The herald and news. [volume] (Newberry S.C.) 1903-1937, 1909-09-24

allegation is not included that the
same is against the form of the stat
ute. Upon this point the State showed
that the offence was a comman law one
and that the statute upon which the
bribery charge is brought in first
count does not include all forms of
bribery.
The demurrer set out several
grounds upon which the indictments
as to the various counts we're alleged
to be fatally defective. In general
the grounds were that it could not be
told in at least two of the counts
the second and third-whether Far
mum or Wyile was the State official
referred to in that the wording Of the
Indictment was defective: that in the
counts that are based upon the state
ute the charge cannot be brought
against a member Of the board, in
that the Constitution and the Code
names who are executive officers and
the statute on bribery cases states
that the crime shall be confined to
legislative, executive and judicial off,
GERS. Upon this point the States
contention that the members Of the
board Of control Of the dispensary
were executive officers was upheld by
Judge Memminger; that the indict-
ment did not ailege with sufficient GER
tainty the crime charged, so as to give
the defendant the benefit of plea at
bar was another contention in the de-
murrer. This part Of the defenee's
contention caused a great deal Of dis
cussion and numerous citations we're
given on both sidse.
Selection Of Jury.
Contrary to all expectations the Sc
lection of jury to try this case oc-
cupied but short while. From the
time the trial Judge announced that
the empanelling Of the jury should
begin until the last juror had been
sworn and took his seat was only
eighteen minutes. This is very prob
ably the record in cases Of such a
grave nature as the ont now in court,
and was a complete surprise to all
who had kept up with the preliminary
fight in ffhe case.
Only eighteen jurors. were called be-
fore the panel was secured. Of this
number six were putt on their volr
dire.
The State asked that three be put
on t'':eir voir dire and the defence
challenged in like manner three. Those
who were put on the voir dire were
asked the statutory questions by
Judge Memminger.
The stringency Of the voir dire OF
the jurymen was added to when the
defence requested that the question be
asked whether or not the juror had
said that he would like to see those
connected with the disepnsary con-
victed. The question was in addition
to the usual statutory questions IN
such cases. Judge Memmlnger asked
the questions himself.
Four Of those who were subject to
this examination were rejected, three
!.by the offence, although all answered
the questions i'll a manner indicating
that there was no bias.
The Jurors Chosen.
E. Powell, of this city, a grocer,
was the first juror called, and he was
accepted by both sides. FL. Legrand,
farmer. was also selected without
question. H. S. Fox, merchant tall
or Of this city, was rejected by the
State after being put on his volr dire
H. H. Frost. dispenSary clerk, was
put on his voir dire and accepted.
The following was accepted with
out question by both sides: +. n.
Jones. an electrician: ". L. iCaugh-
man, a livery man; G. H. Spires, a
mill employee: L. H. Hornsby' a
farmer; H. S. Cochran, farmer;.D.
T. Sharp. farmer; J. H. Shannon,
farmer: and H. ". Desportes, hotel
clerk. John Brazelle was accepted
after voir dire.
Those also rejected wese:. B. A.
Raw. B. R. Wood. L. L. Taylor, W.
F. Muller. B. H. Wilson.
ill., ;.,,,r o. amnanalled Is W. l..