The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1909-01-27
DEATH PENALTY
Provided for Attempts at Grim
nal Assault on women.
A MUCH NEEDED Law

: The Proposed Law Leaves to the Dis
cretiorl of Trial Judge Commute
ton Of Sentence to Life Imprisor
nlent--The Bill Passes Senate b
Good Majority After Discussion.
Columbia, Jan. 22.- Senate
Whartons bill to prescribe the pun
ishment for attempt to rayish wa
passed to third reading today, will
! amendments. As the bill now stand
the provisions are:
l. Attempts to ravish are placed
| upon the same plane as actual com
mission Of the crime, In so far a.
the death penalty is provided.
2. 1t is left to the discretion o
the trial judge to commute sentence
to life Imprisonment.
| 8. The victim shall be allowed tt
testify before the court atenogra,
pher and attorneys, the same to be
read to the jury in open court.
Senator Kelley was opposed to the
bill, because, as he argued, the mere
mention of such crime was suf-
fcient generally in the courts to con-
vict negro. He thought the change
to make the attempt capital crime
was too radical.
Senator Carlisle was Of the opin-
ion that something ought to be done
to do away with lynching law, and
thought that the passage Of this bill
would to large extent accomplish
this result.
Senator Graydon opposed the
measure on the ground that it was
dangerous bill, in that if mis-
take were. made it was irretrievable.
In some cases, he said, there might
be convictions upon testimony OF
women OF. no character, and that In
this way very often men might be
sent to their death who were en-
tirely innocent.
Senator Wharton, the author Of
the bill, made an eloquent plea for
it's passage. To protect the moth
erhood of the State was its first and
main object, and also to reduce the
number Of lynchings in South Car
olina. The jurors are intelligent
and would see to it that NO injustice
is done under the provisions of the
bill. Col. ol.Wharton argued that the
mere fact that the brute does not
accomplish his purpose when sur
prised by someone is nothing to his
credit, and the law should not fav-
or him because Of this circumstance.
Senator Carlisle stated the law
would protect the innocent persons.
But he cited the case where q lady
might, in order to be rid Of the en-
barrassment of testifying before the
whole court room, say that there was
only an attempt. II the actual
crime had been committed under the
law today, the man would be SEN
fenced to death, yet under the testi-
mony as offered he would get at the
most thirty years in the penitentiary.
Well never stop lynching until We
have such law as this" said Mr..
Carlisle.
On the motion to strike out the
enacting words, which motion was
offered by the Senator from Lee, Mr..
Kelley, the vote resulted as follows:
Yeas-Bass, Bates, Clifton, Earle,
Graydon, Griffin, Kelley, Laney,
Montgomery, Sinkler, Summers
Total, II.
Nays-Appelt, Carlisle, Carpenter,
Christensen, Croft, Crosson, Hardin,
Harvey, Hough, Johnson, Johnston,
Lide, Mauldin, McKeithan, Mucken-
fuss, Otis, Rainsford, Spivey,
Stewart, Sullivan, Walker, Wallace,
Watson, Wharton-Total, "a.
So the motion to strike out the
enacting words of the bill failed to
| pass.
Senator Applet, in Offering an
amendment to leave it with the cir.
cult judge as to the committing OF
sentence to life imprisonment, eX-
| planned that circumstances some
times causes the judge to be in
doubt as to the guilt of the men on
trial whom very probably the jury
might have convicted without rec
ommendation to the mercy Of the
| court. Senator Wharton's origina
bill provided that when the jury
recommended the prisoner to the
mercy of the court the term Of serv'
ice might be ten years or more
Senator Appelt's amendment make:
it in the power Of the trial judg;
% commute the sentence to lit
Imprisonment in case there should
,rise some doubt in his mind.
| Senator Weston thought that IL
such case this provision of Mr.
Appelt's; would be necessary as tn
Judges now have the power Of set
ting aside verdicts which they be
lieve are inconsistent with the fact
| in a case. Senator Appel explain
ed that the jury might at times &C
upon feeling, but the judge IN h1
calm deliberation might see some
thing which the jurors have over
looked, and that the provision Is
therefore, a good one.
Senator Maul9in agreed with MI
, Appelt and said that we owed 1t t
civilization to protect the womer
however there was a danger line