Arizona republican., 1906-07-29
THE WILL OF FLOOD
 STILL UNDISCOVERED
Multiplying Evidence Ofthe UnsOund-
 ness of His Hind.

The widow of John Flood yesterday denied a statement made in the course of the preliminary examination the day before of James Mccarthy for the killing of her husband, that Flood had said on leaving home on that fatal morning that he intended to fix that Irishman." She said that her husband made no threat, nor did he mention the name of MT. Mccarthy. When he got ready to go down town he asked his daughter to get his driving whip and when she handed it to him he bade her goodbye. There was nothing else said
 The supposed will of Flood was not discovered yesterday but it is thought there is one somewhere in existence, and that it was drawn by J. A. Kilroy about two years ago. Flood never told his wife or daughter that he had made a will but from conversations between him and Kilroy overheard by his daughter, 1t was believed that his will had been made.
 It is now pretty clearly established that Flood was a paretic and that for some time his brain had been giving way under a disease for which he had been treated for several years. A dog en acts, which only an insane man could have committed. had been per formed by him recently, to say nothing of his wild outbreak in the justices court a couple of months ago.
 Not long before his death he went to the residence of Judge Woodward with whom he had never done any business and to whom he had never spoken. He asked Mrs. Woodward if the judge was in need of hay. She said not when Flood said he would go to the barn and see for himself. He did not return to the house but later brought a load of hay and filled the barn.
 For several days before his death he had been driving aimlessly about the home of Ed. Olsen who took part in the subduing of him in the office of the justice. He had never before been seen in that out of the way place before but for short time before his death he drove back and forth in front of the house almost daily.
 Regarding a criticism of him for his failure to hold Flood on a peace bond at the time of his outbreak two months ago. Justice Burnett last night said:
 During all the years I have occu- pied this position l have never until this time been cognizant of a charge against me, in any instance, of failing in my duty. It does not seem to me necessary to reply to any charge now made in that direction. The para graph in the sheet shown is so evident ly from the pen of an ignorant person that it is not worthy of notice. But in order that the public may have the complete facts relative to the effort toward restraining Flood after the af- fair in my court, a few weeks ago, it| may be as well to dignify the para graph with attention.
 ''When James Mccarthy came to me and asked for a warrant of arrest to| issue for John Flood, the only com plaint he had to make was that of disturbing his peace. in that Flood called him vile names. For this of fense if a defendant is found guilty, the punishment is seldom to exceed a fine of S10. At that time McCarthyI could not satisfy me that he had evil dence to corroborate his complaint and refused to issue the warrant HeI went away to interview some persons whom he said must have heard FloodI use the vile expressions towards him. During that interview with Mccarthy he said something to me about a peace bond, and I asked him if Flood had threatened him. He answered that he did about year and a half ago, but not to his face or in his hearing Sub