The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1871-12-06

this section, but to others subsequent to it
And the first objection Is that the names
of The persons whose suffrage was inter
fered wish, or intended to be interfereG
! with, by this conspiracy are not set out
nor Is Ii alleged that the grand jury Id moi
know their names, and were ignorant of them
there is no excuse given: This, perhaps, Is
one of the most material things in this indict-
ment. 1t is not done ior being consprators
violate the rights Of certain individuals. What
individuals that is the frat question. Who
iars we informed are the persons whose rights
we have Invaded Not name given, nor
any excuse for not giving q name. ls 1t pos
sible that 1t is necessary to argue that point
Would 1t be good to say we conspired to mur.
der man without giving his name or Without
saying the name OF the person was unknown
to the Jury 1.-THE grand jury do not know
| the names of the persona, and, from necessity,
could not name them, they would be excused,
| from that necessity. but for no other reason.
It is not necessary to refer to elementary
| books to sustain that point.
What next? The specific electoral which
| they were not allowed to vote is not stated,
nor does it appear whether 1t was an election
for representatives to the Congress of the
United States or for an elector Of President or
Vice-Presdent OF the United States, or Tor q
State officer, Governor or any officer elected
/ uQQer Lle OOuStlLuLiOu VI tue OLdlc. Wo dIc
not told what was the character Of this elec-
| ton, or when it was held, or what 1t was for;
we are entirely abroad as 10 that. No notice
\ of what election was to be held, or for whom
they were to be prevented from voting Now,
if the court please, the charge is that they
conspired to violate that ffst section by. un-
lawfully hindering. preventing and restrain.
| ing divers male citizens of the United States,
| OF African descent, above the age Of twenty
one years, qualified TO vote at any election by
| the people In said county, district and Stale.
| from exercising The right aud privilege of vot-
| ing, and by other tnlawfM means not allowing
them, the said male citizens, 70 vote at an cleo
tIon by the people, to be held on the third
Wednesday of October. A. D. 1872. Now, II
the court please, we also object 10 this date,
1872. What does the gentleman mean by o
date like that fcourse q date stated 10 an
Indictment generally Is not material, but It
may become very material.s Suppose youstate
as day upon which orlmeis committedf the
3lst day oil. June. There Ia no such day In the
antrhe Indictment is bad. Suppose you state
In your indictment day which is after tAein-
dlctment Is found; that is q material aver
ment, and that makes the indictment bad. Or
suppose, as here, future day which has never
yet happened; as matter Of course, that
would make the Indictment bad. really sup.
pose the gentlemen made mistake. Didyou
mean 1872, gentlemen
Mr. Corblfl (the District Attorney Exactly
Mr.. Stanberry. fyou did not mean IT we
will allow you TO amend 1t. AS to the omis-
sion Of che names, and the omission OF stating
the means resorted to, any further than this,
that by unlawful means threats and intlmids-
tion, without stating shelr character or any
| thing OF the kind, and without stating what
eleeIlon, whether for State, county or munich
pal purposes, In all these particulars, the
question arises whetherit Unnecessary, In an
Indictment Tor consplracy-furs such an offence
as thls-to set them out definitely. IL
Now, II the court please, in the first place,
what is the nature Of the offence A conspi.
racy against what! Against the exercise OF
the right 70 vote. thar is the offence, The
right which man is 10 the exercise of all the
time, as the right to enjoy his liberty, and to
the protection of his person or property. It
js not right to vote ell the time, bnt right
to vote at an election; the right can never be
exercised except In voting az an election.y II,
therefore, cannot be infringed or Impaired,
except by preventing the exercise OF that right
at an election. sT ~
It Ia not charged here land II 1t were, It
would be ridiculous to say.1 that these de-
PENDANTS combined to deprive him OF the
right TO vote generally; that they cannot do
IL ls impossible, for even the parties cannot
dlvest themselves Of that right by not voting
for years. The right remains 70 vote when
they yO choose Ct hs sSps ras spq s9ey
moval, &c. But the right to take away his
vote, 10 rob him of his vote, does not reside
In any combination; that can only be done In
the mode pointed out by law-.As, for In
stance, upon conviction OF an Infamous or
fence-so that the infractlon OF this right IN
point OF law, cannot be deprivation sof the
right SO as to take from the party MS r,ght:
It Is not property or chattel that can be seized
and converted to another's use or seized and
transported to another place out OF the
reach of the owner. II is q personal right,
Intangible, that resides within himself, and
which cannot be taken away, except IN the
legal mode. Therefore, a conspiracy to deprive
man of the right 70 vote, as right, is
thing impossible, and the court would be at
disadvantage to sit and hear cause which
involved such wrong principle OF law as that
a party being an African, ana entitled to vote,
his right to vote was dlvested by conspiracy.
This power TO vote is another thing; but am
now speaking of the right. III Is right,
then, Ii the court please, that can only1be In.
terfered with in It's exercise; 1t canuot, as
have said, be taken away; but It may be inter-
rupted in its exercise, tnserfered with IN its
exercise, or he may be prevented from exer-
clsIng it. VINO? when under what crcum-
stances The only time at which he can ex-
erclse thegright OF suffrage Is at some election
at which he is qualified to vote. Now, mat
being 80, what must an Indictment state That
this conspiracy TO prevent man from voting
would Interfere with the free exercise OF hls
right to VOTE Why as matter oil course 1t
must charge that 1t had reference to an elec-
tion; to an intended exercise of that. right
to vote; to an opportunity to give That
yots. Therefore, the election must be
stated, and 1t must appear to De sueh l
an one as is contemplated by law; that is,
an election for public officers. not an election
for bank directors or anything Of that kind,
but an election for political officers 1t fur
ther must appear what sort Of an election 1t
is. whether for representatives In Congress,
and. therefore, Federal election, or whether
it is an election for some officer of the State-a
State election, But we know nothing of this
by this Indictment. All omitted. Entirely at
large, what election they mean, or what offices
were to be elected; whether lt was to be
special or general election, we are LEFT entirely
in the dark by the allegations 10 this count.
Aud this failure, If the court please, 10 notl-
fy us OF what election 1t Is gives rise to anoth.
er very serious question. II they had alleged
tbat H was an election for Stale officers. we
should have another thing to say, and that is
this, that law OF Congress which attempts to
rer,l,ate the election Of State officers is void
ami unconstitutional; that any Interference
with the domestic concerns Of State the con-
slitution throughout forbids. Whereas, If 1t
was stated to be an election for Federal
officers, that objection would not lie.
Aoain If the court please, it Is nowhere al