Graham guardian., 1904-02-19
TOM HORNS CONFESSION,
Continued from page 2.)

try; and if we could describe to
the author our feelings at different
times IT would be better STILL The
experience of my life or the first
man | killed, was when | was only
26 years old. He was coarse
son =
Lafors: How much did you get
for killing those fellows? In the
Powell and Lewis case you got
5000 apiece. You killed Lewis in
the corral with six-shooter. ]
would like to have seen the ex-
preston on his face when you shot
him.
Horn: He was the scaredest son
y you ever saw. How did you
come TO know that, Joe?
Lafors: / have known every
thing you have done, Tom, for a
many years. l know where you
was paid this money.
Horn; Yes, / was paid this
money on the train between Chey-
enne and Denver -
Lafors: Why did you put the
rock under the kids head after
you killed him? That is one of
your marks, isn't it.
Horn: Yes, that is the way j
hang out my sign to collect my
money for a lob of this kind,
Lafors: Have you got your
money yet for the killing Of Mic
kell?
Horn: l got that before l did
the job.
Lafors; You got $500 for that.
Why did you cut the price?
Horn: l got S2,l00.
Lafors: How much is that
man?
Horn: That is for three dead
men, and one man shot at five
times. Killing men is my special
ty. l look at it as a business
proposition, and | think | have a
corner on the market
1t appears that when they re
turned to the Office in the afternoon
the conversation at first consisted
of stories told by each about vari-
Gus troubles they had been con-
nected with, and such stories con
cerned the killing Of people years
ago, as we are led to understand
from the testimony, but they are
not related in the evidence; and
the witness 0hnhaus did not take
down that part Of the conversation
1t is argued that these two parties,
Horn and Lafors, were merely ex
changing stories, or each telling
yarns, and trying to see which
could tell the tallest yarn about
killing people, and that the recital
by Horn of his connection with
the crime In question was merely
one yarn among others that he
told which had no existence in
fact. The witness Obnbaus testi-
fed that he took down everything
with the exception of the stories
told Immediately after they came
into the Office in the afternoon, and
he read or testified to all the con-
yersation contained in his notes.
1t is proper to state, before pass
ing in review the other oircum-
stances in the case, that Horn, tes-
tifying in his own behalf, admitted |
making all these statements to La
fors at the time mentioned. While
admitting that be had been drink
ing some, he testified that be knew
what he was saying, and he re
membered all of it except that he |
did not remember having said that
it was the best shot he bad ever
made and the dirtiest trick he had |
ever done. He testified, however,
that, if the witness Ohnhaus had so
taken it down, he did not doubt
his having made the statement.
He explained the affair by stating
that everything was said as a
"josh." He says that be saw that
Lafors was assuming and insinuat
ing that be had killed Willie Mic
kell, and be did not wish to dis
appoint him, but would have said
or admitted anything that be
thought would please him He
testified fuIther that at one point
in the conversation he was afraid
that Lafors would discover that he
was lieing. He denied, when testi-
flying, that he killed the boy, or
that be had ever killed any one.
The three witnesses to the con-
versation testified that, although
the plaintiffin error may have been
he was not drunk, but
was sober; and Lafors and Snow
testified that his manner during
conversation was sincere. On the
other hand, the defense introduced
several witnesses who saw him on
that day and the preceding even
ing, and they testified that be was
and was under the in
auence of liquor, and quite talka.
tive; and that he was usually given
10 talking considerably and boast
ing when in that condition, but
that at other times he was not so