been comparatively insignificant. Some few notes of $2 and smaller were found scattered on the floor the following morning, aggregating probably $10. The money in the drawer was probably only what was left there to make change. The object of the mob, I think, was the killing of Rose and not robbery, and whatever money was taken was what was grabbed by some minor characters when the breaking of the drawer scattered it. From this point the larger part of the mob went to the north end of the town in avowed search for Thomas Wright, a colored preacher, one of the county commissioners. They visited his home, and not finding him, and having a couple of shots fired at them from a neighboring field by some negroes, they left, and presently left the town. I believe there would be no difficulty in identifying and proving the presence and participation of a large number of the individuals concerned. They were seen by a great many persons, both white and colored, and I have no doubt the majority of them could be indicted if any effort were made to that end by a grand jury that really wished to find the facts, assisted by a zealous State's attorney.

By Mr. VAN TRUMP:

Question. Do you not understand that all these men were disguised?

Answer. Yes, sir; they were during some portion of the time. At others they were not, according to my information. A considerable number of them reached the corner below here, and were not there disguised, and were there recognized by a number of colored persons. A number of them were recognized at various stages in the proceedings by various colored persons, and, I am told, also by various white persons. In one case I have especially in mind at this moment, and which I recall, the recognition was by a young medical student, and was apparently one of his own comrades. Question. Who was he, the one who recognized the other?

Answer. Doctor Closson.

Question. Is he here yet?

Answer. Yes, sir. He is a young medical student.

Question. Did you talk with him about it?

Answer. No, sir.

Question. Was not he the very person to go and see and talk with about it? Was there any other person on earth more fit to see than Closson himself on that particular point of his recognition of the men?

Answer. As to the identification of an individual, it was only the identification of one more out of probably twenty or thirty who, in my own mind, I was satisfied could be identified and were identified. I proposed to give the means I had to the State's attorney whenever he chose to ask for them.

Question. The point of another man being discovered amounted to nothing?

Answer. I reached the point that I had no difficulty in satisfying myself of the iden tity of the larger part of the crowd.

Question. But you never saw Closson?

Answer. I did not.

Question. You saw divers negroes?

Answer. I saw only two negroes.

Question. Did you go to see them?

Answer. No, sir; I sent for them.

Question. Why did you not send for Closson?

Answer. I heard of Closson's identification of this fact-of that party-long after, quite recently--after I had ceased to take any further special interest in this particular raid.

Question. I thought you stopped inquiring because you had already enough? Answer. I had stopped inquiry on that, but I heard of Closson, and I speak of him I heard of his connection with this identification long after I had ceased my special investigation of the matter.

now.

Question. Go on with your statement.

Answer. There has been no session of the court at this place since this occurrence and so far as I can learn, no move has been made by the civil authorities in this matter except to take action on the defaulting, absconding treasurer. About two or three weeks subsequent to this, the office of the county probate judge was broken open and a box of ammunition for breech-loading muskets belonging to the State, and which had been turned in to the sheriff by the negro militia, was taken and carried off; most of the ammunition was subsequently distributed to a klan of Ku-Klux, which is armed with the muskets, to which it is adapted. Having a reason to believe that a quantity of this kind of ammunition was in the hands of certain Ku-Klux, I endeavored to trace the facts in this case, and found no difficulty in getting at evidence, circumstantial and oral, which clearly to my mind traced this crime to its authors. Preceding these events, and during the time covered by them, there occurred a large number of incendiary fires in buildings of various grades and kinds-generally gin-houses and the like-which are alleged, and I believe in most instances correctly, to have been the work of the negroes in attempting to retaliate for real and supposed grievances brought

upon them by the whites. As is likely to be the case in such instances, most of these fires entailed loss upon persons who, it might reasonably be believed, were not the authors of the outrages which it is supposed provoked them. From the best information I can obtain, I find that this class of incendiary fires, from about December last to the present time, number twenty-two, or about that, besides those which are, with reasonable certainty, to be imputed to the negroes. There have been burned and torn down some three houses or cabins, and several negro school-houses and churchesabout four or five-which was the work of the Ku-Klux. I know of no instance of punishment, and only one instance of arrest of the parties concerned in any of these fires. One, which occurred within ten or twelve days, resulted in the arrest of a negro supposed to have been the author. Since about the 1st of last December there have been six murders by the Ku-Klux. I have examined the official records relating to these cases with considerable care, and find that they show as follows:

1st. Tom Roundtree, alias Black, a negro, murdered by a Ku-Klux mob of some fifty or sixty persons, who came to his house at night, on the 3d of December last, took him out, shot him, and cut his throat. In this case three persons were indicted, tried, and acquitted of participation. An examination of the official record of the trial, evidence, and findings in this case does not encourage much the hope-if it can be entertained that acts of Ku-Klux violence can be punished in the State courts in the present diseased state of public sentiment in this part of the State.

Question. You say you examined the evidence. Is it written evidence?

Answer. It is the judge's notes taken on the trial. In this particular case, that is the only knowledge I have of it at all, except that the statement of the fact that such a murder had occurred, and that men had been tried for it, was common talk. What I have here is derived from the official records which I obtained from the county clerk's office.

Question. Are you an educated lawyer?

Answer. I am not, but my whole family have been lawyers, and perhaps I have learned something in that way, and I have had much experience on courts-martial. During my Army service I have often been judge advocate of courts-martial, and for a long time I was judge advocate of a department; so that I am more familiar with legal points than officers generally are.

Question. That is, so far as the laws of evidence received in the civil courts apply to trials by court-martial?

Answer. They are identical, sir.

Question. That is more than I knew. Proceed with your statement.

Answer.. 2d. Anderson Brown, a negro, shot and killed February 25th, by a party of KuKlux numbering six or seven; being called from his house at night and killed. Coroner's inquest held; no clew to the murder appeared in the evidence before the coroner's jury; and no arrests or, so far as I can learn, no subsequent efforts to discover the murderers have been made.

3d. James Williams, (I would here remark, parenthetically, that he is the man sometimes referred to here as James Rainey,) a negro; captain of one of the negro militia companies disbanded in this county; taken from his home at night and hung, by KuKlux numbering about forty or fifty; occurred about March 6th. I think that is the exact date. Coroner's inquest developed nothing, except the fact of death as stated. No clew to the murderers found in the evidence, and no arrest made or subsequent investigation or effort, that I can learn of, to trace them. Various facts in regard to this case are attainable which promise detection of the parties if properly investigated and followed up.

4th. Alexander Leech, a negro; member of the militia company disbanded; taken from his house at night, about March 7th, by a party of Ku-Klux, about twenty or thirty in number; shot, and his body thrown into Bullock's Creek, where it was found some two weeks afterward. Record of coroner's inquest shows that no evidence was produced leading to detection of the murderers. In this case it was stated to me by two different persons-one of them a very intelligent white man, who was present at the inquest-that one of the witnesses had first stated that he did not dare testify to what he knew regarding it for fear of the consequences to himself from the Ku-Klux, and, receiving no encouragement or assurances of protection, afterward stated that he knew nothing about it. This fact does not appear in the record of his evidence. This witness has since disappeared and is reported to have fled the country. Question. What is the name of the gentleman who told you that?

The

Answer. Mr. Hope, deputy United States marshal here. He is in town now. name of the other person is Henry Lathan, a colored man and member of the coroner's jury which held the inquest.

5th. Mathew Boyce, a negro; taken out at night from the house where he was living and shot through the head and elsewhere, by about ten or twelve of the Ku-Klux; occurred March 1; shot on the door-steps.

Question. Do you know the alias of Boyce?

Answer. I did not observe that any alias was referred to in the papers. I have

always heard him mentioned as Matthew Boyce. Roundtree has an alias-Black. The inquest developed nothing further than the fact of death as related. I know of no subsequent action or attempt at investigation.

6th. Lot Campbell-he is also called Lot Miller-a negro, shot in daylight while at work on the plantation of Hon. B. F. Briggs, member of the State legislature. This man died of his wounds after lingering some eight weeks. In this case no inquest has been held. From what I can learn of the facts there would be strong evidence pointing to two men, who live in that locality, as the perpetrators, if an investigation were had. The report in this case is made from inquiry in regard to the facts. There are no official records in the county office in regard to it.

Question. Give us the sources of your information.

Answer. Major Briggs is one of my informants.

Question. Benjamin Franklin Briggs?

Answer. The gentleman who was here a few moments ago as a witness. Another informant is the sheriff. Another informant, as, to some of the reputed facts, is a negro who lives out near the plantation. And I learn the fact from several persons that it is a common rumor that the two individuals who did the shooting were recognized by several persons who were in a field close by where it was done. Question. Are the persons who recognized them known?

Answer. Yes, sir, and are accessible. The impression I have, from such investigation as I have given to the case, is that there would be no difficulty in finding sufficient evidence to base an indictment upon in the case of the two persons.

Question. Can you state briefly the facts?

Answer. The facts are, the man was at work on a log-chopping, in the edge of a wood. Question. Was it in daylight?

Answer. Yes, sir. He was shot from a distant hill nearly four hundred yards. He was struck through the leg, and was at first expected to recover, but eventually died. Two persons, one of whom fired the shot, passed persons in going to the field, and returning passed these same persons, who recognized them. These persons saw the smoke from the shot and heard the explosion, although the shot was fired at some considerable distance from them. It is stated to me by Major Briggs that two persons, who are supposed to be the murderers, when on their way back, stopped at a house within, say, five hundred yards of where the thing occurred, and made the remark that Lot Miller had been killed and they were very much afraid they would be suspicioned of the murder.

Question. Because they had been passing along?

Answer. For what reason I do not know. I tell the fact as it was reported to me, that they made the statement that they were apprehensive of suspicion. The additional fact was stated in the case that the people at the house, although living within five or six hundred yards of the thing, had, at that time, not heard of Lot Miller having been shot at all. I believe these are about the facts in the case.

Question. Did Mr. Briggs give any reason why he did not commence a prosecution on these facts?

Answer. Mr. Briggs is merely the owner of the plantation on which this man lives. Question. Was the man living on his plantation?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. A tenant of his ?

Answer. Either a tenant or employé; I do not know which. I say living on Mr. Briggs's plantation. I use that word because the people, in speaking to me of it, have spoken of it as having occurred on Mr. Briggs's place.

Question. Is Mr. Briggs a republican member of the legislature now?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. And this man was a tenant on his farm?

Answer. A tenant or employé.

Question. How long ago did you understand that Mr. Briggs ascertained the facts? Answer. I did not ascertain anything about that. It is, perhaps, three weeks since I learned the fact from him.

Question. How long since you learned that?

Answer. Substantially the same facts have been repeated to me at various times within the last three months.

Question. Do you believe them to be true?

Answer. I do not know that I have had any belief in regard to the truth.of the statement; but I have looked at them simply as furnishing sufficient light for a coroner's jury to commence investigation,

Question. Did it not strike you that this was very direct circumstantial evidence? Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. Then you have a belief?

Answer. No, sir; I have not. Assuming the facts to be true, I should locate the murder at once upon these individuals.

Question. Is there any impediment to your prosecuting these individuals?

Answer. I have taken this course: I have twice spoken to the coroner as to the propriety of an inquest. On the first occasion he told me he had not heard of the death; on the other he told me he had only heard of the death a week previously.

Question. How long after the death did you first speak to the coroner about it?
Answer. I think it was perhaps three or four weeks.

Question. The body had decomposed then, perhaps, in the weather as it then existed? Answer. Possibly; but I did not suppose that offered any obstacle to holding an inquest. I understood it to be the coroner's duty to hold an inquest where there was a supposed case of murder. That was my object in speaking to him, because I believed him to be the proper officer.

Question. Who is the coroner?

Answer. Mr. Fayssoux. One case of attempted murder has been reported to meFed. Williams, a negro, who was shot through the lungs in daylight, while at work with his employer in the woods. He recovered from his wounds, and, I understand, has left the country. No official investigation of this case was made beyond a visit of the sheriff to the locality, and some questioning of parties who could tell him nothing beyond the evident facts.

Question. That was understood to be by the Ku-Klux?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. Was it by disguised men?

Answer. I do not think the persons who fired the shots were seen at all, but it is understood, as a matter of common rumor, that it was an attempt at a Ku-Klux murder. The following cases of whipping I have investigated with very considerable care, to the end that they might be brought to trial, the parties having been identified by the witnesses, and otherwise connected by evidence with the acts of violence:

1st. Creecy Adams, a negro woman, severely whipped, May 12, by a party of nine KuKlux.

Question. Who knew them?

Answer. The party whipped and the next party who is named here, and two other persons who were inhabitants of the house at the time of the whipping; and the circumstantial evidence connected with the case is the tracing of the horses of these parties, or a portion of them, to their houses by the negro women who were whipped, on the following morning, on the way to town. Also the seeing of one of the horses known to belong to one of these parties, covered with red-clay mud, the night previous having been a very rainy night.

2d. Phebe Smith, a negro woman, whipped at the same time and place by the same party.

3d. Martha Woods, negro woman, whipped April 27, greatly beaten and abused, had been abused previously.

Question. Are the parties known?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. By whom?

Answer. By her, by her sister, by her brother, and items of identifying evidence by two men, Addison Woods and Jack Garrison, who were in the house when the parties came there, and by a long series of circumstantial evidence, establishing the fact that these parties were on an expedition of this kind that night, and connecting them with various other circumstances of the kind that night.

Question. Were they disguised?

Answer. Yes, sir. The disguise of one of these men was torn away from his face by this girl while he was whipping her.

4th. Hamp Hicklin, a negro man, driven from his home in this county by continued persecutions, fled to North Carolina, just across the State boundary; whipped, beaten, and abused to an extent that compelled me to put him in my hospital for treatment on his arrival.

·Question. Are the parties known?

Answer. In each case, if you will have the kindness to let me finish the statement, you will probably get it in a more connected form. He would no doubt have been killed, but escaped on the road away from the place where they captured him. It was done by a party of Ku-Klux from this county. The parties are not absolutely identified by having been recognized by any person, but to my mind they are by a very strong chain of circumstantial evidence. Two persons were distinctly identified on the road returning from the place where it occurred, and within a mile of where it occurred, by two different persons, who saw them at two different places. They are clear as to both of these two parties.

Question. That is, if they were coming from the whipping?

Answer. Yes, sir; and from the other circumstances connected with it; for instance, the identification of the horses. That case depends entirely upon circumstantial evidence connecting them with the outrage. There are several of the following cases in which I am inclined to think, from the investigation given so far, that the authors of the violence.can be indicted. They are not included in the foregoing because the investigation has not been.as.minute and complete as the above. With these exceptions

the following are cases of whipping, beating, &c., in which little investigation was made in any case beyond the fact of whiping:

1st. Tony Wallace, colored, and called also Tony Hill, Wright's Ferry Road, eight miles from York, about January 10 was whipped and his watch stolen and house ransacked for money. Does not know the parties.

2d. Charley Barron's wife, same neighborhood, shortly after the above, knocked down with a gun and beaten because she would not tell where her husband was. She still (July 13) shows marks of beating. Parties not known.

3d. Andy Kitcar, (March 11,) whipped on the same night as the last; beaten and abused severely and robbed of $40. Had a school-house on his place which they tore down. I learn from that boy that he recognized nearly all the parties who were engaged in it.

Question. How does he say he recognized them?

Answer. I did not question him very closely in regard to that because it was a case in which I had made up my mind not to make any particular investigation.

4th. Sam Simmrell, cross-roads, Wright's Ferry road, eleven miles from York; got after him a number of times; caught him about the middle of February and whipped him severely; about the middle of May burnt down his house and robbed him of some of its contents.

5th. Sam Simmrell's wife was whipped and ravished at the same time they whipped him. 6th. Jordan Tate, same neighborhood, was caught about the middle of February, while the gang were looking for Hamp Hicklin, and beaten severely.

7th. John Tate, son of the above, about the end of February, was whipped and beaten. 8th. Martha, a colored girl living at Jordon Tate's, was whipped about the 27th of May, the same night that Martha Woods was whipped. That is the case spoken of a moment ago and those acts were committed by the same parties who were engaged in her case. Question. In all these instances we are to infer that these men who perpetrated these wrongs were disguised?

Answer. Yes, sir.

9th. Abraham Webb's daughter was in Jordan Tate's house the same night; was whipped and made to dance.

10th. Peter Watson, whipped the same night that Jordan Tate was whipped.

11th. Sylvester Barron, same night that Martha Woods; struck on the head with pistols and beaten with clubs and pistols. He is a boy. I will explain, though perhaps it is not necessary, that these are taken, as you will observe, in many cases from hasty notes made frequently on scraps of paper, and they are repeated here in almost the language in which I took them down.

Question. When you commenced to make a statement of these affairs you had intended to make a record?

Answer. Yes, sir; in each case.

Question. You commenced with an idea of forming a list like this?

Answer. No, sir; but with the idea of reporting correctly to my commanding officer, as I am required to do, the cases that had occurred, and also the cases where there was any hope at all of instituting civil proceedings or any promise of bringing the parties to justice.

Question. Why did you not take a more permanent form-something like a little book?

Answer. I have done so.

Question. I understood that the list is made up from a great variety of loose papers? Answer. In great part it is. This is a general list of cases, as I stated to the committee, in which I had abandoned, in most cases, any intention to pursue the investigation in the individual cases further.

Question. You say that at one time a portion of these very cases which you now report you concluded to abandon ?

Answer. That is the case at the present time with most of these I am reading nowall, in fact, with the exception of five or six.

Question. When did you conclude to revive them again?

Answer. I have not come to the conclusion to revive them.

Question. I understand you to mean, in regard to a certain number of cases on hand, that you at one time concluded to abandon them and not run them through the examination?

Answer. I concluded to make no further examination because I had reached a point which satisfied me that it was useless to proceed with the investigation, as the parties could not be brought to justice.

Question. Then at one time you concluded to abandon this whole thing?
Answer. No, sir; only in regard to certain classes of cases.

Question. Do any of these cases, now reported, belong to that class of cases?

Answer. I do not understand you.

Question. I understood you to say that at one time you abandoned a certain portion