The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1909-09-29

snould say that he money came from
Farnum. when. as set forth bv tbe
defendants attorneys, it might be
presumed that the checks sent Sam
uels In payment Of services by Far.
| mum were taken advantage Of bv the
States two witnesses as acting against
the defendant.
Mr.. Cochran made a telling and
logical speech to the court and ,urv
Col. Abney. who has conducted
most OF the examination for the State.
! made the next argument, having been
aiiotted one hour. Col. Abney stated
that he had been employed to repre-
sent the State under the statute. and
that he had no personal interest IN
the case. He called the attention of
the jury to the law that existed as TO
the State dispensary
Col. Abney referred to the death Of
the old State dispensary, and claimed
that this has done away with the
fraud and corruption that was said TO
have existed in the manapemant of
that institution. Counsel pointed out
the pecautions taken to keep every
influence away from the meetings of
the State Board Of Control. But, Col.
Abney stated, these intentions were
not carried out and that the Hobbies
were filled with agents Of whiskey
houses at the meetings of the board.
In ringing words Col. Abney traced
| the transactions that caused the State
dispensary system to fall.
Com 6 down to the present case
| counsel pictured the temptation Of
Wylie and the heed the members Of
the board peid thereto.
Counsel traced out for the Jury the
main points OF the testimony given by
]. B. Wylie. and based upon 1t a sta te-
ment OF the alleged transaction. The
details Of Wylie's confession we're set
forth by counsel. who argued to the
jury that all other matters brought
out in the cause Of the trial corrobo-
rated the testimony given by the for
mer State dispensary director. Mr..
Abney wove the chain Of evidence
into an apparently unbreakable link,
and pointed ont the simple proof that
he said the State had brought Mr..
Abney made strong showing for the
State in eloquent terms.
Mr.. HagOod, for the defense, COM
mented upon the duty of the jurors.
We'll and truly try. and according to
the evidence" The witness, ]. B.
Wyiie, was put on the rack by coun-
sci being referred to as principal"
ana not Gccomplice. in the alleged
transactions. That Samuels and Wy
lie did everything to save their Gown
hides "Convicts save in name only
was the way counsel characterized
the two principal witnesses for the
State. That this sort of witnesse.
would lie was further charge. and
would put up a scheme to convic
some one to save themselves.
Counsel pointed out the Injustice
Of the State official being given i'm.
munity, and one representative o.
whiskey houses being brought into
court and put on trial.
He asserted that Wylie had hi
STORY" down we'll from reiteration
ana that he knew it we'll when h,
went on the stand: that Wylie KEEP
all the money Wylie said he got. ant
that no money was returned to the
State. These are some of the attacks
made upon witness by counsel in hi
argument.
Samuels' character was severely at
tackled also by counsel Words were
not spared to bring before the jur,
the kind of men that testified agains
Farnum. Thus far the contention o.
the defense was that the story tolt
on the stand by Samuels and Wylit
1 'oS SOhSOSICu ludI Cn1S was QOnf
to save themselves
The States contention was that the
testimony of both these men was cor
roborated, and that the chain OF evi.
dence was complete
Mr.. Hagood referring to the bank.
transmittal book, explained that the
date on which the draft was sen,
from here. the 18th of September
and the defense. he argued, connected
this draft for $1,125 with the cash
entry In the Consumers Beer Bot
ting Establishment. That the draft
could not have left here on the 18th
and reach Charleston on the same
DAY and be entered on the banks book