The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1866-03-08

!, and subsequently he said he thought ut
was Showers who ordered the guard to
throw down their arms; thought 1T was
his voice." 1t is clear that Brown enter
tains slight impression that he saw
Showers on the night of the murder, but
he does not preclude the possibility OF
having been mistaken.
MI. Burt here entered deliberately into
the difficulties of the question of personal
identity read remarkable case in point ;
"James Crow" of York, in England; who
was hung tor no crime save that he un-
Fortunately resembled somebody else
Vide p. 5Ss, accelerated Trials Of all
Countries"
But let us inquire what means, what
opportunity this witness had of recogniz-
ing the prisoncc, His testimony is that
he was in bed and had been sleeping;
that his attention was arrested by the
tramp of feet on the bridge some ten steps
from the gate; that he arose in his bed,
and saw a party Of men as they entered
the gate, distant from him some eighteen
or twenty yards; that they passed within
some ten steps of the bed within which
he was csconced, and were within the
range of his vision some thirty yards,
during ten of which their backs were
presented to him. They made no halt,
and uttered no word; that two were
walking side by beside in front, and the
others scattered aiong''-behind them.
Howell swore that the night was dark,
that the moon was not giving light, and
the silence of Brown is tacit corrobora-
ton of the fact. These are the circum-
stances, and the only circumstances under
which the witness saw this party OF men,
and these are the only means which he
possessed of identifying them. The Court
will recollect that the witness said he
identified or recognized Showers and
Crawford Keyes, as the party proceeded
towards the ferry, and not on their return.
4
The witness voluntarily denied himself
the means of verifying the correctness OF
the impression that the accused and
Crawford Keycs were of the party, by
sneaking out of his bed, and his house,
and taking position in the rear of a
house some thirty or forty yards from the
road from which he saw dimly three men
on horses, and others OH foot, returning
from the ferry. That position was evil
IDENTIFY taken more for concealment than
observation, more that he should not be
observed than that he might observe
others, and he has not pretended that it
gave him any facility for testing the ac-
curacy of the individual resemblances
which he imagined he detected, as the
partv proceeded towards the river. But
the witness testified that he thought"
the voice that ordered tie soldiers to sur
render was the voice Of Showers.
The uttcrance of these few words was
the only means the witness had of identl-
fying the voice of the accused. The dis
tance from the ferry to the witness house,
DR.. Pilsbury said, is about three hundred
and twenty-one yards.
I think the witness has not created the
impression that he is a very accurate OBJ
server, or very calm listener; and the
incidents of that night were calculated TO
disturb the composure of a cool and self
possessed man. They were exciting
beyond anything that had Occurred in the
sluggish and monotonous life of the wit
ness, and if his imagination gained the
mastery over his reason, it is peculiarly
of his mental constitution for which he
ought not to be held responsible.
The hypothesis which 1 suggest is, that
Brown conjectured that the cotton was
to be taken away by this party,of men,
and that the owner of the cotton and the
owner of the boat were most likely to be
engaged in it, and the unmanly fear and
trepidation which their numbers and OBJ
ject inspired, and with apprehensons OF
fearful consequences to himself if the cot
ton should be removed, he clothed the
ghostly phantoms of his Imagination in
tic nondescript dress of Showers and
Crawford Keyes. This would be, l con-
fess, most charitable Interpretation OF
his extraordinary testimony and conduct