Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1882-04-13
THE POLITICAL PROSECUTIONS.

In the U. S. Circuit Court at Charleston,
Judges Bond and Bryan presiding, the cases
for alleged violations of the election laws in
South Carolina were called Oh Thursday last,
District Attorney Melton announcing that he
WAS ready to proceed with the case No. II
against Bates and others, and he moved the
Court for leave toamend the information. Up
on the suggestion of Judge Bond, however, the
argument on the motion to quaSh the infor-
nation was first taken up. Major Theo. G..
Barker, who was charged with this branch Of
the case, then proceeded to make lengthy ar
gument, which was replied to by District At
torney Melton, who spoke until O'Clock,
when court adjourned until 10 A. NJ. Friday.
On the convening of the Court, Friday
morning, Attorney-General Youmans was
heard in reply to District-Attorney Melton in
support of the motion to quash the informa-
tion filed in the election cases.
Judge Bond then announced that the Court
would take time to consider the questions SUBJ
mitted, and suggested that in the meantime
argument on the motion to set aside the array
of grand and petit jurors should proceed.
Meesrs. G. r. Miles and J. P. K. Bryan, the
counsel selected to argue this question, stated
that they were not prepared to 60 on at this
time and the argument was accordingly de-
ferred.
Colonel ]. C. Haskell, one of the counsel for
moved for continuance of these cases, sta
ting to the Court that the prisoners were all
poor men and were here at great sacrifice OF
time and means He argued that the contin-
uance of the cases to the next term of Court
at Columbia would be far more convenient to
them and would allow them time to procure
material witness, who has left the State.
Senator NJ. C. Butler also urged the Court
to grant a continuance.
Judge Bond said the defendants had already
been fully indulged. One of the Richland ca
ses had been called and argument on the pre-
liminary motion had been heard for two days
and the cases must go on.
Haskell then asked the Court if it would
make an order to bring certain of defendants
witnesses at the expenseo Of the government, as
the defendants were unable to procure their
witnesses otherwise.
Judge Bond said that after the requisite af
fidavits had been made the Court would con-
slider the question.
On motion of District Attorney Melton the
Court then adjourned until Saturday morning
at ten O'Clock.
On Saturday the Court overruled the motion
to quash the informations filed by the District
Attorney in the election cases, holding that
the offenses with which the parties are charged
are not Infamous; consequently not to be pro-
ceeded against by Indictment only.
The District Attorney then moved to be al
lowed to amend the information in the Rich
land cases by adding the charge OF conspiracy
under Section $40 of the United States Re-
viSed Statutes.
The Court overruled this motion, holding
that the District Attorney is not entitled to
add counts charging the accused with conspi-
racy with others not named in the original aff-
davit nor in the information already filed to do
acts for which they are now to he tried. In
formation for the warrant of the Commits
sioner, Court held, nor any part OF the record,
gives the accused notice of any such ottense.
1t is entirely new crime, not an amendment
in any.sense of the word. 1t must be cOnsid-
cred new information and cannot be filed eX-
cept upon affidavit and new proceedings The
Court added that this would work contin-
uance of the Richland cases, OF at least post
pone them until late in the trial.
The District Attorney stated that ne would
announce on Monday whether or not he would
proceed with the trial of the Richland cases on
the original information, or ask leave to hle a
new one.
Counsel for the accused said they would
make no objection to the array of grand and
petit jurors in this case, as they had proposed,
but would reserve the right to argue the ques-
tion in other cases when they are called.
The Court then adjourned until Monday
morning at 10 4. NJ.
On Monday, the case of Bates and others,
from Richland county, was taken up. Inc
defence waived the objection to the array OF
tie jury in the case, reserving the question IN
the other cases which may come up, and
Jury was empaneled and witnesses required to
appear in Court Tuesday morning, when the
case was to proceed.