Jasper County Democrat, Volume 17, Number 7, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 29 April 1914 — McFARLAND DRAWS A KNIFE. [ARTICLE]

McFARLAND DRAWS A KNIFE.

One of the Rensselaer Republican’s ‘‘Splendid Citizens” Further 1 Distinguishes Himself. The editor of The Democrat never expects to see anything published in the Rensselaer Republican, pertaining to himself especially, that is either fair or truthful, and its report of a little occurrence Saturday morning in the court reporter’s room at the court house during the examination of J. A. McFarland, is ' but in keeping with the Republican’s established course. The facts—most of which will be borne out by the court reporter’s records—are simply as follows: Perhaps six weeks ago notice was

served on McFarland to take his examination, as the law permits, in the libel case he has instituted against the editor of this paper, and which was taken from Kentland, where he first wanted to try the case, against our protest, because of ineonveniency in reaching, to Crown Point on a change of venue prayed for by the plaintiff. A day was fixed for this examination, bivt for the convenience of the attorneys—'for most part the plaintiffs attorney, Abe Halleck—< the date had been postponed from time to time, and was finally fixed again for Saturday morning at 10 o’clock.

The defendant tnd his*attorneys had fixed a meeting at 9:30 at Attorney Parkison’s office to discuss the proposed examination, and had barely got there when the plaintiff and his attorney came in and the latter demanded that we go at once to begin the examination, and when told that we would be there In a few moments, insultingly insisted that we go immediately. The writer then told him that wo would be there at the hour set and not before, and when he made other insulting remarks gave him to understand that we proposed to have something to say about when we would be there. This was all, and th© two departed. At the appointed time the defendant and his attorneys went over to the court house and the examination was begun before Court Reporter Wagner. The questions put to the witness brought up many things which the plaintiff had perhaps allowed to slip from memory, and while conducted In a courteous manner, the examination aroused the animosity of the witness greatly and he finally began to vent his personal opinion of the defendant, which was not on trial nor a part of the examination. He became very personal and abusive in this and, having no judge sitting, of course, to hold him down to the questions asked, he rambled off on matters entirely foreign to the questions put and finally made a very bitter personal statement to which the writer said: “That is a Me.” The witness then jumped from his seaf/and pulling off his coat and throwing it on the table, reached. In his pocket, and expecting him to" draw a weapon, the writer arose to his feet, and as the witness pulled out a pocket knife and opened its blade, seized hold of one of the heavy oak chairs and raised it in the air, while the bellgerent witness hestitated to come further. He was finally calmed somewhat and after several moments closed up the knife and put it back in his pocket. His attorney, who evidently decided that the windows were too far from the ground to jump out, had finaly edged around and got near the door, and wanted to adjourn at once. As the examination had been practically concluded, the parties left the room.

During the exciting moments attorneys Honan and Parkison got between the bellgerent witness and the writer, but Halleck was evidently trying to find a safe exit, as he asserted, even when th,e witness still had the knife open in his hand and everyone else in the room had seen him have It, and he admitted having it, saiu that he “had seen nobody have any knife.” The parties In the room, with •he exception of the witness himself—'Halleck was too scared to see anything—agree that we did not Pick up the chair until the witness had drawn his knife. People generally have their own opinion of a knife user, and such opinion is not very complimentary, either. The statutes i of Indiana say 1 that whoever does' such act with intent to commit a felony, shall, on conviction, be sent to prison for from two to fourteen, years and be fined not exceeding $2,000. The Republican also asserts that this matter grew out of an article published in The Democrat attacking McFarland’s character.' As a matter of fact The Democrat never mentioned McFarland’s name In its columns until after he had come out in a signed statement in the, republican attacking the writer. His animosity dates from his defeat for the nomination for state representative at Monon two years ago, and for which defeat he wrongfully blames the writer.