Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB
[blocks in formation]

Question. He was appointed by Governor Bullock?
Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. Both of these gentlemen do their duty?
Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. Would there be apt to be any failure in their doing their duty toward colored men, or persons who are known as radicals in politics?

Answer. I do not think so; I think they would have equal justice done to them. I am a democrat, and I would not have the least fears to go before them; I would think myself as safe before them as before any two men on earth.

Question. Knowing the sentiments of your own people there, I will ask would there be any difference, before a grand jury or before a petit jury, in meting out justice to a man on account of his color or his politics?

Answer. I think not. I would like to refer you to a presentment of the grand jury there. I presided as foreman of the grand jury for two or three terms. At the close of a term we make a general presentment of the condition of the county. I did not bring it with me; I wish I had done so.

Question. Can you forward it to the committee?

Answer. I can, and will do so with pleasure. I would like to submit that before this committee as a portion of my evidence. It will show the position which I occupied and which the jury with me occupied. [See page 634.]

Question. Was the jury composed of men of various parties?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. There were gentlemen on it who were called radicals, and others who were democrats?

Answer. Yes, sir; and from different portions of the county. The judge draws the jury there at the close of the court.

By the CHAIRMAN:

[graphic]

Question. From what does the judge draw the jury?

Answer. From a jury-box, from a venire made up by commissioners, who make up a list of jurymen, from which the judge draws out, I think, forty-eight for the grand jury and for the traverse jury. They are all drawn equally; I do not think we have any distinction in our juries between petit and grand jurors, so far as they are drawn. We now draw so many men, and of the first forty-eight enough are taken for the grand jury.

Question. Of how many does the grand jury consist?

Answer. Not less than eighteen nor more than twenty-three, is the law.

Question. How many terms have you served on the grand jury?

Answer. Three or four terms.

Question. As foreman each time?

Answer. I think three times as foreman.

[blocks in formation]

Answer. Twice a year in regular terms, and sometimes in adjourned terms for special cases, upon agreement of the parties.

Question. Do all parties sit upon the jury?

Answer. No blacks are upon the jury.

Question. Do you have any white people in your county known as radicals?
Answer. I think so.

Question. How many were upon the first grand jury upon which you served ?
Answer. I cannot now tell, for I do not recollect who composed that jury.

Question. Can you name one?

Answer. I do not know that I can.

Question. How many of them served on the second grand jury?

Answer. I could not answer that question without referring to the list, for I am not a politician in any sense of the word.

Question. How many radicals served on the last grand jury of which you were foreman?

Answer. Well, sir, I could not tell you that; I have never thought of such a thing. Question. You say that at the close of your session as a grand jury you made a general presentment of the condition of your county, which was intended to represent your estimate of the condition of the county?

Answer. Of the political and social condition of the county and of its pecumary condition.

Question. Did you make any presentment against that class of people commonly called Ku-Klux?

Answer. I think we did; if we did not, we denounced them in as bitter terms as we could.

[blocks in formation]

Question. That is one of the papers that you will send us?

Answer. Yes, sir.

[blocks in formation]

Question. What are they called?

Answer. One of them is called the Commercial, and the other is called the Courier. Question. What are the politics of those papers?

Answer. I think they are both democratic.

Question. Did both or either of them make any comments upon the action of the grand jury in denouncing the Ku-Klux?

Answer. They criticised us very severely, and we had a considerable war of words about it. I know I was engaged in it, and they denounced me and the jury, and denied bitterly that there was any such state of things there. I know they got up a very bad state of feeling about it.

Question. Growing out of the presentment which the grand jury felt themselves bound to make

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. Were there any bills before your body at the last term of the court against parties charged with Ku-Klux outrages?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. Were any of them returned as true bills?

Answer. There was but one true bill returned against them.

Question. Against whom was that bill returned?

Answer. I think his name was Dempsey.

Question. Samuel Dempsey?

Answer. I think so.

Question. How many persons were before you?

Answer. I think there was one bill and some six or eight persons charged with the offense. I do not recollect the names; they were all strangers.

Question. Look at this file of papers, [handing the witness some papers,] and say if the persons there named were before you.

Answer. I see that my writing is upon them; I could not tell the parties' names that gave the evidence that convicted them. But now, as I have the names of the jurymen, can refer more particularly to the politics of that body. This [indicating one of the papers ] is the bill that was before us.

Question. It was ignored as to all the parties charged except one ?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. How many parties are named in that bill ?

Answer. Twelve; more than I supposed.

Question. Is it the bill to which you referred?

Answer. It is the same parties; one was for assault and battery, the other for robbery. We found no bill for assault and battery, but we found a bill for robbery. The party acknowledged taking a gun from the negro.

Question. Examine this bill, Tindicating a paper.]

Answer. This is for assault and battery against James Penny; no bill was found. Question. Here is another bill; look at that.

Answer. We found no bill against any one, except for robbery. Dempsey acknowledged before a witness that he took a gun from the negro.

Question. That was the only bill you found?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. What reason was assigned by the grand jury, or any of its members, for not finding any other bill?

Answer. Well, sir, the evidence would not justify finding a bill.

Question. In none of those cases?

Answer. In none but one. The foreman of the jury has nothing to do in regard to finding bills and voting, unless in case of a tie. Then it is his duty to give the casting vote. We then act in accordance with what the evidence is.

Question. Does. not the judge charge you that if twelve concur in finding a bill you must return it as a true bill?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. Can there be a tie, then?

Answer. It never got up to twelve.

Question. Did you hear as a reason for finding no bill that Governor Bullock had issued a proclamation offering a reward?

Answer. Yes, sir; that was canvassed considerably before the grand jury. I never saw any of those parties; they were men supposed to be very officious. There had been a reward recovered in Chattooga County of six or seven thousand dollars. We had a great many witnesses before us; we investigated the cases, at least I did, as thoroughly and as fairly as I possibly could. I know that I wanted to bring to justice every party who had committed crime where it was in my power. I got a great deal of criticism in my county for that. A case was brought up, and the witness was asked if it was not for the reward, or the hope thereof, if these people should be convicted. That question was asked of some of the witnesses, and on some occasions it was evaded. Finally it was elicited from one of the witnesses that that was the primary object for taking those people up. Then they got up other facts, that these parties were not genuine Ku-Klux, but had been induced to commit these depredations, and then the reward was to be offered for their apprehension; that they would be arrested and perhaps be brought to trial, and only serve a short time and be released; and then the reward would be recovered from the State. The people of Georgia are very suspicious in regard to the finances of the State; you must have heard that through the papers; that had a great deal to do in the minds of some jurymen; the idea that it was not a matter of bringing parties to justice, but seeking to get a reward.

Question. Here are men charged with assault and battery upon different parties. Did those parties come before you and give testimony that they had been abused? Answer. They did; but they could not identify any of the parties who did it. They said they were in disguise.

Question. Did anybody else prove what parties were going about in disguise?
Answer. No, sir.

[ocr errors]

Question. None of them were identified?

Answer. No, sir. This man Dempsey acknowledged to one witness that he had committed a depredation—had taken a gun from a negro himself.

Question. How was the prosecution got up against men if they could not be identified? Answer. I suppose the parties injured supposed they were those men, but they did not swear that they knew them to be the parties; they did not identify them.

Question. I see here an affidavit made in May by a man of the name of James Penny, who says on oath that certain parties, naming them, were with him in disguise on the 18th of February, 1871, and that they then assaulted King Mitchell, and mistreated him.

Answer. Yes, sir; I would like to see that paper again, if you please.

Question. Was not James Penny before your jury?

Answer. No, sir; we could not get him before the grand jury at all. He had run away, and we could not act upon his affidavit as evidence. We advised the solicitor general that we could not convict a party on this evidence; there was something wrong in regard to this affidavit. When we got it, it had been changed; there had been alterations, or something, about it.

Question. Did you call the magistrate, Squire Perry, before whom it was made, to explain it to you?

Answer. We did not.

Question. Is he not in the county?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. Why did you not call him in?

Answer. It was the duty of the solicitor to furnish us with evidence; it was not our business to hunt up witnesses.

Question. Would you, as foreman of a grand jury, sit by and see a failure of justice, because the solicitor had not informed you of a material witness?

Answer. Not at all.

Question. Were you not sworn "diligently to inquire;" was not that a part of your oath ?

Answer. Yes, sir; that was it.

By Mr. BAYARD:

Question. "And due presentment make?"

Answer. Yes, sir; that is it.

By the CHAIRMAN :

Question. Would you, as foreman of a grand jury, see a party escape, or allow an investigation to go incomplete, because the district attorney did not know of a particu lar witness, or if some evidence that he brought in was not satisfactory; or would you give him notice of it so that he could explain it to you?

Answer. I would not.

Question. Was that the spirit in which you conducted the examination ?
Answer. Not at all.

By Mr. BAYARD:

Question. Was this matter brought before the district attorney?

Answer. I recollect that paper being brought before the grand jury, and the reason we did not act upon it was, that it was not evidence before us; we wanted the witness there. We got a letter from Judge Thomas, of the county; we failed to get him before us, and we could not act upon the letter.

By the CHAIRMAN:

Question. Is not that the same James Penny whose name appears here in one of the bills?

Answer. I think it is.

Question. The same James Penny that made the affidavit ?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. Is not that affidavit, sworn to, sufficient evidence for you?

Answer. The jury did not regard it at sufficient.

By Mr. BAYARD:

Question. You do not find indictments against men in your county on ex-parte affidavits ?

Answer. Not at all.

By the CHAIRMAN:

Question. Would not that be sufficient evidence to indict James Penny, on his own affidavit of the fact?

Answer. Let me state further: Mr. Penny's evidence was invalidated, because none of the jury who knew him would believe him on oath; and other witnesses said so, too. We elicited from the witnesses the fact that Mr. Penny would receive a reward for making that affidavit if the parties were convicted.

Question. Was that any reason why you should fail to present him, because he swore he was along when that man was whipped?

Answer. I do not know that it was; only the fact that I would not believe him on oath, even against himself.

By Mr. LANSING:

Question. You would not believe his own confession of guilt?

Answer. No, sir.

By the CHAIRMAN:

Question. Were there any men on the grand jury who were believed to be, or charged to be, or supposed to be, connected with the Ku-Klux?

Answer. I do not think so.

Question. Were any of these impeaching witnesses men who were supposed to be among the Ku-Klux?

Answer. I do not think they were. I do not think there was any one before us that I had any idea belonged to it.

Question. Was Dempsey one of the Ku-Klux?

Answer. He was charged in the bill; the one we got a bill against was supposed to be one of them.

Question. Who is Dempsey?

Answer. I do not know him. I never saw him in my life that I know of.

Question. You say he admitted that he took a gun from the negro?

Answer. He admitted that to two witnesses, named Moses Hill and Anderson Poulane.

Question. Those parties were charged with going about in disguise, whipping negroes, and taking their property?

Answer. I think so.

Question. And those negroes appealed to your body and to the laws of the land for redress?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. And one of the arguments used in the grand jury room was that it was believed those men had combined together to go about and whip negroes, and be arrested and get convicted and be put in jail, and then obtain a reward from Governor Bullock?

Answer. That was the impression among the grand jury, but I do not think it was acted upon. There was not evidence sufficient to find bills against those persons. Question. Were any of the witnesses for the defendants before the grand jury? Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. The fact is that no man has yet been brought to trial or punishment in your county for any of these Ku-Klux outrages?

Answer. Yes, sir; they have been brought to trial.
Question. Who have been brought to trial?

Answer. A man by the name of Thad. Wright, and a man by the name of Joe Moore, and one other man, for shooting the negro Calhoun.

Question. Were they Ku-Klux?

Answer. They were supposed to be.

Question. Did they go in disguise to the house of the negro?

Answer. They were not disguised at the time he was shot, or there was no evidence. of it; but it was supposed they belonged to them. There was evidence sufficient for us to find bills against them, and we did it.

Question..When were they tried?

Answer. At the last term of the court.

Question. Was the evidence pretty conclusive against them?

Answer. It was before the jury, to my mind-enough to find a bill.

Question. How did it happen that the petit jury did not convict them?

Answer. I do not know.

Question. They were not punished?

Answer. They were not convicted or punished.

Question. Have you known a single instance of one being punished?

Answer. I do not think I have in our county.

Question. Have you known of one being punished in your county for a wrong done to a colored man, or to a white man who was called a radical?

Answer. I do not know that I have. Perhaps there may have been a dozen instances, but, if so, they were some trivial offenses before a justice of the peace. I do not know of anything before the superior court.

Question. Do you know a single instance where a colored man has been charged with crime and has not been convicted and punished?

Answer. I think a great many have been acquitted.

Question. Will you give us some of their names?

Answer. There was one negro, I do not recollect his name. I know a great many have been charged with offenses and have been acquitted. They are not all found guilty who are charged, I do not think.

Question. Were they charged before the courts?

Answer. I think so.

Question. And acquitted on trial?

Answer. I think so.

Question. Do you think there has been a single one charged with crime before the courts and acquitted?

Answer. I think the record will show it.

By Mr. LANSING :

Question. Cases of common crimes?
Answer. Yes, sir.

By the CHAIRMAN :

Question. What character of crimes?

Answer. For thefts and things of that sort. I know there have been cases of that sort where they have been acquitted, and for rapes, &c.

Question. They have been acquitted upon charges of theft, rape, &c.?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. Have any been taken from the jail and put to death by parties of men, disguised or otherwise?

Answer. I think not; I have not heard of an instance of the kind. We have now in jail as outrageous a case as ever existed. An old gentleman, seventy-odd years of age, was waylaid by a negro, and beaten nearly to death and robbed; they supposed that hé would die. That negro has been in jail for months, and no attempt made to injure him.

Question. When was that?

Answer. Last summer. I think the crowd was very much infuriated against him, as much so as ever any people were. He beat the old gentleman nearly to death, took the coat off his back, and robbed his pockets of money. It was thought that he had killed him.

Question. How many instances have you heard of, or have you reason to believe, where there have been parties who have been whipped or otherwise outraged by these. bands of night marauders in disguise?

Answer. Well, sir, I have heard where some were abused upon the plantation of Colonel Waltermire; I do not know it of my own knowledge. And then there were those parties committing the offenses charged in these bills. Then there was a colored man by the name of Jourdan Ware, who was abused, and some one else in the same neighborhood; some other negro who was abused about the same time; I do not recollect his name.

« AnteriorContinuar »