purpose, and
Gonzales did not.
THE SOLICITOR.
Solicitor Thurmond followed in an
argument covering the law and facts.
No threat had been made by Nj Con
zaies. What he had said, admitting
the truth of the alleged threats for the
sake of argument, was no stronger
than criticisms. If such language
could be construed as threats then
every candidate, for example, that ap-
peared on the hustings would have a
right; to assume that his life was in
peril. ANY one who had experience
In the court house" knows how easy
it is to prevail upon many people to
make afidavits as to character.
Mr.. Thurmond comprehenisvely ar
gued the law OF the case, citing with
emphasis the rule laid down in a
Texas case as to the meaning Of the
phrase proof is evident" in the con-
stitutional provision as to bail in cap
ital cases. He maintained that bail
should not be granted merely because
the case might contain conflicting afFi-
davits, but that if the court were con
v;nce6 that fhe evidenced of guilt sui