Gainesville daily sun. (Gainesville, Fla.) 190?-1938, 1907-06-20
THOMAS ACQUITTED
or KILLING MAXEY SCOFIELD

that reason alone, that you fired your
gun? A. It was. yes sir.
Q. You believe, then. you say,
from those circumstances, that you
were in danger of suffering great
bodily harm? A. l did,
Solicitor Rivers subjected the de-
PENDANT to rigid cross exahinatlon,
but failed to shake his direct testi
mony in any material particular.
In Rebuttal.
At the conclusion of the statement
of defendant the defense announced
that it had concluded, and the prose-
cution began its rebuttal, L. T..
Stringer being the first witness. He
resided at Bell and was well acquaint-
ed with defendant and deceased. He
was at the depot at Bell with Maxey
Scofield on the Sunday afternoon pre-
ceding the killing; he was in close
company with Scofeld and Oscar
Whitefield that afternoon, but he did
not hear all the conversation between
them. Scoheld left the depot about
an hour and half by sun. He saw
Scofield sitting on his mule talking
to Whitefeld, but did not hear what
was said Witness did not remember
seeing Pipkin there that afternoon. In
fact he was not positive about any
thing, and the defense did not con.
slider his testimony of sufficient inn
portance to cross examine him.
Both sides Close.
The State and defense then an
nounced that both sides closed and
the attorneys were instructed to go
to the Jury, each side being given one
hour and half for argument. The
taking of testimony was concluded at
10 a. m, and at 1915 Col. Christopher
Matheson opened the argument for
the State. preceding his remarks by
reading the Indictment. Col. Mathe-
son spoke for forty,fiye minutes, and
made plain, unimpassioned address,
combining himself principally TO a re-
view OF the evidence, especially con-
tending that from the defendants
own statement he was not justified
I'm taking the life OF deceased.
Col. B. A. Thrasher
Followed Col. Matheson. He began
his argument at ~ O'Clock, and con-
tended that the only evidence that
Maxey Scofeld had been killed was
given by the defense. Like the attor-
ney who preceded him, Col Thrasher
dwelt principally upon the evidence,
but took different view Of the same.
He grew quite imprisoned at times.
and contended that his client was
justifable in taking the nfe Of Maxey
scofield
Congressman Frank Clark.
Col. Thrasher spoke for % minutes
only, leaving 2S minutes of his time
for his eminent associate. Mr.. Clark
approached the issue in solemn, dig
nlfied manner. particularly calling
the attention OF the jury TO the power
with which they we're invested--the
power to take human life-and the
Importance Of their careful considera-
ton of the case He carefully review
ed the evidence from the standpoint
Of the defense. and paid considerable
attention to the law Of selt.defense.
He presented the side OF his client
In an able manner. and closed with
an appeal 10 the jury TO acQuit the
defendant and permit him TO return
TO his wife and children. Col Clark,
according 70 the time kept BY Judge
Wills. spoke just one hour, and had
seven minutes @ hss credit when he
closed az 1889 b. a.. when the court
took recess until 2;15 O'Clock
Aftsrnoo0 Session.
Court reassembled at the appointed
hour. 2;i5. and States Attorney Riv-
srs began the closing argument for
the prosecution. which was the final
areument IN the case. The manner
in which be vent over the testimony,
nom start 60 finish, showed that BE-
had given The case careful coaaitera.
ton. and bis presentation % The
states cause vas considered as sod