Orangeburg news and times. [volume] (Orangeburg, S.C.) 1875-1877, 1877-07-21

Immediately AS Norton, constable,
began to spout law in his defence and
i'll opposition to me i'll regard to the
irregular manner Of drawing the
jury. l nj once saw that if these
worthy (?) officers of tho law were
permitted to do as they pleased that
force and injustice would take the
place Of law and justice. 1 Of course
strcnuously opposed all irregularities,
and would not suffer the ignoranc G,
the spite, the envy nor the cupi,lity Of
either OF them to do detrimcnt to my
client. In the case Of Peter Laur-
cncc a jury Of six white men was en-
panelled and tried the case, and des-
pite the most monstrous violation Of
all law and practice by the Trial
Justice i'll examining the witnesses
and charging the jury, The six white
persons rendered a verdict of'snot
guilty" Does this look rs if I had
attempted to stir up strife or array
the whites against the blacks? 70
the contrary, there was not u VIII itc
man present who did not think that
this case was unfou ndcd and ought
not to have been entertained, nor the
county placed to the expense in insti-
tutng ii. The next case was that Of
Saml Lewis, respectable col orcd
man OF some wealth, and m appoint
cd ovcrsccr of the high way in that
district. LII this case Jury Of six
white persons was cmpancllcd and
after the most intense exhibition Of
feeling against the defendant by the
Trial Justice rs shown in his conduct
OF examinations OF witnesses for The
State, in fact there VIC re but two and
one contradiclcd the other directly rs
to the striking, asking the witnesses
the most cxtravagant leading qucs-
tons, and ut one time dared force
witness to testify as he desired say
ing to him Ill protect you, ais, re
fusing to refer to the testimony for
the defendant, there being six Wit
nesscs for the defence, except to make
it appear is helping The posccution,
and also refusing to charge tic jury
with the law in point rs ed by the
counsel for the defendant; yet these
six white persons were unable to
agree upon verdict Of guilty and IL
mstrial was rendered. How was
this? More than fifty persons, black
and white, will verify the stat,.n.l t
that this worthy (?) Trial Justice,
Harmon Rush, after giving the case
to the jury, was nttcrwarl seen, and
Lclore u conclusion was reached ly
The rJury, III private consultation at
the door o. the building in which the
jury were consulting, with the fore.
man of the jury, and in the al,sen cc
of counsel. | threatened this minis
ter Cd of the law with presentation to
our Grand Jury for official miscon.
duct. | was then asked TO hear what
had already been said, and which I
could not confirm being at the time
absent. 1t was afterwards discover
ed that the said juror in consultation
with The Trial Justice was the cause
Of a mistrial.
This conduct OH the part Of the
Trial Justice was condemned by all
persons, black and white, as outrage
Gus, and the best Of feeling existed be.
tween the races, each sympathizing
with the poor man, Sam Lewis, who
was to be tried by such q Trial Jus
ticc. 1t is well to state that Sam'l
Lewis offence consisted in trying to
prevent West Jones the plaintiff from
shooting Peter Lawrence, enc Of the
men repairing the Highway under
his charge OH the day in question,
The case was next set for rehearing
Oh Thursday 11t!i inst, wl,cn tho
aforesaid scenes, and exhibition Of
feeling intensified, rcappcarcd. A
jury Of white persons and one color
ed was cmpancllcd and despite the
grosscst misrepresentation of the eyi.