The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1903-10-07

right to ask any questions affecting the
reliability of a witness.
The judge said he could not conceive
that these insinuations were made in
good faith. For instance, he could not
understand how man whose character
had been proved by such an array of
witnesses as had testified to Mr.. Schmitz's
character, could be guilty of the conduct
insinuated at.
Mr.. Daniel replied that these attacks
were made in good faith and they had
witnesses to prove that Mr.. Hocutt had
stolen things in Johnston county
Judge PEBBLES said it was very strange
then that the Solicitor of that district
had not indicted Mr.. Hocutt for theft.
Mr.. Pou arose and said hat Mr.. Hocutt
had never lived twenty miles away from
his home, and they would bring witnesses
into court to prove the charges against
him false.
Mr.. Norris then said that as he was
the one who had examined Mr.. Hocutt,
he could say that every question had been
asked in good faith, and that creditable
witnesses would be produced to swear
that these charges had been brought
against Mr.. Hocutt.
Somebody among counsel for defense
said that all the witnesses on that side
had been attacked in this way At this
there was an indignant denial on the part
of counsel for the State. Mr.. Daniel de
clared they had not attacked Mr. Simms
The cross-eamination was written and he
would stand or fall by that
Mr.. Pou said that if their cross-exami
nation had not been for the purpose of at
lacking Mr.. Simms credibility as a wit
ness, then they had for an hour and
half asked foolish and unnecessary ques-
tions.
Mr.. Daniel and Mr.. Norris both said
they considered the courts criticism OF
the methods of the States counsel was un-
warranted
Mr. Pou remarked that for six months
Mr. Simms' character had been attacked,
Mr. Norris said that not one of those
attacks had come from counsel for the
State
Finally Judge PEBBLES said that if coun-
sci for the State really had good reason
to believe these charges against witnesses,
their methods were permissible. Other
wise they were not.
Capt. Day requested to have word IN
the matter, and said that counsel for the
State had subjected Mr.. Simms to
long cross-eXamnation that was exceed
ingly unpleasant and difficult to submit to,
when they could have summoned Miss
Mattye Pace TO the stand, whose evil
dence, according to Mr.. Jones Fuller,
would entirely corroborate Mr.. Slmms'.
But they had not done this. Instead they
had made a compact with Mr. Fuller not
to call her as a witness, and permitted
her, material witness in this case, to
leave the State without being subpoenaed.
The State of North Carolina had actually
made a compact not to summon witness
whose evidence was material to the case.
THE CASE PROCEEDS.
Major j. j. Bernard, Register of Deeds,
was called. He had known Mr.. Hocutt
l3 or IA years, and had never heard any.
thing against him until this trial. On
| cross-examination witness said he had
never heard his character discussed.
r. E. Williams, of Cary. Had known
Mr.. Hocutt eight years, and his character
was good
Lynn Wilder, of Raleigh. testified to
the good character of Mr.. Simms, and
Paul Lee, of Johnston count" and Raj
eigh, testified to Hocutt's good character.
C. r. Lee, of Raleigh, also gave Hocutt
good character On crossexamination
Mr.. Lee. said he had an idea that he
would be asked about Mr.. Hocutt's char
acter, and he had asked his list employer
and clerk about him.