The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1895-07-24
An Unconvicted Convict.

We imagine that there were but few
men in the State, whether they were Re.
formers or Conservatives, whether they
have approved the dispensary scheme or
have opposed it, who read the statement
tslegraphed from Columbia that the
Penitentiary officials had clipped William
Sheppard's hair and put him in the stri-
ped 'Penitentiary garb, without feeling
Of strong indignation.
He was sentenced to imprisonment"
in the Penitentiary for no "crime,"
properly So called, and was not "convict-
ed" of the offence of which which he was
charged, contempt of Court. After a
hearing before Judge Townsend, on
charges supported by the af6davits of
certain constabIes and policemen he was
adjudged by that official to be guilty and
was ordered to be confined In the Peni-
tentiary for eight months, for contempt
of Court" and for nothing more, and
nothing worse. 1t is an outrage that he
should be subjected in these circu mstan.
ces to the indignity Of such treatment as
is given in the prison to the vilest crim1-
nails incarcerated in it.
TO make the matter clear, it should be
noted that on the day before Sheppard
was humiliated go needlessly, dispen
sary constable who was imprisoned by
order of Judge Simonton for the same
offence, contempt of Court" was re-
moved from one of the county jails to
another because, as stated, he was scarce
ly restrained Of his liberty in the one in
which he was first confined. The offence
should be no greater in the one case than
in the other, but while Constable Clanton
was treated as guest of the State, Citizen
Sheppard was treated precisely as he
would have been treated If he bad been
convicted Of homicide or burglary, or
rape, or any other Infamous crime.
There Is no justification for such dis
elimination in the administration of law.
The only excuse offered for 1t is that OF
the Penitentiary authorities that what
was done in Sheppard's case, was "done
according to prison rules" The rules of
the Penitentiary, however, are not sufi-
cient warrant for committing such an
outrage on prisoner in Sheppard's con-
dition, and the State authorities, the
Governor and the Attorney General, who
were fully informed Of what was intend
ed, haYe plainly failed to do their duty in
the matter. They should not have allow
ed Judge Townsends personal prisoner
to be subjected to so shameful abuse. 1t
is perfectly safe to say that if Judge
Simonton had sent the offending consta-
BILE to the same prison for the same
offence, they would not have allowed the
prison officials to shave the constable's
head and put the prison garb on him,
merely because it was according to the
prison rules" They should not have
allowed it in the case of Sheppard.
A fund is being raised in Columbia, 1t
is stated, for the purpose of paying the
expenses Of an appeal in Sheppard's case
to the United States Supreme Court, and
there are suggestions that the superinten-
dent CT the prison will have to answer in
Court for his ill-advised conduct. We
hope that both cases will be pushed to the
utmost. Ifa Judge and jailer alone can
make felon of any citizen of this State
at their pleasure, without the aid Of
jury, and for no greater offence than u
"contempt of Court" the sooner the fact
is known the better for all other citizens
Of the State who have money enough to
leave it.-Neacs and Courier.