The Laurens advertiser. (Laurens, S.C.) 1885-1973, 1914-06-24
AFTER Df[|BERATING ALL NIGHT JURY
is UNABLE TO AGREE ON SULLIVAN CASE

left the waiting room purposely and
maliciously' to attack the deceased
attorney who had just prccc69d them
from he room, or that it was merely
by chance that they struck up with
him outside. The states contention
was that Judging from the actions Of
the SullivanS in the room while Col
Cannon was there, that they purpose
ly followed him outside to accost him
1t was agreed by both sides that Col
Cannon was in heated conversation
with neiShDor OF the Sullvans when
the Sullivan boys emerged from the
waiting room and that Joseph G.. Sui
Ivan took up the conversation which
his ncighbor, Mr.. Levi Wood, had let
drop. On the stand, Joseph Sullivan
testified that he mildly demonstrated
with Col. Cannon about his severe
treatment of the Sullivan family, say
ing to Mr.. Cannon You haven't
shown any respect for the Sullivan
family, you haven't treated us right"
and that Mr.. Cannon replied you're
Just lie". Sullivan said he replied
You have made false statements"
and Cannon replied You're G.
D lie" and drew his walking cane
with which he struck Mr.. Sullivan oy-
er the forehead. Sullivan, according
to his testimony, staggered from the
blow and as he partially recovered
commenced shooting. The defense
contended that Mr.. Sullivan had the
legal right to mildly" demonstrate
with Col. Cannon about tn etrial in
the court room and that it was fol-
lowing his remonstrance that Col
Cannon called the defendant q G.
d lie and struck the blow with the
walking cane. The defendant testi-
fled that he then shot In defense of
his life
The state denied that Col. Cannon
ever called Sullivan lie and that he
was the aggressor, having introduced
testimony that when Sullivan accused
him OF making falst statements Mr.
Cannon replied Don't call me lie"
and that Sullivan replied You're a
G. D. lie" and that following this
the blow from the walking cane and
the shot rom the pistol were SO
close together as to appear simultan-
eous.
An interesting point in the trial
ciI otf
much stress upon was the conflicting
testimony as to the number of Shots.
The attending physicians found indi-
catio!s Of FIVE bullets in the body of
Col. Cannon, four Of which were pick
ed out OF the wounds and clothes and
the fifth lodged in his body. One
loaded shell was found in the gun of
Mr.. Sullivan after the shooting, ac-
counting for six bullets, yet, Mr.. Ar
thur Willis, standing to the side of
the combatants, received bullet in
his leg making seven in all. Solicitor
Cooper asked "Whcre did this bull
let come from?" intimating that one
of the Sullivans standing near the de-
fcndant had hand in the shooting.
DIT. Rogers, who examined the de-
ceased Immediately after the tragedy,
testified that in all likelihood the
wounds in the back were the imme-
diate causes Of death, though it would
have been possible for one Of the
front wounds to, have been ultimately
fatal.
Testimony.
Dr.. G. +. Rogers who attended the
deceased Immediately after the shoot
ing testified that there were eight
wounds in the body two of entrance
and two of exit in the front Two
OF entrance in the back and one OF
entrance in the back Of the elbow and
ing five shots in all, two in front
which did not penttratc the body, two
in the rear that did penetrate and one
in the elbow. He said it would have
been possible for one OF the shots
from the front to cause death but
that 1t was most likely that the shots
in the back were the mortal wounds
Dr. Rogers also testified to attend
Ing the defendant immediately af-
ter tie shooting, stating that he found
a cash about 1-2 inches long on tic
forehead apparently caused by Il
blunt instrument. The stick with
Which Mr.. Cannon struck Mr. SulI-
van was here introduced. 1t was a
light walking cane about 3-i OF an
inch in diameter broken near a knot
about eight inches from the handle.
DIR C. y NiDcpnt tpstifjcd that M