Mineral Point tribune. (Mineral Point, Wis.) 1869-1938, 1880-03-11
REBEL SPIRIT IN SOUTH CAROLINA
Unjust Execution of the Laws I'm Cases
In Which United states Officers are

Unjust Execution Of the Laws i'm Cases
In which United States Officers are
Concerned.
correspondent writing from Charles
tor, South Carolina, says:
The working Of the state Judiciary sys-
TEN, as it is used to shield offenders
against Federal laws and officers, is
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,
1878, 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.
len 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 thai the commissioned had ever seen
him. About two months after this oc-
currence Hutchinson met Farris in
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, and carried
to the hospital. After much unnecessary
delay, Faris was arrested by the state
authorities, and gave bail for his appear
ance before the State Circuit Court in
November, 1879. When the time arrived,
Farris feigned to be sick, and the circuit
solicitor 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 cases 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 in court
81 have learned" said the commits
sloner, that the witnesses were allowed
to go at large without recognizance, and
it seems evident, from the several post
ponements and the general conduct of
the solicitor, that the state has no inten-
ton to punish this cowardly r1ffian, and
the sole reas on is, | am Federal Off
GER" This is not an isolated case; there
are many instances on record in which
witnesses to offenses 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 inhict the heaviest penalties the
statutes prescribe. A former interna
revenve officer, William l.. Springs, was
convicted of stealing 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 did
not warrant the verdict, and yet he stub
bornly declined to exercise his pardon
ing prerogative, though several petitions,
signed by influential citizens, have been
presented to him. Jt is generally be-
ieved that Springs is innocent of the
theft, and that he was convicted for the
serious crime Of being revenue officer.