National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1878-02-23

The following unique but characteristic
specimen of South Carolina justice is re-
ported among the debates in the lie gisla-
ture, as given by the Columbia Is. c. Regis
Ter of February 10:
Mr.. RHErT Insisted that the investigating
committee should be instructed to make an
early report; that they had been at work Il
long time; that he wanted all the testimony
taken before them published to the world that
the Democratic party had been charged by the
Northern press with SURPRISING damaging
evidence which had been adduced against GER
tain Influential Democnts that he was in IA
vOr OF making everything public and opposed
TO secret investigation; that 1t was due the
Legislature that all the working of the COM
mittee should be published.
Mr. HASKELL took an opposite view Of the
resolution. He was opposed to publishing the
testimony against any persons save those who
had held public Offices that he did not believe
in placing before the public gaze slandcrous
testimony, which would ruin the reputation VI
many prominent gentlemen.
Mr.. HASKELL is WADE HAMPTON's SON
in-law, and regarded as his spokesman on
the floor of the House. II is needless Ia
state that his view prevailed 1t was left
discretionary with the committee what
they would report.
The fact is that the committee and the
Democratic party they represent are rather
awkwardly situated They have been in
vestigating the conduct of Republicans,
with the view of destroying the influence
of individuals and the party, hut they
have found that in almost every case
where they have really discovered c0rrup-
ton they have found Democrats involved
in it. The committee are therefore very
DESTROYS of exposing the Republicans, but
shielding the Democrats, and don't see how
they can ride these two horses, going in diff
fercnt directions, at the same time.
Mark the solicitude of Mr.. Haskell! II,
is unwilling to place before the public gaz'
slanderous testimony, which would ruin tn,
reputation of many prominent gentlemen.
Indeed! But Mr.. HASKELL is perfect,
willing that such testimony should bC
placed before the world when Republican
gentlemen are concerned. In the case Of
Democrats the testimony Is slanderous Blu
Mcssrs. CARPENTER, SMALLs, and CARDOZL
have been convicted on just such testimony
| -hhi 'iiN newspapers aie haig iNlnlSilt'
with extracts of such testimony, which arr
published far and wide for the purpose o
injuring the character Of such prominen
Republicans who have not yet been in
dictcd.
Messrs. PATTERSON, SCOTT, HoGE, Dunn
WHITTEMORE, GLEAvEs, and other Rcpubli
can leaders have been indicted on sucl
testimony. If the Democrats OF Soutl
Carolina wish to inspire confidence and Ie
spect, let them publish the full report Of tn
committee and all OF the testimony taken
1t is but or pdrte. The public will judge O
its value by the character of the witnessc
and the circumstances under which the,
testified, us well as the probability of tn
truthiulness of the testimony itself An,
let the Attorney General of the State Obtai
spective OF their political opinions, whom
the testimony will warrant his proceeding
against.
When this is done, as it is in all cvilze,
countries We will place some confidence il
the business and fairness of trials of Repub
Leans in South Carolina. Until then W
agree with Mr. HAsK ELL that such ISLAND
crous testimony ought not to be place.
before the public, (which would ruin tn
reputation Of many prominent gentlemen,
with this addition, however, that it ough
not to be done with Republicans any NOR
than Democratic ones, TO whom he cOnfnc
his exceptions. Let all be treat ed alike.