Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1909-11-19
Case OF BILL BROADWATER.
Edgefleld Controversy Growing Much
Warmer.
LAWYER THURMOND VERSUS DR.. BELL

LAMIEk lhUkMUND vEkSUS Dk. Dill
Lawyer Says Doctor Is MeddIins With
Something That He Has No Business
With and Doctor Insists That He
Stands For Liberty Justice and
Right.
The agitation commenced by DR..
D. A. ]. Bell Of Parksville, Edgef1eld
county, with reference to the alleged
hushing up of testimony in the case
Of an old negro named Bill Broadwater,
and the acquittal Of the negro, regard
less Of the facts, has developed into a
controversy that has begun to make a
noise. DR.. Bells first communication
appeared in the Edgefield Advertiser,
from which 1t was republished in The
Columbia State, and other papers. A
report has gone out from Edgefield to
the effect that Solicitor Zimmerman
proposes to bring legal action against
DR.. Bell for writing, and the Advertiser
for publishing certain statements about
him. In the meantime, Mr.. Thurmond
has replied to Dr. Bell in the Edgefield
Chronicle and DR.. Bell has come back
at Mr.. Thurmond in the same paper
Their communications follow:
From Mr.. Thurmond.
TO the Edgefield Chronicle:
Recently DR.. D. A. ]. Bell Of Parks
vile has made an attack on two cir
cult judges and Solicitor Zimmerman
and imputed to me, by insinuations,
improper conduct. DR.. Bells well
known proclivity for newspaper writ
ing and for running amuck, without
excuse or justification, and attacking
whoever refuses to be guided by his
holy judgments, perhaps would render
unnecessary any notice Of his writings
at all, but as they make false charges
against faithful and competent officers,
am prompted to give the facts in the
Broadwater case.
Old Bill Broadwater, an old negro,
perhaps so years old, became involved
in a difficulty with members Of his
family, and one of his sons dealt him
severe blows on his head with stick.
Bills wife and children, with whom he
had the trouble, went to the house of
one Of his sons, and after the trouble
old Bill went there to get his wife,
and carried his gun, approaching the
open window Of the house and asked
his son for his wife; his son fearing
that the old man might undertake to
he the gun that night, grabbed the
gun and undertook to jerk 1t from
him, when the gun dischal red, the
load taking effect in the arm IF old
Bills daughter-in-law, who was sitting
on a bed in the house. DR.. Bell treat
ed the woman, amputated her arm, and
In q few days thereafter she died. Old
Bill found that his son, the husband
of the woman, was very much against
him, so he went down in Georgia, until
his sons passion abated, where he was
arrested thereafter; not long after the
shooting he came back without extra
dition papers; was granted bail in the
sum of $1,000, after due notice to the
solicitor, and was released on bail, re-
turned home, worked until court con-
vened and then came up for trial.
A good many of the facts above
stated are on information from old Bill,
his wife and children. The bond was
quite adequate in the circumstances,
certainly as large as any judge would
have ordered. At the trial Messrs.
Adams and Middleton, two white men,
were present to testify, and four or five
darkies. All Of the darkies were men,
bers Of old Bills family, and the only
eye witnesses, and they were anxious
to acquit him. The solicitor took them
all in the room and examined them and
then offered as a witness the husband
of the deceased woman. His testimony
was very much in favor Of old Bill; 1t
was certainly insufficient upon which
to base a conviction, as 1t furnished
some testimony that the shooting was
Mr.. Middleton would have
been used by the defendant IL he had
offered any testimony. Mr.. Middleton
told me that he would testify that old
Bill came to his house that night with
blood streaming down his face and In
a crazed condition, and, in his opinion,
not drunk. Evidently the old negro was
delirious from the beating he had re-
ceived on the head.
In my opinion, the solicitor knew If
he offered the other eye witnesses old
Bill would be forthwith acquitted, as
the testimony would have been strong
for the defendant. Messrs. Adams and
Middleton would have testified as to a
statement made by old Bill after the
and when in the condition
already mentioned, and 1 thought that
Mr.. Middleton's testimony would do old
Bill more good than harm. did not
talk with Mr.. Adams at all, but was
informed that he and Mr.. Middleton
would testify as to the same state
ment. The solicitor, presume, thought
that l would offer old Bill as a wit
ness and the otner eye witnesses, and
he would have an opportunity then to
make out his case on cross-examina-
ton, and would also have an opportu-
nifty to contradict old Bill If he denied
the statement by Messrs. Adams and
Middleton; but l offered no witnesses
at all, and the solicitor never had an
after he closed for the
State to offer further testimony.
The jury under their oath could not
have done otherwise than find a verdict
of not guilty in the case.
At the first term Of court this case
was continued on my motion because
I represented several parties charged
with murder, and the State could not
force me before Thursday Of that week
to trial on either one Of those cases,
and there was considerable other GRIM
inal business, so the solicitor agreed
with me to continue the Broadwater
case and to try another homicide case
that had. This agreement on his part