The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1904-05-28
A Day Marked by Hot Lee
gal Battle.
Continued from Page One.)

felt compelled to order verdict Of not
| gullty or withdraw juror ana make
| m1strlal and continue the case to
| De tried at the next term Oh court.
! The court ordered a nistrlal and said
| to the male defendant that in bring
| ing the colored woman 10 court every
| day IN his buggy he had SHOWN an
| absolute want of all sense or decency
| ana That If the trial had gone on and
| ne mad been convicted the court would
! nave given him the highest penalty al
! lowed by law. Mr.. Loftln arose and
! said that his client was not to blame,
| that he had advised him 10 brlng the
colored woman to court as ne dld. The
/ court told him that he had given his
| client very bad advice and II made nirl
| very mad. These are the klnd OF men
| from whom and the circumstances I'LL
der which respondents nave hunted
! far and near for and OBTAINED ATM
daYits from parties chatlng under Just
| punishment and their relations ana
| friends. The foregoing remarks do
not apply to Messrs. Stewart and God
| win, Mr.. Ormond and Mr.. Varser, OF
Lenoir, c. M. Muse, of Harne-t, ana
| Mr.. Brooks, of Johnston, as 40 lot
| remember any cases lost by them
| which excited their anger.
AT the last meeting it was ordered
| IIidI respondents SnOQlu ilttNC III u
Sunday the 21st day of May, 20 lille
affidavts.
Against More Aflidayi;s.
''rhe fling of ahidavits by them
ceased Saturday unless some new
matter is brought out by the State.
| To accept the counter proposition
would be to give them what they nave
been asking for and pay them for
doing so and would be reopening the
case for further affidavits.
such a position is unreasonable
and cannot be entertained for a mo-
ment This matter ought to have
been heard on affidavit rule and an
swer. But the charge of drunken
ness forced me to have the matter in
Vestigated. Your technical defense in
wolves questions of law. and if | have
erred in my rulings thereon the Su-
| prame court will reverse me, but IL
you force me to try the facts of this
case you will be bound by my find
ings and hence you have all to los-
by rejecting my proposition ana MOTH
| ing to gain except the opportunity or
again going to the country upon a
charge of unfairness.
Fifteen Minutes to Confer.
The Judge then stated that the re-
| spondents would be allowed fifteen
| minutes in which to confer ana ac-
] cept or reject the offer TO move u
another judge upon the conditions
setforth. Counsel for the respondent
retired and almost Immediately re-
turned, Mr.. Busbee stating chat they
| were inclined to accept the PROPOSE
ton of the court, but desired longer
time in which to draft an order for
j removal by consent to be signed by
Judge and counsel for the respond
ents. Some question arising AS 10
! the taking of additional aftidaVits IL
| was agreed that all the testimony
on both sides would be taken today
except such evidence as might be
necessary in rebuttal. Mr.. Walter
Daniels, who declined to make III
affidavit was present in Derson, and a.
to him Judge PEBBLES ruled that his
testimony if taken should be taken
today. Additional time was granted
and counsel for the respondents re-
| tired to confer and draft the order for
| removal.
The Court Reconvcn"s.
During the long recess that ensued
there were numerous conferences be-
tween the attorn eys for the respond
ents and the fudge in the effort to
reach an agreement 5as to the order
of removal and wien court finally re-
convened at 2:30 O'Clock it seemed
that the agreement would slip away
into the air. Counsel for the re-
| spondents insisted that the order rs
suggested by Judge PEBBLES was diff
Ifcrent from the proposition which he
had outlined during the morning SEES
| SIGN. The mitch arose over Judge
PEBBLES insistance upon inserting in
the order the provision that the Judge
who the case was to be heard, was to
E,.1 H..
ma&er was argued at length by
Messrs. Busbee, Shaw and Judge Pee
bles the latter stating hotly at one
time that he had made his PROPOSE
ton, stood by it andthat it had been
rejected.
A Surprise Sprung.
A final agreement was at length ar
rived at as outlined above and the
judge then proceeded to spring a sur
prise by reading an amendment to
the rule to show cause originally is
sued by him as follows:
! North Carolina, Cumberland Coun-
ty Superior Court. The rule issued is
this proceeding dated May 10, 1904
is amended by inserting after the
word attached in line II, the follow
ing, to-wit. And the personal knowl-
edge obtained by the undersigned by
reading in the Charlotte Observer, the
Wilmington Messenger; the News
and Observer, the publications refer
red 10 In the affidavit and seeing the
respondents on Monday, April 1904,
confirm and carry out the statements
made in said publications by continu-
ing all tho contested actions wherein
each side was represented by counsel
and also by personal inspection OF
the original telegram sent to the Will
mington Messenger, referred to in Atm
finteroga tory. Objection by respond
ents. Grounds of objection asked and
not given. Respondents except.
AS will be seen from the above the
judge is seeking to strengthen his
case by bringing in the evidence OF his
own sources as to the matter OF al
legged contempt so that there Is IN the
rule as it now reads as amended the
color Of direct contempt. After furth-
er argument the taking of numerous
exceptions and the statement py MT.
Tillet and that in case Judge Brown
would not hear the case the respond
ents would not attempt to pieaa that