Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1909-07-23


certain amount for waterworks. It
is impossible for me to give an opin-
ion as to the effect until have read
the decision, but hope II will not de-
lay the beginning of the work longer
than 1t will take to hold another cleo
ton, which hope can be done with
in the next thirty days"
IN BEHALF OF THE JURY.
One Of the Discharged venirsnsn Up
holds His Side Of the Affair.
Editor Yorkville Enquirer:
AS you have been pleased to give
such repeated publicity to the action
Of Judge Memminger In discharging
the Jury which tried the cases Of the
State against Russell, and also to
highly commend his action, trust you
viii allow me space to publish the
jury's side Of this affair.
The jury was empaneled on Tues
day, July 18th, to try four cases Of the
State against Eli and VIII Russell, In
dicted for assault and battery with In
tent to kill, and for carrying concealed
weapons. The four cases were tried
together.
After hearing the testimony and ar
gument of counsel for defendants, and
Solicitor Henry for the State, and the
charge Of the presiding judge, we re-
turned a verdict of Not Guilty" In
each case.
When the testimony closed, Thos. F.
Mellow, Esq, one Of counsel for de-
PENDANTS, asked Solicitor Henry to
state to the court and jury on what
counts In the indictments he would
ask for conviction, and the solicitor
Ia fI1nf hn al q
Of simple assault and battery on 3. N.
Nivens, and assault and battery with
intent to kill in each Of the other three
cases.
The attorneys for the defense and
the solicitor made no reference what
ever in their arguments to the matter
Of carrying concealed weapons, and
hence 1t was very natural Tor US to
overlook this count In the Indictment
as 1t was not referred to by any OF the
counsel in the cause But, In addition
to this fact, the testimony did show
that during the entire day Eli Russell
did not have on his coat, and at the
time Of the difficulty VIII Russelps
coat was some distance from him, and
he went and got his pistol from his
coat pocket
His honor stated in his charge that
he was not permitted to express or In
innate his opinion on the facts, and
that the facts in the case were solely
for the determination of the jury. On
wednesday morning when the court
re-convened, his honor had the jury
-empaneled, and In substance stated,
among other things, that he did not
question the honesty Of our conclusion
as to the verdict on the main issue,
and that II we saw proper to acQuit
men Of carrying concealed weapons,
even where they had not denied the
charge that he had no power to set
the verdict aside; that the verdict was
the talk Of the town; that people were
laughing about It on the streets; that
we had made ourselves ridiculous; that
before the sun set our ridiculous action
would be known all over South Caro-
lima and should be; that we were eth
er too ignorant to understand the law
when plainly laid down, or tnat We
were unmindful of our oaths, and di-
rected the clerk to hand us our pay
certificates and dismiss US from fur
their service during the term.
You stated In your last issue: Now
while Judge Memminger's action has
our unqualified endorsement-while
we are as proud Of what the Judge did
as we are Of what Jasper did at Fort
Moultrie; we want 1t distinctly UNDER
stood, and Judge Memminger made 1t
distinctly understood for himself, that
we do not reflect upon the character
or motives Of those jurors" Will you
please state what you think would be
a reflection on ones motives, II he was
either too ignorant to understand the
law or unmindfll Of his oath as ju-
ror, either one of which was charged
against the jury by the Judge.
/ am sure 1t would be very interest
ing to a great many people to know
from whom the learned Judge acquired
his information that the verdict OF this
jury was the laughing stock Of the
town. From what information / have
been able to gather, the verdict met
with the approval Of the community.
This jury, of course, did not claim to
be infallible, but even assuming that
its verdict was wrong as to the charge
Of carrying concealed weapons (and In
this connection, l. together with all
good citizens, very greatly deplore the
habit Of carrying concealed weapons
by citizens who occupy responsible
positions) we respectfully submit that
not since the days Of the late Judge
Thos. Jefferson Mackey have the peo-
pie Of York county witnessed the spec
tacle Of a circuit judge ridiculing and
insulting a petit jury, and dischargtng
them from further service as jurors,
because they exercised their right and
returned a verdict not in accord with
the wishes Of the presiding Judge. I
am advised that Judge Memminger
had no more right to dismiss this jury
than the jury would have had to crit
icize him for imposing a sentence Of
two years in the state penitentiary up
on Garrison who had foully assassi-
mated a citizen Of York county while
under his roof as guest, or to crit
al hi f4y, tt,,r
seven years at hard labor upon little
negro, who was practically child, for
an attempt at burglary and larceny.
do not think that the judges ac-
ton will commend itself to any intelii-
gent or fair minded man, who Will re-
fleet upon the fact that the jury had
no redress against the judge for in
sulting 1t in open court discrediting
its intelligence and impugning its mo-
tives without making itself liable for
contempt Of court.
If a circuit Judge, under the consti-
tuition Of the state is not even permit
ted to indicate his opinion on the facts
Of the case or even to state the uncon-
tradicted testimony before or during
the trial Of the case, 1t seems absurd
to contend that he has the right with
out good and sufficient cause being
shown, on his own motion to abuse,
ing a verdict in accord with its best
Judgment. 1t would be unwise to in
trust such power to any circuit Judge,
irrespective Of the fact whether that
judge was learned, humane and i'm
partial, or whether he was a tyrant
and a de5pot who had received his
training for this high office in the mag
istrate's court, and who would ignor-
antly or wilfully abuse his power for
the purpose Of receiving a little cheap
notoriety.
If Judge Memminger's action was
lawful, then the right Of trial by jury
is a farce, for few jurors would care
to put themselves in position to be
held up to contempt and ridicule be-
cause their verdicts might not happen
to be in accord with the judges idea
Of a correct verdict.
trust, however. that the time will
never come when jury of York coun-
ty cannot render a verdict In accord