Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1882-04-27
THE POLITICAL PROSECUTIONS.

THE POLITICAL PROSECUTIONS.
On the 18th instant, in the United States
Circuit Court at Charleston, before Judges
Bond and Bryan, the grand jury returned a
true bill against Henry G. Dickerson and 9TH
ers of Barnwell county, charged with conspi-
racy to intimidate United States witnesses.
The grand jury is composed OF thirteen Re-
pbicans and seven Democrats.
The Court then began the trial of Lucien L.
Carroll, Samuel f. Sllaw and George H. Will
son, Managers of Election Of Mayesville Pre-
cinct in Sumter county, charged with stufing
the ballot box and interfering with the United
States Supervisors. A jury was empanelled
consisting of eleven Republicans and one Dem
ocrat. The District Attorney did not find
it necessary to Use any Of the challenges TO
which the prosecution is entitled, finding the
new system of standing aside jurors allowed
by Judge Bond to be sufficient to secure such
jury as he desired.
The government then examined ten wit
nesses, seven of whom were colored. The
testimony showed that through misunder-
standing as to where the poll was to be located
the United States supervisor did not reach the
poll until three minutes after 6 o'clock in the
morning. When he got there the voting had
commenced and several ballots had been de-
posted. The supervisor testified that he asked
the managers to open the box so that he could
see into it, out they informed him that the
voting had commenced and they would not
again open the box, and that they had exhib-
tied the box before the voting commenced.
The election proceeded quietly all day, and
wheii the box was opened and the votes were
being counted bundle of ten Democratic
tickets and two packets Of Republican tickets
folded together in each were found in the box.
The managers counted one ticket Of each and
destroyed the others. The number of votes
in the box exceeded the names on the poll list
by two hundred and twenty-one, and the man
ayers drew out the surplus ballots without
seeing them and then destroyed them. OF the
ballots destroyed one hundred and fOrty-seven
were Republican and seventy-four Democratic.
The government then closed the case for
the prosecution
On the 10Th, the grand jury found true
bills against thirty-eight citizens of Barnwell
county, charging them with obstructing vo-
ters ut Buford's Bridge precinct in Barnwell
county at the general election in November,
1880. In the original indictment forty-four
defendants were included, but the grand
Jury found ''no bll'' as to five of the number.
After the grand jury had made the above
presentment, the trial of Lucien l.. Carroll
and others was resumed, and the testimony
on both sides concluded. The testimony for
the defense was delivered by fifteen white
witnesses, including three of the defendants.
These witnesses all testified that the poll at
Mayesville had been opened promptly at
O'Clock on the morning Of election in 1880;
that before the voting began one Of the mana
gers opened the box and exhibited it publicly
to the crowd on the outside and turned the
box upside down to show that there were no
tickets when it was locked. All the witness
es who were present stated that they saw in
to the box clearly and that it was perfectly
empty. The Republican Supervisor arrived
at the poll about twenty minutes after the
voting began. He was admitted into the
room, but the Managers refused to reopen the
box so that he could see into it, telling him
that the box had been exhibited and that if
they reopened the box after the voting had be-
gun they would invaldate the whole poll.
The testimony for the defense went further
to show that the surplus tickets found in the
box were deposited through the aperture in
the lid by voters. The good character Of the
defendants was testified to by number Of wit
nesses, both Republican and Democratic.
On the Goth the grand jury returned true
bill against David and James Winn and Hen
ry S. McLaurin, Commissioners of Election
for Sumter county, on an indictment charg-
ing them with refusing and failing to count
three Of the polls in Sumter county.
The trial of the case against Lucien L. Car
roll and others was resumed. Dallas Sanders
opened the argument for the prosecution, and
was followed by Joseph H. Earle, of Sumter,
opened his argument in behalf of the accused;
but soon after he commenced the Court ad-
journed.
On the 21st, Attorney General Youmans
concluded his argument for the defense. 1t
was powerful effort and was listened to by
an immense audience.
District Attorney Melton closed the argu-
ment for the prosecution. His argument was
strong and eloquent.
The jury was then charged very briefly by
Judge Bond and they retired to their room.
The case as to one of the managers, Lucien
l.. Carroll, was nolle pressed by the District
Attorney, the government having failed even
circumstantially to connect him with any cir
cumstance of the alleged offense.
On the 22nd, the grand jury returned mo
bill'' on the indictment against NJ P. Howell,
Henry D. Padgett and Abraham P. Holmes,
Commissioners of election. Of Colleton county,
charging them with conspiracy to affect the
result of the election of 1880 in that county
by neglecting and refusing to provide for the
opening of certain polls.
Before proceeding with the trial of another
case the District Attorney called the atten-
tion of the Court to the cases against David
James Winn and Henry J. McLaurin, Com
missioners of Election for Sumter county,
charged with refusing to count certain polls.
E. w. Noise, counsel for the accused then
came forward and read the following affidavit:
| 'UN1TED STATES OF AMERICA,
| DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA.
''The United States VS.. James Winn and
Henry McLaurin the same vs.. Henry j. Nc
Laurin.
''And now at this day come into Court the
defendants and say that they are charged with
| having failed and refused to count and send
up to the Board of State Canvassers the votes
cast at Sumter precinct No. l, Carter's Cross
ing and Rafting Creek, all in the county Of
| Sumter, and for the election of 1880. They
admit the truth Of the charge, and in excuse
| thereof now oath say that they were there
for the first time acting as commissioners and
afterwards canvassers Of the election of 1880
in the county of Sumter. That certain ques-
tions were made before them as to the legality
of certain boxes in said election. That they
did not know what to do, having received no
instructions on that matter, and, not being
lawyers or conversant with the law Of elec-
tions, that they called in three lawyers OF
good standing to advise them. That they
took and followed the advice given them, as
they would have done in their private affairs,
and by such advice failed and refused to send
up or count the votes in such boxes. They
solemnly swear that they did not do this cor
ruptly or with intent to change the result OF
the election. They did what with the light
before them, they believed to be their duty,
but now they are informed that in calling for
and following such advice they violated the
law and are told they were merely minis
teral officers without any discretionary or
- l. &C. ho %ha on