The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1901-07-03
q. Boegs Of Col. Neal's counsel

grounds on which an appeal for a new
trial was made. Judge Gary asked il
he had anything further to say. Mr..
Boggs declared that he had no re-
marks to make. Mr.. Duncan Bellin-
ger, attorney general, also waived dis
cussion. The paper which was signed
by julius =. Boggs and 2. II. Nelson,
defendants counsel, reads as follows:
The defendant moves for new trlal
on the following grounds
/. Because the court allowed evil
dence as to the amount Of money fo1
which the Carolina National bank had
sued the State.
2. Because the States attorneys
made argument on said evident testi-
mony that Influenced the minds OF the
defendant.
8. Because incompetent and irrele-
want testimony in regard to certain
rent for stables paid by the board OF
directors of the penitentiary was al
lowed to be received against the de-
fendant.
Because the court refused to
charge the jury in regard to the au-
thority of the superintendent Of the
#penitentiary to pay out convict hire on
the running expenses OF the lnstltu-
tion.
-. Because the court failed and re-
fused to charge the law as set forth IN
section 551, to wit: That the super
intendent Of the penitentiary is to re-
ceiyesand pay ont all moneys granted
by the general assembly or in any
other way accrning for the support OF
the prison and. carrying on the work. . ;
Said section among others having been
called to the attention Of the court by
one Of the attorneys forsthe defendant
at the commencement of his argument
as the law applicable to the case, and
upon the courts falling to charge the
jury in reference thereto, the court at
the conclusion of the charge but be-
fore the jury retired was again re-
quested SO to charge, which said re-
quest was utterly ignored, one Of
the defenses being that the moneys
collected as charged in the Indictment
had been disbursed by the superin-
stendent for the support of the prison
and carrying on the work. =
6 Because by your honor's charge
the jury we're prohi bited from consid7
ering whether or not the moneys re-
ceived by the defendant had been dis
:bursed by him :. for the support Of the
prison and carrying on the work, the
same being question Of fact upon
which it was within the exclusive pro-
vince Of the jury.
Z. Because your honor's rulings
during the progress of the trial were
not a fair and impartial exposition Of
the law, and was prejudicial to the
constitutional rights guaranteed to the
defendant.
It had been matter of comment
that during the trial there had been a
number Of little passages-at-arms, in a
thoroughly professional way, between
Col Nelson and Judge Gary. AS the
latter was concluding his charge to the
jury, Saturday, Col Nelson asked that
the judge charge the jury upon Ger
tain point of law. This Judge Gary
did. but in way which Col Nelson
had evidently not expected.
The latter then asked forJ Judge Gary.
tocharge the jury upon the law as to
the right of the superintendent of the.
penitentiary to pay out fer running
expenses money as received from con-
yict hire.
Judge Gary, with some show of i'm
patience, turned from Col. Nelson to
the jury without taking. notice OF. the
request and ordered the jury to retire
and find verdict. This is the matter
to in the complaint of the
attorneys as being utterly ignored. .
Judge Gary replied to this by saying
that Col. Nelson under the law,
should have written his requests to
charge and submitted them before
beginning his argument.
IN ncommenting upon the points sub
mitted by the attorneys, and in refus-
ing the motion, Judge Gary said
81 do not think that the first, Sec
ond and third objections raise any
matter / should consider
g4As o-the fourth and fifth objections
(which are given in the formal obiec-=
tions) the court said
The rule isweu settled in this case
where counsel relies on proposition
Of law and thinks 1t material to the
defence the rule Of court prescribes
that the request must be sent up in
writing at the beginning of the ar
gument. I had no opportunity to
pass upon the question and in fact
had finished my charge to the irry,
but / permitted an interruption In
my charge as to one request, al
though it was submitted not in ac-5
cordance with the rules of court.
After the charge was about concluded
[ permitted counsel to bring before
the court one proposition of law
which I charged. again directed the
jury to find a verdict, whereupon