The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1866-03-22

that the witness has heard ofthe detendan
being connected with deeds of violence
By this cross-examination, no second is
sue will be. raised, because the cross-ex
aminer does not undertake to prove thai
the defendant has been guilty of the acts
. of any of which the witness has heard
but, if he can bring before the Court the
evidence that the witness has heard oi
such transactions on the part of the de-
fendant as tending to show that the wit
ness is in error in stating that the repu
tation of defendant is good, the Court
think, therefore, that the question may be
put.
His Exccllcncy having replied that he
had heard five OF six years ago that
Crawford Keys was engaged, with others,
in lynching two men, he was asked by
the Judge Advocate the following ques-
ton:
estate the names of the persons and
the nature and circumstances of the
transactions as you heard them related,
as far as they concerned Crawford Keys"
The accused objected "that, under the
ruling of the Court just given, the wit
ness may be asked if he heard of any act
done by the accused impeaching the good
character given by the witness. This
question goes further, and opens up all
the particulars of the fact"
The question was withdrawn by the
Judge Advocate, who proposed the follow
ing:
persons mentioned by you were lynched?
If SO, what was the cause ?"
The accused objected on the ground
that the witness may testify as to the
fact, but not as to the particulars of the
fact or the motives which induced 1T, or
the circumstances which accompanied it !;
and further, that if the witness is to tes-
tify as to the cause, we must 90 into an
examination of his opportunities OF OBJ
servation; and further, that it is all hear
say.
The Commission sustained the ehjec-
ton, and the question was not put.
His Excellency said that the commu-
nifty at Anderson would not sanction acts
of violence against persons guilty only of
adhesion to the United States Govern
ment Being asked this question by the
Judge Advecate-"A Assuming that some
action had been taken by such parties to
express and communicate such opinion
Favorable to the United States Govern
ment), what would the community have
Judged of acts of violence against such
persons ?"
The accused objected to the question
:.becausc it asked the witness to suppose
something, and then to suppose what
would be the opinion of the community
on that something. 1t is a supposition
mounted on supposition. Whereas, it
it is respectfully submitted, the witness
mnst testify to facts, and to facts in his
knowledge.
The Judge Advocate insisted on the
question, urging "that the object of the
question being to ascertain whether the
standing and reputation Of Crawford
Keys among his neighbors was such as
to be inconsistent with the commission of
the offence in question, it is important to
know how the community has, until re-
Gently, regarded acts of the class to which
the case in question belongs; namely,
cases in which local interest is in con-
Aict with the general interests of the
United States Government Without in
curing for the present into the precise
class of motives concerned in the murder,
we may assume for the present that they
had public and local character
The objection was sustained.
His Excellency stated in reply to fur
ther questions, that the acts of violence
referred to did not produce an untavora-
bic impression on his mind as to Keys.
being just, upright man; that he had
apprchcndcd that suspicion would rest
upon Crawford Keys, under the belief
that the cotton belonging to Keys had
been removed from the Ferry by the mur-
! derors; that tho same belief led him to
ask Crawford Keys if his sons were at
homo that night; that he replied, Cali
but Peter;" that from his experience in
the Courts, he would suppose that the
perpetrators Of grave offence would
most likely exhibit symptoms of nervous