The Dillon herald. [volume] (Dillon, S.C.) 1894-????, 1909-09-30


about two weeks ago. Mr.. Wylie' s
testimony was ip line with the charges
made In the indictment. The defence :
showing was an attempt to impeach
the character of the witness by having
him admit that he received gifts of
money from agents of whiskey houses.
This the defense succeeded in bring.
ing out forcibly.
Henry Samuels was another witness
for the State whose testimony was in
Keeping with the charges alleged, and
as to the cashing of the draft alleged
to have been sent by the defendant to
Mr.. Wylie.
The State closed its case at this
stage.
The defense gave Wylie a severe
cross examination upon which a re-
direct examination brought out start
ling figures.
The alleged arrangement as set ont
by Mr.. Wylie was:
mat on case goods bought from
Farnum' firms Wylie was to receive
ST per case, and upon bulk goods as
follows:
Upon liquor costing 81 AZ per GAL
lon, $3.50 per barrel On $1.5O whis-
key, 81 per barrel. On $1.6O whiskey,
$3 per barrel. On $l.75 whiskey. SG
pc rbarrel. On $1.S5 whiskey. SIS per
barrel. On 50 whiskey, $l3 per barrel
On $2.15 whiskey, SIS per barrel. On
$50 whiskey, $3.50 per barrel. On
$40 whiskey, $50 per barrel. On $3
whskey, $25 per barrel.
These were the rebates that witness
stated that were agreed upon as 20
wlnskeys purchased and ordered out.
On beer the alleged rebate wos 81
per barrel. and on champaign So per
rase and other wines so cents per case.
!lm Farnum is mot guilty" So
said the Jury of his peers" Satur-
day that tried the :'bccr king" of
South Carolina, the flashing figure of
the old dispensary days, TIC man ac-
cnsed of bribinG former officers OF
ibat happily dead institution, the
state dispensary, the man who was
shown to have received in six months
Soa4: 600 worth of business from a
concern that did business of about
$'.8OO,000 annually.
The jury was in consultation almost
SIX hours. 1t retired just after Judge
Memminger made his charge. which
consumed about % minutes. This was
about 1880 o'clock Saturday morn
ing, and just after court convened at
n lA nft
the verdict was rendered
1t could not be said that the verdict
was absolutely unexpected, that is, be-
yond doubt, but it was extremely
surprising that it should have been
brought in such comparatively short
time. But as will be seen from the
statement Of one of the Jurors the
minds of the men were practically
made up when they went into the Jury
room.
In consideration of lack of time at
this session TO try the other ease
against Farnum ard number of 9th
er cases on ih.n docket the further
procedure against Farnum was laid
over.
HOW the Jury Stood.
1t was learned from one of the Jury
men Saturday night that there was
only one ballot taken, and that on
this the result was II to | for acQuit-
tai, the vote being taken Immediately
after going into conference. He
stated that the man who did not Join
his vote was not absolutely for con-
viction, but undecided as to certain
evidence and that the reason that the
jury remained for any length of time
was because this man had to be talk
ed to. The juror who gave this infor-
nation also stated that the chief
grounds the jury had for acquittal
were because it believed that actual
bribery had not been proved, holding
That while money had passed it had
not been shown to be corruptly unsed,
but might have been passed in the
actual course of business.
The other cases in the dispensary
scandal are as follows:
Case No. 80 charges J. w. Rawlin-
son, j. B. Wylie, John Black, James
A. Farnum, John T. Early, Morton A.
Goodman and II. Lee Solomons with
conspiracy to defraud.
Case No. 81 arraigns M. A. Good
man, L. w. Boykin, ]. B. Towill, w.
D. Tatum and Dennis Weiskopf for
to defraud the State out
Of $500 in the label deal.
No. SO charges lobr Black with ac-
eepting a brib,.
In case No. 50. Jauies S. Fanum is
charged with bribery.
No. "a on the calendar is the case
against J. S. Farnum, j. M. Rawlin-
son, j. B. Wylie and John Black, con-
spiracy to defraud the State out Of