The Mankato free press. [volume] (Mankato, Blue Earth County, Minn.) 1879-1924, 1880-03-12
REBEL SPIRIT IN SOUTH CAROLINA
Unjust Execution Of the Laws In Case
I'm which United states Officers ar
Concerned

Unjust Execution Of the Laws In Cases
I'm which United states Officers are
Concerned.
A correspondent writing from Charles
tor, South Carolina, says:
The working of the state judiciary sys-
TEN, as it is used to shield offenders
aIlinst Federal laws and officers. il
clearly disclosed in the case of the state
against j. Farris, who is accused of as
saulting United States Commissioner
Hutchinson, in the city. From the fol-
lowing particulars, which were obtained
from Hutchinson, it appears that the lat
ter was sent to Georgetown in October,
1873, by District Attorney Northrop, to
investigate complaints against several
white men who were charged with break
ing up Republican meeting held in
that town. Twelve arrests were made.
Ten of the persons were bound over to
appear before the United States court,
and two were discharged. Farris was
among the former, and it was the first
time that the commissionerbad ever seen
him. About two months after this oc-
currence Hutchinson met Farris i'll
Charleston, and accepted an invitation
to drink in saloon on Meeting street.
Hutchinson was in the act of raising the
glass to his lips when Farris. with.
out word of warning, knock
ed him down. broke his arm,
split his scalp, and otherwise cut and
bruised him; he was picked up uncon-
scious by two colored men, aud carried
to the hospital. After much unnecessary
delay, Farris was arrested by the state
authorities, and gave bail for his appear
ance before the State Circuit Court in
November, 1879. When thetme arrived,
Farris feigned to be sick, and the circuit
,licitor continued the case until the
february term, which has just closed.
The case was No. 10 on the docket when
the court opened, which, in the regular
mode of procedure, would have placed it
among the first eases disposed of; but the
solicitor postponed calling it until the
last day, when he again caused it to be
continued, because Farris's counsel was
not i'll court.
~ have learned" said the commits
sioner, "that the witnesses were allowed
to go Mt large without recognizance, and
| it seems evident, from the several post
ponemcnts and the general conduct of
the solicitor, that the state has no lnten-
ton to punish this cowardly ruflian, and
the sole reas on is, | am Federal Off
GER" This is not an isolated case; there
! are many instances ON record i'll which
witnesses 10 oifcnses against Federal Off
GERS were spirited away, and when the
day of trial came the complaints Were
dismissed through lack of evidence. But
woe to the Federal officer who lays him.
self liable to prosecution by the state.
No expenses is too much and no exertion
too great to secure his speedy conviction.
Judges rule and charge to their preju,
dice, and intiict the heaviest penalties The
statutes prescribe. A former interna
revenue officer, William l.. Springs, was
convicted of stealing a silver watch, worth
about So, and was sentenced to three
years hard labor in the penitentiary
Gov. Simpson, who was present at the
time, has admitted that the evidence dit
not warrant the verdict, and yet he stub
bornly declined to exercise his pardon
ing prerogative, though several petitions
signed by influential citizens, have beel
presented to him. 1t is generally be
lieved that Springs is innocent .of thu
theft, and that he was convicted for thu
serious crime of being revenue officer