The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1881-06-30
THE Acou1rrA1 OF COL. CASH.

The second trial of Col. E. B. c. Cash,
at Darlington, for killing Col. VIM. NJ.
Shannon in the duel last year, was con-
cluded last week by a verdict Of "not
guilty." The grounds upon which the
jury based their verdict would be mat
ter of interest to the public, inasmuch
as the charge of the Judge left no posi-
BILE chance for a verdict Of acquittal,
unless they we're deliberately determined
to set at defiance the rules of law and
the obligation of their oaths. So far as
Col. Cash is affected by the verdict, we
apprehend there will be no fault found
with it, for it would have been hard to
punish man for what others have done
with impunity. However great was his
crime, others had been guilty of the
same act and had never been punished,
and for many years not even prosecuted
for it, and therefore fair play and equal
justice forbade that Col. Cash should be
held up to the punishment where others
were passed unharmed and uncensured.
The Executive mercy could never have
permitted him to suffer the penalty Of
the law, even if he had been convicted,
but that point was not reached. The
case was submitted to jury sworn upon
the Holy Evangels to bring in true YER
dict according to the law and the eTi-
dence, and upon the trial it was proven
by the State and admitted by the defense
that the defendant had killed Col. Shan
non in duel, and the Judge charged
most clearly and solemnly that this kill
ing was murder, and yet the jury say
"not guilty." It is, as a general thing,
wrong for newspapers to criticise the
verdicts of juries, because in doing so it
is setting up the judgment of one man
against that of twelve, but in case so
palpable and so culpable as the one in
point, it presents the question mildly to
say that the verdict in this case is not
one of which any member of thatjury
has any occasion to feel proud. AS we
have said, it is not because we have any
objection to the result of the verdict
upon Col. Cash, but it lowers the conf
dence in and respect for jury trials. So
sacred duty should be performed in an
absolutely impartial and fearless manner.
Any cringing to power or any verdict
founded upon favor or prejudice is low
ering to the system and demoralizing to
the community. There can be no doubt
that had that jury been trying some
petty thief, and the testimony and charge
of the Judge been so clear and simple,
the verdict would have been guilty; and
yet, simply because of sympathy and the
prominence of the defendant in this in
stance, the verdict is not guilty.
AS we have said, the verdict in this
case was based in our opinion upon SYM
pathy, and was not intended to justify
duelling. The only excuse that can be
made for it is, that the trial has undoubt-
edly accomplished its purpose-the sup
preston of duelling-for the vigor of
this prosecution and the difficulty with
which an acquittal was secured are sufi.
cient warning that the next case tried for
this offense will not fare so we'll. The
law has been fully asserted and sustained
by the Courts, and from this time for
ward it may be safely assumed that the
duel will be held to be murder, and kill
ing in this manner will hereafter be pun
ished as such.