The Roswell daily record. [volume] (Roswell, N.M.) 1903-current, 1909-07-28

ry to the end was simply an appeal
! for hung jury, no more, no less
If when the members of the jury got
together to consider their verdict
some of them recalled facts forgotten
by others, and they called their at
tention to 1t, then it was the right OF
! the members to base their verdict on
| this refreshened memory.
If some of the jurors, after hear
ing all of this testimony, forget some
of 1t, is it not reasonable to suppose
that some of the witnesses in the
great excitement incident to seeing
man shot down, should remember
some of the incidents connected with
it in a different manner from other
witnesses. is it not possible that
this should be so and their testimony
as TO the main facts of the killing be
true and accurate. There is always
conflict in the testimony of witnesses.
No two witnesses ever agree as to
, the minor details of any case, and in
this case the small discrepancies as
the exact language used was not
material. as they all gave substanti-
ally the effect of it. Then all witness
Some would be observing one partic-
ular thing and some another, but the
main facts were testified to as sub
stantially the same.
There is nothing in the testimony
to show that a change of venue was
not asked for. nothing to indicate
that the defendant wanted an inme-
diate trial and besides all this has
nothing to do with the question of
whether or not w. T. Wells Unlawful
ly killed ollie Shirley.
Taking up the question as to whom
was the first violater of the law, Mr..
Hervey said the purpose of the de-
fense in this was to weave the union
ilto this case. Ii was an attempt with
smooth tongue and in cold and
calculating manner 10 shift the con
troversy. Nothing before the killing
had anything to do with it. All this
was smoke. fuss and feathers to con
fuse the jury and all this conspiracy
buncombe and talk of violaters OF
the law had nothing to do with the
case. There was no connection be-
tween ii and whether w. 7. Wells is
guilty of the murder of Ollie Shirley
Wells had no right to kill Shirley
because he had a right to use the
sidewalk. This was no excuse for
murder. 1t had nothing to do with
the case. He had no right to carry a
gun there
the Territory had amounted 20 moth
ing. The conversation between Wells
and the deceased was practically Civ
en- as the same by the four Witnesses
of the Territory and by Wells. That
of Rogers was a little different, but
1t simply served to show that he was
telling what he thought he heard and
saw. If there had been collusion be
tween the witnesses, they would not
have differed ON this point. Then Mr..
Hervey shortly and briefly onpared
the testimony of these four Witnesses
with that of the defendant.
The testimony OF these witnesses,
is, said Mr.. Hervey, just as worthy of
belief as that of the defendant. There
was a mutual dislike in this case,
one for the other. Wells hated the
union and the members of the union
disliked Wells. But the Witnesses in
this case for the Territory We're no;
so slick and shrewd as w T. Wells,
but just as truthful.
The four witnesses for the Terri
tory did not deny the threats report
ed TO have been made to the negroes,
and over which so must fuss has been
made. but simply testified that they
did not hear them.
Vos, Robinson and Phillips. three
utterly disinterested witnesses, told
the truth and the attorneys for the
defense jumped up like toads on a
hot rock to try and discredit their
testimony. II was not at all fair to
these Witnesses.
Freeland was the butt of the at
tack of the defense. He was an int
crested witness, il was true. but he
was there with a friend and had seen
him shot down without any excuse or
cause. and of course he was interest
ed. He could not help but be.
As to the fund for the prosecution
of Wells, il had not been shown 10
have been raised. There was no law
yer who had appeared to help in this
case as the result of this fund. Mr.
Mr.. Freeland had been telling the
truth as he saw it regardless of the
testimony of the other witnesses.
Then as TO the minutes of the un-
ion They had been permitted in the
case by the defense. They showed
that there had been no deep. desper
ate. dark plot of a band of conspira-
tors The defendant had been trying
TO sneak out of his own deeds and to
hind behind the errors of the union