The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1898-09-06
A ON[SD[D AFFAIR
Clark Not In 1t Before
the Trinity Board.
TESTIMONY RULED OUT

lEOIlMUNl hULLU UUl
The Doors Locke Against all OUTSIDE
ers-The Judge Not Allowed a Stenog-
rapher-The Agent of the Board Not
Allowed TO Testify as to the General
Reputation of KflgO I'm South Caro-
I lima After Having Been Sent There TO
Gather Evidence-KiIgO's General
Charge Of immortality I'm our Graded
chooIs
From The Raleigh News and Observ-
er we get the following proceedings OF
the first days hearing OF the Clark
Kilgo trial:
The first session met at 5 o'clock and
remained in session until Z O'Clock, then
adjourned until $50 o'clock, at which
hour the board met again and remain-
ed in session for three and a half
hours.
OF the thirty-six trustees twenty-six
were checked off as being present.
In addition to these DR.. Kilgo, Pro-
fessors Merritt, Flowers and OtheE
members Of the faculty were present,
as was also Mr.. B.. c. Beckwith, who,
on August 10Th, was appointed deputy
prosecutor to take dispositions in North
Carolina and South Carolina, in the
absence of the prosecutor, Rev. O.. A.
Oglesby. Then there were witnesses
on both sides, including Editor John
r. Webster, of Reidsville, r. 3. Boone,
Esq, of Durham; Zeb P. Council, of
The Durham Sun, and Rev. T. J.. Cat
tbs, Of Durham.
All others, especially newspaper
men, were excluded. The News and
Observer representative asked per-
mission at both sessions to be pres
ent.
A motion was made by Rev. DR..
Greasy at the opening of the hearing
that all matters admitted should be
recorded and printed. Objection was
made by Mr.. Odell that while the
board might be willing to have every
thing goEan record, they might not be
willing to publish it in the papers. Ac-
cordingly a motion was passed simply
to put all matters on record.
To this end Mr.. D.. w. NewsOme, DR..
Kilgo's stenographer, was elected Of
fetal stenographer to the board to
record the proceedings and take down
the speeches and evidence. A motion
on the part of Judge Clark to have this
stenOgrapher sworn was rejected, as
was also Judge C1ark'S request hat
ne too be allowed to ave a stenOgra-
pher at his own expense. This latter
request was made at the opening of
the night session. 1t was refused and
the door locked against all outsiders.
Mr. TnnonC II nIthoot "a nhnirTnnn
of the board, presided, and Mr.. V. Bal
lard was secretary.
After some unimportant prelimina-
ries Judge Clark read his challenge to
the board as a jury and moved that it
be polled and purged.
When the challenge to the jury was
read by Judge Clark DR.. Kilgo earnest
~ opposed it's being allowed, as did al
so DR.. Greasy and Rev. F. A. Bishop.
The last named trustee said that If
Judge Clark considered the jurors cor
rupt his proper remedy was to attack
their character before the conference
and not by a motion of this kind. DR..
Oglesby, the prosecutor. said he did
not concur in the request of Judge
Clark to hav the jury polled and that
he considered it unfair and ~unreasOn-
able and if the paper was admitted it
would put the case out of court.
No one seconded Judge Clark's mo-
ton, and therefore it was declared de-
feated without a roll call.
Another paper was then read by
Judge Clark stating that it was diff |
cult, owing to lack of compulsory pro-
cess, to get witnesses to testify as to
a mans bad character. This Daper
was as follows:
ABSENCE OF WITNESSES.
THE lack of power in this board to
10
witnesses renders it impossible to
place the evidence before you as other
wise could be readily done. Out of
more than a dozen witnesses of re-
pute in South Carolina who are known
to ave stated recently that DR.. Kill
go was we'll known as a wire-puller
and politician, only two obeyed the no
tice issued by this board to take their
deposition-some verbally reiterating
the statement, but declining to give
dispositions. Out of a. large number
summoned here to testify in person only
three are in attendance. Even in civil
courts where attendance of witnesses
a be compelled it is easier as every
one knows to procure witnesses to
prove good character than to get those
to testify whose evidence is of a con-
trary tendency. When your request to
get up evidence was accepted. it was
understood that Methodists. and espe-
cially Methodist ministers. would obey
your subpoena. But as his is not a
church trial. many of them refuse to
do so, and not being a civil trial, no
process to procure witnesses can be
enforced.
THE investigation under these cir |
cumstances is so disadvantageous that
the evidence as to the truth of every
be brought here in much diminished
quantity. The plan presented by your
board of requiring the other side to
be furnished the names of witnesses in
advance necessarily gave to the friends
of the defendant every opportunity to
work upon their fears and prevent
their testimony. IT would open up a