The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1899-06-14
w. r. Crawford Acquitted BY a
kershaw Jury.
WAS ouTFlFTEEN HOURS.
The Jury Asked Judge Buchanan
to Charge Them Again on
Certain points Of


TfCaV evening, IepLU UdiS ---'
lumbia, S. C. The case was tried at
Camden, Crawford having been granted
change Of venue.
At y o'clock Thursday the jury an
nounced that it had arrived at YER
dict. Judge Bunchanan was not IN the
court house at the time: but was sum
moned Immediately. In order to pre-
vent any demonstration in the court
room, he ordered the sheriff and his
deputies to take stations IN different
parts of the hall, and to preserve order;
Mr.. L. l.. Block, foreman, arose and
announced that the verdict Of the jury
was mot guilty" There was no show
of excitement. There was no change
on the expressionless face of ". Il
Crawford.
The crowd in the court house was
dissolved in few moments, Crawford
and his friends hurried to the telegraph
Office where they wired to friends IN
every county that the trla! had ended
and the accused ex.ceastable had not
been convicted.
The Jury was out Is hours. At first,
50 it is reported, and generally accept
ed in Camden, there were nine for ac-
ouittal and three for conviction. 1t IS
stated that, when the jurors went to
sleep at midnight, two OF those Tor con-
viction had given in. THURSDAY morn.
ing at 9 o'clock there was large crowd
gathered around the door Of the court
house awaiting the arrival Of the judge.
The opinion of every one present was
that when the Judge arrived the jury
would announce that it had been un-
able to agree, and a ''mistrial would
b. ordered. Judge Buchanan arrived
al 10 o'clock. The doors Of the court
house were thrown open.
When the jury had been polled,
Foreman Block said they wanted fur
ther information in regard to certain
points in the judges charge. He asked
the Judge to explain the rights Of an Of
6cer in enforcing the execution Of a war
rant where he is opposed by violence.
The Jury did not understand the charge
of the court on this point. Nv wish
to ind out if Mr.. Crawford had the
right to search the house with violent
force" he said.
Solicitor Thurnond rose to object,
but was overruled by the judge, who
then addressed the jury:
THAT involves a mixed question OF
law and fact. The court Instructed
YOU that an officer could use force IN
reasonable circumstances, to meet force
with force; but unless force were neces-
sary he should not exercise any force at
all. Whenever the law givesa man a
process and tells him to search house,
it gives him everything necessary to ac-
complish that purpose, ard II he meets
with force, being authorized by law,
being law officer, he may overcome
that force using so much force as Is ne
cessary to do that.
ssHis first duty is to use gentle means
if gentle means will avail, and when
gentle means will avail, he cannot use
violent means.
after he uses gentle means, if this
does not suffice to overcome the resls-
tance, be may use such force as IS ne
cessary even to the extreme OF taxing
life, because he comes clothed with the
warrant Of the law, and every citizen
must yield to the law.
when man obstructs an officer:
the officers outy is to put his hand
gently on him, push him out Of the way,
unless he sees by the use Of gentle
means he will be taken at dlsaovan-
tage. or his life will be put IN jeopardy
then he may resort to harsh means at
once. Ifhe must resort to such means,
then violence is justi6able. When a
man is authorized by law to do thing,
he has a right to do all things necessary
to accomplish that object, and II per-
son ebstructs him he becomes wrong
doer and if anything happens to him,
he will be the author OF his own
wrong"
After celebrating this point, he said
''The officer must go forward using
gentle means if gentle means will DO,
but if gentle means won't do, 1t must
be done anyhow, He can overcome
force with force, no matter what the
result. y
He continued that an officer is not
responsible for the result if he is pru-
dent and acts with ordinary tirmness.
He has the right to be there and go FOR
ward. but he must not do so ruthleSsly,
and with due care. He concluded by
saying that the violence must be com
mensurate with the resistance. Gentle
means must first be used, out not when
useless, for the law does not require a
man to do vain thing.
The jury retired. 1t is reported that
prior 10 that time but one man had held
out for conviction. He submitted to
the construction of the law BY Judge
Bunchanan, and in half an hour the
jury had agreed.
A combination of circumstances en-
tered into the acquittal Of Crawford.
The first axiom of trial for capital
punishment is that the burden Of proof
must be against the prisoner at the bar.
While the State introduced strong evi-
dence, the defense had greater num-
Der Of witnesses.
Attorneys from another State who
happened into the court room while
the arguments we're in progress, de-
clared afterwards that they did not
know of case on record where the
fatal bullet was not IN evidence.
The bullet was extracted by DR.. l.;
B. Owens and put in the keeping OF
Chief of Police DAILY. The attorneys
for the prosecution claim that Chlet
DAILY neglected to take 1t to Camden,
and that the attorneys did not attach
much importance to 1t.
The defense did not prove that the
fatal bullet was fred by Stuart, but by
ingenius argument showed, by its ao'
se0ce that there was "a reasonable