The Newberry herald. [volume] (Newberry, S.C.) 1865-1884, 1868-08-12

I The particulars Of the breach, ne
stated to be; a frequent abandon
ment of their work, against his
| express orders, to attend drills
| and league. meetings, once or
twice every week, during work
| hours. He asked my opinion
ahout the matter, and I refused to
give it in advance Of: the trial.
He applied to me for the necessary
notice, prescribed in the "Aet to
amend the law in relation to ten
ancies," . [13 Stat, :41e,] "wbose
duty"it became to issue it. This
Act has beer. extended in it's terms
by General Cauby, >and, thus spe-
cially approved ofby him. The no.
tiee was issued and served person
ally, July Is, 1863 The,snegrees
sent word back, "That they would
60, to Columbia to see. about IT.,
They went, or sent, I presume,
and have received ..counsenanee
and, support from the, Governor Of
the State, upon their er: parte
statements: 80. = r.. .cs, =, =,
=. Nom 1 eenjsotare that this;ease
is the sole foundation of the4charge
you prefer against the landlords Of
Union District. l am satisfied
that yeu could have heard of no
other instance An .ejeetment, for
the cause stated in your letter,
could not have taken place in, this
District, wHhoate something being
SAID about it; without its reaching
my ears. -; -;
I Did potthese freedmen, through
their attoraey--for, if I$hsye been
correctly Informed. they remained
at home .andssent one Of their race
from an. adjoining plantation
show yon,the, copy. of the. notice
served, upon them2 Ehthey did,
/ you must harsseenth that theywere
I to show cause before nfeS in: ten
days from 70 persoaal sery1ee
.thereof, Why a warrat Of ejectment
should not be issued against them;
if you did not then see it, you must;
or should have known, tl,at. = such
awas the requirement of the Act.
The information received - by
| YOU must have convinced y on
that the trial had not yet taken
place. Ia fact threats are always
Intended as preventives ). and
therefore, your threats show. that
'you were aware. that the trial was
|: aR }WfITD:s :. -. ':....- -. Il
1t was under these eircum-
stances that your letter was writ
ten, in which: you say. that: "all
such aetsaof outrage will be 4cares
| fully investigated, and both your
self (I) and the landlords will be
held strictly accountable for all
damages that may be sustained
by eolered men thus, wrongedt. y
lf,this was not intended to force
my Judgment and intfmidate my
conscience, tits most unfortunately
expressed will SO appear to:the
public when published. Kit7was
notzse intended, the positiEes as
suranee from me- that pothing con
tanned IN your last letter ,will, IN
the slightest degree, influence ny
[ decision; may relieve your mind.
You know full we'll that a refusal
to join Demoeratieoiub is no legal
offence, and 30 breach Of contract.
Yen might have done me the JUS
tieetosuppcse that knew asmacb.
|. You could: have easily satisfied
yourself to this efectsifa the sup
position was too violent. At any
rate, yousare well aware that 1T is
an established legal principle, that
an officer is presumed to- have
faithfully discharged his duty,
until the contrary appears. With
out single instance Of dereliction
of duty proved against me, you
might have presumed, further,
that I would, at the approaching
trial, discharge my duty, and rem
der a judgment according to the
law and the evidence.
III become satisfied, upon the
hearing, that these laborers ought
not to be dispossessed,; they will
remain where they are. If my
mind arrives at a different con: