The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1866-03-29
RATES OF ADVERTISING.
MILITARY TRIAL.
TcoNTIN U ED.]

=
.si4 CITADEL, March 10, 1866.
The Commission met at 1890 A. M.
and continued the trial of James Crawfore
Keys, his, son, Robert Keys, and Elisha
Byrum.
Joseph Provost, witness for the de
tense, deposed that the general character
Of the accused is good that after their
arrest Fred Clark said to him that Craw
ford Keys was at home the night of the
murder; that Fred said he knew it be.
cause Mr.. Keys called for some one that
night, about 9 o'clock. or later, and he
(Fred) went. near him, and asked him
what he wanted that he ewitness) then
asked Fred whether Keys was at home
after that, and Fred said he did not
know as he went to bed; that, on the
18th. January, Fred, when summoned as
a witness in this case, said, ~ can't i'm
agine what they want with me, as [ as
sure you l know nothing under Gods
Heaven of this matter connected with the
murder"
]. B. E. Sloan, witness for the de-
fense, deposed that the general character
of the accused is good; that Crawford
Keys Is active in public matters in his
community, and possesses influence.
On cross-examination the witness was
asked by the Judge Advocate the follow
ing question:
Question; s.Is Crawford Keys a man
who would be likely to take part in meas
nres of y violent character, determined on
by his neighbors, for the protection OF
some loca! INTEREST,""
The. accused. by his counsel, objected
to the question, on the ground that it
socks to elicit no fact, but the opinion of
the witness ona supposed state of things.
Facts tending to make up general char
acter may be admissible, but opinions as
to what the accused would do are, it is
submitted, inadmissible.
The Judge Advocate insisted on the
question beingput. The witness has as
sumed to describe the character of Craw-
ford Keys; on his cross-examination 1t
becomes necessary to define. with more
exactness, the witness estimate of the
accused. The best way 10 accomplish
this is, by calling the attention of the wit
ness some particular class or character
Of men, and to ask him whether the ac-
cnsed belongs to that class or has that
character.
The objection was ovcrrnled, and the
witness replied as follows:
]. think he is a man who would use
every effort to prevent violent measures
being taken where they were unlawful
T never heard Of his being engaged in
violent proceedings until I saw something
oft introduced in the proceedings in this
case.
Question by Judge ADVOCATE: "Do you
mean to say that had you known that
Crawford Keys had lynched mar
during the war, for opposing the will anc
interest of his State, it would not have
changed the opinion which you have ex
pressed?"
The accused, by their counsel, objected
on the ground that the legitimate in
quiries is as to the general reputation o
the accused, and not the general. reputa
tion of the community or the State, ant
tho question seeks to elicit the public
opinion of Anderson.
The Judge Advocate insisted ON thu
question. 1t was contended that acts o
theskind supposed in the question, are no
condemned by public opinion in the sec
tion of country where this murder wa
committed, aid that such o state of pub
lie morals should be disclosed as affectin!
the aoundness of the public judgment Of
the question of general character.
The objection was sustained.
Questioned By Judge Aduocate; "ls tn
commission of Zach acts of violence "a
the whipping of Horn,) when ordered b.
q meeting of citizens, justified by tn
community ?"
The accused, by their counsel, objecte
on the ground that the whole enquiry, a
to the public opinion Of Anderson Distric
is irrelevant. -
The Commission sustained the obje'
ton,
j. B. P. Alley, a witness for the defeus
deposed that he lives twelve miles trol
Anderson Court House, ,on Seneca River