By Mr. STEVENSON : Question. Speaking on the subject of an alibi, you say you can suppose no defense in these Ku-Klux cases except an alibi? Answer. I did not say that. I say that is an effectual defense, and one a man may have to resort to. Question. I understand you to substantially say that? Answer. I did not say that it is the only one. Question. Of course there might be proof that there was no violence committed? Answer. Yes, sir; and I might have half a dozen different circumstances that I could put together. Question. And you might prove, by the men who did commit the violence, that the men charged did not do it? Answer. I do not know that I could go to them. Question. I am supposing possibilities. If they would tell the truth you would have no difficulty? Answer. No, sir; but the impression seems to prevail that this Ku-Klux organization swear each other out. I find it in this committee even. If that is the general impression, it would be no credit to me to go to one of them. Question. Do you know, when you are proving an alibi, that you are not proving it by a Ku-Klux? Answer. No, sir. Question. Do you know a single man in this county who belongs to the order? Question. You do not belong to it yourself? Answer. No, sir. Question. You are utterly in the dark as to who does belong to it? Question. How do you know, then, but that every witness, by whom alibis have been proved, are either members of it or closely connected by blood with members who are in it? Answer. That is possible. I have just told you that I did not know any. Question. What you mean by the alibi is admitting the fact that an offense has been committed on the man who alleges it to have been committed on him by a band of Ku-Klux, inasmuch as you cannot call the members of the Klan themselves; the only way you conceive of getting a man out is to prove that he was not there ? Answer. Yes, sir; I might prove an alibi by the parties themselves. Question. Suppose, in the Tom Roundtree case, that I had been charged, and this woman had been fair enough to exculpate me, and knew where I was; suppose she had been in a condition to show an alibi for me, as she might have done, so that I could have proved it by the State's own witnesses? Answer. You might prove it by the witnesses of the State. It depends on the cir cumstances. Question. Then that is the only practical defense in these cases? Answer. I do not say the only practical defense. Question. Well, generally, is an alibi? Answer. Yes, sir. Question. And that is by witnesses of whom you cannot know but that they are tainted with the same offense. If that is so, is there any effectual civil remedy against this order? 1 Answer. Yes, sir; I do not think there is any organized band of Ku-Klux here-any regularly organized band. I do not know, though; they are not so numerous as you suppose. That would imply that every male member of the community is a Ku-Klux. That is far from the fact, I know. Question. There are enough of them? Answer. Yes, sir; enough to keep up disturbances, and they may be one-tenth of the population. Question. Enough to swear each other off? Answer. I do not know that. This man Abraham Sapaugh, I would as soon think you or any other man capable of it. Question. Would you think Major Avery to be one? Answer. No, sir; I would not have supposed that from the property he has here and his general character, for he is a very cautious man. I would not suppose that, and yet he may be for aught I know. Question. I will call your attention to an article in the Yorkville Enquirer, of February 9, in which this sentence occurs: "Recent developments rather indicate that there is such an organization, and that it is made up of no mean material." Question. What is the date of that paper ? Answer. February 9, 1871. Question. Is that an editorial ? Answer. Yes, sir. "It is evident, however, that there is some sort of complicity of action in the whipping and killing that has recently been perpetrated in this county, and which is going on at present all over the State, and, in fact, all over the South." Do you, or did you, at any time concur in that opinion? Answer. No, sir; I never have. Question. Do you think yourself, or the editor, the better informed as to the condition of the country? Answer. I do not know the source of his information. I take it, as an editor of a paper, he is pretty well informed. I do not profess to be informed of.everything going on in the county. I am just giving you, gentlemen, my candid impressions. Mr. STEVENSON. I will ask to have this article entitled "Whipping and Houseburning," in the Yorkville Enquirer of February 9, 1871; and the article headed "Public meetings," in the paper of March 30, 1671; and the account of the public meetings of the whites, in the Yorkville Enquirer of April 6, 1871; and also a statement of the population of South Carolina, inserted as exhibits in connection with the testimony of this witness. [The papers mentioned will be found at the end of the testimony of this witness, marked Appendix No. 1.] [The hour of 1 o'clock having arrived, the committee took a recess until 3 o'clock, when the examination of the witness, I. D. WITHERSPOON, was resumed.] By Mr. VAN TRUMP: Question. To come to the trial of these persons charged with the murder of Roundtree, if the evidence in court was that the invalid boy was the first one to speak of the killing of Roundtree on the next morning at his father's stable, is it likely that you would have forgotten the fact? Answer. Whilst I cannot positively deny it, it strikes me that a thing of that kind would have occurred to me. I cannot state that it is not the case, but it strikes me that a matter of that kind would have made its impression upon my mind. Question. When Senator Scott asked you if you might not be mistaken in your estimate of thirty or forty white republicans in York County, he suggested that Wallace had received four or five hundred white votes as an implication that you were in error in your estimate. Was not Wallace's white vote largely swelled by democrats voting for him, and was not that thing an exception to the whole ticket ? Answer. It was; and I know that Major Bell, a man of considerable influence, exerted his personal influence at one of the polls for Major Wallace, but I cannot admit that he got a great many conservative votes beyond his party. I cannot concede that he got the number his majority indicates. Question. You still think the number of white republicans fixed at about thirty or forty would be a fair estimate of what are in the county? Answer. If there are more than that, I do not know them; at least it does not so occur to me now, and I am the attorney of some of them, and have had them come to me for advice freely. Question. You were asked if the Ku-Klux must not be governed by men of ability and intelligence; does the character of the offenses they commit here indicate anything like that? Answer. No, sir; that is the idea I intended to convey. Question. What would induce men of ability and intelligence to whip a poor negro ? Answer. Well, sir, I cannot conceive. Question. Most of these offenses in this country, up here in York, and, so far as you have heard, in Chester and Spartanburgh, are confined to negroes, are they not? Answer. I do not know of a white man being killed in either this or Chester County. Question. If this was an organization or occasional clubs, governed by men of ability and intelligence, and they had their political object in view, would they not visit their vengeance upon very different persons from the blacks? Answer. My impression is they would remove the obnoxious source; they would strike at the white men who lead the negroes. Question. You think they would strike at higher game-some of the State or county officials? Answer. I do; because it is generally conceded that the negroes follow a herd, without reason why or wherefore. Question. Is it not your opinion, from what you have observed of the nature of these offenses, that they arise from a question of labor and social position or cast more than any other cause, any question of party? Answer. I think I indicated that in my direct examination. That is certainly my impression, as I stated before. I think the irresponsible, non-property-holding whites, who have malice toward negroes, are often the perpetrators. Question. Would not they have a more general malice than the other population. toward the negro? Answer. Yes, sir. Question. Outside of personal motive? Answer. Yes, sir; because they compete with them as mechanics, &c. Question. And small tenants of farms? Answer. Yes, sir. I have had negro tenants of farms, and have had white men apply for their places. Question. They suddenly found that, by process of law, the negro, who, for a long period of years anterior to the war, had been a slave, was placed, at least, on equality with their class of white men, if not above them? Answer. Yes, sir; whilst the higher order of men and the intelligence of the country are not annoyed or troubled with them at all. Question. Is it not a fact that after the war and emanicipation and the enfranchisement of the negro, had there been no disturbing influence by bad white men for sinister purposes, the natural condition of that class would have led the former masters and these negroes to assimilate together? Answer. Yes, sir; as an evidence of that, every time one of my own people, or those I could control, have got into trouble, they have invariably come to me for assistance. I remember an instance, to carry out my idea and impression as to this being a contest of labor and the competing influence between the lower class of whites and the negroes; I remember an instance where I had a negro man a tenant on my mother's plantation, a mile below here, who came to me one evening, and stated that some man had rode up and asked him whose place that was. He told him it was mine or my mother's. He asked, "Who lives here?" He said, "I live here." He inquired, "Does no one live here with you?" He said, no. The man told him, "You ought not to be here; you must go away." The boy came to me in trouble. I told him I hardly thought the man could mean what he said; that perhaps he was drunk. He told me, no; his idea was, "I do not think he is much of a man, but, still, you can see he wants me out of the way and off the place." Circumstances like that have led my mind to that conclusion. Question. As to this election law spoken of by you in your examination-in-chief and cross-examination by the chairman, what, in your opinion, was the design or motive of the South Carolina legislature in passing this peculiar election law, as now found upon your statute-book? Answer. I think I saw that Mr. Corbin, at least I will say some prominent member of that party-I do not state this as a fact-alleged that many of these disturbances were in consequence of that election law. It was at the time they were having it up in the legislature, trying to have it appealed as unjust and oppressive. Question. What object, as a matter of convenience or necessity, differing from the election laws in other States, could there be in retaining the box ten or fifteen days during which they were under supervision of these officers ? Answer. I say, without applying the remark, that it gives the party controlling the box an opportunity to tamper with it, and those are times of excitement when many unworthy men are in position. Question. Is that the public impression, whether right or wrong? Is it a Answer. It is, and you cannot convince one man out of five in South Carolina that the October election was a fair one. Every man has his own private opinion. Question. One question I had forgotten to ask in regard to this Barrett case. fact that a very short time afterward, perhaps the next night, that Caldwell's fence was found on fire, and a large portion burned? Answer. Yes, sir; Caldwell was one of the parties charged with the offense. Question. Is it understood that Ed. Rose, the county treasurer, went away, a large defaulter? Answer. Yes, sir. Question. Did he escape secretly? Answer. It was alleged, and I have never seen it contradicted, and it is generally believed, that he went off disguised, with a military guard, afoot, from here to Chester. Question. Where did the military guard come from? Answer. It was Captain Christopher's company. It was before Colonel Merrill came here. Question. Do you know anything of the fact that a man named Benfield, who was examined here the other day, summoned by the Government, was arrested by two soldiers and brought here and delivered over to Major Merrill ? Answer. From hearsay. I heard a gentleman, who traveled with him in a wagon state that when some distance from the town here, and on his way to town, as Benfield was in his wagon, they halted him, and ascertained by some means that was Benfield, and some one of this military escort claimed him to be a prisoner. They commanded him to lay aside his pistol and surrender it up, which he did; that two soldiers-I saw the soldiers passing through the town down here-brought him to this point. Afterward I understood that they brought him to Major Merrill's headquarters. I do not know whether that is so. By the CHAIRMAN : Question. Mr. Benfield was here, was he not? Answer. Yes, sir; I understood so. Answer. Examined as a witness? Question. I do not know. Answer. You have this information that he was arrested from another man? Question. Yes, sir; I think the officer in command of the military squad told me so. The CHAIRMAN. I can only say that the military were instructed that the only use that could be made of them, if they went along with an officer who subpoenaed a witness, was to protect the officer-not to undertake to arrest the parties. Mr. Benfield has been examined, and if he had been the subject of an outrage, having been subpoenaed to show his connection with the Ku-Klux Klan, he would probably have stated that fact. By Mr. STEVENSON: Question. Were you informed that Mr. Benfield had been subpoenaed by the civil officer? Answer. There was a civilian. Question. A deputy sheriff? Answer. No, sir. Question. Was not this man who told you this fact a deputy sheriff? Answer. Mr. Finley, in charge of the guard, told it in my presence. Question. Was he not acting as deputy sheriff? Answer. I do not know. I understood that he was acting under instructions from headquarters. By the CHAIRMAN : Question. He was the deputy sheriff. The sheriff brought him to me as his deputy? Answer. That may be. He is frequently used as a constable or as deputy. Mr. VAN TRUMP. Does he generally take soldiers along with him to arrest civilians on the way to town? By Mr. STEVENSON: Question. Do you deem it improper for a civil officer going to subpoena alleged KuKlux to take a guard along? Answer. I do not know. Mr. Findley told me-it is my impression he did-that he could have brought the man in. By Mr. VAN TRUMP: Question. He was coming in? Answer. Yes, sir; but I do not know what for. By Mr. STEVENSON: Question. Would you not yourself, if it became your duty to go into that region to subpoena men charged with being Ku-Klux, deem it prudent to have a guard along? Answer. No, sir, I believe the sheriff could have gone out. Question. I ask you whether you would deem it prudent, if you were going out yourself, to have a guard at hand to assist you if necessary ? Answer. No, sir, I would not deem it at all necessary or prudent either. Question. I neglected to ask you whether you were in the rebel army? Answer. In the southern army? Question. Yes. Answer. Yes, sir. Question. In what capacity? Answer. I was a lieutenant in a company on the coast. My health failed, and I was post quartermaster at Columbia. Question. Have you looked at the election returns since you were examined this morning? Answer. Yes, sir. I will state for general information that just before the war I was a magistrate. I was appointed just for the convenience of my office, and I am, in consequence, disfranchised, or was so until recently. I never tried a case as a magistrate but I got my foot into it by having been a judicial officer. Question. Your disabilities have been removed? Question. Is this a copy of the election return? [Exhibiting a paper.] Answer. Yes, sir; that is cut out of the county paper. Question. I find from this return that Governor Scott's majority was about five hundred, in round numbers, and Wallace's about seven hundred? Answer. Yes, sir. Question. How do you find them-Scott's majority about 500 and Wallace about 700? Answer. Yes, sir; it was 696. Question. Will you state from that the majorities, including Mr. Hall's? Answer. Governor Scott's majority, 513; Mr. Wallace's, 696; Mr. Hall's, 446. By Mr. VAN TRUMP: Question. Are there any others widely different from that? Is Mr. Hall's the least majority on the ticket? Answer. Yes, sir. APPENDIX No. 1. [From the Yorkville Enquirer, February 9, 1871.] WHIPPING AND HOUSE-BURNING. The state of things which exists in many sections of our country is alarming. Scarcely a night passes but some outrage is perpetrated against the welfare of some community. Houses are burned, persons are whipped, and in some instances killed, by parties unknown, and for causes which no one can decipher. These things are not right; they are not prudent. They are grave crimes against God and the best interest of the country. By common consent, the house-burning is charged upon the colored race, and the whipping and killing upon the so-called Ku-Klux. This is not certainly known to be the case, but the probability is that the supposition with regard to the perpetrators of these deeds is correct. One thing must be evident to every observing man: there is concert of action both in the house-burning and in the whipping and killing. For some years there has been, and still is, we are informed by one who claims to know, an organization known as the Union League. Of this we know nothing, save what we have learned by observing its workings. From what we have been able to learn, we are convinced that the Union League is a secret political organization, and on this ground alone, if we knew nothing about its operations and results, we would condemn it. We take the broad ground that all secret political organizations are nothing but conspiracies against the established government of a country, and as such are ruinous to the peace and quiet and prosperity of the people. Of the Ku-Klux we know even less than we do of the Union League. Sometimes we are disposed to believe that there is no such organization; at other times we think differently. Recent developments rather indicate that there is such an organization, and it is made of no mean material. This is mere conjecture on our part. We do not know one single individual who holds connection with the Ku-Klux. It is evident, however, that there is some sort of complicity of action in the whipping and killing that has recently been perpetrated in this country, and which is going on at present all over the State, and, in fact, all over the South. We do not believe, from what we know of the political party which is opposed to the Union League and the political tenets of the dominant party in South Carolina, that the Ku-Klux is a political organization, in the strict sense of that term. Whatever may be its object, we are convinced that the Ku-Klux is doing much harm. To be honest and frank, we charge the Union League with the shameful state of things which now exists. It has placed its members in a predicament which is anything but enviable. The ostensible purpose for which the thing was organized was, we suppose, to protect the freedman; the real purpose, however, was, as is acknowledged by some of its members, to consolidate the votes of the freedman, that designing men might be elevated to positions of honor and profit. There is no doubt but the Union League has done the colored people a great injury. It has been the means of arraying them in hostility against the white man, and the result always has been that in every conflict between the white man and the colored man, the condition of the latter has been materially injured. We do not blame the colored people for joining the League; but we do blame those designing white men who enticed them into this snare of destruction. However much we may reprobate the Union League, this does not or approve of the Ku-Klux. Two wrongs never can make one right. cause us to love Both the Union |