Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1877-10-11

truth about Senator Morton seems to be that
he will never take bis seat in the Capitol
again. '.'''""There were $4,000 models des-
troyed by the fire in the Patent Office the 9TH
er day. Female suffrage was defeated at
the general election in Colorado 1.-THE
latest mode for curling the hair is tube con-
tanning hot water. The hair is wound round
it, and it curls without being burned or
scorched. .. r. ..r. ...s
Correspondence of the Yorkville Enquirer.
LETTER FROM CHESTER.
CHESTER, October 8, 1877.
When 1 closed my report of the Court pro-
ceedings on last Tuesday, the trial of the case
of the State ps. John Cunningham, charged
with burglary, was going on. The defendant
was represented by Messrs. Brice and San
ders; the Solicitor appeared for the State.
The defendant was charged with breaking
open the smoke-house of Mrs. Fudge. While
there was no direct testimony pointing to his
guilt, the circumstantial evidence was very
strong. The track of the mule belonging to
the defendant was traced from the building
broken open, to the house and stable of the
defendant, and the mule was observed to be
in greasy condition, showing that meat had
been carried upon its back. The track of
this particular mule was kaown from the pc
cuiar formation of ore Of its feet The
counsel for the defendant made quite an inge..
nious and skilful defence for their client, but
the circumstantial evidence leading to his
guilt, was 80 irresistibly convincing that the
jury we're compelled to find accordingly.
The grand jury found true bill in the
case of the State Vs. Edw. Gregory, charged
the case of the State %. James Kennedy,
charged with perjury. . . ..,.' .... I.
Anderson Brown and Thos. Smith, charged
with grand larceny, pleaded guilty. These
are the fellows that stole wheat from McAlil-
ey's mill. .yg
In the afternoon, the Court was engaged in
the trial of the case of the State ps. George
Haynes, Harriet Little and Jesse Nowland,
who were charged with stealing Mr.. Joshua
Walkers watch. The Solicitor entered mol
pros. in reference to Jesse Nowland, who is a
young boy, and he became a witness for the
State. He swore that Harriet Little told
him to take the watch, aud give it to her,
and she would give him two dollars, and q
suit of clothes. Harriet swore that when the
watch was given to her, she gave it to George
Haynes The guilt of the defendants was so
clearly established that the jury consumed
very little time in deciding upon verdict.
While it is known that these parties stole the
watch, it is still unknown who has possession
of the watch at the present time
The grand jury found a true bill in the
case of the State ps Charlotte Brice, charged
with grand larceny, and true bill in the
case Of the State ps. G. j. Kee, charged with
keeping nuisance.
On the assembling of Court CO Wednesday
morning. G. j. Patterson, Esq, counsel for
G. J Kee, asked for an order, requiring the
Solicitor to prepare bill Of particulars,
specifying the times and persons, when and
from whom bis client had bought stolen cot.
ton. This was simple justice to his client, in
order that he might have sufficient time to
procure such testimony as would fully vindi.
cate his character. The Solicitor thought
that the indictment drawn BY him was suff-
ciently particular in its statements. The pre-
siding Judge entertained different opinion,
and ordered the drawing of bill of particl
ulars.
The trial of the case of the State ps. An
drew Caldwell, James Westbrook and John
Moore, charged with burglary and larceny,
then began, and consumed almost the entire
day. They were defended by Messrs. Brice
and Sanders, who could not have worked with
more zeal if their clients had been wealthy
and prominent cii;zeps of the white race.
The prosecutor was DR.. MofYat Wylie, whose
smoke.house the defendants we're charged
with having feloniously entered, and taken
therefrom quantity of meat. The principal
testimony for the State was that of DR.. Wy
lie, who swore to being fully satisfied that
one of the tracks made by the parties at the
smoke-house, on the night Of the stealing, was
that of John Moore, and that of Mary Smith
and Francis Smith, who testified that the de.
PENDANTS brought the stolen meat to their
house. The counsel for defendants endeav.
ored, by opposing testimony, to prove ali6is
in respect to their clients on the night of the
burglary in question, but they did not sue.
ceed to the satisfaction of the jury. The yer.
dict was guilty. .
The Court met at the usual hour on Thurs.
day morning, and entered upon the trial of
the case of the State ps Wade Chalk, charged
with assault and battery, with intent to raw.
isb. Miss Nancy Crawford was the victim Of
the defendants villainy. Her painful &C
count of the outrage-of his entering the
house, of his taking hold of her, and choking
her, of his threatening to murder her-was
so shocking, and produced such a profound
impression upon the jury and the crowded
courtroom, that there was no need OF any
more testimony to secure the conviction Of the
defendant. Yet the mother confirmed the
account of the daughter. She testified to
recognizing the defendant on the night that
he entered her house and assaulted her
daughter. As she testified, her screams for
help were heard by her son, who answered
that he was coming, when the defendant be-
came frightened and ran away. Of course,
the villain was convicted. .... ,'
The grand jury found true bill in the
case of the State us. Alfred johnson. charged
with forgery, and true bill in the case Of
the State ps Abram Holly, William Thomas,
Martin Smith and Sykes Williams, charged
with gambling.
The case of the State W. Thos. Boulware,
charged with arson, was then tried. William
Wilson was the prosecutor, who had an out
building set on FIRE and destroyed. The tes.
testimony was not sufficiently clear to fasten
the crime upon the defendant and he was
cleared.
The next case was that of the State %.
Abram Holly and others, charged with gam.
bling. Major S. P Hamilton represented
the defendants. While they had in all prob.
ability committed the offence charged against
them, the testimony was not sufficiently con.
elusive to warrant verdict of guilty, and