Keowee courier. [volume] (Pickens Court House, S.C.) 1849-current, 1903-10-07

6B fi6 I0oK1Il dc1tIi ID . tf0 f8je, that he]
gave his second account Of. the shooting
to such nen as DR.; j. w. Babcock aud
August Kohn. Prepared TO meet his
God, ho said he bad sent his slaycr no
message, that 30 far az he was concerned
It was all ended flye months before.
This, in the main, is the case againstJ j.,
II, Tinman. ri
xHE pEFENsE.
What the defense will be is, of course,
impossible to conjecture. To break
down the evidence of the prosecution In
an accepted mode of procedure which
will prove Impossible In this case It is
useless TO impeaoh the yeracity of srch.
persons as Senators Thomas Talbird aud
George w. Brown, of Mrs. Emma O..
Melton, Q. M. Lide and the other eye
witnesses--all of whom are persona of
unusual Intelligence and the highest re-
pute. TO prove by witnesses their
equals I'm character aud intelligence that
N. G.. Gonzales was about to assault j..
I'll. Tillman when Tillman shot Gonzales
is necessary for the making Of case of
self-defense. Can 1t be madep There is
no other legal provication for the killing
which TiIlman can plead, unless it be
that he knew Gonzales had threatened
his life or that he had sent the defendant
q warning message. The implication of
the defendants statements up to this
time has been that some such iustifica-
tion would be attempted. The difficulty
of proving 1t cannot be underestimated
even by the defendants own counsel.
Already one witness for the defense
has testified and she told of alleged re-.
marke the deceased made in her pres
ence concerning the prisoner. Miss
conversation in death chamber, simply
said that Mr.. Gonzales said he "had
made Mr.. Tlllman show the white feather
twice; that Col. Tillman had challenged
him to two duels, which he did not
acknowledge, and that COL Tillman had
no more resentment than to come to the
hotel lobby and offer him a cigar, which
of threat In that, nor did Miss Roper
say that Mr.. Gonzales had made one
Her Testimony, in fact, had no bearing at
all on the killing, since she merely re-
peated the opinion of Jim Tillman which
Mr.. Gonzales had expressed to her, the
same opinion he 30 often expressed in
his paper.
THE "HIGBER LAw.'
This is the legal case. There are in
evidence in the court at Lexington every
copy of The State published during the
year 1902. 1t was during six of those
twelve months that N. G.. Gonzales, as
editor of The State, so persistently as
sailed the public record Of the then
Lieutenant Governor. These editorials
have been read to the jury and the jurors
will have the right to inspect them for
themselves. Can anything be found
therein to justify the defendant in be-
lieving that N. G.. Gonzales would assault
him on sightP II not, is there yet any
thing said in those editorials which
tend to destroy the good reputation
which the defendant may claim to have
hadp Did those editorials unjustly ard
untruly attack his charaoterP The prose-
cution has put the editorials in evidence
in order that the jurors may see for
themselves what they contain-whether
they be scurrilous, unfounded, reckless
diatribes or whether they be specific,
definite charges sustained by ample and
unshakable proof; charges approved and
reiterated by majority of the South
Carolina newspapers; "arges against
the second highest offic, - ~" cor,-
monwealth aspiring to the high.
not charges against a private oiIl... ....
one not candidate for public comic u.e.
And it remains to be established tDlt
these charges were prompted by personal
hostility and not by a high and noble
sense of an EDITORS responsibility to the
people.