The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1866-03-29

was said to have been whipped Ior INC
ting negroes to insurrection, and was
member of the Vigilance Committee
The accused, through their counse
gave notice that they had no evidence t
offer before the final close of the case 70
the prosecution. The Commission there
fore adjourned to meet on the 2lst inst
at 10. 80 A. NJ, to resume the evidence TO
the prosecution.
March 21, 1866.
The Judge Advocate stated that hi
witnesses had not yet arrived, but were
daily expected that telegram had beer
received from General Ames, some days
since, stating that they would be imme
diately forwarded. He asked that tho
Commission might be adjourned for day
or two, to await the arrival Of the wit
nesscs.
Theaccused, by their counsel, suggested
that, instead of postponing the case, the
Judge Advocate now proceed to close his
case, and the defense proceed with their
testimony; the Judge Advocate sum-
moning the witnesses, Capt. Bray and
Lieut.. Cook, and then to whatever mat
ter is adduced in the testimony of the de-
fense the Judge Advocate can reply, when
the testimony for the defense is closed
or that day be fixed for the prosecu-
ton to proceed with the case.
Upon the intimation of the Judge Ad-
vocate that he is disposed to adopt the
suggestion of the counsel of the accused,
so far as it relates to the closing of the
prosecution and reserving the testimony
referred to until the close Of the case of
the accused, the Commission directed
that the Judge Advocate forthwith issue
summonscs for Capt. Bray and Lieut..
Cook to attend this Commission as wit
ncsscs, and that the case proceed.
The accused, by their counsel, requested
that the Judge Advocate, before he closes
for the prosecution, will recall the wit
ness Brown, to enable him to be in
terrogated as to the fact whether he did
or did not make statements relative to
the events of the Sth October to the Rev.
w. H. Tyler and Milton Simpson,-at the
time Brown was examined, the counsel
for the accused not being aware of their
statements, and not having had an OPP
portunity of asking Brown in relation to
them.
The Judge Advocate objected to the
motion on the following grounds:
1st. The cross-cxaminaiion OF the wit
ness Brown having been closed by the &C
cuscd, it is irregular to recall him for fur
ther cross-cxamination
This is u step seldom taken, and never
has been, to my recollection, allowed III
any Court, civil or military. 1t often
happens that the counsel make an imper-
feet cross-examination. 1t would lead TO
endless prolixity of proceedings by al
lowing resumption of cross-cxaminatlon.
I'd. When the object OF reopening the
cross-cxamination is to lay foundation
for contradicting the witness, additional
reasons exist for not allowing it. Evl-
dence of contradiction is collateral to the
main issue, and should be limited to a
strict adherence to the rules of order; 1t
is "strictissi,ai juris," and should receive
no indulgence at the expense OF such
rules of order and convenience.
The Commission directed that Brown
be introduced as witness for the pur-
pose of being examined further by the
Court.
W.P. Brown being recalled, deposcd
tha. he did not recollect having any con-
versation with the Rev. W. H. Tyler and
Milton Simpson as to what he saw on the
night of the murder; that he did not
think he had told either of them he hug
not recognized any of the party that
night; that he had been ordered by the
military authorities not to say what he
knew about the murder; that he endeav
orcd to conceal what he knew about it.
David NJ. Simpson and Rev. W. 81
Tyler, witnesses for the defense, deposee
that they arc on intimate terms with the
witness Brown (Simpson having been his
guardian y that shortly after the murder
Brown, in reply to their inquiries, said he
did not recognize any OF the party tha
went down to the ferry on the Sth Octo
ber
Joseph w. Keys, a witness for the de
fence. deposed that he lives with his ia