The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1909-10-13
AID NoT FOR TIE Law.

= IACc "OUlo iIdH Z f1C- i-GE>.o W
answer the question "When, for
example, did even one self-con-
fessed liar" testify?' Unfortu-
nately we do not keep newspa-
per after we have finished read
ing it, but it is our recollection
that we read in the Columbia
State which processes to give a
full and complete report Of the
trials, where the prosecutions S
star witness, Mr.. Wylie, in ans
wer to a question from counsel
for the defense, admitted that he
lied, and undertook TO excuse
himself by saying, that when he
told the lie he was not sworn.
Now, as to the other question,
And what about the Farnum
draft for 81, 1852" Well, if there
was any testimony which proved
that the draft was given as a
bribe, we have been unable to
find it in the States full and com
plete report of the trial. 1t was
proven that Samuels cashed q
draft signed by Farnum, or rath-
er purporting to have been sign
eG by Farnum, but that did not
prove Farnum signed the draft,
nor did it prove, If he did sign it.
it was in payment OF bribe. Oh,
The State will probably say,
that Wylie says, it was given to
him as a bribe. But Wylie was
promised immunity from prose
cuticn, if he would give testi>
mony. and being shrewd man,
who loves the dollar more than
his soul, would rather say, this
money was given to him as a
bribe, because he was promised
his freedom, rather than to say,
the draft was for a rebate, for if
it was a rebate and he put the
rebate in his pocket, it would
have been a confession that he
robbed the State, and while he
would have been relieved of a
jail sentence, he would not have
been relieved Of being forced by a
civil actioc from disgorging this
rebate to the State. Wylie was
shrewd enough to know that
there is a difference between a
rebate and a bribe. 4 rebate, ac-
cording to the law as given to
the jury from the bench, seller
had a right to give, an officer had
a right to accept, but if tie Off
Ger failed to turn that rebate re-
ceived into the treasury, he would
be guilty of crime, but the
man who gave the rebate,
would have committed no
offense, not only would the
officer be guilty of crime, but the
State could recover if he has any
property to orecover out of. There
fore it is easy to understand why
Wylie would prefer the ignomy
ofacknowledging himself a bribe-
taker, than to confess his ill-got-
ten money belongs to the State,
and subject to be forced from
him.
We have tried to comply with
the States request to speak a
word for the law as it applies
to the issue. It is true that our
contemporary did not single out
"none as accomplices,' but it re-
ferred to those newspapers that
were not echoing the views given
out by the State, aud as this
newspaper was one of the four
or Ave, we had a right to assume
that we were included in the
number, and willing to put
ourself in the attitude of the shit
dog" THE TINES is not good at
guessing conundrums, and must
confess it does not understand
what the State means by the sus-
gestion that "the State OF South
Carolina, as represented by the
prosecution, may hold views up
on this point. THE TIMES might
get them-for personal use " ''In-
asmuch as THE TINES IS not in
the confidence of those who rep
resent the prosecution, the mys-
tifying words are lost upon Us.
Further, we have information
that not only are the views as
expressed in The TINES the
views of thousands of citizens of
South Carolina, but they are the
views of large portion of the
citizens Of the city of Columbia,
for We are reliably informed that
the sentiment in the~city is large
" divided as to the conclusion Of
the jury which had the verdict to
render.
We clip this amusing little par
agraph to show the ugly hu-
NOR Of our contemporary, that
is always so fair, and reports the
proceedings of trial the whole
country is deeply interested in,
full, complete and without fear,
favor or prejcdice the entire
proceedings, even mentioning ali
of the questions and answers, by
whom the questions are asked,
and by whom answered, yes our
contemporary is absolutely falr(?9
Speaking OF the Farnutn jurors. Edi-
tor Appeit asserts: They are daily
readers OF The State" We emphati-
cally deny the charge and repel with
Indignation the covert insinuation
There are only six or seven daily read
- sI,,, Coco ;o.!,,5;,r Cap,tor s "