The leader. [volume] (Brookhaven, Miss.) 1895-1905, 1901-11-13

hdu dllCottus
Yesterday afternoon the case came
up in Justice Hofman's court for trial
on this affidavit, aud jury composed
of NJ. r. Leary, H. H. Summers, c. NJ
Brister, F. M. Furr, Jap. Red and
Tom Campbell, was empaneled to hear
and pass on the testimony. Mr.. H.
Cassidy, Jr., appeared for the prosecu
ton and Messrs. G. G. Lyell and j. G
Devereux for the defense.
The lady teachers of the school had
been summoned as witnesses, though
they did not testify, and it looked as il
all Brookhaven kid-dom tried to crowd
into the small court room and clint
into the windows to witness the pro-
ceedings.
Without going into minute details
of the testimony, which limited space
and time preclude, only the principal
points brought out will be stated. L,
was admitted by the State that the boy
had violated the rules of the school, land
that, in doing SO, he was acting under
the instructions of his father; and the
right of the principal to administer a
whipping, even under these circum-
stances, was conceded, but the conten
ton was made that the whipping
was cruel and excessive, beyond that
which the law allowed or healthy
school discipline demanded. 1t was
further conceded that the principal
was not angry when he administer.
ed the whipping or inspired by malice
but that it was administered with
good intentions, yet bad judgement
DR.. Parsons testified that he was
called upon to examine the boy few
hours after the whipping, and that on
his back and arms were 13 or IA welts
about the size of the small end
of the switch with which the punish.
ment was administered. A little blood
had been drawn on one of the arms
He prescribed an application of
antiseptic. Five of the marks made by
the switch the doctor testified were
visible to the naked eye the day before
the trial. The testimony of the father
as to the marks made by the whipping
was substantially the same as DIR
Parsons, and he also testified that in
violating the rules and leaving school
without permission, his son was acting
under his instructions. 1t was not
shown or attempted to be shown that
the boy had suffered any great or last
ing injury, or that he could not return
to school and play as usual next day
on account of his stripes.
The principal was the only witness
introduced by the defense. He testi
fed that he administered the whip
ping in the discharge of what he con
ceived to be his duty in the premises
and for the good of the boy and the
school. He had not acted in anger
and had talked and reasoned with the
boy both before and after the whip
ping. He took him into his private
office and made him pull off his coat
before the punishment was admins
tered, as is his rule in such cases. He
intended to strike hard enough tC
hurt, but had no thought or intention
of being extreme or cruel. When be
had struck the boy eight ticks, he com
planned that he had nothing but {
thin shirt ON his back and arms, which
the principal says he did not know uI
to that time, especially as the morning
was cool and he supposed he had OF
underclothing: after that he lighteneC
the few ticks that followed. The boy
was sent back to the class room, anC
he did not know that any wrong con
duct was charged against him unit
served with a warrant that afternoon
The switch used, a medium sized
taperng one, about 80 or SO inches
long, was introduced in evidence.
When argued by the counsel on botl
sides, the case was submitted to the
jury, and after being out some time
the jury could not agree, standing
three to three, when they were dis
charged and a mistrial entered.
Thus the matter stands at present
writing, 1t doesn't appear that the
Board of Control, whose administra
/ ti,p Of tho Cr.Jal CobooI hoe tb,,
been challenged in the courts, has
thus far taken any official cognizanct
of the matter whatever. Ia this
it seems to US, that the board ha,
been exceedingly remiss and dere
lict in its duty to the public. A cour
of law i no place to settle controver
sizes Of this kind certainly not unit
every other recourse has been tried
and exhausted. If the Board is goins
to sit quietly and permit patrons o
the school to direct their children t.
disregard its rules and when the prin-
cipal or a teacher endeavoFs, in good
faith, as is conceded in this case, to en-
force them, be arrested and dragged
into court to answer to a criminal
charge, without any effort to settle tn,
issue on its merits, it will work in
calculable injury to the schoo
and completely destroy all disci
pline and respect of the pupils TO
the constituted authorities. TIL
LEADER earnestly hopes for the gooC
of the school that there will not be {
recurrence of this kind of thing, and
that the present trouble may b,
amicably and satisfactorily adjusted
without another appeal to Caesar.
"Last winter an infant child of min,
had Group in violent FORM" say,
Elder John w. Rogers, a Christian