The times and democrat. [volume] (Orangeburg, S.C.) 1881-current, 1911-03-28
Who THEY ARE
CONTINUED from first page.)
cretion, which is little, if at all, con-
trnlled by the Courts

me prosecuting Oli-ISi 'ihoSpSAoSHSA'
Of the Court in this State Is shown In
the Mckee case and others hereinaf-
ter referred to. In the case of Rog-
ers VS.. Hill, 22 R. l., page 498, it is
said: ''The practice of entering a
nolle proseuui to informations is
very ancient, but to indictments 1t be-
gan in the latter end of the reign of
Charles H. 1t Is further said In this
case that there are three periods OF
a prosecution in which nolle prose
qui may be entered, before a jury is
empanelled, while the case Is before
the Jury and after the verdict. In
the first, it Is perfectly clear that a
mol pros may be entered at the pleas
ure of the prosecuting officer; such
is the constant practice. 1t may be
that the indictment is defective, and
he may wish to procure another; ne
may discover that the evidence will
turn out indifferently from what he
expected and he may wish to vary
the charge to make it conform to the
proof, or he may have good reason
for not wishing to prosecute at all.
"'There may be innumerable caus-
es for disseminating the prosecution,
all of which he may judge upon his
official responsibility. In many cases
the discontinuance may operate to
the prejudice of the defendant, but
never to the injury of his legai
rights. It is not to be presumed that
this officer will violate his duty or
act oppressively.' And it is further
said in the case that he exercises that
power wholly upon his official re-
sponsibility, without the advice or
permission of the Court.
"In the case of the State VS..
Thomas, Is S. c., 479-4S0, the rule
in the Mckee case as to the power
to enter a nolle prosequi is reaffirmed.
In the case of the State vs.. Cardoza,
II S. c., 1877, it appears that Richard
H. Gleaves, Samuel J. Lee, Josephus
Woodruff, A. O. Jones and Francis
L. Cardoza were indicted for conspir-
acy. The Attorney General, the Hon.
Jas. Conner, called this case for trial
and entered a nolle prosecute as to
the defendants, Samuel ]. Lee Jo-
sephus Woodruff and A. o. Jones;
Richard H. Gleaves not having been
arrested, the trial proceeding against
Francis Cardoza alone. (See Page
2O1.) It appears from the case as
recorded that Gleaves, Woodruff and
Jones were used as States witnesses.
1t will also be noted with interest
that three of my most distinguished
predecessors in office, the Hon. Leroy
Youmans, the Hon. James Conner and
the Hon. c. R. Miles appeared as at
torneys for the State.
During Reconstruction.
"The following quotation from A
Voice from South Carolina Leland,
thrown an interesting light upon the
practice of the prosecuting attorney
in this State granting immunity. 1t
Is in reference to prosections for
frauds committed during the Recon-
struction: More than thirty true
bills have been found by grand juries
of Richland County, not very much
varied in their character, and cover
ing a long list of names. Sometimes
five or six names would be embraced
under the same indictment and some
times the same nalAe would be found
several times repeated. For instance,
the name of Cardoza will be found
on nine. separate indictments.
"'With this explanation, only the
following names can now be found on
the docket: H. H. Kimpton, D. H.
Cham berlain, R. K. Scott, F. j. Moses,
N. G. Parker, F. L. Cardoza, Robert
Smalls, J. L. Neigle, F. S. Jacobs,
(Solomons Bank, B. F. Whittemore,
Solomon L. Hoge, Y. ]. Powers, Thos.
C. Dunn, R. Fl. Gleaves, Samuel j.
Lee, Josephus Woodruff, A. o. Jones
and L. Cass Carpenter.
"'Of these, Parker, L. Cass Car
penter. Cardoza and Smalls have
been tried and convicted on one in
dictment each; so far, the other GRIM
inals have not been accessible.
Immunity has been granted to
very many, mostly mem bers or the
Legislature, as in the seventy-five
examined in Pattersor's case. In 9TH
er cases, as WoodruGf's, Jones
Nash's and some others, promises OF
restitution were eXacted and COM
plied with, and thus the State was
relieved of large amount Of indebt-
cdncss by the surrender Of papers
How much, if any. money was re-
funded, has never come to light.
con page 22S of this book it is
stated that y. G.. Parker was tried
and convicted in the summer of 1919
under an Indictment Of larceny and
breach of trust with fraudulent III
tent: escaped from Jail, was recap
tured and finally pardoned for that
offence, on the promise to tell all he
| knew.
81 have qdoted at length from the
above authorities. in order that i
may appear that it has always beer
the law and the practice in this State
or the prosecuting officer to deter
mine who should, and who should
not be prosecuted. and whom ht
.bould ,1low tO bacOmp States eyi