The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1872-04-17

lashes. Then Wesley Smith again ordered the
witness to fire, and he stepped back a few
PAGES, pointed his double-barrelled Gun al
Good and shot him. Wesley Smith then jerked
the gun ont of his hand and struck Good upon
the head and face, breaking the gun over his
head. Witness could not say lhaTt the defend.
ants, Smith and Spencer, had done anything
If they had lone anything the witness had moi
seen 1t. Spencer had been ordered by wesley
Smith to help him fasten Good and had re-
fused. They might have helped In some way,
but the witness did not know that they did.
william Wilson, white, and Wilson Wilson,
colored, next testified that Charlie Good mao
been q qualified voter, and had always voted
and acted with the Radical party, and this
closed the testimony for the prosecution. Int
defence had no witnesses to offer, and a recess
until half-past seven was ordered by The court.
EVENING SESSION.
At the reassembllng of the court Mr.. John
F. Ficken addressed the jury on behalf Of the
defence. He began by a review of the social
and political condition of South Carolina In
the years Immediately following the war. In
the unsettled, chaotic condition ofthe country
at that time there were established different
organizations for relief from the evils that
| were seen to exist, and that everybody saw
and felt. Under these circumstances O body
[ had been organized for mutual consultation,
protection and safety. All of the witnesses
| had testified that this was their understanding
| of it's objects. That was the spiritin which The
thing began. BE did not mean to say that it
/ ended there, or that uujusti6able abuses mad
| not occurred, but 1t was doubtless 10 this
| spirit that the defendant had joined The organ
izalion. To show that they we're engaged In
O conspiracy 1t must be shown that they Joined
the body with a view Of violating some law,
but there was nothing in the whole testl-
mony to show that as their object. In
the attack upon Charles Good 1t was
shown that they had not gone Into 1t
zealously or willingly, or without duress. 1t
was shown that they were driven into IT.;
that they were forced 10 act with the party at
lacking Good, and that they only went go far
as they were compelled to 60. Surely this
did not prove any conspiracy on their part.
The man who had given the strongest tesli-
mony against them was the man who acknoWi-
edged that he himself fred the fatal shot, bur
even he asserted that he had no understand
ing of the scope or objects of the organiza-
ton, and had got away from it as soon as ne
could. There was nothing, therefore, to show
that these men originated any conspiracy or
plot against the government but, on the
contrary, everything went to show that they
were dupes, that they were trlcked Into what
they did. All laws upon the subject Of con-
spiracy required that there must be shown
an agreement ON the part of all The
parties engaged In 1t to do some certain
thing In violation Of law, but It had
only been shown in this case hal they
had agreed TO resist the principles
OF a certain political party. 1t was
surely no crime to oppose the principles OF
political party, because that is what citizens
of both parties are constantly and invariably
doing towards their political opponents. As
to the charge of murder, the principal wit
ness, William White, had narrated to them
with horrible particularly the whole circum-
stances of that affair. He had been appar-
emily forced into the organization and forced
to act with 1t. BE demurred to the orders.
and, with the two prisoners, demonstrated
and pleaded against them, but without avail.
The victim WAS found. and they were ordered
to destroy him. They refused'- they pteaucu-
to be let of, they demonstrated and prayed
their leader to be released from the deed, but
they were ordered to proceed by apower that
they dared not resist, and the witness nred
the fatal shot. The prisoners did nothing TO-
ward the murder. They started out with no
such purpose, aud there was no previous III
tention, no malice prepense and aforetl'ongot,
and. therefore, there was no murder. They
were under duress. All were unwilling to
obey the orders Of the leader, aud none but
the witness, White, had actually taken part
the murder. The fact ofthe presence of the
prisoners would not make them aiders and
abbettors in the crime even If they were lnere
Voluntarily, but 1t was evident that they were
there because they were compelled to come by
a power which was above them n OF which
they stood In fear.
MI. Earle replied on behalf of the govern
ment. He said that the prisoners were IN.
dicted for conspiracy, and he cited various au-
thorIties to show the method of establishing a
conspiracy. In this case he claimed hat they
had the plainest possible proof In the consti-
tuition and oath OF the organization, which
had not been denied or contested. It was not
merely an organization for lawful opposition
to a political party, because the constitution
expressed all through a spirit OF disguise and
mystery, provided for gowns and pistols and
signal instruments, and showed by its terms
that It's objects were deeds OF violence and
blood. The prisoners, therefore, knew the OBJ
,ects of the organization when they went Int
1t, and they went to the murder of Charlie
Good, and committed that crime with a full
knowledge of what they were doing. There
was no sudden impulse on their part, no heat
of passion, and p~retencs of sell-detence;
and it was a cold. bio oded, premeditated muir
der for the purpose of intimldaling voters and
carrying the election.
Judge Bond then made a brief charge to The
jury, defining the crime OF conspiracy and the
measure of proof needed to establish the fact,
and defining the crime OF murder and the re-
sponsibility of each party engaged or partici-
pating in 1t.
The jury retired at $40 P, NJ, and not hay