The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1888-06-12

w hSAVbOho 1o>NSs
The Mason case is still pending in the
minal court, on the motion for a new
| hi by the defendants counsel. Argu-
nts on the motion will be heard on Sat
lay next. Following is Judge DuBose's
urge to the jury which rendered the
dict OF guilty against Mr.. Mason. 1t
be interesting reading for other pub
officials.
THE CHARGE.
The defendant is charged with miscon-
ct in Office, in that as superintendent of
work-house OF Shelby county he did
|ifully and unlawfully permit and allow
! known as Bolton, a prisoner at said
k-house, then under lawful conviction
| a sentence for crime, to go unattended
a unguarded outside Of the work-house,
III TO 90 TO the plantation OF one -
aughter, in Fayette county, and to work
said Slaughter in an unauthorized en-
byment. II is provided by law that the
. artery court shall elect work-house
perintendent; that the superintendent
' all be required to take an oath faithfully
discharge the duties OF his office; that
shall give bond payable 10 the State,
d conditioned safely TO keep the con-
It's; TO treat them humanely, and when
k 10 provide them with proper medical
tendance; to faithfully account for the
| oceeds OF their labor, and in all things
fully execute his duties MS superintend-
~ 1t is further provided that all per-
| ms sentenced under the provisions OF the
| Drk-house act shall be kept at continuous
| rd labor during the day, except while
| ting or preparing their food, etc, aud
| at the county court shall determine the
aracter OF employment to which con-
| its shall be put, and the superintendent
| all not put convicts to business forbid
. n by said court.
| Yon must first determine from the
oof whether or not defendant
ason was elected by the quarterly
urt OF Shelby county superintend.
/ OF the work-house Of said county. II
not necessary thatthe prosecution should
owe that he was duly commissioned. IL
enough II the proofshows that he claimed
fill the Office OF superintendent OF the
)rk-house OF shelby county by virtue Of
election by said court, and was at the
nc II is alleged the ohense was COM
tilted claiming TO exercise the duties OF
id office. The indictment charges that
defendant, as superintendent OF the
ork-housc, wilfully and unlawfully per-
tilted one Bolton, convict in said work.
Juse, TO leave the said work-house I'M
iarded and 10 engage in an employment
a character other than that determined
the county court, describing the same
an engagement TO work on one Slaugh-
place in Fayette county, Tenn, before
III convict had been discharged in ac-
,rdance with law. II is therefore neces-
/ ~ that the proof show that defendant
,rmitted the said Bolton, convict, will
lily TO leave the work-house; that is, he
tentionally permitted him 10 do so. That
i'd convict was not permitted 10 leave by
,cident, from compulsion or necessity. II
10 proof shows that at the re
TEST OF Esq. Slaughter the said
olton, then n convict, was permitted bN
Ne defendant TO come unattended by
kJnrd 10 see Esquire Slaughter, at his Office
| the&ty, with view Of his being sent e
- slaughtcl's farm, in Fayette county
that he, the defendant, came IN will
id convict TO the city and there delivered
i'm into the custody oil said Slaughter, io
Ne purpose OF being 50 employed, then
n either event, the act was wiliull, a
narged in the indictment.
The word "unlawiully" In the indict
tent must be construed TO mean that III,
Il with which defendant Is charged wa
one contrary TO law, that IL the law pre-
riding the duties OF the superintendent
( the work house. II Is then necessar.
lat you should be instructed rs 10 the laV
efining the duties Of the superintendent
I tine work-house, or 10 much OF II a
cans upon or is applicable 70 the charg
4 the indictment. In addition 70 tn
ath this official Is required TO take tina
will discharge the duties Of his Office
G Is required 10 safely keep the convict
ent 10 the work. house, that they shall b
ept at hard labor during the day, exceT
lille eating or preparing their food, an
hat the county court shall determine th
haracter OF employment 10 which convict
hall be put, and that the superintendent
hall not put conyicts 10 a bushes
)rbidden by said court. This III
ng the plain reading OF III
tatue, YOU must determine iroi
he proof In this case whether In III
Inst place the convict Bolton was permit
cd 20 90 outside OF tho work-house al
uarded and unattended ~ Fayette coui
v, Tenn, 10 the plantation OF one -
Slaughter, there 10 work for said slaught'
n an unauthorized employment And 4
his purpose the court directs your attei
ion 10 the certified copyo the rules, reg
atoms and orders made and intended 4
he governing Of the work-housc by q
county court Of shelby county. II 70
4 lind from this, or the other proof IN u
NJ. that Superintendent Mason, the d
fendant on trial, was not authorized
hermit or allow said convict Bolton
l cave the work-house and 20 10 49,
4 \Slaughter's plantation In Fayctic count
IlTcnn.. 10 engage In work for said Slaug
tcr then In that event he would be gull
A. charged and Il would be your duty
10 find, and your verdict would be guilt
I'M. ON the other hand, the law or author
= Of the county court permitted the workii
l Of this and other conyicts ~ stated 81
YOU 10 find from the proof, II would
/ your duty In that event 10 acquit the q
4 icndant, and II 10, your verdict would
not guilty. The amount OF work perform
on - slaughtcr's place In fayette oou
4 ~, In the event You End that one u
/ ton, convict, was permitted 10 go tibet
n immaterial 40 far as this investigation
concerned. The gist Of the olense clarg
= Il the letting out Of the work-house I
: convict before lac had been discharged
accordance with law, and being employ
i otherwise than ~ directed by the ooui
b court. The length Of time he may la
4 been absent from the work.house contri
d 20 the judgment Of the court sentencing
hard labor in tho work.house for ori
VI al ,ha diroction ~ tho county cour