The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1897-07-07
Rlchland Grand Jury.

The Sumter Item is very much die
pleased With Charleston and Rlchland
grand juries. It says:
The Charleston grand jury refuses to
briog 10 true bills against violaters OF
the Dispensary law, Notwithstanding
indisputable evidence Of their guilt
the Columbia grand jury refuses to find
true bill against S. W. Scroggs who
admitted that be had appropriated to
his own use articles Belonging to the
State. These juries are guilty Of yio-
lating their oaths to perform the duties
incumbent upon them. They have
permitted personal and political consid-
eratioDs to outweigh the law. the evi-
denoe and their regard for their oatbs
and individual honor. With such
fragrant disregard Of the law 10 high
places it is not surprising that the Law
is falling into disrepute.
If these juries have permitted "per-
sonsl and political consideration sto out
weigh the law" The Register thor
oughly agrees with its contemporary
But as rule the proceedings in a
grand jury room are seldom divulged
and ought not to be under any circum
stances Being secret outsiders can
not know what testimony was presented
to them. or whether the evidence given
by witnesses barmonizsd or any other
circumstances which may induce jury
to bring 10 true bill or throw out a
case The public is familiar 10 gen.
eral way through newspapers aud CON-
mon rumors about cer'aio circumstances
conpecsedi with various cases of general
importance, but it does not follow that
all the facts are known Indeed io the
trial OF many cases Of general icrerest
revelations are made about which the
public were in eetire ignorance. We
DO not say that anything Of the kind
occurred is the two instances mcution
ed by The Item, but Sc submit that it
is TOO severe 10 charge eighteen men
with violating their oatbs unless there
is good ground for doing 50. Ooe may
thiok that grand jury should do such
and such thing, bat if they should
happen nc: to that is no reason why
they are guilty of wrong Perhaps
the individual who thought out their
line of action for them 10 advance may
have based his conclusions on false in
formation or unsound premises.
We know nothing about the Charles
ton graud jury. but as far as the Rich
laud grand jury is concerned We koo"
tba, they did not violate their oaths in
the Scruggs case Il may be admitted
that Mr. Scruggs did wrong ia eating
those peaches and smoking those cigars.
but was be guilty Of legal crime in
doing sol The Attorney General and
tie Assistant Attorney General spent
several sleepless n;gh's trying to 6od
out exactly vtat Mr.. Scruggs vas le-
eally guilty of. and toe Attorney Gen
.eraI declared that II was about as hard
question as ne had ever tackled.
Finally they weat 20 the coz mon law aud
charged bin with ''ohi,ial misconduct
and added the statutory crimes o:
"housebreaking aud larceny The
Attorney General himself admitted
that De did not believe any of the
charges. would stand and 10 this opinion
he is backed up by some CT the bss st
legal talcut of Columbia II. then,
Scrugg's crisoe was suco that even
shrewd lawyers :so.od it bard TO charge
him with anything crimioal nodeT the
las. is ii any wonder that grand jury
should look 90 the thing 10 pretty
much the same light aud throw it out !?
We have 40 way Of entertaining
wh>tber politics entered into the dis
cussion 10 the grand jury roon. oa'
under tie circum stances there vas 90
reason for;s Wc know aothiug about
the politics Of the joTy, bot know them
10 be honorable. tEu:5fui men. The
Item With these facts before II should
apologies for Is statemep; as to tbs
Richland grand jury Columbia Reg
lister