The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1882-04-13
Persecuted South Carolina.

When Judge THURMAN's new jury law
for the United States courts went into ope-
ration we entertained the hope that the
business was ended Of packing juries for
the purpose of conyicting Democratic cleo
ton officers, and thus securing by intimida-
ton the return of Radical Republicans to
Congress. But the trials which are going
on now under Judge BOND in Charleston, s.
c., show that that law is treated with con-
tempt by the United States Circuit Court
for that State. The Charleston NelcS and
Courier explains the matter as follows:
"The juries for the United States courts
are drawn from list Of 500 names, which
names are selected by two officers desig-
mated for the purpose and belonging to
different political parties. The presump-
ton is that there is about an equal number
OF Democratic names and Republican
names on the list, and the jurors, in their
political opinions, are about equally
divided. In the present instance this was
the case. Sixty jurors were drawn, and
thirty-sevcn of these are the petit jurors,
thirty OF whom were present. The Govern
ment has the right to challenge peremptOri-
Nv three Jurors, aud can challenge for cause.
The District Attorney now claims that he
can reject as many other jurors
AS he pleases, which rejection is
fantamount to Il peremptory challenge UNI
less the whole list shall be gone through
with before the jury is completed. In that
ease the Jurors who stood aside are re-
CURED to, and from them the necessary
number is taken. The practical working
OF IL was exhibited yesterday. One after
another thirteen white men were ordered
by the District Attorney TO stand aside
One of them was afterwards accepted. But
the Government had twelve peremptory
challenges by standing aside, in addition
to the three peremptory challenges allowed
by statute. In other words, il there had
been fifteen white jurors and fifteen CO.
lored jurors in the beginning, and none
had Sbeen excused, the District Attorney
could have rejected every one OF the white
Jurors and left the defendants to be tried
by a jury OF colored men.
1t may be that in other States one Juror
is as good as another. This is not so in
South Carolina in the case of the colored
people, when the person on trial is prose-
cuted by the United States. The average
colored MN thinks it his duty to give q
verdict for the Government, no matter
what the evidence Is; and this explains the
object OF the District Attorney in pressing
so vigorously his claim 10 reject every iu-
ror who, according TO his information
could not be depended on to convict every
white Democrat on trial"
Thus free white citizens Of South Caro-.
lima are subjected TO the whims and preju,
dices and ignorant differences of negro iu
rors whose firm belief is that IL Is theiI
duty to give verdict for the Government
no matter what the evidence is" VIII Mr.
Arthur interpose in behalf Of these perse-
cuted people OF his own racer When he
desired his negro cohorts in Virginia to
swell the ranks Of the Readiusters he found
1t easy to acquaint them with the fact. Can
he not do kindness for these poor, perse-
cuted white men in South Carolina, hound.
ed down by his ofiicerss Can he withstand
the appeal Of the wives and children Of the
men whom his district attorney is doing his
utmost to convict Of penitentiary offence
by the aid OF negro Jurors, Of whom there
are five on the jury alluded TO In the above
extractf