The Caucasian. (Clinton, N.C.) 188?-1913, 1901-03-21
81 never did off the bench -

II never did off the bench
"Did you talk to Judge Douglass
81 spoke to him once while pass
ing him at the corner of the capitol
He said 1 reckon you will ge,
your money while talking to him
about the case"
"Was that before you got the
WRIT"
81 think So"
"You made no effort to get the
writ until the fall term of the
COURT"
"No. AS soon as 1 got the &C
counts l asked for the writ"
GAS counsel for White, you go
the writ and the pay, did you not"
eyes,"
"Did Judge Furches say that h,
could not issue the writ because Their,
was nothing on which to grant it?'
Mr.. F. II. Busbee, for the defense
objected to this question and the OBJ
lection was sustained.
"Did Judge Furches say why HI
could not issue the WRIT"
"Nothing more than his question
to me as to whether / had an ath
davit. He or the Chief Justice,
don't recall which, said he could no
act unless there was something be
fore the court to proceed on"
"Did you exhibit the claims fol
salary and mileage?"
II did not, though 1 had them q,
the time"
Senator Woodard-"Atw what time
was this?"
Mr.. Watson-"At the October
term of the court. when the writ
was issued"
Mr.. Watson to the witness-"A,
the time you sent the papers te
Judge Starbuck had you determined
in what county you would have the
case tried?"
The defense objected to this ques.
ton, and it was withdrawn.
swell, was the case made up, and
more than q skeleton case?"
Objection was again made to this
question by Captain Cook. He said
no objection was made in answer to
the records and the agreed case. He
said the prosecution was seeking to
attack this record after having filed
it themselves.
Mr.. Watson for the defense, said
that the prosecution intended to at
tack this record.
Mr.. G. M. Busbee said the record
had been fled by the prosecution,
because It was the foundation Of the
case and that the prosecution did not
admit it's validity.
Mr.. Bynum, for the defense, said
the respondents were responsible for
the case agreed as it came to them.
He said they were not responsible
for what took place between Judge
Starbuck and counsel. He said he
did not see how the prosecution
could connect the respondents with
what took place between Judge Star.
buck and counsel. He said it was
unfair to hold them res
ponsible for something they knew
nothing about and with which they
had nothing to do.
Mr.. Watson, for the prosecution.
said that this submission of cOntro-
versy without objection, had been
heard in q remote county; that ell
parties agreed to the case, the facts
in which were sworn to in the gov
ernor's Office; that the case was de-
,ided before Judge Starbuck with
but argument; that within five days
lf.er the records were sworn to they
we're sent to Perquimans county
With judgment already made out
md papers to carry the case to the
Supreme Court. Instructions were
,iven to hurry up the decision.
Mr.. Bynum-'I submit to the
'ourt that such an argument is not |
air. Counsel are arguing the mat
er that we object to. say that |
his is not treating the defendants
With justice. It is not right to in
ect such statements into this trial"
President Turner held that the
transcript In the case was competent |
violence.
The letter which Mr.. Harris sent |
o the clerk of the court OF Per
Luimans accompanying the agreed
ase was identified by the witness.
Col. Harris was given . rigid cross
examination, after which Mr.. e. B.
'erTy, Clerk of the Superior Court