The daily phoenix. [volume] (Columbia, S.C.) 1865-1878, 1871-12-17

OF one whose defence has not been On.
trusted to careful hands. Not only will
al be said by the Distinguished counsel
that can be urged in prisoners behalf,
but their views will be prevented with ali
the learning and eloquenoe Of whioh the
United States bar can boast. shall
not, then, exceed tho measure of INV
duty it present. in all their enormisy,
the circumstances that point unerrinRly
to the prisoners guilt. I am not aware
that there is any controversy between as
as to the definition of conspiracy. or
OF the proof necessary to sustain a
charge of it. Let Us sec now, fret, upon
what offence the prisoner stands indicted.
The first count charges him with hav.
ing conspired, with others, in violation
OF the first section Of the Act of 1870,
to hinder and prevent divers male oiti.
zeas OF African descent. over the age of
twenty-one years. and legally qualified
TO vote. from the free exercise of the
right and privilege OF voting, in an cleo.
tion to be hold on the third Wednesday
in October, 1872.
The second oount-tLut he conspired
with others to injure and oppress James
Williame, alias jim Rainey, because he
had exercised the privilege of votiog and
because he had supported A. 8. Wallace,
u legally q ialified candidate for the Con-
gress OF the United States, Mt an election
held on the third Wednesday of Ooto-
ber, 1870
The first count charges general con-
spiracy, entered into by Robert Hayes
Mitchell and others, to hinder and pre-
vent, by threats, intimidation and vio-
lance. divers male citizens Of the United
States, OF African descent, from tie free
exercise OF the right of voting, in an
election to be held on the bird Wednes.
day Of October, 1872
We will first tell what conspiracy ia .
1t ls combination or agreement of two
or more, by concerted means, to do an
unlawful act. They may never commit
an overt act, but the crime is complete
when the agreement is made or the com.
bination entered into. ALI that is me-
cessary to be proved in this case is. that
Robert Hayes Mitchell conspired, with
others, to commit the offence with which
he is charged. 1 beg that you will oarry
aloug in your mind this definition. and
remember that no overt act need be
proved. but that the agreement, the
breathing together. as it were, to do the
unlawful acf, constitutes the gist of the
ohenoe. Another important considera.
uon to be borne in mind, is that the law
regards all the members of conspiracy
as one man. They think with one mind,
speak with one voice, and strike with
one arm; therefore, the law has said that
the acts, words and declarations of one,
are the words, acts aud declarations of
all, in carrying out the object of their
combination. What we may have proven
here, that any single individual did. sid
or declared, we have equally proven to
have bcen the words, acts and declara-
tions of all aud Of Robert Hayes
Mitchell; and they bind hlm as much IA
1t he had uttered the declaration with
his own voice, or engaged with his own
hands III the commission of the uct.
There are two ways of proving conspi-
racy. First, directly, by the written
agreement originally entered into at the
inception OF the enterprise. Second.
indirectly, by proof of the words, acts,
20, of the conspirators in the effectua.
ton OF their unlawful designs. We
enter hsre upon both methods of proof.
We have here before US the written
agreement, and we have given you full
and ample testimony as to the acts aud
declarations of the parties. The evi.
denoe has been long and oircumstantial.
aud We do you the credit to think that
you remember it sufficiently, and that it
Is unnecessary to rehearse it, except
when We shall desire to call your atten-
ton to special points in the course of
our nrgu ument. We will first show you
the written agreement, to the secrecy of
which each member was bound by a
most terrible oath. What is the evil
dence. now. that connects this paper
with the defendant, Robert Hayee
Mitchell? You will recolleot that the
first witness, Lieutenant Godfrey, testi-
fed that he found this agreement among
the private papers of s. G. Brown.
The second witness, Albertus Hope,
informs us how it got there. He tells us
that he expressed u desire to see the
ground-works, as he termed it. of the
hu hlux organization, and that Major
James William Avery gave him pnper
IN 1868, which he delivered to s. g.
Brown He also testiies that this paper
appears, by its general terms, to be the
same. and that it consisted of one whole
aud IL half sheet of foolscap paper. as
this does. Now. who was Samuel G..
Brown. IN reference to this conspiracy ?
We have it from Kirkland Gum, that
.. u. Brown declared to him he was
member of the Ku Klux Khan; further,
that he gaze him the signs and pass
words OF The order; and further still,
that III conversation with Wesley
Smith. he heard Brown say that he was
chief Of khan, and thut he could kill
and whip mole niggers with his boys
than all the balance Of York County.
But Is this all the proof OF Samuel
Brown being n member OF the orgauiza.
tion? No. Elias Ramsay meets him
with the klan at Sharon Church, and
both lie and Andrew Kirkpatrick testify
to his presence at the Briar Patch, the
night of the Jim Rainey raid
This paper, then, is taken from among