The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1880-02-26

heara OF any thTaGfs 10 q Gia ftsss saeSr 10
h,s 20 be frigbtened; sge ffsf8 EIspslt 100
verde ffYu5 his hotse y hen be tssaa hsIlaA
boo did fheke con 81 0Ds IA tho kpF!nes
yard nil words tfese 6tfE ted to him 4 he.
theft llIifnsets WAS present at the
pT6Itmlnafy axsfli ION sFae qli klle wlsy.
10 w illiairst6 6Ii gi III I,oofe Sod GaRnhyeli; !;
ge were going on talkipgt ssas ir Ssgsasgf
| Poore said ile eWishsd he bad died Ia the
Rarss,, GarpbrelI said lie did aog caro-
| Poofe said no wouldn't. bit for my: eosiss
science - he said he Wished he Ind Gsea IN,
the Ysf inn HeFiDts inElneR; EssiiSon blei.s
| Alley took the hand dcung of for him 10 sign
| It; have known Bledon fiys or ak years !;
know his general character excspt bling
l dissipated, he has d good character. =
III. Cooley, lr1eallg1 j eayg: ] was along
when Ellison was arrested no yiolenses
| dong him did not think ile was ffigtt-
ened hsndsaifs wore put on him about
| 400 or t5g yafds from his boiisa kuowe
| y, a. Blad ave for 9, OF g years; Ills
general character iss good rgild belieys
| him on his BATH ~ q giSs;
Willie Anderson, (recelled. 5sesys 1Iifi-
SON Rss treated very kindl no vlcienggs
was In the a. .. Court dnfing :as examine |.
hdn: saw III ,,tsoh Sign hepapef; bfr. Ford
| said TO Ellison, Do yott know what you arc
saying Z Ellisoft went on 10 giye shiB evi.
dence knows Blsduns- have for FOUR years;
as general character goosi sond believe:
him on oath. "a e , 4.s q ~
E. J. Pinson, (rccailsd,l snys. tsllispn
signed the testimony think no wap
sworn; heard him say lie went nut
through the woods by tho graveyard home.
D; NJ. Cooley, (fccailed,l says: Known.
would believe him on cath, e
IA. !. Epting, sworn, says : 4 atked Ellf-
son which way he went home FROM tho fire;
he said through the woods by the grave
yard ffoin the cut it was his nearest way
home. -
| A. II. Ford. (fegailati,) says ( WIS clerk
at the trial; Ellison signed I'll my recollec-S
tion Is that tho attorney esked I'll llisuli & Did
! you not tell Mai. Anderson in the spfihg
yard that you stopped in the cut, and Che.
others went on to the storef He said the
did. no violence or threats used /; they
DR.: Wilson, trgcslied. } says Was called
TO Elllson's on Monday evening to nee o,
sick child; ON Monday before Are; did not
return on Tuesday; heard of no one being
sick but tlie. child / heard nothing Sf Mrs.
| Ellison's sickness; nndcfStood TINT ELI;
son and his wife lad been to Willianiston.
that day. t..
Mai. Anderson, trecalled,) says II did
not offer to Eail Ellison for him 10 confess !:
! got information from him tllat. he knew
more than he had told me made him no
inducemcnt to confess IN the spring yard |;
/ was sent for to see him morning after fra !;
did not send for him. as
The examination OF witnesses was con-.
clndcd at about ii o'clock d. m. Friday, end
the argument before the jury wac opened
nt once by james L. Orr, ESQ, on tho part
| of the State, who was followed by MSssrs.
Allen, Murray and Breazeqls In the aftsr-
noon and by Mr.. Moore on Saturday lnofa-
| ing fort che prisoners, who twero In trirn
followed by the Solicitor, who closed tbs
largumcnt for tile State. The vafiotis points
of the case were thoroughly ventilated by
the learned counsel on both sides, who loc-
cupjed the Court from II o'clock a. N. on
Friday until about p, IN. on saturday.
The arguments of the council were listened
to attentively and patiently by tho jury,
who seemed ut lis conclusion to Hreathe o
sigh of relief.
The Judge then dcliyerea an able and
impartial chargs to the jury, Of which the
following Is o synopsis:
The Jadge's Chargc. s;
The jury were instructed that they were
to find d verdict In the case withunt refer.
ence TO the opinion ofn single individual id
the large assemblage around them, or to the
| feelings Of the parties or the earnest con.
clusions of tho Counsel who have argtIed
the case; the rule was that stated by tho
Solicitor, 20 verdict according to the eyi-
dence in the casa That inastn,ich as.it
| was stated on the part Of the Stnte no con-
viction of the Ragsdales ffat!ier aud SOM
and of Hancock was asked. their cases
should be dismissed from the consideration
The Court then called the attention OF
the fur to the cases of GambrelI and Po0re,
1 and e aid that in the consideration of their
i cases tho alleged coniessionr OF Ellison
against himself, Gambrell, Popre and others
must be wholly excluded that as q cohfss.
zion or evidence it cotld affect Ellison
alone = that it was not made under the
sanction Of an oath, anu N TO Ganbrell
anC Poore conld ncts hs corrohorated that
the testimony of an accomplice who wns n
| witness might and should be strengthened
ing others could not be becorroborateda as there
was no testimony TO support ;isshut the Jury
were therefore, to coflside! the cases Of
Gambrell and Poorc as If thp5 were not M
cluded in the same indictment esninss I,,.s
son. and were indicted alone
Separating thus che casel of Gainbfnll and
Poore from that of Ellison, the Court sub-
mitted q brief ef,,!tefement of the expressions
of Gsmbrell uttered by him before aud after
the fire, reminding the jury, however, that
all thnt was said By Gambreit was before
them for consideration; that these express
sions or declarations were alleged by the
State to prove the commission of, or par
ticipation in, the offence OF arsotf, as charged
in the indictment. Tho declarations made
by Poore being OF o like character with those
made by Gambrell, were also submitted 60
t;s &: ~; li;s s,;
ted the jury that when declarations were
used as evidence OF. q prisoner guilt, Il ives
incumbent on the State to- show the admis-
sions were made with reference to the Of
fence charged In the Indictment, or some
matter relating to It |; that ifthe decIaratio ions
were dubious in hleEfing, the aocaaed ssas
j not so much under obligation TO explain,
rs the StatewaD bound 20 show tlenpplicn-
Il bilityl of the express lon TO tllds olience
charged that If the State had satisfied the
i jury that the declarations Of Ganlbrell and
nsss ssase..ea &C ...e offence charged, and
also satisfied them of the CONN, ,issI6n oe the
crime, the verdict should lie guilty, but II
giving 70 the declarations reasonable fofce
and efiieaey the quee etiofi Of guilt was donht-
ful. or not proved thp verdict slsoltId be mol
lguilty. The Court instructed the Jury thai
Gambrell and Poore having proved good
character Were entitled 70 the benefit o
such proof; that Ia al cases. and especially
IN doubtful cases, good lliaracter sholle
nIsS5 Wuil,ht. 5Es ~ = "a:
The Court said ti1at the, case OF fslitsor
rested upon his alleged con gession of thi
. offence; not a confession in general terms
but one containing particulars thai con
tession of guilt rests upon q condiiiun o
facts 20 be determines by the Court befors
it can be admitted es testimony. IsTnrs