ON THE FRINGE 325 



but at first said it was his own property. Finally, 

 when asked as to the cutting out of brands, he ad- 

 mitted that the beast belonged to a neighbour with 

 whom he had formerly owned a small herd in part- 

 nership. The herd had since been divided. 



The cross-examination of the witness aroused the 

 feelings of the audience, and was the feature of the 

 trial. It suggested the fact of a long-standing per- 

 sonal feud between witness and accused. It elicited 

 and emphasized the fact that three men armed with 

 Winchester rifles superintended the interview between 

 witness and accused, when the latter admitted that 

 the slaughtered animal was another man's property. 

 Other points were also raised that confused the issue 

 and somewhat weakened the case. At one time the 

 proceedings became lively. Counsel for the defence 

 was endeavouring to keep the witness to the point. 



' You give me no show,' said the witness. 



' More show than you gave poor Jim Avril,' was 

 counsel's retort (Jim Avril being the cattle-thief who 

 had been previously lynched with the woman). 



Caspar was fairly roused by this, and every man in 

 the room was on his feet. The court rang with shouts 

 of approval and threats of vengeance. The tumult 

 was with difficulty quelled by the Sheriff, and the 

 cross-examination was continued ; but we considered 

 the search for arms justified. At the conclusion of 

 the evidence counsel for the defence moved for the 

 discharge of the prisoner on the ground that no case 

 had been made out. Numerous precedents were cited, 

 more ingenious than relevant. A heated display of 

 forensic eloquence took place. Piles of law-books 

 were produced and quoted from. The ' court ' was 

 visibly impressed, and the audience was completely 



