The Laurens advertiser. (Laurens, S.C.) 1885-1973, 1903-10-14

ing. Each side will have the equiva-
lent of a day, seven hours of time for
addressing the jury and Judge Gary
announced that on Wednesday morn
ing he would charge the jury and de-
liver the case to 1T.
Today was in the hearing
of witnesses introduced by the State
against the credibility of Richard Hol-
sonback, the witness upon whose tes-
timony the defense's case seems large
ly to rest, n against the credibility
of Il. ID. Mitchell and y. j. Flowers,
who testified to threats by Mr.. Con
gales, and also in hearing the teSti-
mony of witnesses in support of the
credibility of H~olsonback. Mitchell
was recalled to the stand to testify In
his own behalf, after the terrific at
tacks on his reputation by five or six
witnesses who live in Orangeburg and
Columbia.
The proceedings generally We're char
gitude, area, space, variety, volume
and detail of the testimony heard.
Concerning some of these witnesses,
testimony as to religion, politics, and
pedigree were touched upon either in
the questions or answers. Illustrat
ing this and without intending to pas
Il any way upon the sound
ness or weakness of Judge Ga
RVS view, he delivered one
ruling that created an impression
iiotiiil6 oIoIl VI SldItllnS. JOnn blN-
ingstone of ~Orangeburg was on the
stand and had sworn that he would
not believe II. ID. Mitchell on his oath.
Mr.. Nelson entered upon the cross ex-
animation and inquired If he supported
Tom johnson of Sumter for
against ]. William Stokes of Orange
burg. Mr.. Elliott objected. Mr.. Nell
son said substantially that 1t was de-
sired to know whether or not the wit
ness was a white man in a white mans
1 n Otn ~ ~ ~ ~ L.. - ~
groes. Mr.. Bellinger protested vehe-
mently; fractional n State politics
had already been injected into the trial
and the name of Senator Tillman had
been dragged in; had the time come
in South Carolina when a mans credi-
bility in the courts turned upon how
, he voted?
Judge Gary ruled and ruled promptly
in the following words, as reported by
the st~enographer:
Generally speaking, Mr.. Bellinger, I
think your view the correct one, but
under our peculiar conditions down
here 1T may affect a man character
Will not say anything further before
the jury. 1 will not state what l in
tended to say before the jury, but J.
think this is competent"
; Whether or not his ruling of the
special judge Is to carry with it the
/ full weight of all that it's language
implies is not here to be discussed. A
little examination and reflection will
show to the average reader that 1t was
important and far-reaching, If It should
be appealed to in the future in the trial
! of causes in South Carolina. 1t is not
unlikely that 1T will excite IN
beyond the borders of this State. Later
in the day, the prosecution appealed to
the precedent set when j.. b. Odom of
Johnston was on the stand to assist in
rebuilding the reputation for truth and
~veracity of Richard Holsonback, who
appears to be the especial pet, priced
and precious witness of the defense.
Replying to a question by counsel for
the State, Odom admitted to being a
Republican. Mr.. Nelson asked If he
were a national or a State Republican
n he said that he was q Republican
in national politics.
When the court opened Judge Gary
announced that on reconsideration he
had concluded hat he went "a little too
far in excluding evidence as to the eye
sight OF Mr.. Gonzales, and he stated
that he would not allow the prosecu-
ton to be prejudiced on that account.
He would, therefore,, allow time for
obtaining witnesses on that point If the
prosecution so desired. The prosecu-
ton did desire such witnesses, but later
In the a stated that they could not
reach Lexington until the afternoon
train arrived. An agreement was then
reached and read in court, both sides
consenting, for the admission of the
Following as evidence and as true:
That N. G.. Gonzales habitually wore
glasses, was near-sighted; his eyesight
was so defective that he could not see
sufficiently we'll without glasses to walk
the streets without them"
A feature of the day was the strong
attack upon the reputation for truth
telling of Il. ID. Mitchell, unanswered
save by himself, who will be remember
ed as the man who accosted Nh. Con-
Zales, so he said, on the street at night
M preached the subject OF Tillman
with Mr.. Gonzales. 1t was Mitchelrs
first and only conversation with Mr..
Gonzales, to whom he had never been
introduced. Mitchell testified thai Mr..
Gonzales told him "If Tillman batted
his eye at him he would FIJI him so full
of lead that he could not tote it off,"
Chief of Police Fischer of Orangeburg,
Mr.. Livingstone of the same town, c.. b.
Simmons and Mr.. E. w. Parker of
Columbia were among those who swore
that they would not believe Mitchell
on his oath. The climacteric point of
this line of testimony, however, was
reached when MI. J. A. SaHey, a cotton
burg, sworn for the State, declared that
he would not believe Mitchell on his
oath and stated in answer to Mr..
Elliott's queries that he nae been sum-
moned to Lexington by the defense,
their expectation being that he would
swear to Mitchells good character.
Later Mitchell was recalled to the
stand and allowed to testify in his own
behalf n related that Livingstone
had had him prosecuted for violating
the fish laws, I'm order to obtain a
reward, and that he had opposed Fischer
for chief of police. Mr.. Sailey, he said,
had supported him for the latter office.
Counse for the defense, before
Mitchell was recalled, appealed to the
court to let him testify as to the alleged
animosity harbored against him by
the witnesses and said i'm effect that he
was a stranger and taken by surprise.
The testimony of Mr.. Salley must in
deed have been a surprise.
When the witness, Mitchell, was on
the stand his demeanor towards Mr..
Bellinger was not of a friendly nature,
while that gentleman was conducting
the CROSS examination. Two or three
witnesses for the defense have been
ugly" towards Mr.. Bellinger. One or
two ave threatened him. Mr.. Bellinger
has borne 1t all with admirable self
%control but II was plain today he felt
that patience had ceased to be a vir-
tue. Nevertheless, he did not lose his
patience M what he said was with
his customary calmness and decision.
He was positive but rigidly courteous.
Seldom in the progress of n case has
a lawyer been the subject of such
demonstrative outbursts from the wit
nesses as Mr.. Bellinger has been dur
Ing this week, and the burden of taking
care of himself has been uDon himself.