YALE UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

TRIAL

OT

WILLIAM W. HOLDEN, ... 7
GOVERNOR OF NORTH CAROLINA,
BEFORE THE SENATE OF NORTH CAROLINA,

ON

IMPEACHMENT
BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS.

PUBLISHED BY ORDER OF THE SENATE.

Vol. I.

RALEIGH:
BENTINEL" PRINTING OFFICE.
1871.

TRANSACTIONS
OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
IN CONNECTION WITH THB
MEASURES OF IMPEACHMENT OF
WILLIAM W. HOLDEN,
GOVERNOR OF NORTH CAROLINA.

> Resolution in relation to W. W. Holden, Governor :
Resolved, That William W. Holden, Governor of North Carolina, be Impeached
of high crimes and misdemeanors In offlco.
Introduced by Mr. Strudwiek, of Orange, and referred to
judiciary committee, Dec. Oth, 1070,
REPORT OF JUDICIARY COMMITTEE ON THE RESOLUTION TO IMrEACH
GOV. UOLDEN.
Tho Judiciary Committee, to whom was referred on tho Oth of Dec. Inst , tho
following resolution, namely :
" Resolved, That William W. Holden, Governor of North Carolina, be Impeached
of high crimes and misdemeanors In office,"
have considered tho same and submit tho following report :
That William W. Holden, Governor of North Carolina, unmindful of his oath
of offlco did in July last organize, arm and oqulp a military force not recognized
by, but In subversion of, tho constitution of tho state of North Carolina ; which
military force, so unlawfully organized, was not kept under subordination to and
governed by tho civil power, but was by tho order of tho said William W. Holden,
Governor, at aforesaid, made paramount to, and subversive of tho civil authority.
That tho said William W. Holden, Governor as aforesaid, did, in tho month of
July aud August last, without lawful warrant and authority, and in defiance and
•ubvertion of the constitution, arrest and imprison many of the peaceable and law-
abiding citizens of the state, depriving them of their llbortlci aud privileges, and

Js PRELIMINARY PROCEEDINGS UT
curtain of said citizens, so unlawfully arrested and ImprisoneJ, did causo.to tie sub
ject to cruel and unusual punishment.
That tho snld William W. Holden, Governor as aforesaid, denlod to citizens
unlawfully restrained of their liberty by his authority, all remedy to enquire into
tho lawfulness thereof, und In dellanco of tho constitution, the laws, and tho pro
cess of tho courts, ho suspended the privileges of tho writ of habeas vorptm, claim
ing Unit ho was governed by a •' supremo law" whereby ho could deny tho
privileges of the said writ when, In his opinion, tho safety of tho state required it,
Iw view of the mutters herein seu forth, combining historical facts with state
ments contained In public document*, and the records of the public departments
ijkI the courts, the undesigned members of tint committee, who ate u majority
thereof, are of tho opinion, that Wllllnm W, Holden, Governor of the stato of
North Carolina, bo impeached of high crimes mid misdemeanors, They therefore
recommend lo the House the adoption of the seeompnnjlng revolution :

(Slgnod,)

T, Sl'AKWOW,
C. W. BlIOADPOOT,
Lun M. McAi'BE,
8. A. Ashe,
Joun D. Stanfohd,
GEOllOE H. GltEOOllY,
He.nuy T. Johdan,
John W, Dunham,
R. P. Waking,
James G. Scott,
W. P. Welch,
David Settle,
V. W. Stkudwick,
C. M. T. McCaitley,
T1109. D. Joiinstox.

Resolutions offered by committee :

Resolved, That William W. Holden, Governor of the state of North Carolina, bo
impeached of high crimes and misdemeanors in office.
Read and adopted by Houto of Representatives, December 14th, 1670, and ratl-
lled same day by the speaker, T. J. Jarvis.
"Resolution to inform the Senate ;
Resolved, That a committee of three be appointed to go to the Senate, and at
the bur thereof, and In the name of the House of Representatives, and of all tho
people of tho State of North Carolina, to impeach William W. Holden, Governor
of tho Stato of North Carolina, of high crimes and mlsdsmeanors in office, and
acquaint tho Semite that tho House of Representatives will In duo time exhibit
particular articles of Impeachment agulust him, and make good the same, and that
Uic committee do demand that tho Sonato do tako order for tho appearance of
Mid Wlllluin W. Holden to answer to said impeachment.

THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. O
Resolved, That a committee of seven be appointed to prepare and report articles
of impeachment against William W. Holden, Governor of the State of North Car
olina, with power to send for persons, papers, and records, and to take testimony
tinder oath.
Introduced by Mr. Sparrow and adopted Doc. 15th, 1870.
Chargo of Speaker to committee of information :
House of Rbi'ubskntatives, Doo. 10th, 1870.
Mcwi. Btrtuhokk; Width and Sparrow :
Gentlemen: In accordance with resolutions which havo passod this Hoimp, a
copy of which Is hereby handed you, you aro horoby appointed to appear at tho
bar of tho Senate In tho name of tho Houso of Representatives and all tho good
peoplo of North Carolina, to Impeach William W. Holden, Govornor of North
Carolina, of high crimes and misdemeanors In office
(Signed) Tuos. J. jAnvis,
Speaker of House of Hop.
Report of committee of communication made to tho House
Representatives, Dec. 15th, 1870 :
Mr. Sparrow said :
Mr. Si'eakeii : In obcdlenco to tho ordor of tho Houso wo procoded to tho bar
of tho Senate, and In tho namo of this body and of all tho peoplo of tho Stato of
North. Carolina, wo Impeached, as woworo directed to do, William W, Holden,
Govornor of North Carolina, of high crimes and misdemeanors ; and wo demanded
that tho Sanate should tuko ordor to makohlm appear boforo that body to answer
for tho sumo, and announced that tho Houso would soon present articles of Im-
pcuchmont, and make good tho same. To which tho rosponso was, " The Sonato
lias received tho inessngo, and will consider tho same, and tako proper action
thereon. Report of the Committee appointed by the House to prepare
articles of impeachment against William W. Holden, Governor
of the State of North Carolina for high crimes and misde
meanors. (Seo Report Dec. 24th, Senate Proceeding? ,)
Presented Dec. 19th, 1870."
House in Cominittco of the Whole, Dec. 10th, 1870. Mr.
Strndwick in the chair.
Mr. Welch moved that the articles of impeachment bo taken
up and read seriatim. Tho motion prevailed and Article I
was read and adopted. Article % was read and announced by

* PRELIMINARY PROCEEDINGS IN
the chair as adopted. A call for a division was made when the
chair ruled the call out of order.
Mr. Harris, of Franklin, appealed from the ruling and the
chair was sustained by the committee.
Articles 3, 4, and 5, were then then taken up and adopted,
when Mr. Mabson moved that the committee rise and report
progress. The motion was not adopted, and Article 6 was read
and adopted. Article 6 was then read and adopted, and Arti
cle 8 was read and adopted.
On motion of Mr. Jarvis the Articles as a whole were
adopted, When Mr. Jarvis offered the following resolution :
That the committee of the whole now proceed to elect by ballot seven Mana
gers, members of this Houso of Representatives, to conduct tho Impeachment of
W. W. Holden before the bar of the Senate, and that tho committee recommend
tho House to confer upon said committee power to associate with them other
counsel learned in the law.
Mr. Robinson placed in nomination the following gentlemen
who were elected : Messrs. Sparrow, Gregory, Dunham, Welch,
Johnston, of Buncombe, Scott and Broadfoot. And committee
rose and reported progress and asked to be relieved from furs
ther consideration.
Mr. Strndwick then offered tho following report from the
Committee of tho whole.
Mr. Si'EAicmt : The House having resolved leeolf Into a Commlttco of tho Wholo
for tho purpose of considering tho Articles of Impeachment against W. W. Hol
den, Governor of North Carolina, and nominating seven manugors to prosecuto
the samo, beg loavo to report: Tho Connnlttoo of tho Wholo havo had tho eamo
under consideration and recommend that tho Articles of Impcachmont against
said W. W. Iloldon which were referred to tho Coinmlttoo be adopted by tho '
Houso of Representatives. Tho Commlttco also recommend Messrs, Sparrow,
Gregory, Welch, Johnston, Broadfoot, Scott and Dunham as a board of managers
to conduct the impeachment of W. W. Holden, with power to employ other
counsel if thoy sco proper to do so.
Resolution that a message be sent to the Senate.
Resolved, That a mossago bo sont to tho Senate to Inform them that this House
has appolntod managers to conduct the impeachment against tho Governor of tho

THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. 0
State of North Carolina, and havo directed the said managers to carry to the Sen
ate tho Articles agreed upon by the Houso, to bo exhibited In maintenance of their
impeachment against William W. Holden, Govornor of said Stato, and that the
clerk of tho House go with said message
Adopted Dec. 10th,, 1870. [By Dunham.]
Resolution to authorizo Managers of Impeachment to employ
a clerk and messenger.
*'¦ Resolved, That tho Managers on tho.part of the House in tho matter of Impoach' -
ment of tho Governor, bo and hereby are authorized to appoint a clerk and a mes
senger to be paid for their services at tho usual ratos during tho tlmo that they
are employed, and that tho managers havo power to send for persons and papers *
Adopted Dcc. 20th, 1870. [By Gregory.]
Resolution in regard to conducting the impeachment.
Whbreas, Tho Senate has notified the Houso that the Senato will receive tho
Articles of Impeachment against W. W. Holden to-day at 11 a. m.,
Resolved, That the Housa of Representatives attend tho managor3 to the Senato
Chamber at 11 o'clock In the following order :
First, tho Managers two and two headed by their chairman ;
Second, the Speaker of tho Houso ;
Third, tho Principal and Assistant Clerks ;
Fourth, tho members two and two;
Provldnl, That any members desiring It bo excused from attending the Managers.
Adopted Dec. aoth, 1870. [ByStrudwlck.]
Replication by tho Houso of Representatives of tho Stato of
North Carolina to tho answer of William W. Iloldon, Gov
ernor of North Carolina to tho Articles of Impeachment ex
hibited against him by tho Houso of Representatives.
[Soo Replication third day's proceedings.]
Adopted January 24th, 1871.
Resolution to inform tho Senato that tho Houso has adopted
a replication to tho answer of William W. Iloldon, Govornor,
&c. :
Resolved, That a message bo sont to tho senato by tho clork of tho houso, inform
ing tho senate that the houso of representatives has adopted a replication to tho
answer of William W. Holden, governor of North Carolina to tho articles of im
peachment exhibited against him and that tho same will be presontod to the senate
by the managers on the part of the house.
Adopted Jan. 24th, 1871. [By Mr. Sparrow.}
Order of tho Houso of Representatives relative to amendment

l> PRELIMINARY PROCEEDINGS IN
of Article 8 bflmpeachment of W.W. Holden, Governor of North
Carolina :
It ii ordered by tho Houso of Representatives that tho Board of Mauagors of the
Impeachmont of William W. Holden, Governor of North Ciiroliua, ask leave of tho
Senate, sitting as tho Court of Impoaohmont, to allow tho Houso of Representatives
to amend Artlclo 8 of Impeachmont horotoforo exhibited by them against the
said William W. Iloldon, Govornor as aforesaid, and now ponding before tho Senate
sitting as said Court, by striking out tho naroo "Richard T. Berry," wherever tho
same may occur in said artlclo, and Inserting instead thereof, tho name of " John
B. Neathery," and that tho said Managors bo, and they are hereby authorized to
make such amendment If tho Senato, sitting as such court shall so allow.
Adopted Jan. 20th, 1871.
Resolution concerning Article 9 of the Articles of Impeach
ment of W. "W. Iloldon, Governor &c. :
Resolved, That tho additional artlclo of lmpoochmont Just Introduced bo referred
to tho special commlttoe on articles of Impeachment, and that they bo empowered
to send for persons and papers.
Adopted Fob. 0th, 1871. [By Mr. Robinson.]

PRELIMINARY PROCEEDINGS IN THE SENATE,
TOUCHING THE TRIAL OF IMPEACHMENT
OF WILLIAM W, HOLDEN, GOVERNOR,

Senate Chamber. Dec. 16th 1870.
A committee from the House of Representatives to wait on
the Senate having been duly announced and invited to enter
the chamber came forward and addressed the Senate, through
Mr. Welch, as follows :
Mr. President and Senators : Wo would display the most callous Indiffer
ence — the most remarkable and unnatural absence of sensibility if, in appearing
nt the bar of the Senate of North Carolina, in obedience to tho commands of tho
Representatives of the people, charged as wo are, with tho performance of so
solemn a duty, that of the lmpcaehmont of the Govornor of a great Common
wealth, were wo not oppressed with tho awful responsibilities of tho situation |
but sustained by a consciousness of right, and calling to tho aid of our Inexperience
the experience of one of England's purest patriots and most distinguished states
men, wo proceed with more confidence than wo would otherwise have.
Permit us Mr. President and Senators, to adopt almost the very language used
by him under circumstances somewhat similar, and to ask : " What Is It wo want
here to a great act of national justice ?" " Do we want a cause ?" " You havo
the cause of an oppressed people." " Do you want a criminal ?" " Whore was
there «o much Iniquity ever laid to the charge of any one ?" Senators, " is It a
prosecutor you want ?" " Yon have before you tho Representatives of tho people
of North Carolina." "Do you want a tribunal?" Where will you find one supe
rior to this ? Therefore it is that, ordered by the Representatives of tho people
of this Commonwealth, we Impeach William W.' Holden, Governor of tho State of
North Carolina " of high crimes and misdemeanors in office."
Wo " impeach him in the name of the Representatives of North Carolina whoso
national character ho has dishonored."
Wo " Impeach, him in the name of aU the people of North Carolina whose laws,
rights and liberties lie has subverted."
Wo "impeach him in the name and by virtue of those eternal laws of justice
which he has violated."
Wo impeach him in tho name of human nature itself which he has cruelly out*
rojred, Injured and oppressed ; and in the name of the Representatives of the poo-

o PRELIMINARY PROCEEDINGS
pie do demand that the Senate organize a hlffh court of Impeachment and take
order that William W. Holden appear at its bar to answer the particular charges
which tho House of Representatives wUl in due time exhibit, and that the Senato
do make sneh other and further orders in the premises as may seem to them best
calculated to bring this trial to a Just and speedy termination ; and in conclusion,
the House of Representatives, through us, most heartily prays that God, the God
of Eternal Justice may protect tho right.
On motion of Mr. Warren, the President on behalf of the
Senate announced to the gentlemen of the committee from tho
House of Representatives that the Senate would receive their
message, duly consider the same and take proper action thereon .
Thereupon the committee retired.

December, 19th, 1870.
A message was received from the House of Representatives
informing the Senato that the House had agreed upon
Articles of Impeachment against Willliam W. Holden, Gov
ernor of North Carolina, and that the Managers appointed by
tho House to conduct tho trial would appear before tho Sonate
and exhibit said articles whenever it would bo the pleasure
of tho Sonate to rcceivo them.
On motion of Mr. Jones, a mossago was sent to tho Houso
informing that body that the Senato would rcceivo tho Man
agers and tho Articles of Impeachment to morrow morning at
eleven o'clock.

December 20th, 1870.
A committee from the House of Representatives having
been announced, the Managers on the part of the Houso
accompanied by a committee of the whole Houso came for
ward and exhibited Articles of Impeachment against Wil'iara

TN THE SENATE. 9
W- Holden, Governor of North Carolina, and^demanded that
the Senate take order thereon. Thereupon proclamation
having been duly made, the articles were read by the clerk
in the words following :
Articles exhibited by tho Houso of Representatives of tho Stato of North Caro
lina, in tho name of themselves and all the peoplo of tho State of North Carollno,
against William W. Holden, Governor of the State of North Carolina, In main
tenance and support of their Impeachment against him, for high crimes and mis
demeanors in his said office. Article I.
That by tho Constitution of the Stato of North Carolina, the Governor of said
State has power to call out the militia thereof to execute the laws, suppress rlot3
or Insurrection, and repel invasion, whenever the execution of the- law shall be
resisted, or there shall exist any riot, insurrection or invasion, but not otherwise ;
that William W. Holden, Governor of said State, unmindful of tho high duties of
his office, tho obligation of his solemn oath of office, and tho Constitution and
laws of said Stato, and Intending to stir up civil war, and subvert personal and
public liberty, and the Constitution and laws of said Stato, and of tho United States,
and contriving and Intending to humlllato and degrade tho sale Stato and the peo
plo thereof, and especially the peoplo of tho county of Alamance, and to provoke
tho peoplo to wrath and violence, did, under tho color of his said office, on tho
' seventh day of March, In tho year of our Lord, one thousand eight hundred and
soventy, In wild State, of his own false, corrupt and wlckod mind and purpose,
proclaim and declare that tho county of Alamance In said State, was In Insurrec
tion, and did, after tho days and times last aforosild, send bodies of armod, des
perate and lawless men, organized and sot on foot without authority of law, Into
said county, and occupy tho snmo by military forco, and suspend civil authority,
and tho Constitution and laws of the State ; and did, after tho days and limes last
aforesaid, and before the llmo of Impeachment in this behalf, through and by
moans of such armed, desperate and luwlcos men, arrest many peaceable and law-
abiding citizens of said county of Alaniivnco, then and there about their lawful
business ; and did detain, hold, Imprison, hang, boat and othcrwlso maltreat and
injure many of them, to-wlt : Luelan II. Murray, Gcorgo 8. Rogers, William Bing
ham, Alexander Wilson, Walter Thornton, William Redding, Thomas M. Holt,
Goorgo Andrews, John Andrews, Frederick Blonchard, Adolphus G. Moore, John
Roborson, James N. Holt, William Tato, Aloxander Patton, Jesao Grant, Lemuel
Whltsctt, Josiah Thonipsou, Sldnoy Steel, Goorgo Johnson, William Patton, Joseph
Wright, Benjamin Me Adams, RulUn Andrews, Thomas Ray, Joseph Pilchard,
Loften Tear, Joseph Thompson, Henry Cooke, William Andrews, M. N. Shaw,
John Long, James H. Anderson, Joseph Gibson, Henry Prlchard, Joseph Nolson,
James R. Murphy, Jr., William Kirkpatrlck, Thomas Gray, Jefferson Younger,
Frank Mcbane, Clement Curtis, John W. McAdams, William Mooro, William
Clendendeu, D. W. Weeden, Daniel Moses, P. Thompson, David Moore, Monroe
Fowler, Henry C. Hurdlo, William Whltsctt, Albert Murray, J. G. Mooro, Joseph
Kirkpatrlck, W. V. Montgomery, John Trolllnger, Jerry Whltsett, Calvin Gibson,

10 PRELIMINARY PROCEEDINGS
John G. Albright, Robert Hannah, WlUlam Johnson, Henderson Scott, William
Stockard, James Dickson, K.-A. Albright, Thomas Luttorloh, John Grant, James
Foust, John Curtis, A. Thompson, Robert Stockrrd, J. A. Moore, James T. Hun
ter, James 8. Scott, John Smith, Gcorgo Andrews, Milton Plckard, Henry Robert
son, John R. Stockard, John Curtis and Joseph Stockard, when in fact and truth
there was no such or any iususrection In said county of Alamance. And ho, the
said William W. Holden, governor as aforesaid, well knew that such and said pro
clamatlou wiis groundless and false, end that there was no Insurrection In said
county, and that all civil authorities, both state und county, in said county, were
peacefully and regularly in tho full, froo and unrestrained exorcise in all respects,
of the functions of their offices, nnd tho courts were ull open, and tho duo admin
istration of the law was unimpeded by any resistance whatsoever, whereby tho
snld William W. Holden, governor as aforesaid, did llion and there, and In tho
way and manner, nnd by tho means aforesaid, commit and was guilty of a high
crime In office ngalnst tho constitution and laws of sold state, und the pence, Inter
ests and dignity thereof. Article II.
That by tho constitution of tho state of North Carolina the governor of sold
stato has power to cull out the militia thereof to executo tho law, suppress riots or
insurrection whonovcr tho execution of the law shall be resisted, or there shall
exist any riot, Insurrection or Invasion, but not otherwise. That William W. Hol
den, governor of said state, unmindful of the high duties of his offlco, the obliga
tions of his solemn oath of office and tho constitution and laws of said state, and
Intending to stir up civil war, and subvort personal nnd public liberty, nnd the
constitution nnd laws of snldstatcnnd of tho United States, contriving nnd Intend
ing to humiliate and degrade tho said stato and tho peoplo thereof, and especially
tlto pooplo of tho county of Cuswcll In said state, nnd to provoko tho peoplo to
wrath nnd violence, did under the color of his laid office, on tho eighth day of
July, In tho year of our Lord ono thousand eight hundred nnd seventy, In said
state, of his own false, corrupt und wicked mind and purpose, proclaim und de
clare tho county of Cuswcll in suld stato In Insurrection, and did uftor the duysand
times hist aforesaid, send bodies of armed, desperate nnd lawless men, organized
and set on foot without authority of law, Into tho snld county nnd occupy the
enmo by military force and suspend the civil authority and the constitution and
laws of tho 6tato, and did, after the days and times last aforesaid, and before the
tlmo of Impeachment in this behalf, through and by means of such armed, despe
rate and lawless men, arrest many peaceable and law-abiding citizens of said county
of Caswell, then nnd there about their lawful business, nnd did detain, hold, im
prison nnd otherwise maltreat nnd Injure both of them, to wit : John Kerr, Samuel
P. Hill, William B. Bow'c, Nathaniel M. Roane, Frank A. Wiley, JessceC. Griffith,
J. T. Mitchell, Thomns J. Womack, A. G. Yancey, John McKce, A. A. Mitchell,
Ynncy Jones, J. M. Ncal, Bnrzlllal Graves, Robert Ronno, James R, Fowler, M.
C. Hooper, James C. Wllllnmson and Peter II. Williamson, when, in fact nnd
truth, there was no such or any Insurrection In said county of Caswoll, and ho, tho
snld Wllllnm W, Iloldon, governor its uforomld, well know thut such nnd sold pro-
chimiitlon was utterly groundless mid fnlsu, und that there was no Insurrection In
suld county of Caswell, und that nil the civil authorities, both state und county, In

IN THE SENATE. 11
said county, M'cre peacefully and regularly in tho full, f roe nnd unrestrained exor
cise In all respects of tho functions of their offices, and the courts were oil opon
and the duo administration of the law wos unimpeded by any resistance whatso
ever, whereby tho said William W. Holden, governor as aforesaid, did then nnd
there, and in the way and manner, nnd by tho means aforesaid, commit and was
guilty of a high crime in offlco against the constitution and laws of said state, and
the peace, interest and dignity thereof. Article III.
That the said William W. Holden, Governor of tho Stato of North Carolina, on tho
fifth day of August, in tho year of our Lord one tliousand eight hundred and seventy,
in tho County of Orango, in said State, did then and there Unlawfully, and without
any lawful warrant and authority, and In defiance and subversion of tho Consti
tution and laws of said Stato, and in violation of his oath of office, and under
color of his said office, biclte, procure, order and command on John Hunnlcutt and
other evil disposed persons to assault, seize detain and Imprison and deprive of
his liberty and privileges as a freeman and citizen of said State, Josiah Turner,
Junior, a citizen and resident of the county of Orange in tho Stato aforesaid, and
in pursuance of said incitement, procurement, order and command the said John
Hunnlcutt and the evil disposed persons aforesaid did assault, seize, detain imprison
and deprive of his liberty and privileges as a freeman and citizen of said County and
State for a long time, to- wit : For the time of ten days and more, the said Josiah
Turner, Junior, whereby the said William W. Holden, Governor as aforesaid, did
then and there commit a high misdemeanor In office aiainst the Constitution and
laws of said State, and the peace, interests and dignity thereof.
Article IV.
That the said William W. Holden, Governor of the State of North Carolina, ou
tho first day of August, In tho year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and
seventy, In the County of Caswell In sold State, did then and thcro unlawfully and
without any lawful warrant and authority, and In dofiunco and subversion of tbe
Constitution and laws of said State, and In violation of his oath of office, and ui -
dcr color of his said office, Inclto procure, order and command ono Goorgo W.
Kirk, and ono B. G. Burgcn and other evil disposed porsons, to assault, seize, detain
nnd Imprison and deprive of tholr liberty and privileges as freemen and citizens of
said Stato, John Kerr, Samuel P. Hill. William B. Bowe and Nathaniel M. Roano,
citizens and residents of the County of Caswell in tho Stato aforesaid ; and In pur
suance of said incitement, procurement, order and command, tho Bald Goorgo W,
Kirk and tho said B. G. Burgen, and tho ovll disposed persons aforesaid, did
assault, seize, detain, imprison and deprive of their liberty and privileges as free
men and citizens of said County and Stato for a long time, to-wlt : For tho tlmo
of one month and more, tho said John Kerr, Samuel P. Hill, William B Bo wo
and Nathaniel M. Roane, whereby the said Wl'llam W. Holden, Govornor as afore
said, did then and thero commit and was guilty of a high misdemeanor in offlco
against tho Constitution and laws of said Stato and tho peace, Interests and dig
nlty thereof.

12 PRELIMINARY PROCEEDINGS

Article V.
That tho sold William W, Holden, Governor of the Kate of North Carolina,
heretofore, to-wlt : In tho months of Juno* July and August in tho year of our
Lord ono ahonsand eight hundred and seventy, under color of his said office, un
lawfully recruited, armed and equipped ns soldiers, a largo number of men to wit :
flvo hundred men and more, and organized them as an army, and appointed offi
cers to command, and uso such armed men as ho, tho said William W. Holden,
Governor, under color of his said office, might from tlmo to time order nnd direct;
that during the said months of Juno, July and August, ho tho snld William W.
Holden, Governor os aforoanld, under color of his said office, placed a largo num-
bor of said armed men under tho lmmedlato control of one George W. Kirk as
Colonel, aided by ono B. G. Burgen as Lieutenant Coloqel, ono H. C. Yates as
Major, and sundry other persons as Captains and Lieutenants, nnd sent sneh last
mentioned armed men under the immediate command of George W. Kirk, ns Col
onel, B. G. Burgon, es Lieutenant Colonel, H. C. Yates, as major, and said sundry
other persons as Captains and Lieutenants, into the County of Alamance, and by
the procurement, order and command of him, tho said William W. Holden, Gover
nor us aforesulc, under color of his said office, tho sold armed men last aforesaid,
seized, held, detained and imprisoned, In said County of Alamanco, one Adolphus
G. Moore, a peaceable nnd law-abiding citizen of said County, thon and there
engaged about his lawful business; that tho said Adolphus G. Moore, being so
seized, held, detained and imprisoned and deprived of his liberty, was then and
there In the custody of tho said George W. Kirk, acting as Colonel, and com
manding the armed body of men, last ((foresaid, by the order, command and pro
curement of tho said William W. Holden ; that the said Adolphus G. Moore
being so seized, held nnd Imprisoned and deprived of his liberty, made due appli
cation to tho Honorable Richmond M. 1'uitVson, Chief Justice of tho Supremo
Court of said State, ns by law ho m'ght do, for (lie writ of habeas corpus, to tho
end, that ho the snld Chief Jimtlco might duly enquire tho canne of said seizure,
detention nnd Imprisonment, nnd deliver him from the name according to law.
Thnt the said Chief Justice ln&ued the writ of habeas corpus ut tho instance of the
said Adolphus G. Mooro, directed to tho said Gcorgo W. Kirk, commanding him
forthwith to produco the body of tho said Adolphus G. Moore, before him tho
said Chief Justice, at the Chamber of the Supremo Court In the City of Raleigh,
in said State ; that the said Georgo W. Kirk was, on tho seventeenth day of July,
in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and seventy, in tho County
of Alamance, duly served with the said writ of habeas corpus ; that ho made no
return of or to the same, as required by law, and refused to produco the body of
the said Adolphus G. Moore before the Chief Justico according to the exigency
of said writ, avowing and declaring that he had made such seizure and detained
and Imprisoned the said Adolphus G. Moore at the instance of and by the pro
curement, command and order of the saW William W. Holden, Governor as afore
said, and would not produce the body of him, the 6aid Adolphus G. Moore, before
the said Chief Justice according to the exigency of said writ, unless compelled so
to do by superior armed force, or by the express order and command of the said
William W. Holden, Governor as aforesaid ; that such refusal of the said Georgo
W. Kirk to obey the said writ, was made duly to appear before th« Chief Justice,
whereupon the said Chief Justice made enquiry of . the said William W. Holden,

IN TnE SENATE, 18
Governor as nforosald, If ho had so ordered tho said Georgo W. Kirk to so soizo,
detain and Imprison tho said Adolphus G. Moore ; that tho said William W. Holden,
Governor as aforesaid, mado answer In substance, and to <ho effect to said enquiry
of said Chief Justice, that ho had theretofore ordered and commanded tho said
George W. Kirk to so seize, detain and imprison and deprive of his liberty tho
said Adolphus G. Moore, and that such -seizure and detention was made by his
order and command, whereupon the said Chief Justice, upon due consideration,
solemnly adjudged in substance and effect that according to tho Constitution and
laws of s«id State, the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus was not suspended,
and that the said George W.,Kirk and the said William W. Holden, Governor as
aforesaid, were In duty bound to bring and produce the body of tho said Adolphus
G. Moore, before him tho said Chief Justice, according to tho exigency of the
said writ; yet the said William W. Holden, Governor as aforesaid, unmindful of
his most solemn oath of office, and his high duties as tho Executive of said State,
aud contriving, and then and there intending to deprive the said Adolphus G.
Mooro of his liberty as a frco citizen of said Stato, and to defy and subvert tho
Constitution and laws of said Stato, declared that ho had so ordered, and did still
so order and commanded tho said George W. Kirk not to obey tho said writ so
Issued by tho said Chlcr Justice, and then and there declared to tho said Chief
Justico, that ho, tho said William W. Holden, Governor as aforesaid, would not
obey the said writ, or the command of the said Chief Justico In that behalf, and
that ho would not allow the said Georgo W. Kirk to obey tho same and produco
the body of tho said Adolphus G. Moore, before the said Chief Justice, according
to the exigency of said writ, until such limo as in his discretion ho might
think proper so to do ; that while tho said William W. Holden, Governor as
aforesaid, so seized, hold, detained, Imprisoned nnd deprived of his liberty, seid
Adolphus G. Moore, nnd so refused to obey the said writ, and to command tho
said George W. Kirk so to do, and so resisted the laws and the lawful au
thority of tho eaid Chief Justice, ho was by his own procurement, order and
command supported in that behalf by tho means and Use of said armed men,
so commanded and controlled as aforesaid, and so the said William W. Holden,
Governor as aforesaid, did In tho way and manner, and by tho moans aforesaid,
procure, order and command tho said George W. Kirk, so charged by said writ of
habeas corpus, to rcfuso to mako duo return of or to tho same, and produco tho
body of the said Adolphus G. Mooro, before the said Chief Justice, according to
tho exigency of the said writ, and to resist tho eamo and tho lawful authority of
the said Chief Justico, and did himself then and there In the way and manner and
by tho means aforesaid, resist tho duo execution of tho said writ, and the lawful
authority of the said Chief Justice, and did then and there in the way and manner,
and by the meaus and armed force aforesaid, suspend tho privilego of the writ of
habeas corpus, and did unlawfully and violently 6cize, detain, hold, Imprison and
deprive of his liberty, tho said Adolphus G. Moore, and for a long time, to-wit :
for the apace of one calendar month, after the said Chief Justice had adjudged
such detention illegal, did continue to hold and detain and caused to be held and
detained said Adolphus G. Moore, and did In the way and manner and by the
means aforesaid, make the mllltarys upersede and prevail over tho lawful civil
power of the State, all of which acts, matters and things, the said William W.
. Holden, Governor as aforesaid, did as aforesaid, in violation of his solemn oath
of office, and whereby ho tho said William W. Holdeh, Governor as aforesaid,

14 PRELIMINARY PROCEEDINGS
did then and there commit high crimes and misdemeanors In office, against tho
Constitution and laws of sold State, and tho peace, dignity and Interests thereof.
Akticlb VI.
That the sold William W. Holden, Govornor of tho State of North Carolina,
heretofore, to-wlt i in tho months of June, July and August, In tho year of our
Lord one thousand eight hundred and seventy, under colot of his said offlco, un
lawfully recruited, armed and oqulpped as soldiers a largo numbor of men, to-wlt :
five hundred men and more, and organized them as an army, and appointed offi
cers to command and uso such armed mon as ho, tho said WlUlam W. Holden,
Governor as aforesaid, undor color of his said offlco, might from tlmo to tlmo
ordor and direct; that during tho said months of Juno, July and August, ho, tho
said William W. Holden, Governor as aforesaid, under color of his sold office,
placed a largo numbor of said armed mon undor tho immodlato command and
control of ono Gsorgo W. Kirk, as Colonel, aidod by ono B. G. Burgon, as Lieu
tenant Colonel, ono H. C. Yates, as Major, and sundry otfior persons as Captains
and Lieutenants, and Bent such last mentioned armed men under tho immediate
command of George W. Kirk, as Colonel, B. G. Burgcn, as Lieutenant Colonel,
H. C. Yates, as Ma'or, and said sundry other persons as Captains and Lieutenants,
In the County of Caswell, and by tho procurcmeut, order and command of him,
tho said William W. Holden, Governor as aforesaid, under color of his said office,
tho said armed men last aforesaid seized, held, detained and Imprisoned In said
County of Caswell, John Kerr, Samuel P. Hill, Jesse C. Griffith, Frank A. Wiley,
J. T. Mitchell, Thomas J. Womack, A. G. Yuiccy, John McKee, A. A. Mitchell,
Yancey Jones, J. M. Neal, William B. Bowe, Barzillai Graves, Nathaniel M.
Roane, Robert Roane, James R. Fowler, M. Z. Hooper, James C. Williamson and
Peter II. Williamson, peaceable and law-abiding citizens of said County, then aud
there engaged about their lawful business ; that the said John Kerr, Samuel P.
HIU, Jesse C. Griffith, F. A. Wiley, J. T. Mitchell, T. J. Womack, A. G. Yancey,
J. McKee, A. A. Mitchell, Yancey Jones, J. M. Neal, W. B. Bowe, Barzillai Graves,
N. M. Roane, Robert Roane, J. R. Fowler, M Z. Hooper, Jas. C. Williamson and
Peter H. Williamson, being so seized, held detained and imprisoned and de
prived of their liberty, were then and there In tho custody of the said George W.
Kirk, acting as Colonel and commanding the armed body of men last aforesaid, for
by the order, command and procurement of the said William W. Holden, governor
as aforesaid ; that tho said John Kerr, Samuel P. Hill, Jesse C. Griffith, Frank A.
Wiley, J. T. Mitchell, Thoma3 J. Woraack, A. G. Yancey, John McKee, A. A.
Mitchell, Yancey Jones, J. M. Neal, William B. Bowe, Barzillai Graves, Nathaniel
M. Roano, Robert Roane, James R. Fowler, M. Z. Hooper, Jamca C. Williamson
and Peter H. Williamson being so seized, held aad imprisoned and deprived of
their liberty, made due application to tho Honorable Richmond M. Pearson,
chief justice of the supreme court of said state, as by law they might do, for tho
writ of habeas corpus to the end that ho, tho said chief justice, might duly enquire
the cause of said seizure, detention and imprisonment, and deliver them from tho
same, according to law ; that the said chief justice issued the writ of habeas corpus at
the lustance of the said John Kerr, Samuel P. Hill, Jesse C. Griffith, Frank A,
Wiley, J. T. Mitchell, Thomas J. Womack, A. G. Yancey, John McKee, A. A.
Mitchell, Yancey Jones, J. M. Neal, William B. Bowe, Barzillai Graves, Nathaniel

IN TnE SENATE. 15
M. Roano, Robert Roane, James R. Fowler, M. Z. Hooper, James C. Williamson
and Peter H. Williamson, on tho 2flth day of July, in tho year of our Lord ono
thousand eight hundred und seventy, .directed to the said Goorgo W. Kirk, com
manding him forthwith to produco tho bodies of tho said John Korr, Samuel P.
Hill, Jesso C. Griffith, Frank A. Wiley, J. T. Mltchoil, Thomas J. Womack, A.
G. Yanocy, John McKee, A. A. Mitchell, Yancey Jones, J. M. Neal, William B.
Bowe, Barzillai Graves, Nathaniel M. Roano, Robert Roano, James R. Fowler, M.
Z. Hoopor, James C. Williamson and Potor H. Williamson before him, tho sold
chief justico, at tho chamber of the supremo court In tho city of Raleigh In said
state ; that tho said George W. Kirk was, on the first day of August, In tho year
of our Lord ouo thousand eight hundred and sovonty, In tho county of Caswell,
duly served with the sold writ of habeas corpus, but Instead of making duo return
to the said writ, stated that, " I hold tho said prlsonors under orders from W. W.
Holden, governor and coiniuandcr-ln-chlcf of militia," and refused to produco tho
bodies of tho said John Kerr, Samuel P. Hill, Jesse C. Griffith, Frank A. Wiley,
J T. Mitchell, Thomas J. Womack, A. G. Yancey, Johu MeKco, A. A. Mitchell,
Yancoy Jonos, J. M. Neal, William B. Bowe, Barzillai Graves, Nathaniel M.
Roane, Robert Roano, James R. Fowler, M. Z. Hooper, James C. Wllllnmson and
Peter H. Williamson before the said chief justico, according to the exigencies of
tho said writ ; and thereafter the said Georgo W. Kirk continued to hold and
detain and deprive of their liberty the sold John Kerr, Samuel P. Hill, Jesse C.
Griffith, Frank A. Wiley, J. T. Mitchell, Thomas J. Womack, A. G. Yancey, John
McKee, A. A. Mitchell, Yancey Jones, J. M. Neal, William B. Bowe, Barzillai
Graves, Nathaniel M. Roane, Robert Roane, James R. Fowler, M. Z. Hooper,
James C. Williamson and Peter H. Williamson for a long time, to wit : For tho
space of one calendar month, the said seizure and detention of the said John
Kerr, Samuel P. Hill, Jesse C. Griffith, Frank A. Wiley, J. T. Mitchell, Thomas
J. Womack, A. G. Yancey, John McKee, A. A. Mitchell, Yancey Jones, J. M.
Neal, William B. Bowe, Barzillai Graves, Nathaniel M. Roane, Robert Roane,
James R. Fowler, M. Z. Hooper, James C. Williamson and Peter H. Williamson
by the said George W. Kirk and the military force under his command no afore
said having been made and continued as aforesaid by the orders of tho said Wil
liam W. Holden, governor of the state aforesaid, he, the said William W.
Holden, governor as aforesaid, well knowing that tho privilege of the writ of
habeas corpus was not suspended, and that the said John Kerr, Samuel P. HUl,
Jesse C. Griffith, Frank A. Wile)-, J. T. Mitchell, Thomas J. Womack, A. G.
Yancey, John McKee, A. A. Mitchell, Yancey Jones, J. M. Neal, William B. Bowe,
Barzillai Graves, Nathaniel M. Roane, Robert Roane, James R. Fowler,
M. ' Z. Hooper, Jame3 C. Williamson, and Peter H. Williamson wero
so detained without anthority of law, whereby • he, the said William
W. Holden, governor as aforesaid, did then and there commit high crimes
and misdemeanors in office against the constitution and laws of said state, aud
peace, dignity and interests thereof. Aeticle VII.
That tho said William W. Holden, Govornor of North Carolina, unmindful of
his high duty to uphold and protect the Constitution and laws of said State, and
tho good name, dignity and. honor of tho people thereof, and unmindful of tho

10 PRELIMINARY PROCEEDINGS
obligation of his solemn oath of office, under color of his said office, did, In the
months of June, July and August, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight
hundred and seventy, in said State, without any authority of law, but in con
travention and subversion of tho Constitution and laws of said State and the
United States, and intending to provoke and stir up civil strife and war, recruit
and call together from this State and tho State of Tennessee a large number of
men, to wit: Five hundred men and more, many of them of the most reckless,
desperate, ruffianly and lawless characters, and did then and there organize, arm
and equip them as an army of soldiers, and place tho same under tho chief com
mand of a notorious desperado from the State of Tennessee, by tho name of Georgo
W. Kirk, having falsely proclaimed the counties of Alamance and Caswell In said
State in a stato of insurrection, and did send large numbers of such armed des
perate men into said counties, under the immediate command of the said Georgo
W. Kirk and two other desperadoes from tho State of Tennessee, to wit : One B.
G. Burgcn and one H. C. Yates, and did there and then without any warrant or
authority, seize, hold, imprison and deprive of their liberty for a long time, to-
wit : For the time of twenty days and more, many of the peaceable and law-abiding
citizens of said counties, to-wit : John Kerr, 8oinuel P. HiU,  Scott, John R.
Ireland and many others, and seize, hold, imprison and deprive of their liberty,
and hung by tho neck William Patton, Lucian H. Murray and others, and did
thrust into a loathsome dungeon Josiah Turner, Junior, and F. A. Wiley ; and to
maintain, support and aid the lawless armed men so organized, armed and
equipped, did, under color of his said offlco from time to time during the said
months of June, July and August, without any lawful authority, make Ills warrant
upon David A. Jenkins, Treasurer of tho State, for largo sums of inoney, to-wlt :
For the sum of senenty thousand dollars and more, and cause and procure tho
said David A. Jenkins, tho Treasurer of tho State, to recognize such unlawful
warrant, und pay out of tho Treasury such said largo sums of money to tho agent
or paymaster of tho said William W. Holden, Govctnor as aforesaid, for tho un
lawful uses and purposes aforesaid, whereby the said William W. Holden, Gov
ernor as nforcsuld, did then and there, and by tho means and In tho manner afore
said, commit a high misdemeanor In office, In violation of tho Constitution and
laws of tho Stato, and of tho poaco and Interests and dignity thereof.
Article VIII.
That the said WlUlam W. Holden, Governor of tho said State, unmindful of tho
high dutlos of his said office, und tho obligations of his solemn oath of office, and
contriving and intending, and with a view and for the purpose of supporting and
maintaining an armed military force In said State, which he had then and there
recruited, organized and formed for illegal purposes, without the sanction of the
Constitution and laws of the said State, but in contravention of the same, did from
time to time in the months of June, July and August, in the year of our Lord, ono
thousand eight hundred and seventy, under color of his said office, in said State,
without the sanction of the Constitution andlaws of the said State, and In violation
of tho same, make his warrants as such Governor upon the Treasury of the said Stato
for largo sums of money, to-wlt: for the sum of eighty thousand (§80,000) dollars
and morc.to bo used for tho unlawful purpose aforesaid; that the said W. W. Holden.
Governor as aforesaid, under color of his said offlco, then and there persuaded,

IN THE SENATE. 17
commanded, incited and procured David A. Jenkins, Treasurer of said State to
recognize such and said unlawful warrants on the Treasurer of said State, and to
deliver such and said sums of money to such agents of the said William W. Hol
den, governor as aforesaid, as he the said William W. Ilolden, governor as afore
said, might from time to time designate and appoint; that in pursuance of such
warrants and orders of the said William W. Holden, governor -as aforesaid, the
said David A. Jenkins, treasurer as aforesaid, delivered to one A. D. Jenkins,
called the paymaster, appointed by the said William W. Holden, governor as
aforesaid, for such purpose, large sums of money from said treasury, to wit :
the month of August, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and
seventy, one Richard M. Allison, a citizen of the county of Iredell, In said State,
brought his suit in the superior court of the last named county, in his own behalf,
and in behalf of all the tax payers of said State, praying that a writ of Injunction
might then and there be granted, and issued according to law, restraining the
said David A. Jenkins, treasurer as aforesaid, from delivering any sum or sums of
money to the said William W. Holden, governor as aforesaid, or any other persons
in obedience to such orders and for such purposes, and also restraining the said
A. D. Jenkins, as such paymaster, or in any other respect or capacity from dis
bursing or disposing of said sum of money so in his said hands or any part thereof
for the purpose thereof. That the Honorable Anderson Mitchell, judge of said
superior court, then and there granted the writ of injunction so prayed for, enjoin
ing and forbidding the said David A. Jenkins, treasurer as aforesaid, from deliv
ering any money from said treasury In obedience to any such warrant or
order, so made by the said William W. Holden, govornor as aforesaid, and enjoin
ing and forbidding the said A. D. Jenkins, as such paymaster or agent, from using
or disbursing tho said, money or any part of It, so In his hands, to or for the use of
said armed body of men for any of the purposes aforesaid; that the said David A.
Jenkins, treasurer, and the said A. D. Jenkins, wore each duly served with sold
writ of Injunction, but nevertheless, tho said William W. Holden, governor as
aforesaid, wickedly intending to suspend nnd subvert the lows of snld State nnd
to defy nnd disregard tho Inwful authority of said court, did afterwards, to wit :
after the month last aforesaid, persuade, Incite, order, procure and command tho
said A. D. Jenkins to defy und disregard tho said writ of Injunction, and to deliver
tho suld money so In his custody to another agent of the said William W. Holden,
governor ns nforcsnld, to bo used for the unlawful purposes aforesaid ; that tho
suld A. D Jenkins, In obedience to such lust mentioned ordor, command and pro
curement of tho said WlUlam W. Holden, govornor as aforesaid, and In disregard
of such writ of injunction and the lawful authority of said judge, did deliver the
Bald money so In his hands to another agent of the said WlUlam W. Holden, gov
ornor as aforesaid, to wit: To one Richard T. Berry, to be used for the unlawful
purposo aforesaid, and tho said WlUlam W. Holden, governor as aforesaid, did
¦thou and there, In the way and manner, and by the means and for tho purposo
aforesaid, procure, order and command the snld A. D. Jenkins so to disregard and
disobey the said writ of Injunction and the lawful authority of said judge, and did
then and there, and in the way and the manner and by the means and for the un
lawful purpose aforesaid, defy, disregard, Ignore contravene, suspend and defeat
tho lawful purpose and effect of the writ of injunction so granted and Issued by
tho said judge ; and thereupon and thereafter the said William W. Holden, gov
ernor as aforesaid,' the said sum of public money thus transferred ac aforesaid to
2

18 PRELIMINARY PROCEEDINGS
the hands of the said Richard T, Berry, did order and cause to be paid out and dis
bursed by him, the B&ld Rlohard T. Berry, to, for und about tho Illegal purposes
aforesaid, to wlti Tho payment of tho expenses In keeping on foot, sustaining and
maintaining tho said Illegal military foroo as aforesaid | whoreby tho snld William
W. Holden, governor as aforesaid, was then and thoro guilty of a high misde
meanor In his said office In violation of his oath of offloo, and Iniubvorilon of tho
laws of said state, and tho pence, Interests and dignity thereof.

(Signed i)

Jas. G. Scott,
Geo. H. Gregory,
R. P. Wariho,

John W. Dunham,
Chas. W. Broadfoot,
Henry P. Jordan,
Lf,b M. McAfee.
Presented Dec. 19th 1870.
'THOS. J. JARVIS,
Attest :
Speaker of the
House of Representative*.
W. W. Gathibr,
Clerk.
Thereupon the president informed the managers and mem
bers of the house that the senate would take proper order on
the articles of impeachment of which dne notice would bo
given to the house of representatives. The managers and
members of the house of representatives then withdrew from
the senate chambei.
The president their retired from the chair, after having ad
dressed the senate as follows :
Senators : It now becomes my dutj, under the constitution
and laws of this state, to retire for the time being from the
chair as your presiding officer to take charge of another de
partment of the government. Allow me senators, before I
retire, to return to you individually and as a body my
unfeigned thanks for the courtesy, kindness and consideration
which you have always extended to my efforts as your pre
siding officer. The senate will now proceed to elect a presi
dent pro tempore.
Mr. Graham offered the following resolution :
Retolvtd, That a Committee of this Senate be appointed whoso dnty it shall be
forthwith to proceed to tho residence of His Honor, Chief Justice Pearson, and
respectfully notify him that It is the pleasure of this body, before whom articles
IN THE SENATE. 19
of Impeachment have been preforrod against the Governor of the Stato, to or-
ganliso a court of Impeachmont on Friday, the 23rd Inst.
And the resolution was adopted— yoas 24, nays 18. Tho
president designated Mr. Oowles to oonstitute tho committee
to carry out the resolution.
On motion, two copies of the artioles of impeaohment for
each senator were ordered to be printed.
On motion, the artioles of impeaohment were ordered to be
engrossed.

THE TRIAL OF WILLIAM W, HOLDEN,
GOVERNOR OF NORTH CAROLINA,
FOR HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS.

THE STATE OP NORTH CAROLINA vs. WILLIAM W. HOLDEN.

The Capitol, December 28, 1870.
Tho hour ot 12 m. having arrived, tho Chief Justico,
accompanied by Messrs. Jones and Lehman, entorod tho senato
chamber and took his seat as presiding officer.
Upon assuming the chair, tho Chief Justico said :
Senators: Having been notified by the senator from
Yadkin and Surry, I am present to take part in forming a court
for the trial of the governor of the state. There is ono ques
tion which has been called to my attention. I noticed that in
the trial of the president of tho United States, tho chief
justico of the United States thonght ho must take an oath
because the constitution of the United States does not mako
that a part of his official duty. The view that I take of it is
that, inasmuch as by tho constitution it is mado a part of my
official duty .to take this post, I think the oath I have already
taken is enough. Therefore I shall not take another unless
senators think it proper. I have consulted with some members
and they agree with me in this view. I suppose that it is not
necessary for me to mention that I intend, ot course, to do my
duty impartially and according to law, and that would be the
substance of the oath.
The chief justice then ordered a call of the senate, and 36

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W, HOLDEN. 21
senators responded to their names, and wero duly sworn by the
chief justico, viz : Messrs. Adams, Allen, Bellamy, Brogden,
Cook, Council, Cowles, Crowell, Currie, Eppes, Flomming,
Gilmer, Graham, Hawkins, Hyman, Jones, Xing, Lassiter,
Lcdbetter, Lehman, Manney, McClammy, Merrimon, Moore,
Morohoad, Murphy, Norment, Olds, Price, Robbins of David
son, Robbins of Rowan, Skinner, Troy, "Warron, Whitosidos
and Worth.
Tho chief justico thon said: Tho oath having boon admin
istered, I announce that tho court of impeachment is organ
ized for business.
On motion of Mr. Graham, it was ordered that the rules
adopted by the Benate for the government of the impeachment
trial be retained for the use of this body until further orders.
On motion of Mr. Graham, it was ordered that the principal
clerk of the senate notify the house that the senate is organ
ized for the trial of impeachment of "William "W. Holden, gov
ernor of North Carolina, and are ready to receive the managers
of impeachment at its bar, which was accordingly dono.
Tho doorkeeper having made the proclamation provided in
tho rules adopted by tho court, tho clerk and doorkeeper wero
sworn in.
On motion it was ordered that the doorkeeper arrange seats
in front of tho bar for the accommodation of the managers
from tho house.
The chief justico stated that tho doorkeeper had delivered
the messago to the house, and tho rotura was that the managers
would appear in tho senate chamber at 1 o'clock.
On motion of Mr. Robbins, of Rowan, it was ordered that
the court take a recess untill five minutes to one.
The hour of one having arrived, the committee announced
the return of the chief justice. .
Tho doorkeeper announced the arrival of the board of man
agers from the house. The chief justice invited them forward.
Mr. Sparrow, (chairman ot the board of managers,) said i

22 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Mr. Chief Justice, we are requested by the house of repre
sentatives as its managers, to demand that the senato take pro*
cess against William W. Holden, that ho may answer at the
bar of the senate upon the Articles of Impeachment heretofore
preferred by the house of representatives, through its man
agers before the senate.
On motion of Mr. Lehman, it was ordered that a summons
be issued to William W. Holden, governor ot the state of
North Carolina, to appear and answer tho Articles of Impeach
ment heretofore exhibited against him, and the said summons
be made returnable forthwith.
On motion of Mr. Graham, it was ordered that the following
form of summons be adopted, to wit :
[See Rules second day .J
The chief justice announced that the doorkeeper had served
fhe summons, and that the governor would appear before the
court by counsel.
Mr. R. C. Badger, counsel for the governor, appeared before
the bar and read the following reply to the summons, to* wit :
Mr. Chief Justice: I, William W. Holden, governor of
North Carolina, having been served with a summons to appear
before this honorable court, sitting as a Court of Impeachment
to answer certain articles of impeachment found and presented
against me by the honorable the house of representative of
the State of North Carolina, do hereby enter my appearance
by my counsel, Richard C. Badger, who has my warrant and
authority therefor, and who is instructed by me to ask ot this
honorable court a reasonable time for the preparation of my
answer to said articles. The time has been 60 short since my
impeachment that I have not yet received replies from other
members of the bar to whom I have written, requesting them
to appear as my counsel in this honorable court. I therefore
respectfully ask that they may be hereafter added to the coun
sel already employed by me. After a careful examanation ot
tho articles of impeachment and consultation with my counsel,

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. • 23
I am satisfied that at least thirty days will be necessary for the
preparation of my answer, and I respectfully ask that it bo
allowed. (Signed) W. W. Holden.
• ¦
Richard C. Badger, of counsel for the respondent, moves
the court for the allowance of thirty days tor the preparation
of the answer to the articles of impeachment, and in support
of the motion makes the following professional statement :
The articles are eight in number, involving many questions
of law and a very great number of facts. They were exhibited
in tho senate on Monday, the 19th day of December, instant,
and their contents only brought to the knowledge of the re
spondent on the day following, when they appeared in one of
the daily nespapers published, in the city of Raleigh.
Tho respondent, on account of the shortness of time, has
not yet had replies from the other counsel to whom he has
applied to appear for him jointly with myself, and this season
of the year at which, according to the customs of this country,
all persons make their arrangements for the incoming year, will
cause the loss of at least seven of the days asked for.
(Signed) R. C. Badger,
Counsel for the Respondent.
Chief Justice : The managers have heard the motion ; what
disposition will they make of it ?
Mr. Sparrow said it was the desire of the managers that tho
respondent should have full time to prepare his reply to the
charges presented against him, and he was instructed to say the
time asked for would be agreeable to the Board of Managers.
The Chief Justice said that if no objection was made by the
court, the motion would be considered granted.
Objection was made.
Mr. Sparrow said the Board of Managers desired to know if
the respondent would ask for a longer time after the expir a
tion of the thirty days asked.

24

court or impeachments.

Mr. Badger assured the Court that the governor would
throw no obstacle in the way to delay the trial, but simply de
sired the time necessary to complete his reply.
On motion of Mr. Graham, it was ordered that the res
pondent file his answer to the- Articles of Impeachment on or
before the 23d day of January, 1871, arid that the managers of
impeachment file their replication thereto within six days
thereafter, and that the matter stand for trial on the 30th day
of January, 1871.
The Chief Justice gave notice that the court would stand
adjourned until tbe 23d of January.

TRIAL of wtlliam. w. HOLDEN. 25
SECOND DAY.
Senate Chamber, January 23d, 1871.
At 12 m., pursuant to adjournment, the Chief Justice having
taken the chair, the senate proceeded to the consideration of
the articles of impeachment exhibited against William W.
Holden, governor of North Carolina. Proclamation was made
in due form by the doorkeeper.
The following senators were then duly qualified by the chief
justice, to wit: Messrs. Albright, Barnett, Battle, Beasley,
Brown, Dargan, Flythe, Graham of Alamance, Latham, Linney,
Love, Speed and Waddell.
On motion of Mr. Graham, of Orango, it was ordered that
the additional rules for tho government of tho impeachment
trial heretofore adopted by tho senate, bo tho rules of this
body until furthor orders. The rnlos arc as follows:
Rule 1. Befiro proceeding to tho consideration of tho Articles of Impeach
ment, tho presiding oillcer shall administer to tho members of tho Senato then
present and to the other members as thoy shall appear, tho following oath : " I
 , swear truly and Impartially to try and determine the charges In tho Articles
of Impeachmont exhibited against WlUlam W. Holden, Governor of tho State of
North Carolina, under tho Constitution and laws thereof according to the evi
dence : So help mo God "
Rule II. Tho Principal Clerk of tho Seuate shall act as Clerk of tho Court of
Impeachment, and shall record the proceedings of the court in the samo manner
as tho legislative proceedings of the Senate.
Rule III. Tho Doorkeeper of tho Senate shall execute all orders of the pre
siding officer and tho Senate,, and he may omploy such assistance as may bo nec
essary for that purpose.
Rule IV. Counsel for the parties shall be admitted to appear and be heard
npon an impeachment.
Rule V. Before proceeding to tho trial on each day the foUowing proclama
tion shall bo mad* by tho Doorkeeper of tho Senate : O yos, O yes, O yes all
persons aro commanded to keep silence on pain of imprisonment, while the Senate
of North CaroUna is sitting for tho trial of Articles of Impeachmont against
William W. Holden, Governor of North Carolina.
Rule. VL That the foUowing form of summons bo adopted, to-wlt:

2 6 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS. Thb State or North Carolina.
The Senate rf Forth Carolina,
to WlUlam W. Holden, Greeting;
Whereas, The Honse of Representatives of the State of North Carolina, did,
on tho 30th day of December, 1870, exhibit to the Senate Articles of Impeachment
against you, tho said WlUlam W. Holden, which said articles, appended to this
mimmons, demand that you, tho said WUllam W. Holden, should bo put to answer
tho accusations as set forth in said articles. And that such proceedings, examina
tions, trials and Judgments might be thereupon had as are agreeable to law and
Justice, you, the said William W. Holden, are therefore hereby summoned to
appour forthwith before tho Senate of North Carolina, at their chancer In tho
city of Raleigh, then and there to answer to the said Articles of Impeachment,
und there to abide by, obey and perform such orders, directions and Judgments as
tho Senato of North Carolina shall make in tho premises, according to the Con
stitution and laws of North Carolina. Hereof you are not to fall. Witness, R.
M. Pearson, Chief Justice and presiding officer of tho said Senate, at the city of
Raleigh, this 23rd day of December, 1870,
(Signed,) B. M. Peabson,
Chief Justice S. C.
(PRECEPT.) The Statb of North Carolina.
The Senate of North Carolina, To Joseph J. Roberson, Greeting ;
You are hereby commanded to deliver and leave with William W. Holden, a
true and attested copy of tho within writ of summons and of tho Articles of Im-
pcuchment thereto appended, together with a like copy of this precept, and let It
bo done forthwith.
Fall not, and mako return of this writ of summons and precept, with your pro
ceedings thereon ondorsed, on tho appearance day mentioned in sold writ of
summons. Witness, R. M. Pearson, Chief Justico and presiding officer of tho Senate, at
tho city of Raleigh, this 23d day of December, 1870.
(Signed,) R- M. Pearson,
Chief Justice S. C.
(RETURN.)
The foregoing writ of summons has been duly served upon WlUlam W. Holden,
Governor of tho 8tate of North Carolina, by deUvering to him a copy of tho
summons and of the Articles of Impeachment thereto appended and of this pre
cept, the 23d day of December, 1870.
(Signed,) J- J- Roberson,
Doorkeeper and Sergeant-at-Arms.
Bulb VII. Tho hour of the day at which the Senile shall sit upon the trial of

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 27
an Impeachmont shall be 12 o'clock, M., and when tho hour for such sitting sahll
arrive, the presiding officer of tho Senate shall so announce ; and tliereupon tho
presiding officer upon such trial shall eauso proclamation to be made, and the
business of tho trial shall proceed until 2 o'clock and thirty minutes, P. M.,
unless upon a motion, seconded by ono-flfth of tho members present, the court
shall determine to adjourn earlier or sit longer. The adjournment of the Senate
sitting In said trial shall not operate as an adjournment of. tho Senate; but on
such adjournment the Senato shaU resume tho consideration of its leglslatlvo
business. Rule VIII. All motions mado by the parties or their counsel shall be ad
dressed to tho presiding officer, and if he or any Senator shall require It, they shall
bo committed to writing and read at the Clerk's desk.
Rule IX. The Reading Clerk of the Senate shall read all papers which may
be sent to the clerk's desk, and act as the deputy of tho Principal Clerk, and
assist In the performance of tho duties prescribed for that officer.
Rule X. Witnesses shall be examined by ono person on behalf of tho party
Introducing Uiem, and thon cross-examined by ono person on the other sido.
Rule XI. If a Senator is called as a witness ho shall bo sworn, and give his
testimony standing in his place.
Rule XII. If a Senator wishes a question to bo put to a wltnoss, or to offor a
motion or order, (except a motion to adjourn) it shall bo reduced to writing, and
put by the presiding officer.
Rule XIII. All preliminary or interlocutory questions, and all motions shall bo
argued for not exceeding one-half hour on each side, unless tho Senato shall,
by order, extend the time.
Rule XIV. The case on each sldo shall bo opened by ono person. Tho final
argument on the merits may be mado by two persons on each sldo, (unloss other
wise ordered by the Senate upon application for that purposo,) and tho argument
shall be opened and closed upon the part of the House of Representatives.
Rule XV. If the Senate shall at any time fail to sit for the consideration of
the Articles of Impeachment on the day or hour fixed therefor, the Senate may, by
an order to be adopted without debate, fix a day and hour for resuming such con
sideration. Rule XVI. Witnesses shall be sworn In the following form : '* You solemnly
swear that tho evidenco jou shall give in tho case now depending between tho
State of North Carolina and WlUlam W. Holden, shall be tho truth, tho wholo
truth, and nothing but the truth; So help you God;" which oath shall be admin.
lstored by tho Clerk of the Senate or other authorised person.
Rule XVII. The following shall bo tho form of subpoona which shall bo issuod
upon tho application of clthor of tho parties or their counsol :
The Senate of Forth Carolina, To Joseph J. Roberson, Greeting;
You arc hereby commanded to summon — — — to appear before the Senate of
North Carolina on tho  day of — ¦ — , 1871, at the Senato Chamber In the city
of Raleigh, then and there to testify his knowledge In tho causo which is before tho
Senate, and in which the House of Representatives have impeached William W.
Holden. . < t

28 ' COCBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Fall not, and make duo return of tho sorvlco of this subpoena.
Witness, WlUlam L. Saunders, Clork of tho Senate, at Raleigh, this — day of
 , 1871. , Clerk of the Senate.
Rule XVIII. All tho orders and decisions shall be mado and bad by yeas and
nays upon tho demand of one-fifth of the members present and without debate,
oxeept upon a vote of a majority of the members present allowing discussion,
and in that case no member shall speak moro than once on ono question, and not
moro than flvo minutes upon on interlocutory question, and not moro than ten
minutes on tho final qncstlon, unless by consent of the Senate to bo hod without
debate ; but each Senator shall bo permitted to flic, within two days after the vote
shall hovo been taken upon tho Articles of Impeachment, his written opinion, to bo
printed with tho proceedings.
Rule XIX. In taking tho votes of tho Senate upon tho Articles of Impeach
ment, tho clork will read tho several articles successively, and after tho reading of
each artlclo the Clerk will call tho nanio of each Senator, who shall rise In his
place and thereupon the presiding officer put the following question i " Mr. ¦
how iny you, Is tho respondent, Wllllum W, Holden, guilty or not guilty os
charged In Artlclo of Impeachment | whereupon each Senator shall answer
"guilty" or "not guilty."
Rt'l.u XX. If the Impeachment shall not, upon any of tho article presented,
he sustained hy tho votes of two-thirds of the members present, a Judgment of
acquittal shall bo entered j but If tho person accused In such Articles of Inipoueh-
incut shall bo convicted upon any of snld articles by tho votes of two-thirds of
the mciirbcr* present, the Senate shall proceed to pronounce Judgment, und n cer
tified copy of such Judgment nhnll bo deposited In the oillce of tho Secretary of
Statu. On motion of Mr. Graham, of Orange/ it was ordered that
the principal clerk of tho senate notify tho malingers on tho
part of tho houso of representatives, that tho senate is ready
to proceed with tho trial of William W. Holden, governor of
North Carolina, nnd that seats are provided for tho managers
and counsel.
Mr. Sparrow, on behalf of the managers, announced that
Messrs. William A. Graham, Thomas Bragg and A. S. Merri-
mon were associated with the managers as counsel.
Mr. Badger, in behalf of the respondent, announced that
Messrs. J. M. McCorkle, Nathaniel Boyden, William N. II.
Smith and Edward Conigland were associated with himself as
counsel for respondent.
On motion of Mr. Graham, of Orange, it was ordered that the
doorkeeper inform the respondent, William W. Holden, and

TRIAL OF WUXIAM W. HOLDEN. 29
his counsel, that the senate is ready to proceed with the trial
of the impeachment. v
The answer of the respondent, William W. Holden, gov
ernor of North Carolina, to the articles of impeachment exhi
bited against him was then read, as follows:
The ausweb of tho said William W. Holden, governor of the State of North
Carolina, to the A rtlclcs of Impeachment exhibited against him by tho House
of Representatives of the State of North Carolina.
For answer to tho first article he says : That this respondent on the 4th day of
July, 1868, was Inaugurated governor of tho Stato of North Carolina, and entered
upon the discharge of his duties with tho purpose to administer the government
of said state in strict accordance with the obligation of his oath Of offlco, without
favor or affection, agrccablo to tho constitution and laws of the stato, a purposo
which ho has not Intentionally violated In any of his official acts. On tho first
day of July, A. D. 1808, Jonathan Worth, tho immediate predecessor of this
respondent in tho gubernatorial offlco, addressed to him a protest, of which tho
following is a copy i STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA,
EXBCIUTIVJ! DBI'AHTMICNT,
Raleigh, July 1, 1808.
Governor W. W. Hoj.dbn, Raleigh, Jf. C. ;
Sin : Yestorday morning I was verbally notified by Chief Justico Pearson that
In obodlonco to a telegram from General Canby, ho would to day at 10 a. in.
ndmlnlstcr to you tho oath roqulrod preliminary to your ontoring upou tho dls-
chargo of the duties of civil Govornor of the Stato, and that thereupon you would
domand possession of my offlco. I Intimated to tho Judge my opinion that such
proceeding was premature, oven undor the reconstruction legislation of Congress,
and that I should probably decline to surrender tho offlco to you.
At sundown yestorday evening I received from Colonel Williams, oommondant
of this military post, an extract from the general orders, No. 120, of Genorai
Canby, as follows : GENERAL ORDERS, NO. 120.
[extract.]
" Headquarters, Second Militabt District,
Charleston, S. C, June 30, 1808.
" To facilitate tho organization of the new state governments, the following
appointments are made: To be Governor of North Carolina, W. W. Holden, Gov
ernor elect, vico Jonathan Worth, removed ; to bo lieutenant governor of North

80 COUKT 0F IMPEACHMENTS.
Carolina, Tod R. Onldwoll, lieutenant governor oloot, to fill an original vactney, to
tako offort July 1, 1608, on tho mooting of tho General Asoombly of North
Carolina." I do not rocognlro the validity of tho lato election, under which you and those
co-oporatlng with you, claim to he Invented with tho civil government of the Stato,
You havo no ovldonce of your election save the certificate of a major-general of
tho United States army. 1 regard all you as, in effect, appointees of the military
power of tho United States and not as "dorlvlng your powers from tho consent of
those you claim to govern." Knowing, however, that you are backed by military
forco here, which I could not rosist If I would, I do not deem it nocessary to offor
a futile opposition, but vacate the offlco without the ceremony of actual eviction,
offering no further opposition than this, my protest. I would submit to actual
expulsion, in order to bring before the Supreme Court, of the United States tho
question as to tho constitutionality of the legislation under which you claim to bo
tho rightful Governor of the State, If the past action of that tribunal furnished any
hope of a speedy trial. I surrender the office to you under what I deemed mili
tary duress, without stopping, as the occasion would well Justify, to comment
upon the singular coincidence that tho present State Government Is surrendered,
as without legality, to him whose own official sanction, but three years ago, de
clared It valid. I am, very respectfully,
JONATHAN WORTH,
Governor of North Carolina.
But this respondent was disposed to ascribe this protest against the constitu
tionality of the legislation under which he had been elected, to causes operating
solely upon him by whom It had boon offered, and cherished the hope that It was
not concurred in by any considerable body of his fellow-citizens, but that they
had resolved to submit, In good faith, to the reconstruction acts of Congress, and
to aid him In giving effect to the same. The protest aforesaid was taken up by
various newspapers throughout tho State, the sentiments therein expressed wero
lauded and endorsed, und unmistakable evidence given that the government of the
State was regarded by many as illegal In its character, and was submitted to only
because of InabUlty to overthrow It. Not long after the Induction of this respond
ent to offlco, he became officially cognizant of a settled design, existing In various
parts of the State, through the aid of secret combinations of a political character,
of which ho believes the aforesaid protest was tho nucleus, practically to render
null and void said reconstruction acts, and to set at naught those provisions of the
Federal and State constitutions which secure political and civil equality to the
wholo body of tho people, without respect to race, color or previous condition.
Determined to avert, if possible, tho ovU consequences which, It was foreseen
must ensue from tho attempt of such combinations to effect tho objects for which
thoy had been organized, especially the purposo to aseaU by forco tho right of suf
frage guaranteed by said acts to his colored fellow-citizens, this respondent
doomed it his duty to issue his proclamation of Oct. 12th, IO, sotting forth Uio
nature of tho government, giving warning of tho consequences that must follow
any attempt to subvert tho same, and enjoining all magistrates, sheriffs, and other
peace officers to be vigilant, Impartial, faithful and firm In tho discharge of their

TRIAL 07 WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 81
duties, explaining and enforcing tho law, ferreting ont offoudori, protecting tho*
weak against tho strong who may attempt to deprive thorn of thoir rights, to tho
end thut they Ickod may bo restrained, thojpoaco of sooloty prosorvod, tho good name
of tho Stato maintained, and tho government porpotuatod on tho basis of freedom
and Justico to all.
But tho said combinations oontlnuod to gather strength. The mombers thereof
mot in secret, solected the victims to bo punished, and perpetrated outrages in the
doad of night, through disguised parties, on quiet and unoffending cltlzsns,
chiefly colored poreons, and always of tho RepubUcan party. The Legis
lature, under tho hopo of placing some check upon their unlawful acts
and of affording some security to the objects of their vengeance, passed
the act of April 12Ui, 1869, entitled "An Act making the act of going,
masked, disguised or painted a felony," which this . respondent set forth in his
proclamation of AprU 16th, 1869, of which the following is a copy:
A PROCLAMATION BY HIS EXCELLENCY, THE GOVERNOR OF NORTH
CAROUNA Executive Department,
Raleigh, April 16, 1809.
It is my duty to publish ihe following act, passed by tho General Assembly of
North Carolina at Its recent session :
AN ACT MAKING THE ACT OF GOING MASKED, DISGUISED OH PAINTED A FEL0NV.
Section I. The General Assembly of North Carolina do enact, Any person who
shall disguise himself by painting his face, or by wearing any mask or any other
device for the concealment of the face or person, with Intent to terrify or frighten
any citizen of the community, or part thereof, shaU be deemed guilty of a misde
meanor, and be punished by fine or imprisonment in the county Jail, at the dis
cretion of the court.
Src. 2. Any person or persons, either singly or in association with each other
who, being disguised or masked, or otherwise concealed in the manner described
in the preceding section, shall commit any trespass ot act by force or violence
which U now a misdemeanor by any statute of this State, or at common law
Shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and shall be imprisoned at hard labor in tho
penitentiary for a term of not less than one year, or more than ten years.
Sec. 8. This act shall go into effect on its ratification, and tho Governor shall
causo tho somo to bo published immediately.
Ratified tho 12th day of April, A. D. 186a.
No person In this Stato can bo " In any mannor deprived of his life, liberty or
property bat by tho law of tho lond." Every man's houso Is his castlo, Into
which no man can enter to molest or disturb him unloss by authority of law. Tho
humblost and tho poorest are entitled to tills protection equally with the wealthiest
and most exalted. Tho courts will extend this protection, and tho Exoeutlve I»
prepared to sustain tho courts, and to do everything within tho sphere of hi»
powers and duties to prosorvo peace and good ordor in society. Bands of mom
who go masked and armed at night, causing alarm and terror In neighborhoods,
and committing acta of violence on th© Inofibnalvo nnd defenceless, will be fol-

32 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
lowed and brought to JusUce ; and depredators and robbers, who U ve on the honest
earnings of others, wUl be mado to feel the penalty due to their crimes.
It is hoped tho evils complained of, and which are confined to a few localities,
wiU speedily cease. The great body of the people of the State are submitting
quietly and peaceably to established authority, and laboring assiduously to
retrieve their fortunes and Improve their condition. I appeal to this great body
of the people to unite with me in discountenancing and repressing the evUs
referred to. Public opinion properly embodied and expressed will be more
effectual in repressing these evils and in promoting the general good that will
result from the complete establishment of peace and order in every neighborhood
In the State, than the execution of the law Itself against offenders in a few indi
vidual cases. I respectfully and earnestly Invoke this public opinion. By the
regard which we all have for the peace of society and the good name of the State,
I call upon every citizen to unite with me in discountenancing disorders and vio
lence of aU kindB, and in fostering and promoting confidence, peace and good
will among the whole people of the State.
S^^S Done at our City of Raleigh, this the 16th day of April, one thousand
§*x,z,.-jr.§ eight hundred and sixty-nine, and in the year of tho Independence of
tho United States the ninety-third. W. W. HOLDEN, Governor.
By tho Governor :
W. R. Richardson, Acting Private Secretary.
For a more detailed statement of tho purposes and objects of tho said secret po
litical combinations, and of tho means which they adopted to effect said purposes
and objects, and of tho outrages which thoy perpetrated, tills respondent refers to
his message of November 22d, 1870, to tho Honorable tho General Assembly of
North Carolina, and quotes therefrom as follows :
"Those combinations wore at first purely political In their character, and
many good citizens wero Induced to Join them. But gradually, under tlio lead
orshlp of ambitious and discontented politicians, and undor tho pretext that
society nocded to bo rcgulatod by somo authority outside or obovo tho law, thoir
charactor was changod, and thoso soerot Klans began to commit murdor, to rob,
whip, scourge and mutilate unoffending citizens. Thoso organizations, or thoso
combinations wore callod tho Kuklux Klan, and wero revealed to thopubUc, as tho
result of tho measures which I adoptod, as ' The Constitutional Union Guard*.1
1 The Wliltc Brotherltood,' and ' The LivUlble Empire? Unlike othor secret politi
cal associations, they authorized tho use of forco, with deadly weapons, to Influence
tho elections. Tho members were united by oaths whleh lgnorod or repudiated
the ordinary oaths or obligations resting upon all other citizens to respect the laws
and uphold Uio government; theso oaths inculcated hatred by the white race
against tho colored race; the members of tho Klan, as above stated, wero hostUo
to tho principles on which the government of the 8tato had been reconstructed,
and, In many respects, hosUlo to the government of the United States. They mot
in secret, in disguise, In arms, In a dress of a certain kind inteuded to conceal their
persons and then- hor»os,and to terrify those whomthcy menaced or assaulted.
They held their camps, and under their leaders they decreed Judgmont against their
peaceable fellow-citizens, from mere Intimidation to scourgings, mutllaUons, the
burning of churches, school-houses, mills, and in many cases to murder. This

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 33
organization, under different names, but cemented by a common purposo, Is be
lieved to have embraced not less than forty thousand voters In North CaroUna. It
was governed by rules moro or less military in their character, and struck its vic
tims with such secrecy, swiftness and certainty as to leave them little hope either
for escape or mercy. Tho members were sworn to obey the orders of their camps
even to assassination and murdijr. They wero taught to regard oaths administered
before magistrates and in courts of Justice, as in no degree binding when they
were called upon to give testimony against their confederates. They were sworn
to keep the secrets of the order — to obey the commands of tho chief — to go to the
rescue of a member at all hazzards, and to swear for him as a witness, and acquit
him as a Juror. Consequently, grand Juries in many counties frequently refused
to find bUls against the membe-u of the Klan for the gravest and most flagrant
violations of law ; and when bUls were found, and the parties were arraigned for
trial, witnesses, members of the order, would in nearly every case come forward,
and, taking an oath before the Court on tho Holy Evangelists to tell the truth,
tho wholo truth, and uothlng but the truth, would swear falsely, and would
thus defeat tho ends of Justico. Thcro arc, at least, four Judges and four solici
tors In tho Stato who will bear witness to tho fact, from thoir own cxpcrleneo, that
It was very difficult, If not impossible, to convict members of this Klan of crimes
and misdemeanors. I havo information of not less than twenty-flvo murders com
mitted by members of this Klan, in various counties of the State, and of hundreds
of eases of scourging and whipping. Very few, if any, convictions have followed
In these cases. The civil law was powerless. One Stato Senator was murdered hi
tho open day In a county court-house, and another Stato Senator was driven
from tho State, solely on account of their political opinions. In nolthcr case was
a bill found by a grand Jury. A respectable and unoffending colored niun was
taken from his bed at night, and hanged by tho neck until ho was dead, within a
short distance of a county court-house. Another colored man was drowned be
cause he spoke publicly of porsous who aided In the commission of this crime. No
bills wero found In these cases. A crippled white man, a natlvo of Vermont, was
cruelly whipped because ho was teaching a colored school, No bill wus found In
this caso. Tho sheriff of a county was waylaid, shot nnd killed on a public high
way, und tho colonel of a county was shot and killed In tho open day, whllo en
gaged In his usual business. A county Jail was broker open and five mon taken
out and their throats cut. Another Jail was broken opon, and men taken out and
shot, ono of whom died of his wound. Another JaU was broken opon, and a
United 8tate's prisoner released. No punishments followod in theso cases. Tho
members of this Klan, undor the ordors of their chiefs, had ridden through many
neighborhoods at night, nnd had punished free citizens on account of their politi
cal opinions, and had so terrified many of them by threats of f uturo visitations of
vengeance that they fled from their houses, took refugo in the woods nnd did not
dare to appear In public to exercise their right of suffrage. Some of theso victims
were shot, some of them were whipped, some of them were hanged, some of them,
were drowned, some of them were tortured, some had their mouths lacerated with
gags, one of them had his ear cropped, and others, of both sexes, were subjected
to indignities which wero disgraceful not merely to civilization but to humanity
itself. The members of this Klan, under the orders of their chiefs, had ridden, defi
antly and unmolested, through the towns of Hillsborough, Chapol Hill, Pittsbo-
rough and Graham, committing crimes, defying the lawful authorities, and cans-
3

34

COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.

Ing real alarm to all good people. In fine, gentlemen, there was no remedy for
these evils through the clvU law, and but for the use of tho mUitary arm, to which
I was compelled to resort, tho whole fabric of society in the State would have
been undermined and destroyed, and a rolgn of lawlessness and anarchy would
have been established. The present 8tate government would thus have failed In
the great purposo for which it was created, to wit: tho protection of Ufe and
property under equal laws ; and necessarily the national government would have
Interfered, and, lu all' probability, would have placed us ugaln and for an indefinite
period under military rule."
Which he desires to bo taken as a part of this answer, and aU of which he Is pre
pared to sustain by proof.
' This respondent, actuated by a sincere desire to restore tho good order of
society in the State, and determined to uso nil peaceful ways aud means to bring
back those misguided men to a sense of their duty to their fellow-citizens, and to
cause them to abandon the said organizations, issued, on tho 20th day of October,
1SG9, his proclamation, of which the following Is a copy :
"A PROCLAMATION BY HIS EXCELLENCY, THE GOVERNOR OF NORTH
CAROLINA. Executive Depabtment,
Raleigh, October 20th, 1869.
" Notwithstanding the existence of peace and good order in other, portions of
the State, I regard it as my duty to unnounce that in four counties, to wit:
Lenoir, Jones, Orange and Chatham there is, and has been for some months vast,
a feeling of insubordination and insurrection, insomuch that many good citizens
arc put in terror for their lives and property ; and it Is difficult, if not impossible,
to secure a full and fair enforcement of the law. Information has reached, and
eontinues to reach the Executive, that in the above counties a state of feeling
exists which is totally incompatible with the free exercise, by the friends of the
government, of that independent expression of opinion and that freedom of action
which is the birthright of every American. In Lenoir and Jones various thefts
and mnrders have been committed; Jails have been forcibly opened nnd the
prisoners taken thence have been murdered ; an officer of the law has been
waylaid and slain on the public highway, and another officer of tho law has
been slain lu open day while engaged In his ordinary avocations. Private
dwellings have been entered and the occupants terrified, nnd some of them whipped
or murdered : others have been shot or cruelly bcaton ; nnd tho result Is that thus
far tho civil law, though firmly assorted and maintained, has not been adequate to
bring tho Insubordinate nnd tho wlckod to condign punishment. In Chatham the
Jail has been forcibly opened and a prisoner, confined under sentence of a ( ourt
of tho United State, has boon liberated and Is now nt large. In Orango tho Jail
has becu forcibly opened nnd two prisoners (colored men) taken out nnd shot, ono
of whom has died of his wounds, Throo other colored men hnvo boon bunged
until they were dead, ono him boon cruelly mutilated, and others havo boon
whlppod, White cltlxons havo boon injured, Insulted and terrified. ThoUnlvor-
slty of tho Stato, sacred to tho causo of learning, has been repeatedly Invaded by

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 35
bands of armed mon in disguise on horseback, and acta of violence have been
there perpetrated on unoffending citizens and officors of tho law. Many of the
colored people in these counties, and no inconsiderable portion of the white
people, though obedient to the law and good citizens, aro living undor constant
apprehensions that they may fall victims at any moment to tiie malice of their
enemies. " It is made my duty under the constitution " to call out tho militia to execute
the law, suppress riots or insurrection and to repel Invasion." I deeply regret
that It seems necessary to resort to the mUitary power to enforce the law and to
protect the citizen. But the law must be maintained. I have waited in vain,
hoping that a returning sense of reason and justice would arrest these violations
of the law. But these evils, instead of diminishing have increased, and no courso
is left to mo but to Issue tills proclamation of admonition and warning to all tho
people of the counties mentioned, whether engaged In theso flagrant violations of
law, or whether Indifferent or Insensible to what Is occurring in their midst. I
now call upon every citizen In tho counties aforesaid to aid the civil power In a (
fearless enforcement of the laws. No sot of men can tako the law Into their own
hands. Every citizen, however humble, or whatever his color, htm a right to be at
peace in his own house, and cannot bo. taken thence except by duo process, and
cannot be punished savo by tho law. If there bo thoso who counsel resistance to
established authority, such persons are traitors and should be punished accord
ingly ; if there be those who, disguised or masked, enter the dwellings of others
by force and commit nets of violence, such persons arc guilty of felony, and
should be punished by hard labor in the penitentiary ; if there be those who, with
out precept or order, hang or shoot, or otherwise deprive any ono of life, such
persons are murderers, and should be punished accordingly.
" I now give notice in the most solemn manner that these violations of law and
these outrages in the aforesaid Counties must cease; otherwise, I will proclaim
those counties in a state of insurrection, and will exert tho wholo powor of the
State to enforce the law, to protect those who are assailed or injured, and to bring
criminals to justico. In a matter like this thoro should bo no party feeling. It is
my fixed purpose to protect every citizen without regard to his antecedents, his
color or his political opinions ; but to do this tho law must bo sacred, must be
spread ovor all alike, and must be Inflexibly maintained.
i'trsT8 " Done at our Clty of RalclSh> tblB th& 2°^ d°y ot October, in tho
tcmmanS year of our Lord, one thousand eight hundred and slxty-nlno, and lu tho
ninety-fourth year of our Independence. W. W. HOLDEN, Governor.
By tho Govornor ;
W. R. RiOHAnnsON, Private Secretary,
The said organizations oxtondod Into the counties of Alamonco and Caswell,
with, If possible, redoubled atrocity In tho means to which thoir membors resorted
to carry out their Illegal objects, when tho Legislature, moved by tho fearful dis
orders which had so alarmingly lncroasod in theso and other counties, passed tho
act of January 89th, 1870, onUtlod " An act to soouro tho hotter protection of ll-fo
nnd property," which authorb.es and empowers tho Governor " whenovor In his
Judgment the civil authorities In eny couuty are unablo to protect its clUccns In
tho enjoyment of life and property, to deolare such county to bo In a stato of

36

COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.

Insurrection, and to call Into active service the mUltla of the State to tnvh an
extent as may become necossary to suppress such Insurrection j and in such case
tho Govornor is further authorized to caU upon the Prosldont for such assistance,
If any, as In his Judgment may bo necessary to enforce, the law."
Within a few days after tho ratification of tho said act, a band of armed men, to
tho number of fifty or moro, members of tho aforesaid organization, disguised by
masks and othor means, Intending to awo members of tho republican party
throughout the State, by putting to death certain ropubUcan citizens of Alamance
county, did, on the night of tho 20th of February, 1870, enter tho town of Graham,
tho shlro town of the said county of Alamance, with tho purpose and Intent of
putting to death every adult republican male resident of the sold town of Graham,
and, did, with such purpose and intent, visit tho houses of all such residents, and
did drag from his bed and put to death by hanging, in the pubUc square of said
town, ono Wya't Outlaw, an old colored man, whose only offence was that he bo-
longed to tho said Republican party. But for tho fact that the other adult male
republican residents of said town succeeded in making their escape, It is believed
that they would havo shared the same fate.
Tills respondent, notwithstanding tho aforesaid atrocities so subversive of the
good order of society, was reluctant to have recourse to the extraordinary moans
provldod by tho Constitution of tho Stato and tho aforesaid act of January 27th,
1870, In order to repress tho same, but still hoped that ho could effect the said
object by moans of tho civil power alono. In addition to tho proclamations already
herein set forth, he addressed lottors to various civil and military officers nnd citi
zens of tho Stato, urging tho necessity of repressing tho said outrugos, and of en
forcing tho law. In tho early part of 1870, ho enlisted In Chatham county, tho ser
vices of Captain N. A. Rainsay, and In Orango county, of Captain Prldo Jones,
both belonging to tho political party opposed to him, to aid in composing tho
troubles In thoso counties.
Tho number ot tho ordor In Alamanco county, as stated by a credible witness
under oath, was between 700 or 800; in Guilford county 1200; tho number In
Caswell county wos not stated, but tho order oxtended over tho Stato and num
bered 40,000 members. Many citizens of Alamance and Caswell counties had been
»courgod, whipped, mutllatod aud murdered, with Impunity, tho civil law had bo-
como a by-word nnd a reproach, and II; having bocomo cvldont, in tho Judgment of
this respondent that tho civil authorities of tho county of Alamanco woro unable
to protect tho citizens theroof In tho enjoymont of llfo and property, this respond
ent deomod It his lmporatlvo duty, to oxorclso tho powers vested In him by tho
Constitution and laws of tho Stato, and on tho 7th day of March, 1870, Issued his
proclamation as Govornor of North Carolina, doclarlng tho county of Alamanco In
a stato of Insurrection, of which tho following Is a copy :
"A PROCLAMATION BY HI8 EXCELLENCY, THE GOVERNOR OF NORTH
CAROLINA Executive Department,
Raleigh, March 7th, 1870.
" By virtue of authority vested in me by the Constitution of the State, and by
virtue of an act passed at the present session of the General Assembly, entitled

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 37
" An act to secure tho better protection of Ufe and property," ratified the 29th
day of January, 1870, and for tho reason that tho clvU authorities of tho county
of Alamance aro not able to protect tho citizens of said county in the enjoyment
of Ufo and property, I hereby proclaim and declare that the county of Alamance ,
is In a stato of Insurrection,
"On the 26th day of November, 1869, a citizen of the United Statos, who was
engaged In teaching school in said county, was taken from his houso by a baud
of mon armed and disguised, and was by them cruolly beaten and seourged.
" On tho night of tho 26th of February, 1870, a citizen of said county was
taken from his houso by a band of men armed and disguised, and was by them
hanged by tho neck until ho was dead, on tho pubUc square In tho town of Gra
ham, near tho court house.
" And moro recently tho postmaster at Company Shops, In said county, an ofli-
cor of tho government of tho Unltod States,, was compollcd to floe tho county,
and whllo absent a baud of mon armed and dlsguUcd vlsltod his house, with the
purposo, doubtless, of taking his Ufo ; and this within a short distance of Federal
troops stationed In said county, not to overawe or Intimidate good citizens, but to
prescrvo tho pcaco and to protect tho innocent and law-abiding.
" In addition to these cases Information has been received at this department that
peaccablo and law-abiding citizens of tho county aforesaid havo been molested In
thoir houses, havo been whipped, shot, scourged and thrcatonod with further
Visitations of vlolenco and outmgo unless they would conform to some arbitrary
standard of conduot set up by theso disguised assnsslns and murdorors.
" I havo Issued proclamation aftor preclamntlon to tho people of tho State,
warning offenders and wicked or misguided violators of the law to cease their
evil deeds, and, by leading better lives, propltlato thoso whoso duty It Is to enforce
tho law. I havo Invoked public opinion to aid mo in repressing these outrages and
. preserving poaco and order. I havo waited to see If tho people of Alamanco would
assemble In public mooting and express their condemnation of such conduct by a
portion of the citizens of Uio county, but I have waited In vain. No mooting of
tho kind has boon hold. No oxprcsslon of disapproval oven of such conduct by
the great body of tho citizens has reached this department; but, on tho contrary,
It Is bollovcd that tho lives of cltlzons who havo reported these crimes to tho
Executive havo been thereby ondangorod, and It Is further bollovod that many of
tho cltlzons of tho county aro so terrified that thoy dare not complain, or attempt
the arrest of criminals In their midst. Tho civil officers of tho county aro silent
and poworloss.
"The laws must bo maintained. Theso laws are over aU. Every citizen of
whatever party or color must be absolutely free to express his political opinions
and must bo safo In his own house. These outrages and these violations of law
must and SHALL cease. Criminals must and shall be brought to justice. Tho
wholo power of both governments, Stato and Federal, is pledged to this, and this
power will be exorted. Criminals who may escape to countlos adjoining Ala
manco wiU bo pursued, and If not doUverod up by tho civil authorities of said
counties, or If sheltered or protected In said counties with the knowledge of tho
civil authorities, the said countlos wUl also be declared to bo In a state of insur
rection. " I oarnotUy appeal to all good citizens to aid tho clvU authorities In maintain-

3S

COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.

Ing peace and good order, and to support me In my purpose to protect life and
property without regard to party or color.
" Done at tho city of Ralolgh, this 7th day of March, 1870, and In the 04th year
of our Independence. W. W. HOLDEN, Governor.
By tho Govornor :
W. R. Richardson, Private Secretary,
And which ho prays may bo taken as a part of this his answer.
Undeterred by tho proceedings taken for tho protection of society in tho
county of Alamanco, tho aforesaid organizations continued to perpetrate outrages
In tho county of Caswoll, reforenco to somo of which is made in a proclamation
of this respondent of July 6, 1870, of which the following is a copy :
"A PROCLAMATION BY HIS EXCELLENCY, THE GOVERNOR OF NORTH
CAROLINA. Executive Department,
Raleigh, June Otb, 1870.
" WintnnAB, In January or February, 1800, tho houso of Dnnlol Bluo, colored,
In tho county of Mooro, was ontorod at night by a band of disguised mon, known
as tho Kuklux klan, and tho wife of tho said Bluo, who was pregnant, and 11 vo of
tho children, were murdered, and the houso with tho bodies of tho murdord per
sons aforesaid was burnod ; and
" Whorcas, on tho 20th of February, 1870, Wyatt Outlaw, colorod, a citizen of
Alamanco, was taken from his houso in tho town of Graham by disguised persons
known as tho Kuklux, and hanged by the nock until ho was dead, on a tree near
the Court houso; and
" Whoreas, on tho 21st day of May, 1870, John W. Stevens, white, State Sena
tor from the county of Caswell, was murdered In open day-light In the court
houso In the village of YanceyvlUc, by persons unknown, supposed to belong to
the Kuklux klan af orosald ; and
" Whereas, on the 13th of May, 1870, Robin Jacobs, colored, living near Leas-
burg, Caswoll county, was murdered at night by a band of Kuklux klan aforesaid ;
und " Whoreas, from tho 2d of April, 1870, to the 15th of May, 1870, not less than
twonty-ono persons, white and colored, In tho aforesaid county of Caswell, wero
eruolly whipped ond scourged by a band or bands of tho aforesaid Kuklux klan ;
and " Wheroas, during tho week ending the 14th of May, 1870, a colorod man In tho
county of Lincoln, was taken from his bed at night and Ued to a tree by a band of
dlsgulsod persons known as tho Kuklux .klan and cruelly whipped ; ond
" Whoreas, about tho same tlmo, in said county, a band of men disguised,
known as tho Kuklux klan, In said county, shot a colored man on the pubUc high
way, and then told him they had shot him through mlstako for another colorod
man, but laid him on a pile of fence rails and told him to cry for help ; and >
" Whereas, a colored man named Puryear, of tho county of Alamance, supposed
to bo half-witted, having followed two of tho dlsgulsod murderers of Wyatt

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 89
Outlaw to their homes, and having spoken of tho fact publicly, suddenly disap
peared, and was found drowned In a mill pond with a twenty-pound rock to his
feot; and
" Whereas, T. M. Shoflncr, ono of tho Senators in tho General Assembly of this
Stato from tho counties of Alamance and Guilford, has been compelled to sacrlflco
his property, and, to save his life, to make his escape from said county on account
of bis opposition to the Kuklux klan aforesaid, and his devotion to tho govern
ment of the United States ; and
" Whereas, on tho 26th of May, 1870, a most atrocious murder was committed
by three disguised men on Neill McLeod and Daniel McLood, white, of tho county
of Cumberland, and three others of tho family were wounded by these assassins ;
and "Whereas, In divers other localities, peaceable citizens havo«»becn Insulted In
their homes, put In fear of their lives, whipped, scourged, maltreated, mutilated
and murdered by persons disguised and known as the Kuklux klan ; and
" Whereas, retaliation has commenced by the burning of barns, stables and
mills; and
" Whereas, all these ovils aro to bo traced to tho Kuklux klan aforesaid, though
no apology can bo offered for tho retaliation referred to, for It Is equally to bo
deplored and reprobated as a wicked violation of the law ; and upon duo Informa
tion laid before mo, (which Information has not been furnished,) that barns, or
stables, or mills, or dwelling houses, havo been burned by Incendiaries, mention
ing localities and tho persons to whom tho said barns, or stables, or mills, or
dwelling houses belonged, rewards will also bo offered for tho arrest ond convic
tion of the incendiaries aforesaid.
" Now, therefore, I, William ^W. Holden, Governor of the State of North
Carolina, do Issue this my proclamation, offering a reward of FIVE HUNDRED
DOLLARS for the arrest of each of the murderers of tho wife and chUdren of
Daniel Blue, of each of the murderers of Wyatt Outlaw, of each of the murder
ers of John W. Stevens, of each of the murders of Robin Jacobs, of each of the
persons who murdered Puryear, and of each of the persons who murdered Neill
McLeod and Daniel McLeod, and robbed tho family of the said NeiU McLeod,
together with such evidence as wiU lead to the conviction of the persons thus
arrested ; those who planned, advised or counselled the commission of this act ;
those who participated in tho act or acte ; or those who conspired to conceal tho
bodies of the murdered, or aided in the concealment and escape of the felons.
And I enjoin upon all officers, clvU and military, to aid in bringing these and
all other offenders to justico ; and especially to discountenance, discourage and
repress aU organizations of men who ride or walk at night in disguise, with arms
In thoir hands. It is a misdemeanor thus to go disguised, and it is felony if theso
disguised persons molest or Injure peaceable citizens In their Ufe and property.
*'l"V| Done at our clty °* Ralel£u» mt glxtn dav °* Juaoi m tno year ot our
tir.lntai Lord ono thousand eight hundred and seventy, and In the ninety-fourth
year of our Independence. W. W. HOLDEN, Governor.
By tfie Govornor :
W. R. Richardson, Private Secretary,
And which bo prays to be token at a part of this his answer. But the hope of pa-

40

COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.

cnniary reward, and the fear of punishment proved alike unavailing. Autnated
by tho same Imperative senso of duty by which he was Impelled in the case of the
county of Alamance, and It having become ovldont to his Judgment, that tho au
thorities of tho county of Caswoll wero unablo to protect tho cltlzons thereof in
the enjoyment of Ufe and property, this rospondont, in Uie oxerclso of tho powers
vested In him by law, on tho 8th day of July, 1870, Issued his proclamation, as
Governor of North Carolina, declaring the county of CasweU in a state of insur
rection, of which the following is a copy :
A PROCLAMATION BY HIS EXCELLENCY, THE GOVERNOR OF NORTH
CAROLINA.
*? Executive Department,
Raleigh, July 8th, 1870.
In accordance with authority vested in me by the Constitution of the State of
North Carolina, and by virtue of an act passed at the last session of the General
Assombly, ontltlod "An act to soouro the bettor protection of Ufo and proporty,"
rntlfiod tho 29th day of January, 1870, 1 hereby declare the county of Caswell to be
in a state of insurrection,
iv{^*°i Done at our city of Raleigh, this tho 8th day of July, In tho year of our
Sc«.«*c«8 Lord ono thousand eight hundred ond sovonty, and in tho ninety-fourth
year of our Independence. W. W. HOLDEN, Governor.
By tho Governor :
W. R. Richardson, Private Secretary.
This respondent therefore denies and declares to bo both falso and scandalous,
the allegation In said first artlclo, that
" WlUlam W. Holden, Govornor of said State, unmindful of tho high duties of
his office, tho obligation of his solemn oath of office, and tho Constitution and
laws of said State, and Intending to stir up civil war and subvert personal and
public liberty and tho Constitution and laws of said State, and of the United
States, and contriving and intending to humiliate and degrade the said Stato
and the people thereof, and especially tho people of the county of Alamance,
and to provoke the people to wrath and violence, did, under color of said office,
on the seventh day of March, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight
hundred and seventy, in said State, of his own false, corrupt and wicked
mind and purpose, proclaim and declare that tho county of Alamance, in said
8tato, was in insurrection." ,
" On the contrary this respondent carjsed the said proclamation, as well in the
case of the county of Alamance as In tho county of CasweU, to be issued in his
official capacity as Governor of the State of North Carolina, truly for the causes
therein and heroin 6et forth, and not untU, in bin judgment, thocivU authorities
in each of the said counties had become unable to protect the citizens thereof in
the enjoyment of life and property, and he had been long and constantly impor
tuned by letters from citizens in various parts of the Stato, and in person, by many
of tho victims of tbe outrages which aro herehi dotaUcd, and urged and counseled

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 41
by many of tho most respectable citizens of the Stato, to adopt the said means as
some protection to society In said counties.
Further answoring, this respondent denies the allegation in said first article that
this respondent " did, after the days and times last aforesaid (moaning after the
7th day of March, 1870,) send bodies of armed, desperate and lawlessmen, organ
ized and set on foot without authority of law, Into said county, and occupy tho
same by military forco, and suspend civil sathority, und the constitution and laws
of the State ; and did, after the days and times last aforesaid, and before the tune
of Impeachment in this behalf, through and by means of such armed, desperate
and lawless men, arrest many peaceable and law-abiding citizens of said county
of Alamance, then and, there about their lawful business; and did detain, hold,
Imprison, hang, beat and otherwise maltreat and injure many of them, to-wit :
LucienH. Murray, Goorgo S. Rogers, William Binghamr Alexander Wilson, Walter
Thornton, WlUlam Redding, Thomas M. Holt, George Andrews, John Andrews,
Frederick Blnnchard, Adolphus G. Mooro, John Roberson, James N. Holt, William
Tate, Alexander Patten, Jesse Grant, Lomucl Whltsctt, Josiah Thompson, Sidney
Steel, Georgo Johnson, WlUlam Patten, Joseph Wright, Benjamin McAdams,
Ruffln Andrews, Thomas Ray, Joseph Pilchard, Lofton Tear, Joseph Thompson,
Henry Cooko, William Andrews, M. N. Shaw, John Long, James H. Anderson,
Joseph Gibson, Henry Prlchard, Joseph Nelson, James R. Murphy, Jr., WlUlam
Kirkpatrlck, Thomas Gray, Jefferson Younger, Frank Mebanc, Clement Curtis,
John W. McAdams, WlUlam Mooro, William Clcndoncil, D. W. Weeden, Daniel
Moses, P. Thompson, David Mooro, Monroo Fowler, Henry C. Hurdle, William
Whltsctt, Albert Murray, J. G. Mooro, Joseph Kirkpatrlck, W. V. Montgomery,
John Trolllngcr, Jerry Whltsctt, Calvin Gibson, John G. Albright, Robert Hannah,
William Johnson, Henderson Scott, William Stockard, James Dickson, K. A.
Albright, Thomas Lultcrloh, John Grant, James Foust, John Curtis, A. Thomp
son, Robert Stockard, J. A. Mooro, James T. Hunter, John S. Scott, John Smith,
Georgo Andrews, Milton Packard, Henry Robertson, John R. Stockard, John
Curtis and Joseph Stockard, when in fact and truth thcro was do such or any In
surrection In said county of Alamance," and declares the fact to be: That by the
provisions of an act of the General Assembly of the t-tnte of North Carolina, en
titled " An act to organize a militia of North Carolina," ratified tho 17th day of
August, 1868, tho Governor is authorized to accept and organize regiments of vol
unteer infantry not exceeding six : also to accept and organize battalions of
cavalry not to exceed three, and one volunteer battery of artillery. And tho Gov
ernor is required to appoint and commission all the officers- thereof, and, accord
ing to tho provisions of said act, this respondent, as Governor of North Carolina,
caused to be organized a body of volunteer militia of good and lawful men, and
of good behavior and deportment, and appointed and commissioned citizens of
North Carolina, and no others, officers thereof, and having declared tho said coun
ties of Alamance and Caswell to be In a state of Insurrection, as, by tho Consti
tution and laws of North Carolina, ho, as Governor thereof under tho clrcum
stances herein <,et forth, was empowered and bad a right to do, be directed the
said body of militia, so by him organized, to proceed Into the counties of Ala
mance and CasweU, so declared by him to be In a state of InsorrocUon as afore
said, 'for the purposo, and no other, of protecting the inhabitants thereof m the
enjoyment of Ufe and property, and issued to the officer* in command of the
same an order, of which the foUowing is a copy :

42 COURT OK IMPEACHMENT*. STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA,
Adjutant General's Omoa,
Raleigh, July 13th, 1870.
Special Order No. 1L
CoL G. W. Kirk, commanding 2nd Reglmeut North Carolina Stato Troops, will
at once procure the necessary transportation for his camp equipage, and proceed
to Yanceyville, and assume command of Alamanco and Caswell counties.
Ho wUl tako the necessary steps to preserve order, and to give tho fullest pro
tection to life and property.
Ho will take charge of tho pubUc buUdings, and arrest and hold for examination
persons accused of felonies, especially thoso charged with, or of being accessory
to the murder of J. W. Stevens and Wyatt Outlaw.
By command of Gov. Holden, Commander-in-Chief :
A. W. FISHER, AoVjt Gen'l.
This respondent admits that under the aforesaid general order, the persons
named in said first article, were arrested and detained and held for examination by
the officers commanding the said organized body of militia in the county of Ala
mance, and that this respondent, as Governor of North Carolina, did approve of
their said arrest and detention, but this respondent was informed and believes and
£0 charges that the said persons and each of them were suspected persons, and
.arrested on probable cause, for crimes alleged to have been committed by them
and each of them. This respondent denies that said named persons, or- any of
them, weue hanged, beaten, or otherwise maltreated, or injured, as alleged in said
ilirst article, but if the said persons, or any of them, were in anywise maltreated
or injured, tho saui« was done contrary to the orders and without the advice,
procurement, knowledge or consent of this respondent; on the contrary the orders
of this respondent were to treat aU such persons as it might be found necessary to
Arrest humanely and kindly.
This rcspondont denies, and declares to be false, the nllegaUons In said 1st
artlclo, charging that Uo, the said "William W. Holden, Governor as aforesaid,
well knew that such and said proclamation was groundless and falso, and that there
was no Insurrection in said county, and that ull civil authorities, both State and
<:ounty, In said county, wero peacefully and regularly in the full, f reo ond unre
strained exercise hi all rcspocto of the functions of their offices, and tho courts
ivcre aU open, and the duo administration of tho law was unimpeded by any re
sistance whatsoever, whereby tho said WlUlam W. Holden, Governor as aforesaid,
did then and there, and lu the way and manner, and by tho means aforesaid, con>
¦nit and was guilty of a high erlmo In office, against tho Constitution ond laws of
said Stato, and the peace, Interests and dignity thereof."
On tho contrary this respondent declares the facts to bo as In tho promises ho
has answered and sot forth, and furthor this respondent says that a majority of
the whlto adult male citizens of tho said county of Alamanco, and also of the
county of Caswell, Including Uio sheriff of said county of Alamanco, were members
of the Kuklux organizations aforesaid. Grand Juries refused to find true bills
against members of the said organizations, or if pcrchanco any were found against
such members, petit juries refused to convict tho samo, magistrates failed to
act, and tho Judge and SoUcltor of tho district attended tho Courts merely as a
matter of form, a reign of terror existed, and the administration of justice was.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 48
Wholly Impeded. In no ono instance had tho perpetrators of tho crimes and
felonies herein dotaUcd and set forth been brought to Justico, men, obnoxious
to tho Illegal organizations aforesaid, dare not sleep beneath their roofs at night,
but, abandoning their wives and children, wandered In the woods till day,
murder stnlked abroad In the land, nnd thoso whoso hands were red with tho
blood of their victims remained unnoticed and unpunished.
Further answering, this respondent denies that he was actuated by any false,
corrupt and wicked mind and purpose, in proclaiming and declaring tho said coun
ties of Alamanco and Caswell in a state of insurrection ; on the contrary ho wns
therein actuated by tho purest motives, by a sincere desire to restore the efficiency
of tho civil authority, to protect life and property, and to promote tho welfare of
the peoplo of the whole Sfate.
Further answering, this respondent says that the Constitution' of North Caro
lina and the laws then in force, vested in the Governor thereof, a discretionary
power to declare a county to be in a state of insurrection, whenever in his judg
ment the civil authorities thereof were unable to protect its citizens in tho enjoy
ment of life and property, thatfull faith and credit are to bo given to the action
of this respondent as Governor of North CaroUna in declaring, as aforesaid, the
counties of Alamance and Caswell in a state of Insurrection, and he submits and
he insists that his said action cannot be questioned by any other department of
the government.
Further answering, this respondent denies the aUegation in said first article that
ho was guilty of a high crime in office against tho constitution and laws of said
State and tho peace, interests and dignity therof.
ANSWER TO ARTICLE II.
And for answer to tho snid second article, this respondent says that he abides by
his answer to tho snld first article, In so far as tho samo Is responsive to the allega
tions contained In the said second article, and without hero again repeating tho
same answer, prays the same to be taken as answer to this second article ns fully
as If hero again set out at length ; and as to tho new allegation contained in the
said second article, that this respondent did detain, hold, imprison and ottierwlso ,
maltreat nnd Injure John Kerr, Samuel P. Hill, WlUlam B. Bowe, Nathaniel M.
Roane, Frank A. Wiley, Jesso C. Griffith, J. T. Mitchell, Thomas J. Womack, A.
G. Yancey, John McKcc, A. A. Mitchell, Yancey Jones, J. M. Neal, Barzillai
Graves, Robert Roano, James R. Fowler, M. C. Hooper, James C. Williamson
and Peter H. Williamson, this respondent admits that Uio said named partlos wero
arrested and detained and held for examination in tho said county of Caswoll by
officers commanding tho organized body of rnllltla therein, and that this respon
dent, as Governor of. North Carolina, did approve of their arrest ond'detentlon, but
this respondent was informed and bollovcs and so charges that tho aforesaid per
son?, and each of them were arrested on probable causo, and wero cither sus
pected persons or persons accused of being accessories or principals In offences
against tho laws. But this respondent donles that the said named persons, or any
or them, wero maltreated and injured, or If the said porsons.'or any of them,
wore maltreated or Injured, as alleged in said second article, tho samo was done
contrary to tbe orders, and without the advice, procurement, knowledge or con*,
¦ont of this respondent.

44

COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.

Further answering, this respondent denies aU and all manner of allegations In
said second article set forth which he has not already answered.
Further answering, this respondent denies, os aUegCd in said second nrticle, thot
ho was guilty of a high crime in office against the Constitution and laws of said
Stato, and the peace, Interests and dignity thereof, as in said second article set
forth. ARTICLE III.
And for answer to tho said third article, this respondent says that ho abides
hy his answer to the first and second articles, In so far ns tho same Is respon
sive to tho allegations contained In snld third artlclo, and without horo ognln re
peating the snme answer, prays the sniue to bo taken an an answer to this third
article, ns fullly as If here sut out at length, and ns lo the now allegation con
tained In said third artlclo, this respondent snysi That the said Joslnh Tur
ner, Junior, wns, on tho fifth day of August, 1870, and for some tlmo previous
thereto bad been, and now U editor of a newspaper published in the city of Kal-
ojgli, In suld Stato, and known ns the Sentinel, which at that tlmo had a large circu
lation, mid for some tlmo previous thereto had circulated largely In the snld
counties of Alamance nnd CasweU, By his writings In said newspaper, ns well n»
by hi* public speeches, made In various parts of tho State, and by n continued
course of agitation which ho had pursued, tho suld Josiah Turner, Junior, In the
Judgment of this respondent, had contributed largely to produco tho deplornblo
stuto of affairs which existed In tho said counties of Alamance and Caswell, a*
detailed lu tho answer of this respondent to artlclo first, and which had compelled
this respondent to declare said counties In a stato of Insurrection, ns set forth In
his snld answer to tho said first article. This respondent was led to believe, and
did believe, the said Josiah Turner, Junior, to bo a member of the aforesaid Ille
gal organizations, and well knew that the said Josiah Turner, Junior, by his
writings und speeches, unmindful of his duty as a citizen, ond of tho peace of the
State, was using his endeavors at and In the snld counties of Alamance and Caswell
to bring about a collision between tho mllltla stationed in tho counties of Ala
manco nnd CasweU and tho citizens thereof, and to persuade, incite and induce
the citizens of tho aforesaid counties to eject the said militia by forco therefrom,
nnd was likewise endeavoring to persuade, incite and Induce the citizens of other
parts cf tho State to cuter the sold counties of Alamanco and CasweU, and to
drive therefrom by forco of amis tho snld mllltla stationed therein, although tho
suld Josiah Turner, Junior, well know that the snld counties of Alamanco
and CasweU had been proclaimed by this respondent as Governor of North Ciir
oliua, to be lu a state of Insurrection, und that the said mllltla had been stationed
therein to protect Uio cltlzons thereof lu tho enjoyment of Ufo and property, and
all this by duo warrant of law. Moreover, the said Josiah Turner, Junior, under
a morbid craving for notoriety, o desire to advance his political prospects, and a
hope to Increase his patronage as a citizen and editor amongst his politlcul
friends, did resort to vurious ways and means to procure his own arrest, nnd to
that end frequently challenged and dared this respondent to make the sumo, ex
pressing his purpose to protect himself by forco of arms and declaring that ho
should bo arrested only over tho dead bodies of such as might attempt tho samo,
and counselling the citizens of Alamanco and CasweU counties to pursue the like

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 45
course whenever any efforts should be made to arrest them, or any of them, by
tho officers commanding the mUitia stationed in said counties. This respondent
thus having reason to bcUo«e that the said Josiah Turner, Junior, would endeavor
to provoke his own arrest, gave express verbal orders to the officers command
ing the said body of mllltla In Alamance and Caswell counties not to arrest
the said Josiah Turner, Junior, at any point or place beyond tho limits of
said last named counties. But this respondent having good reason to bollcvo
that tho said Turner was a member of tho Illegal organizations aforesaid and a
seditious porsou, Inimical to tho good ordor of society and tho poaco of tho
State, an apologist and an Instigator of all the outrages which had boon com
mitted In tho aforesaid counties, as In the premises detailed and sot forth, and
was then In fact engaged at and In tho said counties In tho cilort to bring
about a stato of clvU war In tho said counties, undor an Imperative sense of
duty, actuated solely by a desire to repress disorder, and to prosorvo tho peace
of tho Stato, by virtue of tho power vested In him by tho Constitution
and laws, as Governor of North Carolina, did ordor tho officers command
ing said mllltla In tho counties of Alamanco and Caswoll to arrest tho said; Joslnh
Turner, Junior, If found within tho limits of said lost namod countlos, and not else
where. This respondent denies that ho ordered tbo arrest of tho said Josiah
Tumor. Junior, In tho said county of Ornngo, aud If tho snld Tumor was nr-
rested therein, ns alleged and sot forth In sold third artlclo, tho said arrest was
mado contrary to the orders, and without tho advlco, procurement, knowlodgo or
consont of this rcspondont. But this respondent admits, that It was reported to
him by tho officers commanding the said body of mllltla In tho sold counties of
Alanionco and Caswoll, that tho said Josiah Tumor, Junior, was under arrest In
tho said county of Alamanco, aud that thereupon this respondent, as Govornor of
North Carolina, by vlrtuo of tho power vested In him by law, did ordor the de
tention of tho said Josiah Turner, Junior, In tho said counties of Alamanco and
Caswell, and not elsewhere, and this upon public considerations growing out of
his executive duties for the reasons and causes herein set forth.
Further answering, this respondent denies the allegation in said third artlclo sot
forth that he, Governor as aforesaid, did then and there commit a high mis
demeanor in office, against tho Constitution and laws of said State and the peace,
Interest, and dignity thereof. ANSWER to ARTICLE IV.
And for answer to said fourth artlclo, this respondent says, that ho abides by his
answer to tho said first and second articles In so far as tho samo are responsive to
tho allegations contained In said fourth article, and without Rore again repeating
tho samo answer prays tho samo bo taken as an answor to this fourth article, and
as to any allegations in said fourth article not already ausworod in this rospou
dent's answer to tho said first and second artlclos this rcspondont denies tho samo
Further answering, this respondent donios that ho was guilty of a high rals-
domeanor In office against the Constitution and of sold .State, and the peace, in
terests and dignity thereof as alleged In sold fourth article.
AN8WER TO ARTICLE V*
And for answor to article fifth, this respondent says, that he abides by his

46

COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.

answer to the first article In so far as the same Is responsive to the oUegaUons
contained In said fifth article, and without here again repeating tho same answer,
prays tho same to bo taken as an answer to this fifth article, as fnUy as If here
again sot out at length ; ond as to tho new oUcgatlons contained in said fifth
article, this respondent answering says:
That ho did not otherwise arm and equip as soldiers, a large number of men, nor
any number of men, nor organize as an army a large number of men, nor any
number of men, undor tho command of Georgo W. Kirk, B. G. Burgen, H. C.
Yates, or undor the command of any other person or persons, and send tho same
Into the county of Alamanco, savo as this respondent has set forth inhls answer to
the said first article, which ho prays may bo considered as hero again repeated.
This respondent admits that ho organized a body of mllltla according to the
Constitution and laws of North Carolina, as sot forth In his answer to tho said first
artlclo, and did ordor tho samo Into tho county of Alamanco, us In his answer to
said first artlclo sot forth and doclarod, and not othorwlso.
And this respondent further admits, that Georgo W. Kirk, Colonel commanding
tho said body of mllltla In Alamanco county, did, for good and sufficient cause,
arrest and detain tho said Adolphus G. Mooro, named In said fifth artlolo, and that
tho Buld arrest and detention was approved of by Ulls respondent ns Govornor of
North Carolina. Furthermore, this rcspondont admits thut tho said Adolphus G.
Mooro npplled to tho Honorable Richmond M. Pearson, Chief Justico of
North Corollna, for the writ of habeas corpus to tho end sot forth In said
fifth article, nnd that tho said Chief Justico caused tho said writ to bo
Issued and directed to tho said Goorgo W. Kirk, commanding him to produco tho
body of said Moore, nt tho tlmo and place alleged In said fifth article, and this
rcspondont further admits that tho said writ was served on tho said Kirk, and that
tho suld Kirk mado no return thereto and refused to obey the same, and that this
failure on the part of eald Kirk to mako return to said writ and to produce tho
body of tho snld Mooro In obedience thereto, wasdono by tho ordor of this respon
dent as Governor of North Carolina. But this respondent donlos that therein he
acted contrary to law, and declares that ho was Impelled by tho highest senso of
public duty and by tho conviction that tho public safety required tho detention of
tho said A. G. Mooro and the other parties under arrest In tho said counties of
Alnmanco and Caswoll, and this respondent submits, ns a part of his answer, his
letter of July 10th, 1870, addressed to the Honorablo Richmond M. Pearson, Chief
Justico of tho Supreme Court of North Carolina, of which tho following Is u
copy : , " Executive Office,
Raleigh, July 1, 1870.
To the Hon. Richmosd M. Pbahson,
Chief Justice of North Carolina ;
" Sin t— Your communication of yostorday concornlng the arrests made by Col,
Goo. W. Klfk, togothorwlth tho onclosed, Is received.
"I respectfully reply i— That Col. Goo. W. Kirk mado tho arrests and now
detains the prisoners namod by my ordor. Ho was Instructed firmly but rospecti
fully to docUne to dollvor tho prlsonors. No ono goes bef oro me In respect for the

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 47
civil law, or for thoso whoso duty ft Is to enforco It, but tho condition of Ala
manco county, ond somo other parts of tho State, has. boon and Is such Uiat,
though reluctant to use tho strong powors vested In mo by law, I havo been forced
to declare them in a state of Insurrection.
" For months past there has boon maturing In thoso localities, under the gnldnnco
of bad and disloyal men, a dangerous socrot Insurrection. I havo lnvokod public
opinion to aid mo In suppressing this treason I I have Issued proclamation after
proclamation to the people of tho State to break up these unlawful combinations ! I
havo brought to bear evory clvU power to rostorejicaco and ordor, but nil lu vain I
The Constitution und laws of tho United States and of this Stato are set at naught ;
the clvU courts arc no longer a protection to Ufe, liberty and property ; assassination
and outrage go unpunished and tbe clvU magistrates aro Intimidated and are afraid
to perform their functions.
" To the majority of the peoplo of these sections the approach of night is like
the entrance into the valley of the shadow of death; the men dare not sleep
beneath their roofs at night, but abandoning their wives and little ones, wander in
the woodB until day.
•' Tho civil government was crumbling around me. I determined to nip this
new treason in tho bud.
"By virtue of the power vested In mo by tho constitution and laws, and by that
Inherent right of self-prcsciTiitlon which belongs to all governments, 1 have pro
claimed tho county of Alamanco lu a stato of Insurrection. Col. Goo. W. Kirk Is
commanding the military forces In that county, mado tho arrests referred to In tho
writ of habeas corpus, and now dotalns tho prisoners by my ordor.
"At this tlmo I om sutlsllod that tho public Interests require that thoso military
prisoners shall not bo dollvcrod up to tho civil power.
" I dovoutly hopo that tho tlmo may be short when the restoration of peaco and
order may rclcaso Alamanco county from Uio presenco of military forco ond tho
enforcement of military law. When that time shall arrive I shall promptly restore
tho civil power. i
W. W. HOLDEN, Governor."
This respondent, as Governor of North Carolina, and by virtuo of the powors
vested in him by the Constitution and laws of tho said State, actuated by tho most
patriotic motives, and In the cxcrclso of his best judgment, had declared tho
counties of Alamanco and Caswell to bo In a stato of insurrection, In tho mannor ond
for tho causes set forth In his answer to tho first artlclo. Tho said Insurrection
had not been suppressed, and it was tho duty of this respondent, as Governor of
North Carolina, under tho sanctity of his official oath, to tako all lawful ways and
moans to suppress tho samo. This rcspondont verily bellovod that tho state of
affairs oxlstlng In tho counties of Alamanco and CasweU, and in various other
counties throughout the Stato, If not remedied, would precipitate another collision
between tbo pooplo of this Stato and tho Government of Unltod States, and this
respondent could soe no other moans of remodylng tho said stato of affairs in tho
¦aid counUos of Alamanco and Caswoll, and In various other counties throughout
the Stato, and those ho had adopted, as sot forth la his answer to said first article
and In the arrest ond detention of thoso men, of whom the said Mooro was ono,
whose evil Influence, counsel and example bod precipitated the said counties Into
Insurrection. This respondent believed that the safety of the State would be fen-

48 • COURT or IMPEACHMENTS.
perilled by yielding obedience at that time to the exigency of the said writ, In this
and in other coses where parties had been arrested and detained Id said countlos
of Alamance and CasweU ; and for this reason he felt It to be his lmporaUve duty
¦os .Governor of North Carolina, to withhold obedience in the said cose. And
heroin this respondent beUevod, and docs stiU believe, and now submits and insists
that ho was sustained by the opinion of the Honorable the Chief Justice aforesaid,
rendered In the application of tho said A. G. Mooro for tho said writ of habeas
corpus. By every principle of fair construction, the said Chief Justlso holds,
In his said opinion, that " the safoty of tho State Is the supreme law," and {hat
this respondent as Governor of North Carolina; was tho sole Judge whether tho
exigency had arisen, which, upon said principle, would Justify this rcspondont lu
withholding obodlonco to the suld writ. It was upon this principle that this res
pondent aotod, and ho submits and doslros to bo taken as a part of this his answer,
his letter of July UOth, 1870, addressed to tho Honorable tho Chief Justico afore
said, of which tho following Is a copy s
" Executive Department,
Raleigh, July Ittlth, 187a
"To tho Hon. R. M. PnAnsoN,
Chltf Justice of tho Supreme Court of N. C. :
" Sir : I have had tho honor to roeolvo, by Uie hands of tho Marshal of Uio Su
premo Court, a copy of your opinion In tho matter of A. G, Moore ;.and tho Mar
shal has informed mo of tho writ In his hands for tho body of said Mooro, now in
tho custody of my subordinate offlcor, Col. Goorgo W. Kirk.
"I have declared tho counties of Alamanco and Caswoll In a stato of Insurrec
tion, and havo taken military possession of them. This your Honor admits I had
tho power to do ' undor tho Constitution and laws.' And not only this, ' but to do
all things nsccssary to suppress tho Insurrection,' Including the power to arrest
all suspected persons ' In the above montloncd counties.
" Your Honor has thought proper also to declare that tho cltlzons of the coun
ties of Alamance and Caswoll aro Insurgents, as tho result of the constitutional
aud lawful action of the Executive, and that therefore, you wUl not Issue tho writ
for Uio production of tho body of Moore to any of tho men of the said counties ;
that * the posse comitatus must come from the county where the writ is to ,be exe
cuted,' and that any other means would be lUegal.
" I havo official and reliable information that in tho counties above named, du
ring tho last twelve months, not less than ono hundred persons, 'In the peace of
God and tho State,' have been taken from their homes and scourged, mainly,
if not entirely on account of their political opinions ; that eight murders have
been committed, Including that of a State Senator, on the same account ; that
another State Senator has been compelled from fear for his Ufo to make his escape
to a distant State. I havo reason to believe that tho governments of the said
counties have been mainly If not entirely In the hands of men who belong to the
Kuklux klan, whose members have , perpotroted the atrocities referred to ; and
that tho county governments have not merely omitted to ferret out and bring to
Justice thoso of this klan who havo thus violated the law, but that they have
actually shielded thorn from arrest and punishment. The Stato Judicial power in

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 49
the said counties, though in the hands of energetic, learned and upright men, has
not been able to bring criminals to justice ; Indeed, It Is my opinion, based on
facts that have come to my knowledge, that the life of the judge whoso duty it
is to ride tho circuit to which the said counties belong, has not been safe, on ac
count of tho hatred entertained towards him by the klan referred to, because of
his wish and purpose to bring said criminals to Justice. For bo it known to your
Honor that there Is a widespread and formidable secret organization In this State,
partly poUtical and partly social in its objects ; that this organization is known,
first, as ' The Constitutional Union Guards,1— secondly, as * The WIMe Brother-
hood,'1— thirdly, as ' Tlus Invisible Empire /'—that tho members of this organiza
tion aro united by oaths which Ignore or repudiate the ordinary oaths or obUga-
tions that rest upon all other cltlzons to respect tho laws and to uphold the gov
ernment; that thoso oaths Inculcate hatred by tho white against tho colored peo
ple of tho Stato ; that tho members of this klan aro Irreconcilably hostile to the
groat prlnelplo of political and clvU equality on which tho government of this
Stato has boon reconstructed ; that theso klaus moot in secret, in dlsgulso, with
arms, In uniform of a cortaln kind Intended to conceal thoir persons and their
horses, and to terrify thoso whom thoy assault or among whom thoy movo; that
they hold thoir camps In secret places and decree Judgment against thoir pcacoa-
bio follow-cltlzons, from moro Intimidation to scourglngs, mutilations and murdor,
and that cortaln persons of tho klan aro deputed to oxocuto thoso Judgmonts ;
that when tho mombors of this klan aro arrested for violations of law, It Is most
difficult to obtain bills of Indictment against thorn, and still moro difficult to con
vict them, first, because some of the members or their sympathizers aro almost
always on tho grand and petit juries, and secondly, because witnesses who are
members or sympathizers unblushlngly commit perjury to screen their confeder
ates and associates in crime ; that this klan, thus constituted and having In view
the objects referred to, Is very powerful in at least twent-flve counties of the
State, and has had absolute control for tho last twelve months of the counties of
Alamance and CasweU.
" Under these circumstances I would have been recreant to duty and faithless to
my oath, if I had not exercised the power in the several counties which your
Honor, has been pleased to say I have exercised constitutionally and lawf uUy ;
especially as, since October, 1868, I have repeatedly, by proclamations and by
letters, invoked public opinion to repress these evils, and warned criminals and
offenders against the laws of tho fate that must hi the end overtake them, If, under
the auspices of the klan referred to, they should persist in their course.
" I beg to assure your Honor that no ono subscribes more thoroughly than I do
to the great principles of habeas corpus and trial by Jury. Except in extreme
cases, In which beyond aU question ' the safety of the State is the supreme law,'
these privileges of habeas corpus and trial by jury should be maintained.
" I have already declared that, In my judgment, your Honor and all tho other clvU
and Judicial authorities are unable at this lime to deal with the insurgents. The
clvU and the mUitary aro alike constitutional powers— the clvU to protect Ufe and
property when it can, and the military only when the former has faUed. As tho
Chief Executive I seek to restore, not to subvert, the judicial power. Your
Honor has done your duty, ond In perfect harmony with you I soek to do mine.
" It la not I nor the miUtary power that has supplanted the clvU authority ;
that ha* been done by the insurrection in the counties referred to. I do not
4

BO COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
see how I can restore the clvU authority untU I " suppress the insurrection,"
which your Honor declares I have the power to do; and I do not see how I
can surrender the insurgents to the clvU authority untU that authority is re
stored. It would be mockery In me to declare that tho civil authority was unable
to protect the citizens against the insurgents, and then turn the insurgents over
to the clvU authority. My oath to support the Constitution makes it imperative
on me to "suppress the Insurrection" and restore the clvU authority in the
counties referred to, and this I must do. In doing this I renew to your Honor
expressions of my profound respect for tho civil authority, and my earnest wish
that this authority may soon be restored to every county and neighborhood in the
State. I havo the honor to be, with great respect,
Your obedient servant,
W. W. HOLDEN, Governor."
Further answering, this respondent declares that it was his purpose to detain
the said Adolphus G. Moore, and the other persons so arrested in the said coun
ties of Alamance and CasweU, only untU such time as he might with safety to-
the Stato surrender them to the civil authorities, and as soon as in his judg
ment the said time had arrived, he so surrendered them, and this respondent
submits, as a part of this his answer, his letter of August 15th, 1870, addressed
to the Honorable the Chief Justice aforesaid, of which the foUowing is a copy :
"STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA,
Executive Department,
Raleigh, Aug. 16th, 1870.
" To the How. R. M. Pearson, Chief Justice Supreme Court of North Carolina :
" Dear Sir : In my answer to tho notices served upon mo by the Marshal
of tho Supremo Court, in tho matter of Adolphus G. Moore and others, ex parte:
I stated to your honor that at that tlmo the public Interests forbade mo to per
mit Col. Goorgo W. Kirk to bring before your Honor tho said parties ; at the
samo tlmo I assured your Honor that as soon as tho safety of tho State should
justify It, I would cheerfully restore tho civil power, and cause tho said parties
to bo brought before you, together with the causo of their caption and detention.
"That tlmo has arrived, and I havo ordorod Col. Georgo W. Kirk to oboy tho
writs of habeas corpus Issued by your Honor. As tho numbor of prisoners and
witnesses Is considerable, I would suggost to your Honor that It would bo more
convenient to make rotum to tho writs at the capitol In Raleigh. Col. Kirk Is
prepared to make such return as soon as your Honor shall arrive In Raleigh.
With great respect, Your obedient servant,
W. W. HOLDEN, Governor."
And so this respondent denies that by reason of any new matter alleged in tho
said fifth article, he did commit high crimes and misdemeanors In office against

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 61
tho Constitution and laws of add State, and the peace, dignity and Interests
thereof. ANSWER TO ARTICLE VI.
And for answer to said sixth article, this respondent says thathe abides by Ms
answer to said first, second, fourth and fifth articles, in so far os the same are re
sponsive to the allegations contained in tho said sixth article, and without here
again repeating the same answer, prays tho samo to be taken as answer to this
sixth article as fully as If here again set out at length ; and as to the new allega
tion contained in said sixth article, this respondent answering, says : That this
respondent admits the arrest and detention of the persons named In said sixth article
In manner and form as he hath heretofore admitted the same, and not otherwise.
This respondent further admits that the said named persons, and each of them, sued
out writs of habeas corpus before the Honorable Richmond M. Pearson, Chief Jus
tice of the Supreme Court of North CaroUna, returnable at the time and place
stated and set forth in the said sixth article ; that the said write were duly served
upon George W. Kirk, as'in said sixth article stated ; that the said George W.
Kirk refused to produce the said named persons In obedience to the said writs, but
continued to detain the said persons, and this under the orders and with the ap
proval of this respondent, as Governor of North Carolina, as in said sixth article
stated and set forth. Further answering, this respondent says that he abides by
his answer to the fifth article, and without here again repeating the same answer,
prays that the same may be taken as an answer to this sixth article, and that each
and every part thereof may bo taken as applied to the persons in said sixth article
named, and to each of them as f uUy, and in like manner, as the same is appUed to
Adolphus G. Moore in said fifth artlclo named and specified.
And so this respondent denies that by reason of any new allegations In this sixth
artlclo contained ho did commit high crimes and misdemeanors in office against
tho Constitution of said State and tho peace, dignity and interests therof.
ANSWER TO ARTICLE VII.
And for answer to said sovonth artlclo, this respondent says ho abldos by his an
swer to said first, second, third and fourth articles so far as tho samo aro respon
sive to tho allegations contained In said sovonth artlclo, and without here again
repeating tho samo, prays tho samo bo takon as an answer to this sovonth artlclo
as fully as if hero again sot out at longth ; and as to the new allegation contalnod
In said sovonth artlclo, that this respondent did " recruit and caU together from
this State and the State of Tcnnesseo a large number of men, to wit : Five hun
dred men and more, many of them of tho most reckless, desperate, ruffianly and
lawless characters, and did then and there organize, arm and equip them as an
army of soldiers, and place ' the samo under the chief command of a notorious
desperado from tho State of Tennessee, hy the name of George W. Kirk, having
falsely proclaimed the counties of Alamance and CasweU in said State hi a state of
insurrection, and did send large numbers of such armed desperate men into said
counties, under the Immediate command of the said George W. Kirk, and two
other desperadoes from the State of Tennessee, to wit : One B. G. Burgon and

52 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
one H. C. Yates, and did there and then without any warrant or authority, seize,
hold, Imprison and deprive of their Uberty for a long time, to wit : For the time
of twenty days and more, many of the peaceable and law-abiding citizens of sold
counties, to wit : John Kerr, Samuel P. HiU,  Scott, John R. Ireland and
many others, and solzo, hold, Imprison and deprive of then- liberty, and hung by
the nock WUllam Patten, Luclan H. Murray and others, and did thrust Into a
loathsome dungeon Josiah Turner, Junior, and F. A. Wiley," this respondent de
nies the same and declares tho facts to be as herolnboforo stated and set forth
In his answer to the first, second, third and fourth articles, and espe
cially that tho body of mllltla sent by him into tho countlos of Ala
manco and CasweU, as horelnbeforo set forth, wero organized according
to tho provisions of tho act of tho General Assembly of tho State of North Caro
lina, entitled " An act to organize a mllltla of North CaroUna," ratified tho 17th
day of August, A. D. 1808. This respondent donlos that the mon composing said
volunteer mllltla wore many of thorn tho most reckless, desperate, ruffianly and
lawless characters from tho Stato of Tennossoo ; on tho contrary this respondent
deolaros that tho said men woro cltlzons of North ( arollna at and Immediately
before the organization of said mllltla, and woro of good deportment and behavior,
and woro^rocolvod and organlzod strictly acoordlng to tho provisions of said act,
and not othorwlso j and If any of thorn ut tho tlmo of said organlr.aUon woro cltl
zons of tho State of Tennossoo tho samo was unknown to tills respondent.
Further answering, this respondent says that tho said Goorgo W. Kirk, B. G.
Burgon and II. C. Yates, officers In command of said volunteer mllltla, were at
the time of the organization of tho said mllltla, and Immediately before, citizens
of North Carolina, and wore duly commissioned and sworn. But this rcspondont
submits, and Insists, that, in and by tho provisions of the aforesaid act, he was
at liberty to rocolvo and onroll, in tho said volunteer mllltla, any citizen of tho
United States. And as to tho seizing, holding, Imprisoning and doprlvlng of their
llborty, and maltreating tho porsons named In said seventh artlclo, this respondent
denies tho samo, and has nothing further to answer than ho has already answorcd.
And as to the allegation in said seventh artlclo contained, that this respondent,
" to maintain, support and aid tho lawless armed men so organized, armed and
equipped, did, under color of his sold office from time to time during the said
months of Jnne, July and August, without any lawful authority, make his war
rant upon David A. Jenkins, Treasurer of tho State, for large sums of money, to-
wit : For the sum of seventy thousand dollars and more, and cause and procure
the said David A. Jenkins, the Treasurer of the State, to recognize such unlawful
warrant, and pay out of the Treasury such said large sums of money to the agent
or paymaster of said William W. Holden, Governor as aforesaid, for the unlawful
uses and purposes aforesaid," this respondent denies the same in manner and form
as therein sot forth.
Further answering, this respondent denies that he did, then and there, as alleged
in said seventh artlclo, commit a high misdemeanor In office, in violation of tho
Constitution and laws of this Stato, and of tho peace, Interests and dignity
thereof.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HQLDEN. 53

ANSWER TO ARTICLE VIII.
And for answer to tho said eighth article, this respondent abides by his answer
to said first, second, fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh articles, In so far as the same
are responsive to the allegations contained Ip the said eighth artlclo, and without
here again repeating tho same answers, prays the samo to be taken as answer to
this eighth article as fully as if here again set out at length. And ns to the new
allegation contained in tho said eighth arUcle, "that the said Wlllam W. Holden,
Governor of tho said State, unmindful of the high duties of his said office, and
tho obligations of his solemn oath of offlco, and contriving and intending, and
with a view for tho purposo of supporting and maintaining an armed mili
tary forco In said State, which ho had then and there recruited, organized
and formed for Illegal purposes, without the sanction of tho Constitution
ond laws of the sold State, but In contravention of tho same, did from to tlmo,
in tho months of June, July and August, in the year of our Lord one thousand
eight hundred and seventy, under color of his said office, In said State, without
tho sanction of the Constitution and laws of said Stato, and In violation of tho samo
make his warrants ns such Governor upon tho Treasury of tho said State, for
largo sums of money, to-wlt: For tho sum of eighty thousand ($80,000) dollars
nnd more, to bo used for tho unlawful purposo aforesaid : that tho said Wil
liam W. Holden, Governor as aforesaid, under color of his sold offico, thon and
there persuaded, commanded, Incited and procured David A. Jenkins, Treasurer
of said State, to recognize such and said unlawful warrants on tho Treasury of
sold Stato, and to deliver such and sold sums of money to such agonts of tho said
WlUlam W. Holden, Governor as aforesaid, ns he the said WlUlam W. Holden,
Governor as aforesaid, might from tlmo to tlmo designate and appoint; that In
pursuance of such warrants and orders of the sold WlUlam W. nolden, Governor
as aforesaid, tho snld David A. Jenkins, Treasurer ns aforesaid, delivered to ono
A. D. Jenkins, called tho paymaster, appointed by tho said WlUlam W. Holden,
Governor as aforesaid, for such purpose, largo sums of money from said
Treasury, to-wlt: The sum Of. forty thousand ' doUars or moro," this respondent
denies the same, In manner and form as therein set forth ; and as to the further
allegation in said eighth article, that " in the month of August, in the year of our
Lord one thousand eight hundred and seventy, one Richard M. Allison, a citizen
of the county of Iredell, in said State, brought his suit In the Superior Court of
the last named county, in his own behalf and in the behalf of aU the tax payers of
said State, praying that a Writ of Injunction might then and there be granted,
and issued according to law, restraining the said David A. Jenkins, Treasurer as
aforesaid, from delivering any sum or sums of money to the said WiUiam W.
Holden, Governor as aforesaid, or any other persons, in obedience to such orders
and for such purposes, and also restraining tho said A. D. Jenkins, as such pay
master, or in any other respect or capacity from disbursing or disposing of said
sum of money so in his said hands, or any part thereof, for the purposes thereof ;
that the Honorable Anderson Mitchell, Judge of said Superior Court, then and
there granted the Writ of Injunction so prayed for, enjoining and forbidding the
said David A. Jenkins, Treasurer as aforesaid, from delivering any money from
said Treasury, in obedience to any such warrant or order, so made by the said
WlUlam W. Holden, Governor as aforesaid, and enjoining and forbidding the said
A, D. Jenkins, as such paymaster or agent, from using or disbursing the sold

84 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.

money or any part of It, so in his hands, to or for the uso of said armed body of
mon for any of tho purposes aforesaid ; that the said David A. Jenkins, Treasurer,
and tho said A. D. Jonklns, wero each duly served with said Writ of Injunction,"
this rcspondont suys that ho has not sufficient Information to answer whether tho
samo bo true or falso, In manner and form us therein set forth, and insists upon
¦tho proof thereof.
And us to tho additional allegation In said eighth artlclo that "WlUlam W.
Holden, Govornor as aforesaid, wickedly Intending to suspond and subvert the laws
of said State, and to defy and disregard tho lawful authority of suld Court, did
•afterwards, to-wlt : After tho month last aforesaid, pcrsundo, Incite, ordor, pro
cure and command the said A. D. Jenkins to defy and disregard tho said Writ of
Injunction, and to deliver tho said money so in his custody to another agent of
the said William W. Holden, Governor as aforesaid, to bo used for tho unlawful
purposes aforesaid ; that tho said A. D. Jenkins, In obedience to such last men
tioned order, command and procurement of tho suld Wllllnm W. Holden, Gover
nor ns aforesaid, and In disregard of such Writ of Injunction und the lawful uu-
thorlty of said Judge, did deliver tho said money so In his hands to another agent
of the said William W. Holden, Governor as aforesaid, to wit : To one Richard
T. Berry, to bo used for the unlawful purposo aforesaid, and the said
WlUlam W. Holden, Governor as aforesaid, did then and there, In tho
Tvay and manner, and by the means and for the purposes aforesaid, procure,
order and command the said A. D. Jenkins so to disregard and disobey tho
said Writ of Injunction, and tho lawful authority of said Judge, and did then
and there, and In tho way und manner and by tho means and for tho unlawful
purpose aforesaid, defy, disregard, Ignore, contraveno, suspend and defeat
tho lawful purposo and effect of the Writ of Injunction so granted and Issued
by the said Juc'ge; and thoreupon and thereafter tho said William W. Holden,
Governor as aforesaid, tho said sum of public monoy thus transferred ns
aforesaid to tho hands of tho said Richard T. Berry, did order and cause to bo
paid out und disbursed by him, the said Richard T. Berry, to, for and about tho
illegal purposes aforesuld, to wit : Tho payment of tho expenses In keeping on
foot, sustaining and maintaining tho said Illegal military forco as aforesaid," this
respondent denies tho same.
And this respondent denies that ho was guilty of a high misdemeanor in his said
office of Governor, In violation of his oath of office, and In subversion of tho laws
In snld State, and tho'peacu, Interest and dignity thereof, as alleged In said eighth
article. And this rcspondont, In submitting to this honorable court this his answer to tho
Articles of Impeachment exhibited against him, respectfully reserves leavo to
amend and add to tho samo from tlmo to time, as may boeumo necessary orpropor,
und when aud as such necessity und propriety shall appear.
W. W. HOLDEN.
R, 0. Baixikk,
J, M. MoCOHKLB,
Natiianiici, Boydhn,
Kdw. Goniuland, .
W. N, II. Smith,
ij/' Counsel,

TRIAL OF1 WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 55
On motion of Mr. Graham, of Orange, it was ordered that
the answer of the respondent be received and filed, and that a
copy bo furnished the house of representatives and to tho
managers of impeachment.
Mr. Graham, of Orange, moved that it bo ordered that one
hundred copies of tho proceedings of the impeachment trial
be printed on every clay, and a copy laid on the desk of each
membor, and furnished to tho parties and their counsel, on the
succeeding day.
Upon this motion, Mr. Gilmer demanded the yeas, and nays.
The senate agreed thereto, and tho motion prevailed — yeas
37, nays 11.
Those who voted in the affirmative are :
Messrs. Adams, Albright, Allen, Barnett, Battle, Beasley,
Bellamy, Brogden, Brown, Cook, Council, Crowell, Currie,
Dargan, Eppes, If lemming. Flythe, Graham of Alamance,
Graham ot Orange, Hyman, Jones, Lassiter, Lathaim Ledbetterr
Lehman, Mauney, McClammy, Moore, Murphy, Olds, Pricer
Robbins of Davidson, Robbins of Rowan, Skinner, Speed and
Waddell— 37.
Thoso who voted in tho negative are :
Messrs. Cowles, Gilmer, King, Linney, Love, Merriraon,.
Morehead, Norment, Troy, "Whiteside and Worth — 11.
On motion of Mr. Flomming, it was ordered that when the
court adjourns, it will adjourn until to-morrow at 12 o'clock.
On motion of Mr. Graham, of Orange, it was ordered thaU
tho clork ot tho senate havo a sufficient number of blank sub
poenas printed for the use of parties and thoir counsel during1
the trial.
On motion of Mr, Glltnor, tho court adjourned.

38 COURT OP IMPEAOHMENTS.

THIRD DAY.
Senate Chamber, January 24th, 1871.
At 12 m., the Chief Justice having taken the ohair, the
senate, pursuant to adjournment, proceeded to the considera
tion of tho artioles ot impeaohment exhibited against William
W. Holden, Governor of North Carolina.
Proclamation was mado in due form by the doorkeeper.
Mr. McOottor, senator from tho 8th district, appeared and
was duly qualified by the chief justice.
Mr. Gilmer moved the adoption of the following :
Ordered, That after the proclamation made on each day, the
doorkeeper notify the managers on the part of the house of
representatives and counsel, and the respondent and his
counsel, that the senate is ready to proceed with the trial of
the impeachment.
Mr. Jones moved to strike out the words " and the respon
dent and his counsel."
Mr. Robbins, of Rowan, was proceeding to discuss the ques
tion, when Mr. Graham, of Orange, raised the point of order
that under the XVIII Rule for the government of the im
peachment trial, no debate could be had upon the adoption of
any order or decision except by the consent of the senate.
The chief justice decided the point of order to be well
taken, and submitted to the senate the question whether de
bate should be allowed, and it was decided in the affirmative.
The motion of Mr. Jones to strike out did not prevail,
and the senate refused to make the order proposed by Mr.
Gilmer. The journr I of the proceedings of the senate sitting on
yesterday as court of impeachment was read and approved.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 57
Mr. Sparrow in behalf of the managers on the part of the
house of representatives, presented the replication adopted
by the house of representatives to the answer of the respon
dent which was read.
Replication by the Houso of Representatives of the Stato of
North Carolina, to the answer of William W. Holden, Gov
ornor of tho State of North Carolina, to the Articles of Im
peachment exhibited against him by tho House of Represen
tatives.The House of Representatives ot tho State of North Carolina
have considered tho several answers ot William W. Holden-
Govemor of North Carolina, to the several articles of impeach,
ment against him, by them exhibited in the name of themselves
and all the people of said State, and reserving to themselves all
advantage of exception to the insufficiency and irrelevancy of
his answer to each and all of the several articles of impeach
ment, exhibited against said William W. Holden, Governor of
said state, do deny each and every averment in said several
answers, or either of thoih, which denies or traverses tho acts,
intents, crimes, misdemeanors, offences, or misconduct charged
against said William W. Holden in said articles of impeach
ment, or either of them, and, for replication to said answer, do
say that said William W. Holden, Governor of said state, is
guilty of high crimes, misdemeanors and offences mentioned in
said articles, and that the house of representatives are ready to
prove the same.
Passed House of Representatives January 24th, 1871.
THOS. J. JARVIS,
Speaker of the House of Representatives.
Attest :
W. W. Gaitheb, Clerk.
On motion of Graham, of Orange, it was ordered that the

58

court of impeachments.

replication be received and filed, and an authentioated c >py
be furnished to the counsel of the rrespondenfc
Mr. Lehman moved the adoption of the following :
Ordered^ That the senate will commence the trial of tho
governor upon the articles of impeachment exhibited against
him, on Monday, the 6th day of February, 1871, and proceed
therein with all convenient dispatch, under the rules of the
senate sitting upon the trial of impeachment.
Mr. Robbins, of Rowan, moved the adoption of the following
as a substitute for the order proposed by Mr. Lehman :
Ordered, That the Senate, adhering to the order heretofore
adopted, will proceed with the trial in the senate chamber on
Monday, the 30th of January, 1871, and from day to day, unless
otherwise ordered on reason shown.
The substitute was adopted by the following vote — yeas 25,
nays 22.
Those who voted in the affirmative are :
Messrs. Adams, Albright, Battle, Brown, Cook, Council,
Crowell, Flemming, Gilm>r, Graham of Alamance, Graham
of Orange, Jones, Latham, Linney.Mauney, Merrimon, More-
head, Robbins of Davidson, Robbins of Rowan, Skinner, Speed,
Troy, Waddell, Whiteside and Worth— 25.
Those who voted in the negative are :
Messrs. Barnett, Beasley, Bellamy, Brogden, Cowles,
Currie, Dargan, Eppes, Flythe, Hawkins, Hyman, King, Las-
siter, Ledbetter, Lehman, Love, Mo Cotter, Moore, Murphy,
Norment, Olds and Price — 22.
The order as amended was then made.
Mr. Norment movod the adoption of the following :
Ordered^ That the managers on the part of the house of
representatives, together with their counsel, and also th© res-

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 59
pondent and counsel be requested to take notice of the sitting
of the court of impeachment, and regulate thoir attendance
accordingly. Mr. Gilraar offared as a substitute therefor the following :
Ordered, That after proclamation is made on each day the
doorkeeper notify the managers on the part of the house of
representatives, and counsel, and the respondent and his
counsel, that the senate is ready to proceed with the trial of
impeachment. The substitute was rejected, and the order as proposed by
Mr. Norment was made.
Mr. Graham, of Orange, called the attention of the senate
to the 9th and 10th sections of an act of the general assembly,
ratified the 10th day of April, 1869, proceedings upon impeach
ment, and asked whether or not, in the opinion of the chief
justice, it was necessary for senators to take any further oath
before proceeding with the trial of the impeachment of Gov
ernor William W. Holden.
The chief justice announced his opinion to be that the oath
hitherto taken by senators at the organization of the court of
impeaohment was sufficient, and that no other oath was
necessary. On motion of Mr. Moore, the court adjourned until 12 M.
Monday, 80th January, 18.71.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 61
FOURTH DAY.
Senate Chamber, Jan. 30, 1871.
The COURT met at 12 o'clock, M., pursuant to adjournment,
Hon. R. M. Pearson, Chief Justice of HAie Supreme Court, in
the chair.
The CLERK proceeded to call the row of Senators when &
quorum was found to be present.
Proceedings were opened by a proclamation made in due
form by the door-keeper.
The CLERK proceeded to read thej<o\irnal of the proceedings
of the previous meeting.
The CHIEF JUSTICE tfftYioUftwe'A that the court was now
ready to proceed to bushKess.
Mr. SPARROW. Mr. Chief Justice: Tho Board of Man
agers for whom I speak have been instructed by the House of
Representatives to request of the "Seriate, permission to amend
their eight article of impeachment. I will deliver it to the
cle^c- and- request that he May read the resolution containing
the proposed amendment, and ask that the amendment be
.allowed. The CLERK read the order of the House of Representatives
in the words following :
Order of the House of Representatives relative to amend
ment of Article VIII of Impeachment of Wm. W. Holden,
governor of North Carolina,
It is ordered by the House of Representatives that the
Board of Managers of the Impeachment of William W. Holden,
Governor of the State of North Carolina, ask leave of the
Senate, sitting as the court of impeachment, to allow the Houso
of Representatives to amend Article VIII of Impeachment
heretofore exhibited by them against the said William W.
Holden, governor, as aforesaid, and now pending before the
Senate sitting as said court, by striking out the name of
5

92 cocbt of nrpEAOHsnESTfl"..
u Richard T. Berry ," wherever the same may ©c<rarr in saidV
article, and inserting instead thoEeof the name " John B.-
Neathery," and tliat tlie said managers be, and they are hereby
authorized to maka such amendment, if the Senate sitting as-
such court shall so- allow- Thomas J. Jarvis,
Speaker of House of Representatives.
Mr. BOYDEN.. May it please the court, I understand
that there has been, some proposition to consent to this amend'
ment, and that my associates have consented to it. I under
stand their consent to extend this far, that the amendment is not
to be made without examining witnesses to prove the charge,,
before the committee- We do not object to it now, provided it
can be done by consent ; but we wish, it distinctly understood
that theso charges here are like the presentment of a grand
jury.. They are made upon proof. And we take it for granted
that all the proof has. been made of the charges already pre
ferred. If the managers now think proper to make a new
charge, we do-not oppose their making it,, provided it is made-'
in tho regular way, by going back to the Hou8o,examining the
testimony, and if the testimony is found sufficient at common.
law, and then it can l>e dono, wo shall interpose no objection.
Hut, hh thin is a now proceeding, with which wo are not very
familiar, It might bo propur to hoo whether Mitch things can. bo
dono. I suppose there; Imio question bub tho manageridmvo a
right to withdraw thoso articles and present now articles in
their place, or. a now article. But it strikou me1 that thcec
artioles-are precisely like a bill of indictment found by a grand
jury. Under our constitution, this is a high oourti ofiimpeaoh-
ment., It is not tho senate, at all, but; is a court for the trial of
impeachments -j; and. under, our law the House of Representa
tives of the statcara-coiiBtituted a grand jury to » find bills of
indictment,. andl it seems to me that all the rules which apply to
a court of law apply to this court. I desire to read an authority
upon this subject, which is a very, high authority— that, of'"

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN, 6#
Cliarles Lee, the Attorney General of the United States duiing
the administration of President Washington, and which is to
be found on page 101, volume 20, of the American State Papers,
The caption of the paper is : "Inquiry into i\w official conduct
Kof a judge of the Supreme Court of the Northwestern terri-
" toiy, communicated to the House of Representatives, May 10,
" 1796." I will not read tho whole opinion but only so much
which has; relation to the present case,
" In tho prosecution of an impeaehment, such rulles must be
"observed as are essential to justice; and if not exactly the
" same as those which are* ptaciicied in ordinary .courts, they
" must be analagous, and as nearly similar to them as forms
" will Tpermit. Thus, before art impeachment is 6ent to the
" Senate, witnesses must be examined in solemn form respect'
* ing the charge* before flue committee of th© House of Repre--
* sentativeB to be appointed! for that purpose, as in a case of
" indictment witnesses- aro examined by a grand jury. Upon
" tho trial the wJfimcsBes imi«* give thoir testimony before the
K Senato, as in a case of ind'fctwtont thoy do before tho ordinary
" court and petit jury."
That, if the court please, is the opinion of an Attorney Gen
eral ot the United) States^ touching aw inquiry into the official
conduct, for tlw ibiipeacliinont of Goorgtf Turner, who was then
a judgo of tho SJwprorno Court in tho Nwthwostorn territory.
It would sociw to irvo that tho rulos Jrero must bo exactly
analagous. The Senate of the United S'Hartos is not like this,
declared to lie a high cowf of impeachment, twit tho trials of im
peachment must be befo»» that body. Our pveecnt constitution
declares the Senate of thfo state, I think in terms "the high
court of impeaehment."
It is this high court of impeachment which i« now sitting;
and as in the Senate of the United States with the chief justice
presiding, the rules1 of law are to prevail as far as possible,
and it seems to m& that in thr&case, in this court, the rules
©f law are also to appfy, and! that these articles are nothing
more nor less, according to< the- rales of law, but an indictment.

04 COCBT OF IMPEACHMENTS. '
(tho House ot Representatives being the grand jury,) found
against tho respondent, who is governor of the state; and it
strikes me that, following the analagies, they have not the power
to amend their indictment* They can withdraw their bill, we
admit, and send in a new one, as in a court of law. Perhaps it
may bo amended. If it can bo, legally, we shall interpose no
objection, only thus far, that tho amendment shall be made
upon proofs. We contend that they must have the evidence
boforo thorn which authorizes them in law to make the amend
ment. I will cito to the court another procodont in the caso of
Judge Chaso, where the flame course was pursued, It appors in
tho annals of the 8th Congress, 2d session, 1804' and 1805, pago
808. The language there used is this :
" This report, accompanied by a great mass of printed docu-
" monts embracing various depositions taken before the com-
" mittee as well as at a distance, was made the order of the day
" for the Monday following."
Now we do not consent that this amendment shall be made,
and it was not so intended to so consent, without the necessary
proof to warrant the amendment. If such proofs have been
had and the amondmont can be made, we shall have no objec
tion ; and when I speak of proof I mean proof before the com-
mittoo of tho House of Representatives, which we contend, as
matter of law, must bo had before a now article can be brought in.
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. Chief Justico, we understand tho rulo
to be a little different from that laid down by tho counsel for
tho respondent. This court is not bound, as we apprehend,
by the rules of common law directing the proceedings to be
taken by grand juries ; and all that is meant, I apprehend, by
tho opinion of- the Attorney General of the United States
which has been referred to, is that it would be a safe guide— it
would afford something like analogy to refer to the proceedings
of gmnd juries when articles of impeachment are about to be
preferred. There have been various commentaries on the constitution,

TRIAL OE WILLIAM W. IfOlDEN. 65
and among others that of tho illustrious jurist, Mr. Justico
Story, and that, in addition to tho article in the Federalist on
the subject, gives us a flood of light in relation to what consti
tutes a court of impeachment and what should bo its rules of ac*
tion. Not anticipating that this objection would bo raised, I did
not bring tho authority into court ; but Judgo Story says, if I ro
mombor his language, eorrowtly, that a court of impeachment is
ot liberty to act upon any niloa thatit may itgolf establish and
that tho analogies of tho common law aro not binding upon it,
further than it thinks proper to adopt thorn as a part of tl'io
rulos for tho government of Its proceedings, Indeed wo know
that tho common law was novor adopted in the Unltod States
as a system, and so much of it as obtains now, in the jurispru
dence of the United States, has been authenticated by statute
Udopting that much and no more.
Sir, tho proceeding hero is onto which makes certain charges
against the respondent. Thoso charges are eight in number.
Seven of them the managers are content shaill remain as they are,
Tho eighth they propose to change in the particular suggested, so
that it shall not read that the offence there imputed was com
mitted through tho agency stated in the article as it originally
stood, but through another agency, I rather liken this to that
liberal doctrine of amendment which has been admitted in the
statutory codes of all the states since the time the opinion
ot the Attorney General of the United States, referred to by the
learned counsel, was delivered, and that is of allowing anything
to be amended at any time. Such a course is in accordance with
the statutes of North Carolina. And while it has not been
extended to allow indictments to be amended, this court is at
perfect liberty to establish tho principle in regard to matters of
impeachment. There is no such formality required here, in the
proceedings of the House of Representatives as is required in
indictments. There is no reason why such an amendment
•hould not be allowed. The amendment has the approbation
of the House of Representatives, just as the original article had
k» approbation at the tine that article was adopted. By some

<W COURT Of IMPEACHMENTS.
inadvertence, it was not discovered, until the testimony came to
bo taken, that the articlo was required to be changed, in order
that tho allegations should correspond with the proof.
Tho change might have been made in two different ways.
Ono way would have been for tho honorable managers to with
draw the eighth article, and instead of that article, to have adopt-
.od another, in the Bamo language, but with the change in tho
name. That would be one mode. Tho other, which is equally
valid, equally intelligible and equally capable of being compre
hended by the court, is by requesting permission to amend the
aiticlo by striking out the name of a certain person who is
.alleged to have been the agent in tho commission of tho offence
and putting in the name of another. There is no reason why
this charge shall not bo amended— if you call it an amendment—
as well as a declaration in a civil suit. There is no reason, I
apprehend, why you should not amend charges of this kind,
before the court where they have been presented, in the same
manner you amend anything charged either as a tort or a con
tract alleged to have been broken by the defendant in a civil suit.
These proceedings are of actor and reus. It is one party
making a complaint aud another making a defence ; aud what
is desired is that he, who is called upon to defend, shall have a
distinct notice of tho manner in which tho charges aro mado
and of what is expected to bo proved ; and if you havo that,
you havo all that iB noccssary for the purposes of this pro
ceeding. The amendment, it will be remembered, is simply an amend
ment alleging that insteadof an unlawful disbursement of public
money through Mr. Berry, that unlawful disbursement was made
through Mr. Neathery. That amendment may as well be mado
here and now as at any other time. The House of Represen
tatives are not bound to send in tho testimony upon which they
find thoir charges. A case occurs to me in the history of Eng
land, which I have not before me, but which I can produce,
where it was proposed to proceed in an impeachment upon a
message sent from the king .to the House of Commons. But

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN, fl*
the House took the objection that if they proceeded upon evi
dence of that kind, they surrendered that great right appertain
ing to representatives of England, in proceeding in any way they
pleased to pursue criminals. The members of the House of Rep
resentatives have a right, upon any testimony that satisfies them,
td prefer articles of impeachment ; and if they find there is
anything erroneous which leads them to desire to put an
article in a different form, they can consent to an amend
ment, .and that amendment may be either by the common
mode of striking out the whole article and inserting another
article instead, or the more convenient mode of striking out
something in the article and inserting something else in its
stead; so that, as to the legality of it, this court is'a law to
itself on that subject. No precedents have been found that
could ever restrain a court of impeachment in its proceeding.
All that it requires to know, is to consult its own breast as to
whether any inj ustice will be done by the course taken, and to
act upon high principles of morality. That is the only obli
gation upon which it rests in relatiou to 6uch a proceeding. Is
there anything wrong in this, apprising the respondent dis
tinctly of what is expected to be proved? — and is there any
unmeaning formality ? Some of these old proceedings at com
mon law have existed for a long time, and it is very difficult,
except for an antiquarian, to ascertain where they first origi
nated. They have been conformed to rather becauso nobody
thought it was necessary to inquire why they were adopted,
than any reason that exists showing they were necessary ; and
in that jurisprudence, affecting matters meum et tuurh, and
between the state and the individual, administered by courts
tlirough judges, it has been thought proper and even essential,
that they should conform to certain usages. But this court is
not bound by any such artificial system, and may make the
specifications conform to what the proof ia expected to be, upon
the request of tho body who prefers a prosecution, in any way
that it • thinks proper.
We then respectfully suggest, that it is proper for this court

w

COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS^

to determine whether this amendment shall be made ;: and we
submit it in such form as to show distinctly what it is desired
to prove. Tho House of Representatives have indicated its
wish by distinctly declaring the amendment to be made, and
this court has tho power to make it. And we submit, in tho
noxt place, that this is a proper form in which to present the
question of the amendment.. If that be so, the only question is
whether the House, in any form, has a right to amend its speci
fications. I submit respectfully to the court, therefore, that the
application made by the House of Representatives is reasonable
and ought to be granted
Mr. BOYDEN. May it please the court, I think the
learned counsel, when he says there is- so reason why an amend
ment should not be allowed in 6tate> cases and indictments the
same as in civil courts,, is in error. There is a manifest differ
ence between the two.. Declarations; m civil suits are filed
witliout oath. Bills of indictment aae found upon oath ; and
our court has already settled that point in a case, I believe,
where a colored witness was sworn before the grand jury in
finding a bill of indictment. The coi&rfc quashed the indictment
upon that ground, it appearing to theia that improper testi
mony had been takers Surely a man cannot be indicted with
out there is probable cause shown to a grand jury. It is the
grand jury that makes the presentment ; and it is the House of
Representatives here that has the right to impeach. The Sen
ate has no right to impeach and' has no right to supply an
article of impeachment.. Itr possesses no such power under our
constitution*. The* power to present an article of impeachment
vests alone in the House of Representatives. That body must
frame the article- and present it here. And this, as I understandl
it, is nothing more or less than asking 'this court to put in*
another allegation. I think it cannot be done. I think the .
true plan ia the one suggested by the honorable gentleman*
who has. just addressed the court, to withdraw the article and
then call upon the House of Representatives to frame a new
charge and brin$; i,t in hejw^ That aeeraa to ma to. he a much.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN.' G&
letter, and it strikes me it is the only proper and legal way
to accomplish it. This is a new question to me and I am simpry
stating the manner in which it strikes me. The clause reads,
" The House off Representatives solely shall have the power of
u impeachment." I say that this court — not the Senate — sitting
as a high court of impeachment has got no power to bring in
another article, and that the only manner to effect the purpose-
desired is for the managers to move to withdraw the article-
sought to be amended,, and then, if the testimony will warrant!
it, bring in a new article. That certainly would have a much
better appearance.
Senator DARGAN. Mr. Chief Justice, I desire to offer the
following order.
Mr. SPARROW. Will the senator withdraw tho order
for a moment as one of the counsel for the managers desires-
to address the court upon the pending question.
The request was acceded to.
Mr. BRAGG. Mr. Chiefi Justiea and senators, I have no-
disposition whatever to prolong this discussion. It seems to
me that the matter under consideration is a very simple one.
In the first place, the amendment is- ®ae that is comparatively
formal in its character, it being merely t®. chauge the name of
an individual, and to allege that this disbursement was made-
through Mr. Neathery instead of through Mr. Berry.
The learned counsel on tho part of the respondent admitB-
that the House of Representatives has a right to withdraw this
article entirely and to send back another or others in its stead-
That is conceded ; and being conceded, the only question here
is, whether that should be done,. or whether this court now can
allow an amendment which has been already adopted by the
House of Representatives. It seems to me that this is a dis
pute about a matter which is of no moment, and amounts to.
little or nothing ; for the amendment which the house have sent
in is virtually adopting another article. Then it comes down*
simply to the form of doing it, whether tha house can do it ia
tills particular mode suggested*

70 OOTJRT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
The learned counsel is wrong in saying that this court
"" adopts " the amendment. It is adopted by the House of
Representatives ; and all that body oeks this court to do is to
substitute tho article as amended in the place of the article
which was originally sent to this body, and that is all — nothing
more and nothing less. Why, then, go through the formality
of sending this article back to the House of Representatives
and having a new one substituted in place of it, when tho course
hero suggested amounts to precisely the same thing ?
Tho c6unsel has referred to proceedings before grand juries,
and ho has undertaken to assimilate tho Houso of Representa
tives, in this proceeding, to a grand jury in a proceeding on
indictment. He contends that the action of the House of Rep
resentatives is analogous to that of a grand jury, in finding a
bill of indictment. lie will find no authority for that in the
constitution or in tho laws regulating proceedings on impeach
ment. Ho speaks about ovidenco to bo submitted to tho Houso
of KoproKontutivca as a condition precedent to that body pre
senting articles of impeachmont. How does tho counsel know
that ovidenco has not been submitted? This court is bound
to presumo that all theso articles wero found upon ovidenco
duly presented. Ho has no right to show they wero not bo
found. Mr. BOYDEN. I did not intimate that they were not. I
snpposo they were, and I take it for granted they were found
upon ovidence.
Mr. BRAGG. So upon this amendment: this court is
to take it for granted that it was adopted upon evidence
appearing before the House that there was an error, and that
they now seek to correct tho article in the particular stated.
Wc have tho right to presumo that that evidence was snl>-
mitted, and that tho House of Representatives acted upon that
evidence, and hence they send the request that the change be
made. The learned counsel spoke about the power of a court of im
peachment to quash an article presented by the House of Rep-

TRIAL OF WIXLIAM W. HOLDEN. 71
resentatives, because it. was found upon insufficient testimony, in
analogy to the power of a court of common law to quash a bill
of indictment when it regards the action of a grand jury to have
been upon insufficient testimony. I think he can show no au
thority for holding that this court has any such power. This
court has no authority whatever, either by the constitution or
by the laws, to quash any article that may be sent here as the
basis of a trial, either for the reason that the article was found upon
insufficient evidence or any other reason. The gentleman falls
into these errors by undertaking to follow out analogies and to
show that this senate, sitting as a court of impeachment, is
analagous to an ordinary court of common law for tho trial of
criminal offenses. Tho gentleman admits that tho Houso of
Representatives have a right to amend this article, but ho says
tho amendment should bo made in a particular way. We
submit to tho court that tho way proposed is appropriate,
though tho other ono would bo proper also ; but this way in
equally appropriate and it certainly is moro convenient.
Tho question simply comes before tho court, whether thoy
will allow this article to bo changod in tlio particular stated
when tho change is mado by tho voto of tho Houso of Repre
sentatives which is tho impeaching body. I submit that tho
court will allow tho change.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. Tho impeachment act makes it
incumbent upon tho presiding officer "to decido in the first in-
•" stance without a division, all questions of evidenco and inciden-
" tal questions, but the same shall, on tho demand of one-fifth
" of tho members present, be decided by tho yeas and nays."
This I consider to be an "incidental" question. It is the
opinion of the presiding officer that the Senate havo the power
to allow tho aineudraent to be made at the instance of the
House of Representatives. I consider it to betho' same as if
tho foreman of a grand jury, attended by tho wholo grand jury,
came into court and requested the judge to allow them to strike
out one name and insert another. Unless a division is called
for, that will be taken to be the rule, that the Senate have the

72 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
power to allow the amendmont. The next question wflT toy
will the Senate allow the amendment to be made, and that is a
matter for the body to decide. la the court ready for the
question ?
Sonator DARGAN offered the following order :
" Ordered) That tho amendment to the eighth article of
u impeachment requested by the House of Ropresontatviefl bo
"allowed." The CHIEF JUSTICE put tho question on the order
offered by Senator Dargan, and it was decided in the affirma
tive. Mr. McCORKLE. Mr. Chief Justice, the amendment
which has just been made, by permission of the Senate, will ma
terially affect the answer to the article. Senators who have read
tho article first presented by tW Houbo of Representatives audi
the answer thereto by the respondent, will have seen that the
answer Ib a general denial of the allegations of that article.
Under the amendment which has just been permitted, it will
become necessary for the respondent to irame a specific answer to
that article, and it may be that it will entirely change the charac
ter of the answer. We therefore a6k that we be allowed until
Thursday to file our answer. Two of the counsel for the
respondent are not present to-day, and therefore we , will n©t
havo the Itranefit of their counsel to aid in foaming the answer,.
unless we ftavo an adjournment. That is the reason why we'
ask that further proceedings be adjourned un/Jil Thursday next.
Mr. SPARROW. Om behalf of th« managers, I feel author
ized to say to thar couimsel for the respondent, that we are wil
ling to consent to an adjournment until Wednesday. We very
much desire that there shall be no unnecessary delay in the
prosecution of this trial. Wo deaire to deal fairly and cous-
teously with the other side, and we hope that by Wednesday1
St will suit their purpose to conform their answer to the articlo
as amended. We consent to an adjournment until that time,
which we think will be long enough. This suggestion which I

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 73
.have made meets with the approval of the managers. We do
not speak for the Senate.
Senator GRAHAM, of Alamance, offered the following
order :
Ordered) That the respondent be allowed until 12 o'clock on
Wednesday, the 1st of February, 1871, to answer the eighth
article. Mr. MOORE moved to amend the order.by inserting the
word Thursday in lieu of the word Wednesday, and on which
motion he called for the yeas and nays.
A sufficient number seconding the call, the yeas and nays
were ordered.
The CHIEF JUSTICE put the question on the amendment
offered by Mr. Moore, and it was decided in the negative.
Those who voted in the affirmative were :
Messrs. Barnett, Battle, Beasley, Bellamy, Brogden, Cook.
Cowles, Eppes, Flythe, Hawkins, Lassiter, Latham, Lehman,
Linney, McCotter, Moore, Murphy, Olds, Price. — 19.
Those who voted in the negative, were :
Messrs. Adams, Albright, Allen, Brown, Council, Currie,
Dargan, Flemming, Gilmer, Graham, of Alamance, Graham,
of Orange, Jones, Ledbetter, Love, Mauney, McClammy,
Merrimon, Norment, Robbins, of Davidson, Robbins, of Rowan,
Skinner, Speed, Troy, Waddell, Warren, Whiteside,Worth. — 27,
The CHIEF JUSTICE then put the question on the reso
lution of Senator Graham, of Alamance, and it was decided in
the affirmative.
On the motion of Mr. Gilmer, the court adjourned to meet
on Wednesday, at 12 o'clock.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. nOLDEN. 77
FIFTH DAY.
Senate Chamber, Feb. 1, 1871.
Tho COURT mot at 12 o'clock, M., pursuant to adjourn
ment, Honorable R. M. Pearson, Chief Justico of the Supreme
Court, in the chair.
Tho proceedings were opened by proclamation made in due
lorm by the doorkeeper.
Tho CLERK proceeded to call the roll of senators, when a
quorum was found to be present.
Senator GRAHAM, of Orange. Mr. Chief Justice, it has
been understood that the point would be raised that the proper
time for the swearing in of all senators would be after issue
joined. I suggest that it would be as well to postpone the
swearing of Senator Edwards until that time.
Senator ROBBINS, of Rowan. Mr. Chief Justice, I do not
understand issue to be entirely joined as yet, as there is still
some pleadings in tho course of preparation on either side.
An answer is to be made to the amended article, and there
will probably come in a replication to that. The point raised
by the senator from Orange, will be in order after issue has
been completely joined. Senator Edwards, who has been
recently admitted to his seat, has uot been sworn, and I submit
that he be now sworn and that the point be raised after issue
joined when all the senators shall be finally sworn.
The CHIEF JUSTICE- I think the senator named should
now be sworn. He will come forward.
Mr. McCORKLE. Mr. Chief Justice, we desire, on behalf
of the respondent, to interpose a challenge before Mr. Edwards
shall be sworn in. We have reduced the challenge to writing,
and ask that it be read by the clerk.
The CLERK proceeded to read the challenge as follows :
The counsel for tho respondent challenge the right of Hon.
L. 0. Edwards to sit as a member of this, a court of impeach-

78 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
ment, upon the ground that he was not a member thereof at
the organization, and cannot be now admitted to participate in
its deliberations, and beg to be heard upon the question.
(Signed,) R. C. Badger,
Nathaniel Bovden,
Edward Connigland,
J. M. McCorkle,
W. N. H. Smith.
CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer is of the opinion
that the counsel have a right to be heard on the motion sub
mitted. Mr. CONIGLAND. Mr. Chief Justice, I have but a few
remarks to offer in support of our right to challenge as herein
expressed. I take it to be our duty " to challenge the right of the
" Hon. L. C. Edwards to sit as a member of this, the court of
" impeachment, on the ground that he was not a member thereof
" at its organization."
Sir, the question arises whether a court can open to admit
new members to participate in its deliberations. If it can open
at one stage of its sittings, it can open at any stage of its. sit
tings; and we submit that under the constitution of North
Carolina, this court, sitting as a court for tho trial ot an impeach
ment, cannot open to admit new member* who wevo not mem
bers thereof at its organization.
I know, sir, that a great deal of learning may be exhibited
upon this point. Wc'nvny be referred to the impeachment of
Warren Hastings and to impeachments that have occurred be
fore the senate of the United States. Ami that we have no
precedent and no authority in this case, is due to the fact that
our constitution is different not only from the British constitu
tion and the constitution of the United States, but different
from the old constitution of om own Btate. The constitution
of the United States uses this language :
" The senate shall have the sole power to try all impeach-
" ments. When sitting for that purpose, they shall be on oath
u or affirmation. When the president of the United States is

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 79
"tried, the chief justice shall preside; and no person shall be
" convicted without the concurrence of two-thirds of the mem-
"bers present."
The constitution of North Catolina says expresssly :
"The judicial power of the state shall bo vested in a court
" for the trial of impeachments, a supreme court, superior court,
" courts of justices of the peace, and special courts."
By our organic law the senate is' invested with a judicial
character and this body under it becomes a court and nothing
else. It organizes it as a superior court is organized. Theso
members are sworn, and when they are sworn they constitute a
court Known to the constitution of North Carolina for the time
being. They are no longer the senate of the state of North
Carolina, sitting in that capacity, but they are " The court for
the trial of impeachments," — expressly so declared by the
organic law ; and sir, it is taking it away from all precedents
that have heretofore occurred, becauso no one of them has that
express provision that wo have in our constitution. " Courts for
the trial of impeachments," " the supreme court," " tho supe
rior courte," aud "courts of justices of peaco and special courts,"
arc all put on precisely tho same footing. Sir, if a court can
admit new members, who woro not members at tho timo of its
organization, what is to prevent it from being packed ? Sup
pose, sir, an impeachment wero pending and a motion should
be mado in the senate, in its legislative capacity, that the inquiry
should bo entered into whether certain members were qualified
to hold their seats under tho fourteenth amendment, and it
should be decided to throw out five or six or seven or eight
senators on tho ground that they labored under tho disabilities
of that amendment, what becomes of our court of impeach
ment? If these things aro to bo allowed, what hopo is there
of an impartial trial ?
The question was raised by Mr. Butler in bohalf of tho
the managers on tho trial of Andrew Johnson, and I take tho
liberty of reading a portion of his remarks, to bo found on
page 89, volume 1, of the reported proceedings of that trial :

80 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
" I trust, Mr. president and senators, I may be pardoned for
" making some suggestions upon these topics, because to us it
" BodmB those aro questions not of forms but of substance. If
" tl 1 lis body horo is a court, in any mannor as contradistinguished
u from the Benato, then wo agree that many, if not all tho
" analogies of tho procedures of courts must obtain ; that tho
" common law incidents of a trial in courts must havo place ;
"that you may bo bound in your proceedings and adjudication
" by tho rules aud precedents of tho common or statuto law ;
" that tho interest, bias or preconciovod opinions or affinities to
"tho party, of the judges, may bo opon to enquiry and oven
"rales of order, and precedents in court should havo effect ;
"that tho managers of tho houso of representatives must con-
" form to those rulon, as they would bo applicable to public or
"private prosecutors of crime in court*, and that tho accused
"may claim tho benefit of tho rule in criminal cases, and ho
" may only be convicted when tho ovidenco makes tho fact
" clear beyond reasonable doubt, instead of by a preponderance
" of tho evidence."
No one, sir, could contend more strongly for the position
that the senato of the United States on the trial of Andrew
Johnson was not sitting as a court ; and it was upon that ex
press ground that the managers insisted that tha senate could
open to admit new members and that none of tho incidents of
a court attended it. All this ground, however, is swept away by
our constitution which cxproBsly declares that "tho judicial
" power of the stato shall consist of a court for tho trial of im
peachments," <fec, and when that court is once organized it
becomes a court of tho stato of North Carolina under its con
stitution, and it cannot bo opened for the purposo of admitting
u« membei'B persons who wero not members at tho timo of Its
organization. It might as well bo said that a judgo of the
superior court who had commenced the trial of a cause could
bo displaced by another to finish tho trial— a proposition which
would shock all our notions of tho manner In which tho courts
of North Carolina should bo organized and conducted.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 81
I submit, sir, thoroforo, that the challenge is properly taken
and ought to bo allowed.
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. Chief Justico and Senators, wo con
tend that tho challongo intorposod on bohalf of tho respondent
ought not to bo allowed. Tho right of a senator, as such, to sit
in this court is unquestionable, and tho only question that can
bo entortainod by this body is whothor tho porson taking his seat
as a member of this court is a sonator from a district of tho Stato
of North Carolina. If ho is that, and his poors havo adjudged
him such, his right to exorcise tho functions of a judgo of this
court are as perfect as is tho right of thoso who appeared hero
on tho first day of tho sessions of this court. It is not true, as
I apprehend, that it is necessary that members of a court shall
bo uniformly present from tho beginning to tho end of ovoiy
proceeding, in order to entitle them to participate in tho pro
ceedings or to enable them to escape, if they aro disposed to do
so, from tho responsibility of such proceeding. Tho 6ole ques
tion to bo presented is whether this is a sonate, and about that
I suppose there can be no doubt. Tho next question is whether
the honorable gentleman referred to in this challego is a sena
tor, and of that I presume there is as little doubt, for he seems
to occupy his seat here, and, so far as we know, by the permis
sion and approbation of his peers ; and if he is a senator then
ho is a judge in this court as much as the gentleman who ordi
narily presides over tho senato is a judge of this court.
Sir, it is not infrequent that courts consist of numerous
membors. Tho supremo court of tho United States consists I
boliovo of nino judges, and it is not unfrequently the caso that
one of their numbor is absent for a day or a part of a day ; and
yot, Bit-, his right to participate intho judgment of tho court and
to voto on all questions arising in its proceeding, is as porfoot ns
though ho woro thero during tho wholo time. So it was in tho
case of inferior courts in North Carolina, in formor times con-
elating of magistrates ; any magistrate, whothor ho was present
at tho beginning of tho case and took his seat, or whether ho
camo in at any timo during its progress had tbe power and tho

82 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
right to act and act upon the subject under consideration. So it is
with every court constituted of more than one person. Neces
sarily somo one may be absent for convenience or necessity for a
short period, and yot ho is as competent as any of the others to
havo a voice in tho determination.
And, sir, the inconveniences to which the honorable gentle
man refers aro not matters which a court can consider. It may
bo that like other human institutions this court of impeachment
is not guarded by all the' securities that may bo desired ; but,
Hir, such ns it is it must stand. Thero is no right for any party
to mako a challenge — no right to challenge to tho' favor and
no right to challengo for any irregularity in the election, for
that has been settled boforo by tho members of the senato.
There is no right to challenge for any such cause as that, much
loss a right to challengo because a gentleman has been kept
out of his placo during all the preceding sessions of the court
until tho present timo. If ho now shows as clear a title to a
seat in this body as any of his peers, thero is no ground of chal
longo. lie cannot avoid tho responsibility of participating in
tho trial, nor can thoso concerned in it exclude him from tho
right, which his constituents have, to bo represented in tho deter
mination of judicial questions that arise, precisely as they have
to bo represented by him in tho determination of legislative
questions. Looking into tho precedents as I havo dono since I came into
this case (for I had givon but littlo attention to tho subject pre
viously) I find that mon have been pormitted to sit and havo
boon required to sit upon tho trials of their own relatives. A
peer has boon compelled to sit upon tho trial of his daughter.
And I find that in such cases, where near relatives have been
undor trial, members of tho court could not escape tho responsi
bility of sitting. If he is a peer he must perform his j udicial
duty as such, as well as his legislative duty. If a man is a
senator he must perform his judicial duty as a senator, as well
as his legislative duty as a senator.
The gentleman says that no precedent can be found for the

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 83
position he claims because our constitution differs from all
others. I do not see that it differs at all. It says that " the
"judicial power of the state shall be vested in a court of im-
"peachment" and other courts. That expresses no more than
is expressed in the constitution of the United States when it
says that the House of Representatives shall have the sole
power of impeachment and that " the senate shall have the sole
" power to try all impeachments." And tho question comes
back, who make up the senate and who is, and what is, the title
of the individual against whom the challenge is interposed ?
If any 6iich objection could be substantially made, it should be
an objection to his taking his seat as a senator ; but having
taken his seat as a senator, his rights are tho same as those of
any other member of tho body.
With all tho research which the gentleman has made, I do
not see that any authority is produced to support tho proposi
tion which ho has submitted. lie shows no precedent either
in England or in America whore any such objection was allowed
to prevail. Tho argument of Mr. Butler and tho elaborate
brief from tho pen of Mr. Lawrence, of Ohio, in tho impeach
ment of president Johnson — tho most elaborate trcati'60 upon
that subject which has ever been written in this country at
least, — both allow that a senator may take his seat at any
time when his title is shown — that he may go into tho pro
ceedings at any 6tago of the progress of tho trial ; and that,
although he had not heard a word of evidence, he would bo
entitled to vote, and be required to vote, on the question of
the guilt or innocence of the accused, and that that being a
right pertaining to his office, he can no more evade it or be
excluded from it than he can evade or be excluded from .any
other right or duty.
So far from there being any precedent in the argument of
Mr. Butler to which reference is made, it shows that there can
not be any such thing as a challenge. In that argument he
throwB out insinuations calculated to embarrass certain members
of the senate of the United States — that they had expressed
opinions favorable to the respondent then on trial. But he

8-4 COURT OP IMPEACHMENT*.
concedes that anything of that nature is altogetlier out of the
question whether such members shall be entitled to exercise
thoir functions as Bonatore and members of the court.
If any objection of this kind to a senator was intended to be
be taken, it should have been taken before the committee on
elections or before the senate, for the gentleman challenged is
a senator now, and a judge, for if he is one he is the other, be
cause the title in the one case determines the title in the other.
This idea is recognized by the legislature in the act which
they passed in reference to proceedings of impeachment, as
will be found by reference to the act itself which, much to our
convenience, has been printed in connection with the rules of
the court. The tenth section says: "At the time and place
" appointed and before the commencement of the trial the pre-
" siding officer of the senate 6hall administer to each member
" then present and to other members as they may appear, an
" oath or affirmation," &c.
According to the strictness contended for on the other side,
if a gentleman is not here at eleven o'clock, or whatever is the
time fixed when senators are to be sworn, he can never be
sworn afterwards, because if there were a quorum present there
was a court constituted. I say that that enactment of the leg
islature is a recognition of the doctrine for which I contend.
There is also a recognition of the same idea by the senate in the
rules which they have prescribed for the government of these
proceedings. In their first rule it is provided that " before pro-
" ceeding to the consideration of the articles of impeachment,
" the presiding officer shall administer to the members ot the
" senate then present and to the other members as they shall
" appear, the following oath." So that, whether they appear
that day, or the next day, or the next week, or the fourth week,
thoy havo a right to bo sworn and come into this court as the
representatives of their constituents, numbering I believe some
twenty thousand peoplo for each senator. We have a million
of inhabitants in tho state and there are fifty members of this
body and each member comes here as the representative of a
body of the people who, through their voice publicly expressed,

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 85
have selected him to represent them injudicial matters as well
as in matters legislative. And if any senator is detained at
homo by indisposition or any other cause, so that he cannot get
here when tho court is constituted, when he does come his
powers are. in no way abridged. If he comes here tho fourth
week of the session and takes the necessary oath he is entitled
to the same privileges as any other member of. the body who
has been here before'him.
I submit, therefore, that it is not only so in reason, but it is so
by authority, as far as there is any authority upon the subject,
and is so by analogy ; for, sir, if there cannot be a challenge to
the favor or a challenge upon any ground of personal prejudice
or disqualification, there surely cannot be a challenge that a
member did not happen to be in the chamber at the time when
the court was first constituted. And, sir, while the subject is
under discussion, the thonght occurs to me that it was quite
unnecessary to have sworn the members of this body at tho
time of these first proceedings. I find nothing in the law
which requires it. I have not a copy of the constitutiou before
me, but there are but two articles applicable to it, and they
say nothing about the members of the body being sworn.
The law regulating proceedings of impeachments says nothing
about their being sworn until the tenth section. The ninth
section says that " when issue is joined in the trial of an im-
" peachment, the court shall fix the time and place for the trial
" therefor," and then it is in the tenth section that, for tho first
time, we hear that it is necessary for senators to take any oath
at all as judges. Ab I apprehend, it was presumed by tho
legislature which enacted this law that, by the first oath which
they took, when thoy qualified as members of this body, they
might act in constituting tho court— convert a legislative tri
bunal into a judicial ono, and receive tho articles of impeach
ment, the answer to tho same, and tho replication to tho answer.
Having done that, and timo for the trial being agreed upon, tho
law requires that there shall be an oath taken by theniembera of
the court. Tliis senator who ia objected to ia here in time, even

86

COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.

if the challenge could be allowed, to the effect that there is
a change in the incumbent is made by admitting him and ex
cluding another, because senators are not formally sworn in as
members of the court until issue is joined. If a vacancy had
occurred by death, the objection would have been the same
that the people of the district had lost their right to have a mem
ber of the court, because their senator, who was present when
tho court was constituted, had died, and nobody could be elect
ed to fill his place. No, sir, in these high functions of a legis
lator and in these high duties of .a court of impeachment, when-
over the proper man appears clothed with the authority of a
senator, he is clothed also with tho authority of a judge of this
Court. Senator GRAHAM, of Orange. Mr. Cliiot Justico, I
dcHiro to state, ns a matter of order, that each sido boing enti
tled to a half hour in an argument on the question, if the wholo
time is not consumed in their argument, they can occupy tho
residuo in reply.
Mr. BOYDEN. Mr. Chief Justice, it is not denied upon the
part of tho respondent that the senate of the United States
sitting as a court can admit members after the court. has been
organized. That has been dono repeatedly. We place our
challenge upon a totally distinct foundation. We insist, and
it will be seen on the trial of Mr. Johnson that it was insisted
on behalf of the managers at great length, that the senate of
the United States was not a court, but that it was the senate of
the United States, with the chief justice of the supreme court
of the United States presiding, which Avas trying president
Johnson. It was admitted on behalf of the managers on that
trial by their chairman, that if the senate of the United States
were a court, most if not all the rales applicable to courts of law,
would apply- I wish to read a little more distinctly what
manager Butter said on that subject. It will be found on page
S9, volume 1, of the trial :
" K this body here is a court in any manner, as contradis-
" tinguished from the senate, then we agree that many, if not
" all the analogies of the procedures of courts must obtain ;

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 87
" that the common law incidents of a trial in court must have
"place ; that you may be bound in your proceedings and adju-
" dication by the rules and precedents of the common or statute
" law ; that the interest, bias or preconceived opinions or af-
" finities to the party, of the judges, may be open to enquiry,
" and even the rules of order and precedents in court should
" have effect ; that the managers of the house of representa-
" tives must conform to those rules as they would be applicable
" to public or private prosecutors of crime in courts, and that
"the- accused may claim the benefit of the rule in criminal
" cases, that ho may only be convicted when the evidence makes
" the fact clear beyond reasonable doubt, instead of by a pre-
". ponderance of tho evidence.
" We claim and respectfully insist that this tribunal has none
" of tho attributes of a judicial court as they are commonly
" received and understood. Of courso this question must be
"largely determined by tho express provisions of tho constitu-
" tion, and in! it there is no word, as is well known to you, sen-
"ators, which gives tho slightest coloring to the idea that this
" is a court, savo that in the trial of this particular respondent
" the chief justice of the supremo court must preside."
Mr. Chief Justice, we admit that the doctine is well set
tled as to tho senate of the United States upon a question of
impeachment, that senators can come in at any time and be
sworn in at any time and vote, oven if they do not attend until
tho vote is to bo taken. What wo contend for is, that under our
constitution this is a high court of impeachments. On the trial of
Mr. Johnson wo find that distinctly admitted by the matiagors,
that if tho sonate of tho United States were declared to be a
" court " of impeachment by the constitution of the United
States, then all or nearly all the rules obtaining in courts of law
must govern. It is admitted that the party would have a right
to a challenge on the ground of bias as he would to challenge
a juror ; it is admitted that that court should be governed by
the ride that the person charged could not be convicted except

88 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
a caso was mado out beyond a resonable doubt. They start
out with that.
And, sir, how is this met? They say that in England in the
houso of lords, men have ;been compelled to sit in judgment
upon their children ! Great God 1 is that a precedent for the
senate of North Carolina? It is to avoid the occurrence of such
things, — such terrible situations, such outrages upon every feel
ing of humanity as to make a man sit in judgment and vote
upon tho guilt of his own children, that our constitution makes
this body a "court of impeachment," and being a "court,"
each party is entitled to all tho lights and privileges which ho
would bo entitlde to in any court under the statutes of our coun
try. That is the distinction, sir. Gentlemen need not quote any
precedents. We admit that the records of the senate of the United
States are full of them. Bnt, sir, when the managers admitted
on that important trial that all those rules upon which we now
insist would apply in a " court," and when wo show that this is
a "court" in terms, we say that nil these rules nnd nnalagies
follow. That is our viow. That was admitted to be tho
law on tho trial of president Johnson by the prosecutors. Wo
admit that a senator on that trial could bo admitted at any timo
prior to tho vote being taken to come in and record his vote.
But wo deny that such a rale applies to this court. We say
that we have nil the rights here which we would have in an
ordinary court according to the common law and statute law
of the land.
I desire to stato also, sir, that when this trial commenced,
tho applicant now asking to bo sworn in, was not a senator and
it had not thon been determined that he had any rights nB a
senator. Another gentleman was thon occupying his Boat who
had been sworn in as a member of this court. That gentle
man ban boon ousted and, sir, whero this thing may end no body
can toll If thlrt cout'HO Is to bo pursued.
Mr. MEUR1MON. Mr. Chief Justice, it boouis to mo that
thlfl challengo which has been interposed proceeds upon
a falso notion of tho naturo, power and purposes of this
court. It goes upon tho idea that all courts aro govomed by

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 89
like rules and that they are organized to accomplish tho
same end. There is no authority in principle or precedents
for any such suggestion. One court has one nature, ono char
actor, one purpose and one method of procedure ; nother
court is entirely different in these respects. We have our
ordinary superior courts in this state. They proceed under
the organic law of the state in a particular way, and their
object is to effect a particular purpose according to the con
stitution and the laws of the state. We then have commis
sioners' courts under our present organic law. They have
different powers and a different jurisdiction, and they proceed
in an entirely different way. Again, we have courts-martial
authorized by law, and they have certain powers and they
aro intended to effectuate certain purposes, and they proceed in
a way entirely different from our superior and commissioners'
courts. And while I am willing to concede that wo have " a
court for tho trial of impeachments " — it is so called, — it has a
peculiar jurisdiction and a peculiar nature, and is intended to
accomplish a particular purpose ; and its method of procedure
under the law of the state is entirely different from the method
of procedure prescribed by that law for the superior courts.
And while the object contemplated by it is entirely different
and the method of procedure is different, and there are certain
rules of evidence and there may be rules of law applicable to
every single tribunal I havo mentioned, there are certain other
eulcs of law, and rides ot evidence which would not apply to
each of tho courts in common.
The fact that this is called a " court for the trial of impeach
ments " amounts to very little. Suppose it was called in our
constitution " a commission for tho trial of impeachments," it
could equally as well bo contondod that it was a judicial tribu
nal, for it would be to all intents and purposes. And if it
woro callod in the constitution a " commission for tho trial of
impoaolimontB," would the character of the body bo at all
changed I . Ii it not manifest that tho rules of law would
apply the same then as they apply now ? We have hefird of

90 COURT OF IMPEA01IMENT9.
" military commiaBiona " to try offendere ; but because they aro
called military commiBeions will any one doubt that they are a
judicial tribunal exorcising judicial power and that they pro
ceed according to law enacted for the purpose of creating and
governing them ? No body doubts it. So that this challengo
is eupported by an argument based upon worda rather than an
argument based upon principle. Tho fact that tho word
" court " ia used in our constitution dooa not change tho
character of tho court or its purposes.
Now our organic law providoB in terms that tho " court for
the trial of iinpeachmontfl " elinll bo the senate. " Trial of
impeachments " — what does that imply ? It moans that tho
constitution provides that certain classes of officers in tho state
shall be amenable to the tribunal provided by the organic law
of the state to answer for thoir official misconduct or thoir
official incompetency. That is what it moans. It means that
they may bo impeached for official turpitude or official incom
petency. The word " impeachment," has a significance. It
has a legal forco ; and it implies that whoever is impeached
shall bo tried— that is, that somebody in behalf of tho public
shall make a charge against the officer and that the officor shall
have an opportunity to be heard. And whenever it is said
that there shall bo a trial of an impeachment, it is implied that
there shall be a judicial tribunal to hear what the managers
have to say on the one side, and what the accused shall have to
say by way of defence on the other side ; and whenever that is
so, whether you call the tribunal a " court of impeachment " or
whether you call it a " commission of impeachment," whatever
you may call it, it is a trial.
Therefore, I say that this challenge proceeds upon a false
notion as to the character of this court. It is a court bo con
stituted that if a senator is present at tho time the trial Ib begun
ho shall be allowed to sit and participate in the proceedings to
their close ; but it is also provided, not in terms in our constitu
tion, but in the common law of courts of impeachment, (for
there is such a common law, gathered not only from the de-

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 91
cisions of courts like this in England, but in tliis country also,)
that if one of the members of the court shall resign and another
shall take his place, he shall come in and be one of the tryers
down^to the last moment ; and that is the rule of law applicable
to tribunals to try impeachments whether called " a court of
impeachment " or " the senate of tho United States."
A strenuous effort has been made to liken this court to an
ordinary judicial tribunal. That, it seems to me, is a false no
tion. The object of this court is not to convict an accused
party of any particular crime with the view to impose the or
dinary punishment provided by law for tho crime, but tho ob
ject is simply inquisitorial. The trial ia, in many of its features,
political. It might bo otherwise, however, as in a case whero
an officer should bo impoachod bocauso of incompetency. But
this is a political trial, to a very groat extent, and ie inquisitorial
in its character, the object being to ascertain whether tho ac
cused by reason of tho official misconduct charged upon him is
fit to longer exercise the office of governor, or to exerciso any
office in the state. The purpose is not to try and convict tho
accused of an offence he has committed as a man, but to ascer
tain whether he has committed any offence in his official
capacity that disqualifies or unfits him to -hold the office of
which he is the present incumbent. Hence, there is an ex
press provision in the constitution that the judgment of this
'court shall not go further than to remove the person convicted
from office, provided he shall not hold any other offico in tho
state, and it expressly provides that, for the very offences
charged in these articles, he may be charged before the ordina
ry tribunals of tho country and convicted and punished accord
ing to law.
I call your attention to this further provision of tho constitu
tion, " that no person shall be convicted without the concur-
" rence of two-thirds of the senators present." Present when ?
Present at the time the judgment is pronounced ; — present
before the court closes ; — present at the time the vote is being
taken ; andjwhether you call the suit a prosecution or whatever

92 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
else, every senator present at the moment the vote is being
taken shall vote as the representative of his constituency as
part and parcel of the senate to determine whether or not the
accused iis guilty of the official turpitude and misconduct
charged upon him. The question of interest cannot be raised
by reason of the very nature ot a court ot impeachment, and it
never was known to be raised, or if raised it was never sus
tained in England or in this country. (On that point I will
state some authorities in a moment.) In the case of the im
peachment of president Johnson, his own son-in-law was one
of his tryers, and there is a parallel case in this very body now.
Would any body pretend that the honorable senator represent
ing the Wake district could bo challenged because of his affin
ity with the accused? It is absurd to talk about it. A ques
tion of interest does not arise. And in reply to the honorable
gentleman who last addressed the court, [Mr. Boy den, J I say
that if the father of tho accused were here it would be his duty
to vote upon this issue.
I beg leave to call your attention to the provision in the
constitution of the United States which says : " The senate
" shall have tho sole power to try all impeachments." What
is the reason that it is not the same in substance as the pro
vision in our constitution, except that we designate the senate
as a " court ?" It is a tribunal for the trial of impeachments.
Ours, also, is a tribunal for the trial of impeachments. The
senate of the United States and this court are bound by tho
rules of law, so far as they are applicable, to trials of this kind.
Unless some provision is made to the contrary there may be
many rules of law and of evidence that will apply to this court.
But this court has the power, just as much as the senate of the
United States has to prescribe rules and to limit and change
the ordinary rules of law that would apply except such pre
vision were made at the trial, whether you call the tribunal a
"court" or "a military commission" or a "commission of
impeachments " or any name which may be mentioned. Any
tribunal that tries impeachments does exercise judicial powers

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 93
just as this court does, and the same rules apply unless they
aro modified by some rule prescribed by itself; hence the
distinguished manager on the trial of president Johnson
said that the senate was the law unto itself; and so it is if it
shall see fit to exercise that power.
I beg leave to bring to your attention these strong cases,
both from the English and Americau records. I read from the
opening of the managers in the case of president Johnson :
" Nearly five hundred years ago, in 1388, the house of lords
"resolved, in the case of Belknap and the other judges, that
" these matters, when brought before them, shall be discussed
" and adjudged, by the course of parliament, and not by the
" civil law, nor by the common law of the land used- in other in-
" ferior courts.
" And that resolution, which was in incontravention of the
" opinion of all the judges of England, and against the remon-
" strance of Richard II, remains the unquestioned law of Eng-
" land to this day.
" Another determining quality of this tribunal, distinguish-
"ing it from a court and the analogies of ordinary legal pro-
" ceedings, and showing that it is a senate only, is that there
" can be no right of challenge by either party to any of its mem-
" bers for favor, or malice, affinity, or interest."
I may remark here — what must be manifest to every lawyer,
that Mr. Manager Butler conceded there what he did not need
to concede. He said that if the senate was a court it was
bound like other courts. That was conceding too much. It
was bound like other courts, so far as the rules of law were ap
plicable to courts of impeachment, and only to that extent.
But I read further.
" This has been held from the earliest times in parliament
" even when that was the high court of judicature of the realm
" sitting to punish all crimes against the peace. ..{
" In the case of the Duke of Somerset, [Howell's State Trials,
" p. 521] as early as 1551, it was held that the Duke of Northum-
" berland and the Marquis of Northampton and the Earl of
7

94 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
" Pembroke, for an attempt upon whose lives Somerset was
" on trial, should set in judgment upon him against the objec-
" tion of the accused because " ' a peer of the realm might not
"be challenged.'
" Again, the Duke of Northumberland, [ibid., 1 State Trials,
" p. 765] Marquis of Northampton and Earl of Warwick, being
"on trial for their lives, A. D. 1553, before the court of
"the Lord High Steward of England, one of the prisoners
•' inquired whether any such persons as were equally culpa-
" ble in that crime, and those by whose letters and command-
" ments he was directed in all his doings, might bo his judges
" or pass upon his trial at his death. It was answered that, ' If
" ' any were as deeply to bo touched as himself in that case, yet
" ' as long as no attainder of record wero against them, thoy
" ' were nevertheless persons able in tho law to pass upon any
" ' trial, and not to bo challenged thorefor, but at tho princo's
"'pleasure'" "Again on tho trial of Earls of Essex and Southampton [ibid.,
"1 Stato Trials, p. 1825] for high treason, boforo all tho justi-
" cob of England, A. D. 1000, tho Earl of Essex desired to know
" of my Lord Chiof Justico whether ho might challengo any of
" the peers or no. Whereunto the Lord Chief Justice answered
" Again; in Lord Audley's case (ibid., State Trials, page 402,
" A. D. 1631,) it was questioned whether a peer might challengo
"his peers as in the case of common jurats. It was answered
"by all the judges, after consultation, 'he might not.' "
" This case is of more value became it was an indictment for
" being accessory to rape upon his own wife, and had no po-
" litical influence in it whatever. The same point was ruled in
" the Countess of Essex's case on trial for treason."
Senator GRAHAM, of Orange. Mr. Chief Justice, I will
state as a question of order that the time allotted by the rales
to the managers, is up.
Mr. MERRIMON. I would like to state, if I am permitted,
tl,c imovin™ ooqps which are, «lwo in mv iudrrmfint, very str^'v

The CHIEF JUSTICE. The time has expired and unless
the senate extend it, the counsel will have to close his remarks.
Senator GRAHAM, of Orange. I hope the Senate will grant
. the indulgence.
Senator LEHMAN. I move that the time be extended for
ten minutes.
The CHIEF JUSTICE put the question on the motion of
senator Lehman, and it was decided in the affirmative.
Mr. MERRIMON. Mr. Chief Justice, I will now read
with referenc to the American precedents. '
" We have abundant authority also on this point in our own
" country. " In the case of Judge Pickering, who was tried in March
"1804 for drunkenness in office, although undefended in form,
" yet he had all his rights preserved.
"This trial being postponed a session, three senators —
" Samuel Smith of Maryland, Israel Smith of Vermont, and
'• John Smith of Now York — who had all boon members of tho
" houso of representatives, and thero votod in favor of impoach-
" ing Judgo Pickering, woro senators when his trial came off.
" Mr. Smith of Now York, raised. the question, by asking to
" bo exocused from voting. Mr. Smith of Maryland, declared
" he would not bo influenced from his duty by any false deli
cacy, that he, for his part, felt no delicacy upon the subject ;
" the vote he had given in the other house to impeach Judge
" Pickering would have no influence upon him in the court ;
" his constituents had a right to his vote, and he would not by
" any act of his deprive or consent to deprive them of that
" right, but would claim and exercise it upon this as upon
" every other question that might be submitted to the senate
" whilst he had the honor of a seat.
" A vote being had upon the question, it was determined
" that these gentlemen should sit and vote on the trial. This
"passed in the affirmrtive by a vote of 19 to 7, and all the
" gentlemen sat and voted on every question during the trial.
"On the trial of Samuel Chase before the senate of the

96 OORRT OF IMPEA0HMENT8.
" United States, no challenge was attempted, although the case
"was decided by an almoat atrict party vote in high party
" times, and doubtlesa many of the eenatora had formed and
" expressed opiniona upon his conduct.
".That arbitrary judge, but learned lawyer, knew too much to
" attempt any such futile movement as a challenge to a senator.
u Certain it is that the proprieties of the occasion were not
" marred by the worse than anomalous proceeding of the chal-
" lenge of one senator to another, especially before the defen-
" dant had appeared.
"Nor did the managers exercise the right of challenge,
" although senators Smith and Mitchell of New York, were
" members of the senate on the trial and voted not guilty on
" every article, who had been members of the House when the
" articles were found, and had there voted steadily against the
"whole proceeding.
" Judge Peck's case, which was tried in 1831, affords an-
" other instance in point.
" The conduct of Judge Peck had been the subject of much
" animadversion and comment by the public, and had been for
" four years pending before the congress of the United States
" before it finally came to trial. It was not possible but that
" many of the senate had both formed and expressed opinions
" upon Peck's proceedings, and yet it never occurred to that
" good lawyer to make objection to his triers. Nor did the
" managers challenge, although Webster of Massachusetts was
" a member of the committee of the house of representatives,
" to whom the petition for impeachment was referred, and
" which, after examination, reported thereon ' leave to with-
" draw,' and Sprague of Maine voted against the proceedings
" in the House, while Livingston of Louisiana voted for them.
" All of these gentlemen sat upon the trial and voted as they
" did in the house.
" A very remarkable and instructive caae was that of Judge
" Addison of Pensnylvania, in 1804. There, after the articles
" of impeachmont woro framed, tho trial was poatponod to

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. \) t
" another session of the legislature. Meanwhile three mem-
" bora of the house of represontativea who had voted for tho
"articlea of impeachment wero elected to the aenate, and
" became tho triers of the articlea of impeachment of which
" they had solemnly voted the respondent to be guilty. To
"their sitting on the trial Judge Addison objected, but after
"an exhaustive argument his objection was overruled, 17 to 6.
"Two of the minority were the gentlemen who had voted
"him guilty, and who themselves objected to sitting on the
"trial. "Thusftands the case upon authority."
I close by saying what I stated at the outset, that this chal
lenge proceeds, and I say it with all respect to the other side,
upon a false notion of the nature, powers and purposes of this
court. Mr. BO YDEN. Can I make a brief reply ?
The CHIEF JUSTICE. I understood the motion submit
ted by the gentleman from Craven, (Mr. Lehman,) to extend
the time of the discussion indefinitely.
Senator GILMER. I submit as a question of order that the
motion was to extend the time for ten minutes.
Senator GRAHAM, of Orange. I understand that the
counsel for the respondent have still seven minutes left, with
out a motion.
Mr. CONIGLAND. Mr. Chief Justice, the point which
we have made, it is not necessary for me to say, was not made
with any other than a bona fide purpose. I may be permitted
further to say, that no one can have a higher regard for the
honorable senator (Mr. Edwards) to whom we object, than
myself. But, sir, we place our objection upon what we believe
to be tenable grounds, and we believe further, sir, that we
would be derelict in our duty to the respondent if we failed to
make the challenge. We make it because we desire this trial
may bo conducted according to the laws of North Carolina and
that the scales of justice may be held evenly between the im
peaching body and the accused.

0,,) COujII ui> ijirn,at,iijic,i»io.
Now, sir, as I said when I addressed the court before, every
precedent which has been quoted on the part of the managers
is entirely without authority here. The learned counsel has
stated that a peer of Great Britian cannot be challenged. I
answer by saying that he cannot be sworn as a member of a
court of impeachment, or any other court but he is put
upon his honor. The analogies are altogether different. The
language of the constitution of North Caralina, and the language
of the British constitution if wo could get at it (which I imagine
to bo a very difficult matter) are wholly different from the
language of the constitution under which we are trying this case.
Let us go for a moment to the latest impeachment trial that
has occurred in this country, and certainly tho most important
and tho most extraordinary, and tho ono that was tho most
thoroughly discussed of any that has occurred in tho United
States. Ono great point of discussion, was whether tho senato
was a court, to bo govomod by tho rules of a court, or whothor
it was a Bonato, sitting moroly for tho tlino being as a court.
Sir, it was conceded — and la not that the highort authority —
by tho managers on that important trial, that if tho senato woro
a court, it was govornod by tho rules of a court. Is not that
so, sir? Was it not ao concoded that if a court, it must bo
govornod by tho rules and analogios of courts ?
Sir, tho counsel who last addressed tho court Btatoa that tho
word " court " doos not chango tho case. Why, sir, does it not
chango the case? If there was any moaning in tho word it must
chango it. If tho word " court " docs not make Biich a chango,
what effect has this clause in the constitution of North Carolina
which says that " the judicial power of the state shall be vested
" in a court for the trial of impeachment, a supreme court, supe
rior courts, courts of the justices of the peace and special
" courts ? " I say, then, that the moment the senate is organized
and sits as a court of impeachment, it becomes a part of the
judicial power of North Carolina, is sworn as a court, is desig
nated as a court, and sits as a court by the organic law of the
state, and for the time exercises judicial functions. I say, there-

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 99
fore, it is clear that this clause of the constitution sweeps away
the precedents which are quoted hero to sustain this prosecu
tion, and it may bo said that it was put in there expressly to
settle these matters, in order that when tho court was first
organized there coidd be no more tampering with justice, and
that the scales might be held evenly between the state and the
respondent. But, sir, what is the position of tho other side ? You or
ganize as a court of impeachment under the constitution of
North Carolina ; you are sworn as a court of impeachmont
and then, under tho constitution of North Carolina, you be-
como a part of tho judicial power of the state. Then it is
contended that after being thus organized and sworn as a court,
you may opon it when you please to othor members which
formed no part of the court at the beginning of its delibera
tions. Sir, if it is a court of impeachment — a thing so de
clared by tho organic law of tho state — why should not tho
Bamo analogies apply to it ns the other courts ? What right has
any ono to mako a distinction and say that although tho con
stitution declares you to bo a court you shall bo a court, but a
court which shall not bo govornod by tho rules of othor courts
in this stato ?
Lot us supposo, as I statod beforo, tho ease of a suporior court
judgo who had organized his court and had hoard tho ovidenco
or a portion of it ; could ho leave his place and another judgo
bo allowed to go upon tho bench and decide upon tho case,
when there was no law permitting it ? Would it not be mon
strous and shock our sensibilities ? Would it not be contrary
to all analogies ? Was there over such a thing hoard of in the
judicial history of North Carolina ? I say thon, sir, it is clear
that while, under the British constitution, the precedents aro
against us, our present constitution lias changed tho rule and
mado this body a court ; and the moment it becomes a court and
a part of tho judicial power of tho state it must be governed by
tho analogies of tho courts of tho state.
This, air, is tho wholo point of iny argument, and I could
not add to it if I were to continue my remarks for an indefinite

100 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
•
poriod. I trust that I have proaontod the argument ao clearly
as to bo understood by the mombora of tho court.
The CLERK again read the challengo proaontod by the
counsel for the respondent.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer is of the
opinion that the challenge is not well taken, and that the aena-
tor (Mr. Edwards) is entitled to be sworn as a member of tho
court. Unless a division is called for, the opinion of tho pro-
siding officer will be taken as the rulo of the court. Thero
being no division, the senator will please come forward.
Mr. EDWARDS, senator from the^twenty-first district, camo
forward and was duly qualified by the chief justice.
The CLERK proceeded to read the journal of the proceed
ings of the last meeting of the court and there being no objec
tion thereto they were declared approved.
Mr. BADGER, of counsel for the respondent, submitted the
following answer to article VIII, as previously amended :
" Answer to article VIII as amended.
" For answer to said eight article as amended, this respon-
' dent says, that he abides by his answer to the eight article
' originally filed in this cause in so far as the same is respon-
' sive to the allegations contained in said eight article as amen-
' dod, and without here again repeating the same answer, prays
' the same to be taken as an answer to the said eight article as
' amended, and as to the new allegations contained in said
'eight article as amended, this respondent denies the same.
" And further answering, this respondent denies, that by
' reason of any now allegations contained in said eight article
' as amondod, thia respondent waa guilty of a high miademoanor
' as thoroin charged,

"W. W. HOLDEN.

" R. C. Badger,
" J. M. MoOorkle,
*' Nathaniel Bovden,
" Edward Conioland,
f'W. N. H. Smith,
"Of CounseV

TRIAL OF WIl.l.lAM W. HOLDEN. 101
Senator LEHMAN moved thnt tho amondod answer op rend
bo accepted and. tiled.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE put the question on tho motion of
Senator Lehman, ami it was decided in tho affirmative
Mr. DUNHAM. Mr Chief Justico, the respondent having
filed his answer to the eighth article of impeachment as amended,
in behalf of tho board of managers I ask that the court take a
recess of fifteen minutes that we may submit the answer to tho
house of representatives and obtain its replication thereto.
The CHIEF JUSTICE put the question on granting the
request of Mr. Dunham, and it was decided in the affirmative.
The time for the recess having expired proceedings were
resumed, the Chief Justice in the chair.
Mr. DUNHAM. Mr. Chief Justice, the house of repre
sentative have prepared a replication to the amended answer,'
which I ask that the clerk may read.
Tho CLERK proceeded to read the replication in tho words-
following : '
In the articles of impeachment by tho house of representa
tives against William W. Holden, governor of North Carolina,
it being shown to the house by the report of the board of man
agers that the amendment of tho eighth article requested by the
Iioubo has been allowed by tiro senate sitting as a court of
impeachment, and tho answer of tho respondent to tho said
article as amended being exhibited to the house it Ib ordered:
That this house is content with the replication heretofore
made to all such articles of impeachment and re-adopts tho
flame, in roply to tho answer as now exhibited.
Adopted by Uonno of Representatives, February lat, 1871.
THOMAS J. JARVIS,
Spoakor of llouao of Roproaontativoa.
Mr. GRAHAM, of Orange, inovod that tho additional repli
cation bo rocoivod and filed.
The CHIEF JUSTICE put tho quoation on tho motion of
Mr. Graham, and it waa decided in the affirmative.

103 COl'IlT OF IMI'KAIIMFX'IK.
Senator GRAHAM, of Orange, submitted tho following
order :
Tho eighth article of impeachment of William W. Holdon,
governor of North Carolina, having been amended by tho
house of representatives at the last session of the senato, sitting
as a court of impeachment, to which said article as amended,
the respondent has filed an amended answer, and to which the
house of representatives has taken replication.
It is ordered, That tho senate fritting a6 a court of impeach
ment, will now proceod with thetrial of tho respondent on said
articles, in tho hoti ate chamber in tho capitol of tho state.
Ordered, That the presiding officer of the sonate, sotting as
such court, do now administer to each member here present
and to other members as they may appear, the oath or affirma
tion required by law.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. In looking at tho act relating to
proceeding* on impeachment, the presiding officer discovers
that a trial on an impeachment lias two stages. One is the
consideration of the articles of impeachment and the other is
the trial after issue is joined. The act provides for an oath, to
be administered at the time and place appointed for the trial
after issue joined, then the rules of proceeding adopted by this
body required that before proceeding to the consideration of
the articles of impeachment, the presiding officer shall admin
ister the oath to the members. That has been done in accord
ance with the rules. The presiding officeris of the opinion that
the time has arrived, issue being joined and the time and place
of the trial being fixed, to administer the oath to members
again. The clerk will proceed to call the roll of senators.
Mr. ROBBINS, of Rowan. Mr. Chief Justice, I suppose it
will be necessary to vote on the order fixing the time and place
of trial.
The CHIEF JUSTICE put the question on the adoption of
the order submitted by Senator Graham, of Orange, and it was
decided in the affirmative.
The CLERK proceeded to call the list, of senators in their

TRIAF. OF W1T.MAM W. 1IOT.OKN. 104
order when the following senators came forward and wero duly
qualified by the chief justice:
Messrs. Adams, Albright, Allen, Barnett, Battle, Bellamy,
Brogden, Brown, Cook, Council, Cowles, Crowell, Currie,
Dargan, Edwards, Eppes, Fleinming, Gilmer, Graham, of
Alamance, Graham, of Orange, Hawkins, Hyman, King,
Latham, Led better, Lehman, Linney, Love, Mauney, Mc-
Clammy, McCottcr, Merrimon, Moore, Morehead, Murphy,
Olds, Price, Robbins, of Davidson, Robbins, of Rowan, Nor
ment, Skinner, Speed, Troy, Waddoll, Warren, Whiteside,
Worth. Senator ROBBINS, of Rowan, submitted tho following
ordor: Ordered, That the chief stenographer omploycd by the
senato to record tho proceeding* in the impeachment trial, tako
the following oath, to-wit : " I solemnly swear that I will per
form my duties as stenographic reporter faithfully and impar
tially, and will, to the best of my ability, make an accurate
and truthful record of the proceedings in this trial, and of the
evidence of the several witnesses introduced by the respective
parties." Mr. EDWARD F. UNDERHILL, the chief stenographer,
came forward and was duly qualified by taking the oath pre
scribed. Mr. GRAHAM, of Orange, moved that the court adjourn.
A sufficient number seconding the motion (as required by
the rules, the hour for adjournment not having arrived),
The CHIEF JUSTICE put the question on the motion of
senator Graham, and it was decided in the affirmative.
So the court adjourned.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 105!
SIXTH DAY.
Senate Chamber, Feb. 2, 1871.
Tho COURT met at 12 o'clock, M., pursuant to adjourn
ment, Honorable R. M. Pearson, Chief Justice of the Supreme
Court, in the chair.
The proceedings were opened by proclamation made in duo
form by the doorkeeper.
Tho CLERK proceeded to call the roll of senators, when a
quorum was found to be present.
Senators BEASLEY and FLYTHE came forward and were
duly qualified by the chief justice as members of the court.
Senator LEHMAN moved that the reading of the journal
of the proceedings of yesterday be dispensed with.
The CHIEF JUSTICE put the question on the motion of
Senator Lehman, and it was decided in the affirmative.
Mr. SPARROW, chairman of the board of managers, opened
the case on the part of the managers. He said :
Mr. Chief Justice and Senators:
The partiality of tho board of managers has devolved upon
me tho responsibility of making to the senate, convened as a
court of impeachment, a statement of the facts and of tho law
as applicable to the facts on which they rely, in slipport of the
articles of impeachment preferred by tho house of representa
tives against the governor of the State, and upon which they
expect to urge before this honorable body his conviction. In
the discharge of this important duly I cnn scarcely hope, with
the limited time and means which I have had at my command,
to do that justice to the aubject, which the gravity of tho
occasion would aoem to demand.
Tho spoctacle exhibited in this senate chamber to-day, ia
without precedent in the annals of our country. It ia tho
arraignment of the chief executive officer of a state, by the

106 COURT of impeachments.
people of a state, through the representatives of the people, at
the bar of the senate, for crimes and misdemeanors in office.
It is an accusation preferred by the people of North Carolina
against the governor of North Carolina, for an alleged invasion
of their rights as secured to them by the constitution and laws
of the land, and the subversion of their liberties. It is a
charge preferred by the people, that he, who was exalted by
their suffrages to the highest office within their gift, to be a
terror to evil doers, has himself become a doer of evil — that he
who was sworn to support and maintain the law, has become
himself a violator of the law — that he whose sworn duty it was to
protect tho innocout and punish tho guilty, line made instru
ments of tho wicked and disorderly to punish the innocent and
unoffending, verifying in his porson the scripture maxim,
" when tho wicked are in authority tho people mourn."
Thoso who may imagine that this impeachment of the Gov
ornor is an attempt of a successful political party, in the flush
of their triumph, to depose from his high office one who has
made himself politically obnoxious to them, greatly underesti
mate the case and impute unworthy motives where none exist.
As a party measure, it would be fruitless' of results as the
removal from office of the present incumbent, would place in
the executive chair as his successor one of his own party, the Lieu
tenant Governor, who is far less obnoxious to the people. It is
a movement, Mr. Chief Justico and Senators, which rises far
abovo all party considerations. It is tho uprising of an outraged
and oppressed people, to vindicate tho violated law. Of far lese
moment is the suggestion sometimes seen and heard, that this
prosecution ought not to be carried on in the present depleted
condition of the public treasury, and amid the financial prostra
tion which abounds in all our borders. That it will cost money
and fnrtlior burden the peoplo ! The question of dollars and
cents, poor as are the people of North Carolina — oppressed
as they have been — plundered as they have been — groaning
as thoy are under a burden of taxation — is a suggestion under
estimating, as it is unworthy of their honor, their intelligence, their

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 107
virtue and their patriotism. The price to be paid for liberty,
is always costly, sometimes in blood, invariably in treasure. No
true son of North Carolina will hesitate to pay this price. God
grant that it may never again be in blood I God grant that
in all time to come, brother may never in all this land bo
arrayed against brother in civil strife.
Mr. Chief Justico and Senators, tho people of North Caro
lina have always been distinguished for their obedience to law,
and their lovo of liberty. If they possess any peculiar traits
of character, pre-eminent above all others, they are theso. It
has been so in all their history from the 20th of May, 1775,
of Mecklenburg memory to the present time. Tho cause
which they seek to vindicate beforo this tribunal, is not theirs
only, but the cause of all people who seek to preserve the
forms of constitutional government and civil liberty. It is tho
cause of all free people, and of all people struggling to be free,
the world over ; the cause of Now York and Missouri, as well
as of North Carolina. The question is a groat question. Tho
issues are momentous issuos. Are the principles of liberty, built
up and established and perpetuated in Great Britain — handed
down to our fathers — adopted by them and cemented with their
blood — are these great principles of the English bill of rights of
1689, incorporated by the framers of our organic law into thatin-
strument-r-of the great charter and habeas corpus, to be preserved
in this country ? No less issues than these are .involved in this
proceeding. Do we live in tho enjoyment of constitutional
freedom? Have we preserved unimpaired the liberties be
queathed to us by our English and American ancestors, or have
we adopted a highor law than these, the law of tyrants and of
temporary majorities, which override and subvert at will the
forms of constitutional freedom \
Mr. Chief Justice, when those in whose persons the rights of
freemen and the law of liberty have been violated by their
unlawful arrest, and imprisonment, shall have appealed to the
judiciary for rehef in vain ; when the people through tlieir
representativeB shall have called upon tlie Senate, sitting as a

108 COCRT OF IMPBA0HMENT8.
court of impeachment for redreaa, in vain, then indeed will our
liberties havo departed. Then will a revolution in our form of
government have takon place, fearful in its proportions and
realized by none of ub. Then will tho glorious temple of lib
erty reared for us by our fathers, instead of being, as we had
too fondly supposed, real, substantial, built of strong rock and
founded on a rock, have become as the house of the foolish
man built upon the sand — swept away like similar fabrics of
old, by the strong hand of power, and the "necessity" pleas
of tyrants.
We are relieved of a subject which was fruitful of discussion
in the impeachment trinl of president Johnson, as to the char
acter of impeachable offences. The constitution of the United
States simply refers to the subject of impeachment without defi
ning it. The long list of authorities cited in the very able discus
sions in the trial referred to, very conclusively establish the fol
lowing as the law of the subject :
That every act which by parliamentary usage is impeacha
ble, is defined a "high crime and misdemeanor.' "
That when the words "high crimes and misdemeanors" are
used in prosecutions by impeachment, the words high crimes
have no detiuntc signification, but aro used merely to give
greater solemnitv to the clu:rye.
That thero may be canes appropriate for the exercise of the
power of impeachment, whore no crime or misdemeanor has
been committed.
That with thooHtnbllhlied parliamentary law of Great Britain,
un their land marks to guide them, our fathers adopted a con
stitution under which olfielnl malfeiwarn'O and nonfeasance, and
In Homo cnees misfeasance, mny bo the subject of impeachment,
although not made criminal by net of congress, or bo recognized
bv the common law of England, or of any stato of the union.
They adopted impeachment ns a means of removing men from
office whose misconduct imperils the public safety, and renders
them unfit to occupy official position.
Woodeson, whoso lectures were read at Oxford in 1777,

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 109
t
declared that impeachments extend to cases] of which tho ordi
nary courts had no jurisdiction. He says : " Magistrates and
" officers may abuse their delegated powers to the extensive
" detriment of the community, and at the same time in a man
ner not properly cognizable before the ordinary tribunals."
And he proceeds to say " the remedy is by impeachment."
[See impeachment of Andrew Johnson, pages 125, 126 and
147.] These extracts, Mr. Chief Justice and Senators, define the
common law doctrine of impeachable crimes and misdemeanors
as it exists in Great Britain and tho United States.
The provisions of the constitution of North Carolina on the
subject of impeachment are as follows :
" No person shall be put. to answer any criminal charge,
except as hereinafter allowed, but by indictment, presentment,
or impeachment." [Art. I, sec. 8.J
" The court for the trial of impeachments shall be the senate.
" A majority of the members shall be necessary to a quorum,
" and the judgment shall not extend beyond removal from and
" disqualification to hold office in this State ; but the party
" shall be liable to indictment and punishment according to law.
" [Article IV.— Sec. 5.]
" Tho house of representatives solely, shall have tho power
" of impeaching. No person shall bo convicted without the
" concurrence of two-thirds of the senators present. When
"the governor is impeached, tho chief justico shall preside."
" [Art. IV.— Sec. 0.]
It thus appears that tho constitution of North Carolina
provides for impeachment, but does not proHcribo for what
ofibneos public officers may bo impeached. It proscribes the
court, tho number nocosBary to convict, tho -judgment of tho
court and its.eftect upou tho accused, the impeaching powor,
and the presiding officera of tho court, and thero leaves the
subject. Our act of assembly of 1868-'69, [p. 409,] entitled " Pro
ceedings of Impeachment," comes to our relief with a defini-

110 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
t
tion, and one in precise accordance with the common law -doc
trine heretofore announced, as prevailing in England and the
United States. The sixteenth section of the act provides that
" every officer in this state shall be liable to impeachment for,
" 1st. Corruption or other misconduct in his official capacity ;
"2d. Habitual drunkenness;
" 3d. Intoxication while engaged in the exercise of his office;
" 4th. Drunkenness in any public place ;
"5th. Mental or physical incompetence to discharge the
"duties of his office;
" Oth. Any criminal matter, the conviction whereof would
" tend to bring his office into public contempt."
An enumeration of offences which neither enlarges nor
abridges the common law doctrine as already understood and
practised, both in Great Britain and in this country, but which
for our purposes makes tho discussion of what impeachable
offences aro, both definite and certain. This definition, it will
bo observed, embraces crimes and misdemeanors which are
indictable both at common laAV and under statutes, and also a
largo class of offences which aro not indictable at all. This
latter class all seem to be embraced in the first subdivision of
section 16, to wit : " Corruption or other misconduct in his
" official capacity." The first embraces, "Any criminal matter,
" the conviction whereof would tend to bring his office into
" public contempt."
Has the respondent in this case been guilty either of " mis-
" conduct in his official capacity," in his office of governor, or
of " any criminal matter, the conviction whereof would tend to
" bring his office of governor of North Carolina into contempt ?"
These are the questions submitted to the consideration of the
senate. And this brings us to a brief statement of the nature and
character of the offences preferred in the articles of impeach
ment against the accused.
Article I, charges, substantially, that the accused corruptly
and wickedly declared the county of Alamance to be in " insur-

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. Ill
rection," whereas there was no insurrection ; that he took mili
tary possession of the county by armed bands of lawless and
desperate men, organized without lawful authority ; and that
he made unlawful arrests of peaceable citizens, whom ho im
prisoned, beat, hung by the neck, and otherwise maltreated.
Article II, charges that he did tho same in the county of
Caswell. Article III, charges the unlawful arrest and imprisonment of
Josiah Turner, Jr., in the county of Orange, by tho procure
ment and order of the accused. /
Article IV, charges the unlawful arrest and imprisonment of
John Kerr and three other citizens, in the county of Caswell,
by tho procurement and order of the accused.
Article V, charges the unlawful arrest and imprisonment, in
the county of Alamance, by order of the accused, of Adolphus
G. Moore, and tho refusal of George W. Kirk, acting under
and by the authority of the accused, to surrender the said
Moore, in obedience to the writ of habeas corpus, to the civil
authorities. Article VI charges the arrest of John Kerr and eighteen
other peaceable citizens of Caswell county, and their detention
and imprisonment, under the orders of the accused, by a large
band of armed men, unlawfully organized into an army and
commanded by George W. Kirk and others as officers, and the
refusal of said Kirk by the order and command of the accused,
to surrender the said citizens unlawfully held by him as pris
oners, to the civil authorities in obedience to the writ of habeas
corpus. Article VII charges,
1. The unlawful organization of an army of desperate men
commanded by Kirk, Burgen and Yates, all desperadoes from
the State of Tennessee.
2. The hanging by the neck in Alamance county of William
Patton and Lucien H. Murray, and thrusting into a loathsome
dungeon Josiah Turner Jr., and F. A. Wiley. |
3. Unlawful warrants made by the accused upon the Treas-

112 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
urer of the State, for large sums of money, for the unlawful
purpose of supporting and maintaining the lawless bands of
armed men organised as aforesaid.
Article VIII charges, that the accused as governor, made his
warrants for large sums of money on the public Treasurer for
the unlawful purpose of paying the armed men before men
tioned — caused and procured said Treasurer to deliver to one
A. D. Jenkins, appointed by the accused to be paymaster, the
Bum of forty thousand dollars; that the Hon. Anderson
Mitchell, one of the superior court judges, on application to
him made, issued writs of injunction which were served upon
the said treasurer and paymaster, restraining them from paying
said money to the 6aid troops ; that thereupon the accused
incited and procured the said A. D. Jenkins paymaster, to
disobey the injunction of the court and to deliver the money
to another agent of the accused, to-wit : one John B. Neathery ;
and thereupon the accused ordered and caused the said John
B. Nethery to disburse and pay out the money so delivered to
him, for the illegal purpose of paying the expenses of, and
keeping on foot the illegal military forco aforesaid.
This enumeration of crimes and misdemeanors, Mr. Chief
Justice and Senators, which are more particularly described in
the articles of impeachment, and which we propose to make
good by proofs, embraces all the offences of which a person is
liable to be impeached, as set forth in the first and sixth subdi
visions of the 16th section of the impeachment act of 1869
already referred to. It embraces acts which amount not only
to " misconduct in office," but " corruption in office." It em
braces also acts which are criminal in law, and will subject
the offender to indictment before the courts ; and who will say
that a conviction thereof will not only not tend to bring, but
will not actually bring his office into public contempt.
And in the commission of these offences, the accused has
not only made himself amenable to the law as enacted by the
General Assembly, he has also violated the fundamental law
of the land which he is .sworn to support and maintain.

TRIAL OF WIXLIAM W- HOLDEN. 113
• We allege that he has thus violated the following sections of
article I ot the constitution of North Carolina, known as the
declaration of rights :
" Section 17. No person ought to be taken, imprisoned, or
" disseized of his freehold, liberties or privileges, or outlawed or
" exiled, or in any manner deprived of his fife, liberty or property
" but by the law of the land.
"Sec. 21. The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall
" not be suspended.
" Sec. 24. A well regulated militia being necessary to the
" security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and
" bear arms shall not be infringed ; and as standing armies in
"time of peace aro dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be
" kept up, and the military should be kept under strict subor-
•' dination to and governed by the civil pmoer."
Mr. Chief Justice and Senators : The first and second ot
the articles of impeachment, declare, " that by the constitution
" of the state of North Carolina, the governor of said state has
" power to call out the militia thereof to execute the laws, sup-
" press riots or insurrection, and repel invasion, whenever the
"execution of the law shall be resisted, or there shall exist any
" riot, insurrection or invasion, but not otherwise;" and they
allege, that the respondent, with intent to incite war, subvert
liberty and law, and to degrade the state and people, proclaim
ed the counties of Alamance and Caswell to be in insurrection,
occupied them by military force, and suspended civil authority,
when he well knexo that such proclamation was groundless
and false, and that there was no insurrection in said counties.
This raises, as it seems to tho board of managers, a very im
portant question for the consideration of this honorable body,
to wit : the precise meaning and import of the word insurrec
tion as used in the constitution of the state of North Carolina.
The language of the constitution in article XII, section 3,
is as follows :
" The governor shall be commander-in-chief, and have power

114 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
" to call out the militia to execute the law, suppress riots and
" insurrection, and to repel invasion.
What does the constitution mean by " suppressing insurrec
tion ?" What is " insurrection ?" When ia a county or state
in insurrection ?
Webster, in his unabridged dictionary, defines it aa followe :
" A rising against civil or political authority ; the open and
"active opposition of a number of persons to the execution of
" law in a city or state. It is equivalent to sedition, except that
"¦ sedition expresses a less extensive rising. It differs from re
bellion, for the latter expresses a revolt, or an attempt to
" overthrow the government, &c.
" Insurrection is however used with such latitude as to coin-
" prebend either section or rebellion."
Valtel in his Law of Nations, page 422, uses tho following
language : " Sec. 288. Tho namo of rebelB is given to all sub
jects who unjustly take up arms against tho ruler of tho
" society to deprivo him of tho supreme authority, resist his
"commands nnd impose conditions on him."
" See. 289. If the rage of tho malcontents bo particularly
" levelled at the magistrates or other officers vested with tho
"public authority, and they proceed to a formal disobedience or
" acts of open violence, this is called sedition. When it spreads,
" when it infests the majority of tho inhabitants of a city or
" province, and gains such strength that even tho sovereign
" himself is no longer obeyed, it is usual, &c, ' to dintingnish
" ' such disorder by the name of insurrection.' "
These definitions which might be multiplied, will answer our
purpose. Let us analyze them. According to Webster, its
very deriation from the Latinfwords in and surgo, to rise
against, defines its meaning. There must be a rising ; open
and active, and violent of a number of persons ; in opposition
to the execution of the law.
Now analyze Vattel's definition. It is this, " If malcon-
" tents take up arms, and they proceed to formal disobedienco
" or acts of open violence against magistrates or others vested

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 115
•
" with the public authority — when this spreads so as to infect a
" majority of inhabitants, &c, it is insurrection."
This definition fulfills all the conditions of that laid down by
Webster. There must be a rising, of a number, open, active
to oppose the execution of the laws.
Now follow up these definitions by a few well known exam
ples taken from history.
And first, let us turn to Great Britain, to the time of Henry
VIII, and to the effect produced upon the people by the illegal
exactions of Wolsey, in 1523 and 1525, .under the "Forced
Loan." Hallam, in his Constitutional History, vol. 1, page 28,
Bays of tho people : " Nor did thoir discontent terminate in
" complaintB. Tho commlBsionoi'B (to collect tho tax) mot with
"forcible opposition in several counties, and a serious inaurrec-
" tion broke out in Suffolk. In this commotion ho speaks also
"of the assemblages ns tumultuous."
Turn to the well known insurrection in Mnssachusetts in
1786, to bo found in all tho histories of the United States, com
monly called Shay's Rebellion. Here, according to Judgo
Marshall's lifo of Washington, (p. 117,) twelve or fifteen thou
sand men were, at different times, arrayed in open hostility
against tho payment of dues to the officers of the United States
government ; against the payment of taxes fo the government ;
against lawyers aud courts of justice. IIo says " tumultuous
" assemblages of the people arrested the course of law, and
"restrained the judges from the execution of their duty."
Turn to the case of insurrection in the western counties of
Pennsylvania, in August, 1794, familiarly known as . the
" Whiskey Insurrection." Marshall, in his life of Washington,
(pages 340-'41, et. seq.,) says of it, that there was " seditious
" and violent resistance to the execution of the law imposing
" duties on distilled spirits in the United States ;" that thero
was " open defiance of the laws, insurgents fired on the Mar-
" ahal, and attacked the house of General Nevil, the Inspector."
Fiuley and Hallam, and the report of the case in tlie state
trials, more than confirm all that ia here said.

116

CORUT OF IMPEAOIIMENTS.

These authorities, Mr. Chief Justice and senators, all apeak
one language ; and they might be multiplied to an almoat in
definite extent. To conetituto ineurrection thero muBt be a
riaing of the people, and open, active reaistance by them, to the
enforcement of tho lawa in a town, county or distinct. And
you may consult the authorities, both of law and letters, and
tho examplea of history, foreign and domestic, ancient and
modem, and you will consult them in vain for another defini
tion. Are we not justified, therefore, in the assertion that the
word insurrection, as used in the laws of England, the consti
tution of the United States, and the constitution of North
Carolina, indeed the constitutions of all the states, has a com
mon law meaning, which is not uncertain, but fixed and definite ?
It will doubtless be argued here, as it was argued before the
chief justice at chambers in tho habeas corpus cases, that the
meaning of tho word " insurrection " as used in the constitu
tion, is modified, altered or abridged, by tho act of assembly of
" lS(!9-'70, " to Becuro the better protection of life and prop-
" crty." Tho first section of that act authorizes nnd empowers
" tho governor " whenever in his judgment the civil authorities
"in any county aro unable to protect its citizens in the enjoy-
"ment of life and property, to declare such county to be in a
" stato of insurrection," *fcc.
Supposing that the legislature by this act, intended to modify
tho common law meaning of insurrection) and to give a partial
definition of it, which intention wo do not mean to concede ;
then two questions present themsolves. First, had tho legisla
ture tho right to declare that to be insurrection, which is not
insurrection ? In tho oxerciso of tho discretionary power vested
In the governor by tho act of assembly, had ho tho authority to
declare a county to bo in a otato of iiiBuiToctlon, when there
was no insurrection. For tho abuse of bucIi authority, oven if
jt M-ero properly bestowed, would ho not bo amonablo to tho
court of impeachmont ? Theso questions carry with them their
own answers. It is not within tho province of the legislature
to construe and declare tho meaning of acts of ossembly, which

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 117
had become law, except in certain oxceptionary case?. [Soo
Houston vs. Bogle 4 Iredol 496, and casca cited.] This ia tho
peculiar province of the courts. Much less is it within the
power of the legislature by any act of theirs to declare tho
meaning' of an article in the constitution ; and if it cannot
define, how can it alter, modify or abridge its meaning ? If
such was its purpose, which is not believed, in passing the act
of 1869-70, its action was unconstitutional, and the act itself
is a nullity. The legiflature cannot give to the constitution a
meaning not intended by the framers of that instrument — put
upon an article thereof a construction which it will not bear —
pronounce that to bo insurrection which is not insurrection, and
bo encourage a violation of the law of the land, and the liberty
of the citizen. We shall insist, therefore, that in this investiga
tion, it will not be competent to give in evidence, any state of
facts, which do not go to make up insurrection as already
defined. We are prepared to show on the contrary that there was
nothing in the condition of the counties of Alamance and Cas
well which goes to fulfill the conditions of an insurrection. There
wero no uprisings of the peoplo to resist the enforcement of tho
laws or the officers of the law. The people of thoso counties
wero in complete subordination to lawful authority. The busi
ness of tho country was not interrupted. The farmer was in
liis fields — tho mechanic in his workshop— tho merchant
behind his countor — the minister of tho gospel in tho pulpit.
The officers of tho law were in tho undiaturbod exercise of all
the functions of their offices. The juatices' courta wore
open — tho courta of tho probate judges wero open — the
offices for the regietration of deeds and conveyances were
opon — the sheriffs and constables oxcuted the process of the
courts undisturbed, — regular terme of the auperior courta were
held, and at no time and no place, ao far as is known, was there
resistance by any body of men to the officers of the law.
Ia it a sufficient answer to all this to say, that in Caswell
county a state senator waa secretly murdered in the day time,

118 COURT OF IMPEA0HMENT8.
and that in Alamance county one man was secretly hung, and
another secretly drowned, and others secretly whipped ? How
do these cases vary from aimilar onea occurring in all parta of
the country every year, and every month in the year ? Why
should tho aeoret murder of Stephens in Caswell, or of Outlaw
in Alamance, constitute insurrection in those counties, more
than that the eecret murder of Nathan in the city of New York
should put that city in a state of insurrection ? And why
should the military be called on to ferret out secret crimes ?
Have the men who usually belong to military organizations any
peculiar aptitude or fitness for such duty more than the sworn
officers of the law ? The men sent to these counties were pecu
liarly qualified for the perpetration of outrages upon the per
sons of unoffending citizens, and of suspected persons, and by
threats, intimidations, hanging by the neck, and other like means
to extort confessions from unwilling or innocent witnesses.
Tho civil authorities are more competent and bettor qualified
to detect and bring to justice secret violators of the law than the
military. Especially must this be true if the military must do
as tho law requires, turn over offenders when arrested to
the civil authorities for trial. Even if military aid had been
wanting, there were we expect to show by the evidence, com
panies of the United States troops stationed in both these coun
ties, sent there by the governor of the state, before and after
the organization of these forces.
Mr. Chief Justice and senators, it is charged in the fifth,
sixth and 6even articles of impeachment, that the military force
organized, armed and equipped by respondent, and sent under the
command of one George W. Kirk, into the counties of Alamance
and Caswell, were unlawful troops ; an armed force not recog
nized by the constitution of the United States, nor by the con
stitution and laws ot North Carolina.
The constitution of tlie United States, article I, section 8,
clause 14, empowers, congress " to provide for calling forth the
" militia to execute tho laws of the union, suppress insurrec-
" tions, and repel invasions."

TRIAL OF WDLLIAM W. HOLDEN. 119
The constitution of North Carolina, article 3, section 8, is as
follows: "The governor shall be commander-in-chief of the
" militia of the state, except when they shall be called into the
" service of the United States." _ '
Article 12, section 1 reads :
" All able-bodied male citizens of the state of North Caro-
" lina, between the ages of twenty-one and forty years, who
" aro citizens of the United States, shall be liable to duty in
" tho militia."
Section 2 reads :
"The general assembly shall provide for the organizing,
" arming, equipping and discipline of the militia, and for pay-
" ing the same when called into active service."
Section 3 reads :
" The governor shall be commander-in-chief, and have power
" to call out tho militia to execute the law, suppress riots and
" insurrection, and repel invasion."
The general assembly of North Carolina in August, 1868,
passed " An act to organize a militia of North Carolina."
Section 11 of that act provides :
" No man shall be an officer or private in the detailed militia
" unless he be an elector of the state, and first take and subscribe
" the constitutional oath of office."
The act of 1869-70, known as the Shofrher act, section 1,
authorize? the governor whenever, &c, " to call into active
" service the militia of the State to such an extent as may be
come -necessary to suppress insurrections."
These various recitals from the constitutions and laws suffi
ciently explain that no body of armed men can be lawfully
organized in North Carolina otherwise than as miltUa and
under tho mihtia laws. And who are to constitute the militia ?
The constitution prescribes that they must be citizens of the
state. And section 11 of the same act provides that " no man
" shall be an officer or private in the detailed militia unless he
" be an elector of the State." . <<
..Was this the character of the force organized by governor

120 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Iloldon, and sent into the counties of Alamance and Caswoll 1
We are prepared to prove that theae men were not organized
aa militia under the militia lawe, but were raised aa an inde
pendent volunteer force, recruited mainly from one locality in
this state and an adjoining locality in the state of Tennessee,
and that the colonel, lieutenant colonel, and major of one of
the regiments were all men of desperate character from the
state of Tennessee. And very many of the men recruited
were under and over the age prescribed for the mititia in the
constitution. Neither in the constitution of the state, nor in
the acts of 1868, nor in the Shoffner act of 1869-70, is there
any provision for the character of troops raised by the respon
dent and commanded by George W. Kirk, called state troops.
Such a military force was not only not authorized by the con
stitution of the state, but was organized in express violation of
the 1st article of the constitution of the United States, which
declares that " no state shall without the consent of congress.
" keep troops or ships of war in times of peace."
The third and fourth articles of impeachment charge tho
unlawful arrest, detention and imprisonment, by order of tho
respondent, as governor, of Josiah Turner, jr., in tho county
of Orange, and of John Kerr and three others in tho county
of Caswell, without any lawful warrant or authority.
Was the arrest of these men unlawful ? Was it mado by tho
order of the respondent ; or having been mado without his
order, were they detained and imprisoned with his knowledgo,
approval and consent, by his agents?
Section 17 of the declaration of rights of North Carolina,
declares that, " No person ought to be taken, imprisoned or
" disseized of his freehold, liberties or privileges, or outlawed,
" or exiled, or in any manner deprived of his life, liberty, or
" property, but by the law of the land."
In the face of this plain provision of the constitution, by
what authority is it claimed that these arrests were made ? Is
it under the provisions of the act of 1869-70, " to secure tlie
" better protection of life and property?" The provisions of

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 121
that act do not authorize such arrests, and if they were intended
to confer that authority such provisions would be unconstitu
tional. Is it claimed that the county of Caswell having been
declared in insurrection, civil law was suspended and martial
law was in force ? The answer is, martial law cannot prevail
in North Carolina. The writ of habeas corpus cannot be sus
pended. It is a civil writ issued by the judiciary and served
by a civil officer. Martial law suspends all civil authority and
therefore the writ cannot run.
In the insurrection in western Pennsylvania in 1794 against
the laws of the United States, where the resistance was violent
and treasonable, martial law was not declared, nor the writ of
habeas corpus suspended. The troops were called out expressly
to co-operate with the civil authorities, and to cause the laws to
be duly executed. Arrests were then made by the civil
officers, and those seized carried before the civil authorities for
hearing and trial. [See cases cited by Woodbury J., in Luther
vs. Borden, 7 Howard.]
In Burr's conspiracy in lS05-'6 arrests were made on oath
and warrant, except in two cases, and these were immediately
discharged under writs of habeas corpus.
The use of the army of the United States, and of the militia
of the states, in time of insurrection, riots and rebellion, is to
assist the civil authorities in the enforcement of the laws, not
to supercede and set them aside.
This doctrine has been very wisely incorporated into the
militia act of 1868, in force when these arrests were made.
Section 22, of that act provides that, " The detailed militia or.
"ganised under the provisions of this act, shall not be used on
" any occasion, nor under any pretext for any other purpose
" than to execute the law's, and to repress resistance to the
"same, and it may be called upon by any peace officer for that
"purpose." No principle of law, Mr. Chief Justice and senators, ia
better settled in this land of liberty than the exemption of citi
zens from arrest; except by due warrant of law.
9

122 COURT OF IMPBAOHMENTEr.
In the case of Josiah Turner, jr., he was arrested in the
county of Orange, which had not been proclaimed to be in
insurrection, and therefore the respondent ia deprived of even
this shallow pretext for justification. And hie plea that he did
not ordor his arrest in that county, but only in the counties of
Alamanco and Caawell, cannot avail him, aa he oonfoBaoa that
when informed of tho arrest, he outhorizcd the detention of
the prisoner, thereby giving his sanction to his arrest, as though
it had been made by his order in the first instance. Even tho
rights of war are not to extend beyond tho place where the
insurrection exists,* nor to persona not connected with it; nor
oven within the scene, to persons or property of citizens
against whom no probable cause exists. [See Luther vs. Borden,
7 Howard, p. 84.}
As conclusive of tins wljole- matter, tho chief justice in ex
parte) Moore, decided that as a means to suppress insurrection,
" the detention of the petitioner as a military prisoner, is not a
"proper means. For it violates the bill of rights." [See
Habeas Coipus cases, p. 33.]
Articles five and six charge the arrest and imprisonment of
Adolphus G. Moore, of Alamance, and John Kerr and seven
teen others, citizens of Caswell county, and tlie refusal of George
W. Kirk, acting under the orders of the respondent, to surren
der them to the judiciary for examination, in obedienee to the
writ of habeas corpus. The respondent acknowledges that said
prisoners were detained by his orders and that the refusal to
deliver them in obedience to the exigencies of the writ was by
his authority.
Section 21 of the declaration of rights, declares that " The
"privilege of the writ ©f habeas corpus shall not be suspended."
Adolphus G. Moore, a citizen of Alamance, filed his petition
before Chief Justice Pearson at chambers, on the 16th of July,
1870, in which he alleged that on the 15th day of July,
1870, While he was about his lawful bu&inesa in &3id county, he
was arrested and detained by a fequad of person* purporting io
be soldiers, acting Under the order* ©i one George W. Kirk.

TRIAL OF WTLLIAM W. HOLDEN. 123
That bail was offered by him and denied by said Kirk — that
his arrest was without warrant and for no cause, and ho there
fore prayed the chief justice to grant to him the writ of habeas
corpus, to be directed to the said Kirk, commanding him to pro
duce forthwith tho petitioner before his honor together with the
cause of his arrest. The writ was granted as prayed for on tho
same day. On the 17th day of July it was duly served upon
tho said Kirk, who upon being informed of its contents declared
" That he could take no notice of such papers — that they had
played out — that ho was acting under orders from governor
Holden, with instructions to disregard such papers— that the
court had been appointed to try them (the prisoners,) and that he
would surrender them on governor Holden's order, but not
otherwise unless overpowered by force. This return having
been made to the chief justice on the 18th day of July, ho im
mediately informed the respondent that Kirk had refused to
make return of the writ, and asked whether Kirk " acted under
" his orders." On the day following the accused replied that
" Col. Kirk made the arrests, and now detains tho prisoners
" named, by my order. He was instructed firmly but respect-
" fully to decline to deliver the prisoners."
The chief justice in announcing his decision on a motion
for the arrest. of Kirk for contempt of court, said : " I declare
"my opinion to be, that the privilege of the writ of habeas
" coi'pus has not been suspended by the action of his excellency ;
" that the governor has power under the constitution and laws
" to declare a county to be in a state of insurrection, to take
" military possession, to order the arrest of all 6uspected per-
" sons, and to do all things necessary to suppress the inenrrec-
" tion, but he has no power to disobey the writ of habeas
" corpus, or to order the trial of any citizen, otherwise than by
"jury. According to the law of tlie land, such action would
"be in excess of his power."
Writs of habeas corpus were also issued on tho 26th day of
July, upon tlie petition of John Kerr and eighteen others, citi
zens of Caswell county, by the chief justice. These writs.

124 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
were placed in the hands of Geerge Williamson, for service on
the said Kirk. On the 29th of July said Williamson filed an
affidavit which I propose to read :
" George Williamson makes oath that, he is a citizen of the
" county of Caswell, and a qualified elector of the staje of North
" Carolina ; that writs of habeas corpus in behalf of all the per-
" sons above named, issued by Richmond M, Pearson, chief
" justice of the state, were placed in his hands, for service upon
" George W. Kirk. That he went to Yanceyville with the 6aid
" writs, on the 27 of July, 1870 ; that the prisoners above
" named, were, as he was informed, confined in the court house
" at that place ; that he found armed sentinels surrounding the
" court house ; that for the purpose of seeing the said George
" W. Kirk, and serving the said writs, he attempted to enter
" the court house square, when he was stopped at the gate
" thereof by a sentinel at the said gate ; affiant told him he
" wished to see Col. Kirk ; an officer was then called, and came
" out ; he was said, in affiants presence, to be the adjutant; ho
" uBkcd affiant what was his business ; affiant told him he had
"a communication for Col. Kirk; he asked the nature of it;
" affiant toldhiin ho preferred to see Col. Kirk; the said adju-
" tant then entered the court house, and a person said to bo
" Major Yates, camo out to affiant — asked affiant's name, and
" that of another person with affiant, which was given him.
" The said Yates thon asked affiant what was the nature of tho
" tho communication ho had for Col. Kirk. Affiant told him
" that thoy wore writs of habeas corpus, issued by chief justice
" Poarson (taking the Baid writs from his pocket at the time)
" which he wished to servo upon tho said Kirk, Ho told
" affiant that he would have nothing to do with them — and that he,
" affiant, could not sco Col. Kirk. Ho, the said Yates, finally
"said Col. Kirk was busy, but might see him in half an hour.
" Affiant then retired to tho piazza of a storo, in view of the court
" house. Some half hour or more afterwards, seeing the Baid
" Yates at the gate of the court house square, affiant again went
" to him, and asked him what Col. Kirk said, and whether he.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 125
" could see him. He replied that Col. Kirk refused to have
" any communication with affiant. Affiant then retired some
" fifty yards, and took his seat under a tree. He saw two per-
" sons standing at an upper window in the court house, one of
" whom he was informed was Col. Kirk ; and affiant then at-
" tempted to approach the window, holding up the said writs
" in his hand ; the person said to be Col. Kirk, immediately
" retired ; affiant had not gone within the line of sentinels, but
" after his attempt to. approach the said window, he saw the
" same person who he had been told was colonel Kirk, when at
" said window, in the vestible of the court house, on the lower
" floor ; he seemed to be giving orders or instructions to the
"soldiers outside; immediately a drum was beaten; affiant
" then retired under the tree as aforesaid ; some thirty or forty
" armed men, upon the beat of the drum, formed a line, and
" seemed to be loaning thoir muskets. They approached affi-
"ant, but before getting to him woro halted, and in a few
"moments returned to the court houso, and just after a squad
" of aeven mon, armod with muskots, and under tho command
" of tho said major Yates, came to affiant, and affiant was
" ordered to leave, or he would bo fired into, affiant then left,
" and made no further attempt to deliver tho said write to the
" said George W. Kirk. "George Williamson.
" Sworn and subscribed before me this the 29th day of July,
" A. D. 1870. "W. H. Bagley, Clerk:'
Mr. Chief Justice and senators, tho unlawful conduct of the
respondent, complained of by the peoplo, cannot be put in a
stronger light than by reference to the effect produced by the
soldiers organized by his orders,' and sent into the Counties of
Alamanco and Caswoll. Thoso desperate men, not only ar
rested innocent and unoffending citizona, aome of them men
like John Kerr and Samuel P. Hill, whom the State had
honored with high offices, and who had proved themselves non
unworthy of the confideuce bestowed, but they defied and

126

COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.

thwarted the action of the judiciary of the atate, (always here
tofore the bulwark of civil liberty,) in affording relief to tlie
prisoners. Ia not the fact notorious, that the chief justice,
having iseued the writs aa prayed for in the case of Mooro
and others, having ordered tho production of the prisoners be
fore the court, and when this order was disobeyed, tlie court
declined to adopt tho usual and necessary orders to enforce
obedience to its mandate I And for what reason? Let tho
court speak for itself:
" It is highly probable, nay in my opinion certain, that tho
" writ in the hands or the sheriff (with authority to call out the
" power of the county) by which he is commanded if neces-
" sary, to take the petitioner out of the hands of the military
" authorities, will plunge the whole state into civil war. "
So the enforcement of the great writ of right, by the judi
ciary of the state, would have brought on a conflict with the
military organized by the governor, and therefore they decline
to enforce the writ. The governor by his military, not only
established a terrorism over the people, but he silenced the
voice of the judiciary.
The respondent claims that he was authorised to call out the
militia to suppress insurrection and to make arrests, and that
he is sustained in this by the judiciary.
And so he had power under the laws, to execute the laws,
suppress riots or insurrection, and repel invasion, had such a
state of things existed, but no such state of things did exist,
and even if it had, he would be responsible for the abuse of
that power before a court of impeachment.
In Martin vs. Mott, 12 Wheaton, p. 14, Story, Justice, Bays :
" When a statute gives a discretionary power to any person,
" to be exercised by him upon *his own opinion of certain facts,
" it is a sound rule of construction that the statute constitutes
"him the sole and exclusive judge of the existance of these
" facts. It is no answer that such power may be abused, for
" there is no power which is not susceptible of abuse. The
" remedy for this as well as for all other official misconduct, if

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 127
** it should occur, is to be found in the constitution itself," —
meaning impeachment.
Tho respondent in hia answer to article V, says : " It was his
" purpose to detain the said Adolphus G. Moore and the other
" persons so arrested in tho said counties of Alamance and
" Caswell, only until such timo as ho might with safety to tho
"atate surrender them to the civil authorities," (p. 87.)
We propose to test the truthfulness and sincerity of this de
claration by facts which we shall put in evidence. These facts
will also tend to show tho animus of tho respondent in theeo
proceedings, and deprive him of the plea of " good intent," if
indeed such plea could avail him in this tritd.
On tho 10th of March, 1870, he wrote to the president of the
United States, and what follows is an extract from his letter.
He aays :
" If Congress would authorise tho suspension, by the presi-
" dent, of tho writ of habeas corpus, in certain localities, and if
" criminals could be arrested and tried before military tribunals,
*' and shot, we should soon have peace and order throughout
" all this "country. The remedy would be a sharp and a bloody
" one, but it is as indispensable as was the suppression of the
" rebellion." On the 14th of March, 1870, he wrote to the "senators and
" representatives in congress " and says : " I have been com-
41 pelled to declare the county of Alamance in a state of insur-
" rection. I have called on the President for aid. But he is
"restricted by the writ of habeas corpus. We want military
" tribunals by which assassins and murderers can be summarily
" tried and shot ; but we cannot have these tribunals unless the
"president is authorized to suspend the habeas corpus in cer-
" tain localities. Please aid in conferring this power on the
" president, as the only effectual mode of protecting life and
" property in Alamance and other localities in this state."
And on' the 17th of the same month he appeals to Mr* J. C.
Abbott, U. S. senator, &c, in this wise : <
"What ia being done to protect the good citusena in /Ala-

128 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
" mance county ? We have federal troops, but we want power
"to act. Is it possible the government will abandon its loyal
'* people to be whipped and hanged ? The habeas corpus Bhould
" be euspended at once."
So much as to the animus of tlie respondent. Now as to his
purpose to release the prisoners.
Tho petition of Adolphus G. Moore was filed July 16th,
1870. That of John Ken- and others on the 26th of July,
1870. We propose to show by the correspondence of the respondent,
that he had, at this very time, provided for the calling of a
military court to try the prisoners then held in custody, and
that it was his purpose to convene the same the first week in
August. On the 7th day of August, 1870, he again writes to th©
president of the United StatoB, and the oonoluding paragraph
in his letter is as follows :
" It is my purpoBo to detain iho prisoners, unlesa the army
of the United Statoa, under your ordera, shall demand them."
When judge Brooks, of tho Unitod States district* court, at
a later day, to wit, on the 6th day of August, issued his precept
in the name of the president of the United States, directed to
Kirk, commanding him to produce the prisoners before him at
the court house in Salisbury, immediately, then it was for
the first timo, that the respondent made the discovery that it
had all along been his intention to surrender the prisoners, " as
" soon as the safety of the state should justify it," announced,
for the first time, in his letter of August 15th, 1870, to the
chief justice, which letter we propose to put in evidence.
Then it was, that for the first time, he ordered George W.
Kirk to obey the writs of habeas corpus, having protracted
their imprisonment until tho very last hour, meantime thrust
ing them into jail.
The eighth and ninth articles of impeachment, charge that
the respondent having organised an armed body of men, un
known to the laws of North Carolina, and sent them to the

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 129
counties of Alamance and Caswell, and there having arrested,
imprisoned and otherwise maltreated many of the peaceable
and law abiding citizens of those counties ; to sustain and keep
on foot this unlawful force, he made in June, July and August
last, his warrants upon the public treasurer of the state, with
out authority of and in violation of law, for large sums of money,
exceeding in amount,' from time to time, tho sum of eighty
thousand dollars, and caused the treasurer to pay the same to
one A. D. Jenkins, whom the respondent had appointedto be
paymaster to this unlawful military force. That thereafter one
Richard M. Allison a citizen of Iredell county, on behalf of
himself and all the tax payers of the state, brought his suit in
the superior court of Iredell county, praying that a writ of in
junction might be granted restraining the said treasurer from
delivering any sums of money to tho governor, or to any other
persons by his order, and also restraining the said A. D.
Jenkins, as paymaster, from disbursing any funds in his hands
for the payment of said unlawful troops. The Hon. Anderson
Mitchell, judge of the superior court, granted the writ prayed
for, enjoining and forbidding said treasurer and said paymaster,
to deliver or disburse any part of the said inonoy for the ubo of
said body of mon, and the process of the court was duly served
upon these parties. That after this the respondent ordered
and procured the said A. D. Jenkins, as paymaster, to disregard
the writ of injunction and to pay over the money in his custody,
to one J. B. Neathery, who had been appointed paymaster by
the respondent, in the place of the said Jenkins, and thereupon
the respondent ordered and caused the said Neathery to pay
out and disburse the money bo transferred to him, for the illegal
purpose of paying the expenses and keeping on foot the mili
tary force aforesaid.
If this force, Mr. Chief Justice and senators, as organized by
the respondent, was an unlawful force, such as was not author
ised to be Organised, armed and equipped by the constitution
and laws of the state, the respondent's warrants, as governer,
made upon the treasurer for money to pay these troops Were

WO COURT OF IMPBAHMENTa.,
unlawful. And when a court of law had ao decided, and had
issued its process enjoining and forbidding the payment of the
money, he was bound to respect the decision of the court, and
had no right to cause its order to be violated or evaded. But
this he did by a subterfuge— an artifice unbecoming the dignity
of his high office, which cannot avail him before this court.
He not only violated the law in organizing an armed body of
men unknown to the law, but he caused the courts of law and
tho mandates of the courts, to be disregarded and set at open
defiance by his agents. And for this beliaviour", bo unbecom
ing the governor of a free people, he will be held to a strict
accountability before this tribunal.
I will hero ask one of my associates on the board of managers to
read a statement of facts which has been prepared and which we
shall substantiate by the evidence.
Mr. Manager JOHNSTON read the statement of facts in
the words following :
We expect to satisfy the senate by the most undoubted
proofs, in addition to what has already been said as to the con
dition of the counties of Alamance and Caswell, where, from
the organization of the existing state government to the month
of July, 1870, the civil authorities, both county and state, were
in the full exercise of their respective powers ; and where no
opposition had been offered to any effort to bring offenders to
justice according to the ordinary couse of law. The respondent
on the 7th day of March, 1870, under circumstances manifest
ing a wicked heart and purpose, falsely proclaimed the county
of Alamance to be in insurrection ; and on the 8th day of July
of the 6ame year, made a like fake proclamation as to the
county of Caswell ; that these proclamations were made under
circumstances calculated to provoke the people of those coun
ties and manifested a purpose on the part of the accused to
humiliate and degrade them. That in furtherance of this
wicked design, the accused procured from the state of Tennessee,
a man of notoriously desperate character, by the name of George
W. Kirk, who was very offensive to the people of this state on

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 181
account of his widely-known character for lawlessness and vio
lence, and on tho 21st day of June last, commisaioned him to
recruit a regiment of men of like desperate character with him
self, with tho understanding at the time of his appointment,
that his men should be mostly recruited from one locality in
this state and an adjoining locality in the state of Tennessee,
where numberless outrages and atrocities had been perpetrated
during the late war, which had been participated in by the said
Kirk and the men whom he was to recruit. That the accused,
with a full knowledge of the lawless character of Kirk, drew
from the treasury of the state, without lawful authority, the
sum of one thousand dollars, and committed it to the custody
of this man, as a recruiting fund, taking no bond or security for
its safe keeping or proper disbursement. That at the same time
the respondent appointed another man of like bad character
and antecedents from the state of Tennessee, named B. G.
Bergen, a companion of Kirk, to be his lieutenant-colonel ;
and afterwards another by the name of Yates, also from Ten
nessee, to be major under him. That these men thus armed
with authority and furnished with money by the respondent,
went into the mountains of East Tennessee and the counties of
North Carolina adjacent thereto, where they recruited a force
of several hundred men and organised them into a regiment
of soldiers. Thus organised, by order of the respondent, they
encamped at Company Shops, in the county of Alamance.
That of tho men so recruited, many were from the state of
Tennessee, many were under the lawful military ago of twenty.
ono, and some of them old men, much beyond the military
ago of forty years, while the large majority of them were
ignorant, roving, desperate characters, who werei scarcely
half civilised, and had served on both sides in the late civil
war. That the respondent used the funds' of the treasury in
tho armifag arid equipment of these men, and having organised
them into a regiment, ordered and procured them to take
forcible armed . possession of the counties of Alamance and
Caswell. ' Having done so, the Baid Kirk absolutely subverted

132 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
the civil authority and proclaimed martial law in those counties.
He took forcible possession of the court houses and pubh'c
records, and many of the latter he and his men destroyed, using
them as waste paper. ' That ' the said Kirk under tlie orders of
the respondent, arrested great numbers of the citizens of these
counties in the most brutal and insulting manner, and among
those bo arrested, were some of the purest and best men of tho
state, men against whom a breath of suspicion had never been,
nor can be uttered. That most of the persons so seized, were
held in close confinement for the space of a month or there
abouts, and many of them subjected to tho grossest insults,
while others were treated with cruelty and inhumanity. In
Alamance several were hanged by the neck for the purposo of
extorting confessions, others were thurst into a loathsome dun
geon in the common jail of that county ; while one at least, was
confined in a cell with a negro man who had been condemned
to suffer death for the crime of rape and was afterwards execu
ted, and still another was chained to a floor in a dungeon.
That the persons so confined, were denied wholesome food and
water, and the humane were not allowed to administer to their
necessities. These atrocities were perpetrated by the men
who were armed by the respondent, and sent into thoso
counties to take military possession thereof, and to make
arrests. And in vain did the press, the peoplo and indi
viduals call such outrages to the attention of the respon
dent, and protest against them. These complaints were to
him "like the voice of the charmers, charm they never
so wisely." They went unheeded. When notified that his
troops were destroying the papers and records of the courts,
deposited for safe keeping in the court houses of Alamance and
Caswell, and importuned to allow the proper custodians to tako
possession thereof, he peremptorily refused, declaring that mar
tial law prevailed. The citizens so imprisoned and so mal
treated were under orders of the respondent, denied the privi
leges of the writ of habeas corpus, and the mandates of tho
chief justice of the state, ordering the production of the prison-

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 133
ers before him to inquire into the cause of their arrest and
detention, were treated with contempt. We expect further to
show, that failing to obtain relief from the judiciary of the
state, who had declined to take the necessary steps to enforce
the process of the court, lest it should result in war and the
shedding of blood, the prisoners so detained at length applied
for the writ of habeas corpus to the judge of the United Statea
district court, and the writ was issued ; even then the respon
dent sought to obtain authority from the president of the United
States and from congress to secure their further detention, and
yielded at the very last moment, with extreme reluctance, and
when it had become manifest that he could no longer hold.
them. We shall further, show, that while the avowed object of the
respondent, was to suppress crime and punish offenders, he,
caused to be arrested great numbers of citizens against whom
thero was not only no charge preferred, but who were not even
liable to a well-grounded suspicion, and who after having been.
subjected to insults and indignities at the hands of a brutal sol-,
diery, wero at length discharged, without inquiry. That not
withstanding all these arrests under one pretext and another,,
as well those who were examined before the chief justice and
tho United States district judge, as those who were not, we
shall be able to show,- that to this day there has been no attempt
on the part of the respondent, to have them prosecuted before
the courts of law, the tact being patent, that thero is not suffi
cient evidence against those alleged to be the most guilty, to
justify tho finding of a bill by a grand jury. That after the
arrest of these men in the counties of Alamance and Caswell
the respondent did not order, nor intimate any intention to
order a court of oyer and terminer for their trial in those'
counties, as he might at any time have done, but on the con
trary from the Very inception of his military movement
declared it to be his intention to order a military commission to
try them.' . ';' '¦" ; . ' •¦ "' ' :"'f:' 1( ¦ tJ i'-i'],v A
There are many facts and- circumstances tending to show the

184 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
animus of the respondent in these proceedings, with which wo
do not nowpropoae to trouble the court, but which will he
developed in the course of the investigation.
Mr. SPARROW (resuming]. Mr. Chief Justice and aena.
tore, the people and their reprosontativea, and this board of
managers and their learned aassociato counsollora, do not desiro
tho conviction and deposition from offlco of tho reapondont, if on
full hearing of tho case both on tho facta and the law, aa wo
shall present thorn, lie be not guilty. If ho cannot bo fairly
and legally oonvicted of tho Crimea charged against him, thon
lot him be acquitted— lot him be restored to his offlco and
obeyed aa the chief executive magistrate of this great common
wealth. But if he be guilty it ia expected, and the people of North
Carolina demand of her senators, a fearless vindication of the
majesty of her violated laws. If this be done, freedom and
personal liberty may again become the proud boast of tho citi
zen — our liberties be perpetuated, and our beloved North
Carolina continue to be the pride and glory of her children,
long years after these granite walls within which we sit shall
have crumbled into dust.
Mr. MERRIMON. Mr. Chief Justice and senators, the
managers are ready to proceed with the trial and to introduce
evidence in support of the statements made in the opening of
the chairman of the board of managers.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. Are you ready to proceed with
the examination of witnesses ?
Mr. MERRIMON. We first propose to introduce the docu
mentary evidence. We first offer in evidence a certified copy
of the oath of office taken by the accused as governor.
Mr. Manager DUNHAM read the oath in words following :
Supreme Court Room,
Wednesday, July 1, A. D. 1868.
I, William W. Holden, do swear upon the Holy Evangelist
of Almighty God, that I will support the constitution, and

TRIAL or WILLIAM W. TIOLDEN. 185
laws of the United States and of the state of North Caroli Aa,
and that I will faithfully perform the duties appertaining to
tho offlco of govornor of tho state, bo help me God.
W. W. Holden,
Sworn to and subscribed boforo mo, R. M. Pearson, 0.' J.
State of North Carolina,
Exocutivo office.
I, J. B. Noathory, private aocrotary to his oxcellency, tho
Govornor, do hereby cortify that tho foregoing ia a true and
perfect copy of the oath of offlco on file in this offlco.
Given undor my hand the 30th day of January, A. D. 1871.
[Seal.] J. B. Neathery,
Private Secretary.
Mr. MERRIMON. We next offer in evidence a certified
copy of the proclamation iasued by the accused declaring the
county of Alamance in insurrection.
Mr. Manager DUNHAM read the paper in words the fol
lowing :
A proclamation by his excellency, the governor of North
Carolina. Executive Department,
Raleigh, March 7th, 1870.
By virtue of authority vested in me by the constitution of
the state, and by virtue of an act passed at the present session of
the general assembly, entitled "An act. to secure the better
"protection of life and property," ratified the 29th day of. Jan
uary, 1870, and for the reason that tlie civil authorities of tho
county of Alamance are not able to protect the citizens of said
county in the enjoyment of fife and property, I hereby proclaim
and declare that the county of Alamance ia in a state of insur
rection. ;
On the 26th of November, 1869, a citizen of the United
States, who was engaged in teaching a school in said county,
was taken from his home by a band of men armed and disguised,
and waa by tjiem cruelly beaten and scourged. , ,,....'¦ j

136 court of impeaohment.
On the night of the 26th of February, 1870, a citizen of
eaid county was taken from his home by a band of men armed
and disguised, and was by them hanged by the neck until he
was dead, on the public square in the town of Graham, near
the court house.
And more recently the postmaster at Company Shops, in said
county, an officer of the government of the United States, was
compelled to flee the county, and while absent, a band of men
armed and disguised visited his house with the purpose, doubt
less, of taking his life, and this within a short distance of federal
troops stationed in said county, not to overawe or to intimidate
good citizens, but to preserve the peace and to protect the
innocent and the law abiding.
In addition to these cases, information has been received at
this department that peaceable and law abiding citizens of the
county aforesaid, have been molested in tlieir houses, have been
whipped, fihot, scourged, and threatened with further visitations
of violence and outrage unless they would conform to some arbi
trary standard of conduct Bet up by these disguised assassins
and murderers.
I havo issued proclamation after proclamation to the peoplo
of the state, warning offenders and wicked or misguided viola
tors of the law, to ceaso thoir evil deeds, and, by leading better
lives, propitiate thoso whose duty it is ,to enforce the law. I
have invoked public opinion to aid me in repressing these out
rages, and in preserving peace and order. I have waited to
see if the people of Alamance woidd assemble in public meet
ing and express their condemnation of such conduct by a. por
tion of the citizens of the county, but I have waited in vain.
No meetiug of the kind has been held. No expression of dis
approval even of such conduct by the great body of tlie citizens
has yet reached this department ; but, on the contrary, it is
believed that the lives of citizens who have' reported these
crimes to, the executive, have, been thereby endangered, and it
is further believed that many of the citizens of the county are so
terrified that they dare not complain, or attempt the arrest of

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 137
criminals in their midst. The civil officers of the county are
6ilent and powerless.
The laws must be maintained. These laws are over all. Every
citizen, of whatever party or color, must be absolutely free to
-express his political, opinions, and must be safe in his own
house. These outrages and these violations of law must and
SHALL cease.- Criminals must and shall be brought to jus
tice. The whole power of both governments, state and fed
eral, is pledged to this, and this power will be exerted. Crimv
iiials who may escape to counties adjoining Alamance will be
pursued, and if not delivered up by the civil authorities of said
counties, or if sheltered or protected in said counties with the
knowledge of the civil authorities, the said counties will also
be declared to be in a state of insurrection.
I earnestly appeal to all good citizens to aid the civil author
ities in maintaining peace and good order, and to support me
in my purpose to protect life and property without regard to
party or color.
Dono at the city of Raleigh, this 7th day of March, 1870>
and in tho 94th year of our independence. W. W- Holden, Governor.
By tho Governor :
W. R. Richardson, Privato Secretary.
State of North Carolina,
Executive Office.
I, J. B. Neathery, private secretary to his excellency the
governor, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and per
fect copy of the original proclamation on file in this office.
Given under my hand the 30th day of January, A. D. 1871.
[Seal] J. B» Neathery,
Private Secretary.
Mr. MERRIMON. We also offer in evidence the procla
mation issued by the accused, declaring the county of Caswell
in insurrection. 10

138 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Mr. Manager DUNHAM read the proclamation in the words
following :
A proclamation by the governor of North Caroiina.
Executive Department of N. C,
Raleigh, July 8th, J 870.
In accordance with authority vested in me by tlie constitu
tion of tho stato of North Carolina, and by virtue of an act
passed at the last session of the General Assembly, entitled
" An act to secure the better protection of life and property,"
ratified the 29th day of January, 1870,1 hereby declare the
county of Caswell to be in a state of insurrection.
Dono at our city of Raleigh this 8th day of July, 1870,
and in the ninety-fifth year of our independence.
[Seal] W. W. Holden, Governor.
By the Governor :
W. R. Richardson, Private Secretary.
State of North Carolina,
Executive Office.
I, J. B. Neathery, private secretary to his excellency the
governor, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and
perfect copy of the original proclamation on file in this office.
Given under my hand the 30th day of January, A. D. 1871.
[Seal] J. R. Neathery,
Private Secretary.
Mr. MERRIMON. I now offer in evidence a certified copy
of tho order issued from the office of the adjutant general
authorizing K^rk to recruit troops.
Mr. SMITH. Under what authority and by virtue of what
law do you offer it ?
Mr. MERRIMON. Under the rules of evidence. We have
the original book here containing orders, but we offer a certified
copy as being more convenient.
Mr. Manager DUNHAM read the order in the words
following :

trial of william w. holden. 139
State of North Carolina.
Executive Department,
Adjutant General's Office,
Raleigh, June 21, 1871.
General Orders, No. 5.
Col. Geo. W. Kirk is hereby authorized and ordered to
organize one regiment of state troops to be designated the
second regiment, to consist of not less than five nor more than
eight companies of seventy-five men each.
Col. Kirk will call his regiment into active service to ren
dezvous as soon as possible at Morgan ton.
He is hereby authorized to contract for necessary supplies for
his men while en route, taking vouchers for all sums contracted
for or expended.
He will report progress every six days to this office,
By command of Governor Holden, commander-in-chief.
A. W. Fisher, Adj't Gen'l.
True copy :
A. W. Fisher, Adj't Gen'l.
Mr. MERRIMON. We offer in evidence a certified copy
of the order assigning Mr. A. D. Jenkins as paymaster.
State of North Carolina,
Adjutant General's Office,
Raleigh, July 11th, 1870.
Special Orders, No. 10.
Col. A. D. Jenkins, A. D. 0., to commander-in-chief is here
by detailed for duty as paymaster and disbursing officer for
North Carolina state troops, and will at once enter Upon the
discharge of the duties of his office.
By order of Governor Holden. A. W, Fisher, Adj't, Gen'l.
True copy :
A. W. Fishbb, Adj't Gen'l.
Mr. MERRIMON. I now offer in evidence an order by

140 OOUBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
telegraph for Kirk to rendezvous his troops at Company Shops^
Mr. Manager DUNHAM read the paper offered in evidence;
in the words following :
Telegram. Raleigh, July 8th, 1870,
To Col. G. W. Kirk, Salisbury, N. 0.
Rendezvous your men at "Co. Shops" and report here
in person on Monday. A. W. Fisher, Adj't Gen'l,
True copy :
A. W. Fisher, Adj't Gen'l.
Mr. MERRIMON. I offer in ovidenco an order to Kirk to,
tuko possession of public buildings, &c,
Mr. Manager DUNHAM read t)io paper offered in the
worda following : State of North Carolina,
Adjutant General's Office,
Rajolgh, July 18th, 1870.
Special Ordors, No. 11.
Col. G. W. Kirk commanding 2nd regiment North Carolina
Htato troops will at once procure the necessaiy transportation
for his camp equipage and procee4 to Yancey ville and assume
command of Alamanco and Caswe.ll counties.
He will take the necessary stops to preserve order, and to
givo the fullest protection to ljfe and property.
llo will take charge of tli,e public buildings, and arrest and
hold for examination persons accused of felonies, especially
those charged with;"or of being accessory to the murder of J.'W.
Stephens and Wyatt Outlaw.
By command of Governor Holden, commander-in-chief.
A. W. Fisher, Adj't. Gen'l.
True copy,
A. W. Fibher, Adj't. Genl
Mr. MERRIMON. We next offer in evidence the order to,
Douglas, to, m^ter Kirk's men into service.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 14rl
[Mr. Manager DUNHAM read the paper in the words fol
lowing : State of North Carolina,
Adjutant General's Office,
Raleigh, July 13, 1870.
Special Orders, No. 12.
Col. S. A. Douglas, A. D. C, Will proceed to Company
Shops immediately, and muster into service of state colonel G.
W. Kirk's regiment 2nd N. C. State Troopa.
By command of the Governor, A. W. Fisher, Adj't. Gen'l.
True copy :
A. W. Fisher, Adj't. Gen'l.
Mr. MERRIMON. The next paper we offer is an ord6r
appointing Douglas acting adjutant general.
Mr. Manager DUNHAM read the paper in evidence in the
Words following : Executive Department,
State of North Carolina,
Raleigh, July 23, 1870.
Col. 8. A.Douglas will, in absence of General A. W. Fisher,
act as adjutant general, and attend to all tlie business coming
within tho sphere of that officer's duties.
W. W\ HqIden, Governor^
True copy.
A. W. Fisher, Adj't. G'eh'L
Mr. MERRIMON. We offer now another order proceeding
from the office of the adjutant general.
Mr. Manager DUNHAM read the paper offered in evidence in
the words following. StAtE of North Carolina,
Adjutant General's Office,
Raleigh, August 1, 1870.
General Orders No. 12.
The following is published for the information and guidance

142 court of impeachments.
of tho state troops. All officers and mon will govern them*
solves accordingly.
I. A. D. Jonklns is paymaster to tho brlgado with the rank
and pay of  • It is his duty to pay tho offlcors and mon,
to examine, approve or disapprove all accounts, and audit and
pay tho samo when approved. Ho is required to file within
five days with tho adjutant general, his bond in tho sum of
$20,000. II. Major R. T. Berry ia brigade quartermaster with tho
rank and pay of major. Hie duty ia to contract for and furnish
all provisions, transportations, &c, for tho brigade. Ho will
submit all Ids accounts to tho paymaster, and if approved thoy
will bo paid by tho paymaster. Major Borry will fllo within
fivo days in this office hla bond in tho sum of $6,000.
III. John R, Harrison is depot quartermaster with tho rank
and pay of captain.
Ilia duties arc tho ordinary once of his position. IIo will
fllo $5,000 bond.
IV. J. R. Rulifson is depot commissary with tho rank and
pay of 2nd lieutenant. Ho will perform the ordinary duties
assigned him. He will file $5,000 bond The attention of
these and all other officers is particularly called to the facts
that their accounts must be kept with the most severe accuracy
for thoy will be exposed to the most rigid scrutiny, and that
they will be held to the strictest accountability for all their
faults and mistakes in the expending of the public funds.
By order of tho Governor, S. A. Douglas, Act'g Adj't Gen'l.
True copy :
A. W. Fisher, Adj't Gen'l.
Mr. MERRIMON. The next paper we offer in evidence is
an order to Mr. Douglas to bear dispatches to Caswell.
Mr. Manager DUNHAM read the paper in evidence in the
words following :

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 143

State of North Carolou,
Adjutant General's Office,
Raleigh, Aug. 11, 1870.
Special Orders, No. 15.
Col. S. A. Douglas, A. D. O, will proceed at once to Yancey-
ville, N. O, as bearer of dispatches from the commander-in-
chief. By order of Governor Holden :
A. W. Fisher, adjutant general.
True copy.
A. W. Fisher, adjutant general.
Mr. MERRIMON. The next is a order to Kirk to muster
his men for pay.
Mr. Manager DUNHAM read the paper in evidence in the
words following : State of North Carolina,
Adjutant General's Office,
Raleigh, Aug. 15th, 1870.
Special Orders, No. 16.
Col. G. W. Kirk, commanding socond rogimont N. 0. S.
T., will at onco muster his regiment for pay, and have the
muster rolls properly made out in triplicate, and two copies
forwarded to colonel A. D. Jenkins, P. M. at this place.
By order of the Governor : A. W. Fisher, Adj't Gen'l.
True copy. A. W. Fisher, Adj't Gen'l.
Mr. MERRIMON. The next paper is an order to officers
to account for funds.
Mr. Manager DUNHAM read the paper in evidence in tho
words following :

IM

COURT OF impeachments:.

State of North Carolina,
Adjutant General's Office,
Raleigh, Aug. 16, 1870,
Special Ordera, No., 18.
All officers of the N. C S. T. who have been furnished by
the State with funds for expenses of recruiting service, will at
once furnish to this office a final statement of their account of
of expenditures with vouchers.
By command of Governor Holden, commander-in-chief.
A. W. Fisher, Adj't. Gen'l.
True copy :
A. W. Fisher* Adj't. Gen'L
Mr. MERRIMON. We now offer an order removing Mr.
Jenkins as paymaster;,
Mr. Manager DUNHAM road the paper in evidence in the
words following : State of North Carolina,
Adjutant General's Office,
Raleigh, Sept. 3, 1870.
Special Orders, No. 22.
Col. A. D. Jenkins paymaster and disbursing officer of North
Carolina state troops is hereby relieved from duty and will aft
once turn over to Maj. John B. Neathery, the money in>hi&
possession by virtue of his office as paymaster and send to this
offlco a final settlement of all his accounts.
By order of tho Governor and commander in-chief.
A. W. Fisher, Adj't Gen'l.
True copy :
A. W. Fisher, Adj't Gen'l.
Mn. MERRIMON., The next order we introduce i& one
appointing Neathery paymaster.
Mr. Manager DUNHAM read the paper offered in. avir-
dence in tha words following.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN.. 145

State of North Carolina,
Adjutant General's Office,
Raleigh, Sept. 3, 1870.
Special Orders, No. 2.
Maj. John B. Neathery, brig, inspector 1st brigade, will!
report to adjutant general for duty as paymaster of N. C. S. T..-
By order of the Governor. A. W. Fisher, Adj't Gen'l. '
True copy :
A. W. Fisher, Adj't Gen'l.
Mr. MERRIMON. We offer in evidence an order to pay
R. T. Berry $10,000.
Mr. Manager DUNHAM read the paper in evidence as fol--
lows : State of North Carolina,
Adjutant General'a Office^
Raleigh, Sept. 5, 1870.
Special Orders, No. 23.
Maj. J. B. Neathery, A. Paymaster, will turn over to Maj.
R. T. Berry, A. Q. M. ten thousand dollars, and then proceed
to Graham, N. 0. and pay off the 2nd Reg't N. 0. S. T.
Maj. R. T. Berry will at once proceed to pay the 1st Reg't
N. O. S.T.
By ordor of Gov. Holden, A. W. Fisher, Adj't Gen'l.
True copy :
A. W. Fisher, Adj't Gen'l.
Mr. MERRIMON. The next paper we introduce is an
order to Kirk to disband his men.
£J Mr. Manager DUNHAM read the paper in evidence in. the.
words following :

146 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.

State of North Carolina,
Adjutant General's Office,
Raleigh, Aug. 30, 1870.
General Orders, No. 18.
The commanding officer of the 1st and 2nd regiments of N.
C. S. T. will have made out immediately triplicate muster-
out and descriptive rolls of their respective commands, one
copy to be retained by company commander, one for paymaster,
and one for this office.
Officers commanding companies will enter upon their rolls
the money value of clothing issued to each member of the
company, also amount of stoppages for arms, equipments, or
camp equipage, lost or destroyed.
Regimental commanders will muster their respective com
mands on the first day of next month.
By order of Governor Holden, Comd'r-in-chief.
A. W. Fisher, Adjt Genl.
True copy :
A. W. Fisher, Adj't Gen'l.
Mr. MERRIMON. The next paper is an order to Kirk to
turn over the property to Berry, and to disband his men.
Mr. Manager DUNHAM read the paper in evidence in the
words following : Adjutant General's Office,
Raleigh, N. C, Sept. 7, 1870.
General Orders, No. 15.
Col. G. W. Kirk, comd'g 2nd reg't N. C. S. T., will cause
the public property in his command to bo turned in and safely
stored and kept.
He will turn over to Maj. R. T. Berry, A. Q. M., the quar
termaster property in his possession, except one two-horse team
and one extra horse. Ho will direct the several companies of
his regiment under command of their respective officers to

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 147
proceed as soon as paid to place of enlistment, and there to be
disbanded. Quartermaster Berry will furnish the necessary
transportation on railroad to point nearest to place of enlist
ment. By order of Governor Holden, commander-in-chief.
A. W. Fisher, Adj't Gen'l.
True copy :
A. W. Fisher, Adj't Gen'l.
Mr. MERRIMON. We now introduce another order to
Kirk disbanding his force.
Mr. Manager DUNHAM read the paper in evidence in the
words following : State of North Carolina,
Adjutant General's Office,
Raleigh, N. C, Sept. 16, 1870.
Special Orders, No. 28.
Col. G. W. Kirk, 2nd reg't N. C. S. T., will at once havo
the ordnance stores and clothing, camp and garrison equipage
in his command, properly packed and forwarded to adjutant
general at this place.
Col. Kirk will have made* out muster and pay rolls of his
command, and as soon as paid off will muster out of service
those living in vicinity, and direct the others to proceed under
command of company officer to place of enlistment, and there
to be disbanded.
As soon as practicable Col. Kirk will report to the Gov.
in person.
By order of Gov. Holden. A. W. Fisher, Adj't Gen'l.
True copy :
A. W. Fibher, Adj't Gen'l.
Mr. MERRIMON. We offer now an order relieving Kirk
from duty.
Mr. Manager DUNHAM road the paper in evidence in the
words following :

148 COURT 0F IMPEACHMENTS.

State op North Carolina,
i Adjutant General's Office,
Raleigh, Sept. 80, 1870.
Special Orders, No. 82.
Col. G. W. Kirk, 2nd reg't N. 0. S. T. is hereby relieved
from duty and directed to make final returns at once of public
property put in his charge.
j. By order of Gov. Holden. A. W. Fisher, Adj't Gen'l.
True copy :
A. W. Fibiier, Adj't Gen'l.
Mr. MERRIMON. Wo now offer in evidence special ordW'
No. 9, reading it from the book aa wo' have not a copy of it
mado. Mr. Manager DUNHAM read the order in the words
following : State of North Carolina,
Adj't General's Office,
Raleigh, July 9, 1870..
Special Order, No. 9. *
Captain J. R. Harrison, Post Q. M. Raleigh, will issue
provisions to families of men enlisted in state troops on
order' of the soldier; approved by his company commander.
Tho amount issued will not exceed eight dollars per month
on order of one man.
An accurate account of amount isfeued will be kept with man
giving order.
By direction of Gov. Holden. A. W. Fisher, Adj't Gen'l.
Mr. MERRIMON. We now offer in evidence the muster
rolls of Kirk's men.
Objected to on the ground that the papers had notbeety
properly proven,.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 149
ABIEL W. FISHER, a witness called on behalf of th$
managers being duly sworn testified as follows.
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. Look at the papers now shown you and state what they
are ? A. They are muster rolls.
Q. What muster rolls ? A. The muster rolls of Col. Kirk's
command known as the 2nd regiment of state troops.
Q. What is your office ? A. Adjutant general of the State.
Q. State where these muster rolls came from? A. They
were sent to me from Col. Kirk's command, I think by the
hands of Major Neathery.
Q. I mean where did thoy come from directly now ? A,
Thoy came from my office.
Q. You recognize them as muater rolla of the 2nd regiment
of atate troops 3 A. I do.
Q. Commanded by Kirk ? A. Tho samo.
Mr. MERRIMON. Wo shall want to recall the witness.
We produced him now only to identify the papers.
Mr. MERRIMON. We now offer in evidence description
and pay roll of company G. 2nd regiment state troops.
Mr. Manager DUNHAM proceeded to read the names on
the list and had reached the fourth name.
Senator GILMER. Mr. Chief Justice, I desire to enquire of
the board ot managers whether it ip necessary to read such
lengthy documents for the purpose of establishing their case.
Mr. Manager SPARROW. Mr. Chief Justice, it is neces
saiy to read these docnmenta to show the fact alleged that a
large number of the enlisted nien m this force were from the
state of Tennessee. The enlistment of such men, we contend^
'is not in accordance with the constitution and laws of this,
state. It is a circumstance going to show that these troops,
were unlawful troops. Further than that, the constitution pro
vides that the mihtia of the state shall be composed of men,
between the ages of twenty^m© and forty, and we desiift 1ft

150 COBUT 07 IMPEACHMENTS.
show that many of thoso troops under Kirk woro undor tho
ono and ovor tho other limit as to ago.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. Tho presiding officer thinks that
you might consider the whole of tho documonts in evidence
and read such portions as may be deeired.
Mr. MERRIMON. We are willing if the other Bide will
permit us to do so.
Mr. BOYDEN. Mr. Chief Justice, I desire to know
whether all these papers are to be printed, so that we can have
an opportunity to see them ?
Mr. MERRIMON. They will be filed.
Mr. BOYDEN. But we can't go to tho files. If tho papers
aro to bo printed wo have no objection to your reading such aa
you desire to call particular atttontion to.
Mr. BRAGG. Mr. Chief Justice, as I understand the ruloa
adopted by the court, all evidence offered here will be printed
and laid upon the desks of members and counsel on either side.
It will be very voluminous, but still under the rules I suppose
it will all have to be printed. I only make this remark for tho
purpose of eliciting information. If it is to be printed, tho
respective counsel and the members of tho court can thon refer
to it aftorwards.
Mr. BOYDEN. It will not bo necessary to road all thoso
documonta now.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. As tho presiding officer under
stands it, tho objoct of printing was to savo tho tlmo of reading
them. Mr. BRAGG. I will stato further, Mr. Ohiof Justice, that
as far as my observation extends in reading the impeach
ment trial of president Johnson, the course suggested here
was the one pursued there. A large number of documents
were put in evidence without being read, such as tables, lists of
offlcers,"&c, it being suggested that on account of being printed
thoy wero in a form for reference, and therefore need not be
road. The CHIEF SUSTIOE. It might bo well to read one or

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 151
two of the rolls to show the general fact, and then let them bo
printed. Mr. Manager DUNHAM read from one of the rolls the
names, rank,. and birth-place of the officers and men.
Mr. MERRIMON then put in evidence the descriptivo and
pay rolls and roster of the second regiment North Carolina
troops, which will be found printed in the appendix.
Mr. BOYDEN. Mr. Chief Justice, we desire it noted that
these documents are admitted on the express understanding
that they are to be printed and laid on our tables. Otherwise
we cannot consent to tlieir admission.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. That is the understanding.
Senator TROY moved that the sitting of the court this day
be continued till half past three o'clock.
A sufficient number seconding the motion (as required by
the rules on a proposition^ extend the time of a session),
The Chief Justice put tho question on the motion. Before
tho decision on the vote was announced the yeas and nays were
called for. A sufficient number seconding the call they wero
ordered. The CLERK proceeded to call the roll on the motion of
Senator Troy, and it was decided in the affirmation by the follow
ing vote :
Those who voted in the arffimative are ;
Messrs. Adams, Albright, Allen, Brown, Cook, Council,
Cowles, Crowell, Currie, Dargan, Edwards, Flemming, Gilmer,
Graham, of Alamance, Graham, of Orange, Latham, Ledbetter,
Linney, Love, Maimey, McOlammy, Merrimon, Moore, More-
head, Murphy, Robbins, of Davidson, Robbins, of Rowan,
Skinner, Speed, Troy, Waddell, Warren, Whiteside and
Worth— 34.
Those who voted in the negative are i
Messrs. Barnett, Battle, Beasley, Bellamy, Brogden, Eppes,
Fly the, Hawkins, Hyman, King, Lehman, MeOotter, Norment
and Price — 14.
Mr. MERRIMON offered in evidence a certified copy of the

152 COURT OF IMPEAHMENTS.
proceedings on habeas corpus before the chief justice of the
supreme court, the same being certified by the clerk of the
eupreme court.
Mr. BOYDEN. The papers spoken of are not a part of
the records of the supreme court and there was no authority
for the clerk to certify to them.
Mr. MERRIMON. Allow me to read the certificate ot tho
clerk. " State of North Carolina,
(i Office of the Clerk of the Supreme Court,
" Raleigh, January 30th, 1871.
" I hereby certify that the foregoing are true copies of tho
" original papers in the cases of habeas corpus disposed of at
" chambers by Chief Justice Pearson growing out of military
<' arrests during the months of July and August, 1870, said
" papers having been filed with me for safe keeping by his
" honor, the chief justice.
" In witness whereof I hereto set my hand at office at the
*' date aforesaid. "W. II. Bagley, Clerk."
We have the originals, as the clerk was summoned to produco
them. I think there is no question about these being true
copies. Mr. SMITH. Mr, Chief Justice, you will observe that tho
statute regulating the introduction of evidence of this kind is
,( restrictive. Section 8 of the code provides that " copies of
'* all official bonds or writings recorded or filed as records in
" any court, or lodged in the office of the governor, treasurer,
" comptroller, or secretary of state, shall be competent evidence
*' as the originals, when certified by the keeper of such records
" or writings under the seal of office, when there is such seal,
" or under his hand when there is no Buch seal, unless the cour
<' shall order the production of the original."
These papers are in no sense records of the office, and there
is no authority on the part Of the officer to certify them.
Mr. MERRIMON. The clerk of tho eupreme court has.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 153
boon in attendance but he has gono to his dinner without our
permission. We will take up another branch of tho case.
WILLIAM LARKIN, a witness called on behalf cf the
managers, being duly sworn testified as follows :
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. What is your office ? A. I am clerk of the Cape Fear
district of the United States court for tho district of North
Carolina. Q. Look at the papers which you have and state what they
are % A. These are papers in connection with the habeas corpus
proceedings at Salisbury at the last August term of the court.
Q. How did they come in your possession 1 A. They were
handed to mo on the occasion of the trial.
Q. By whose order ? A. They came into my hands as clerk
of the court.
Q. United States district court ? A. Yes, sir.
Mr. MERRIMON. Mr. Chief Justice, I offer the papers
produced by the witness in evidence, being the proceedings in
the several matters of habeas corpus determined before hie
honor Judge Brooks.
Mr. BOYDEN. I desire to know in what view the papers
are offered.
Mr. MERRIMON. Mr. Chief Justice, they are pertinent
in this case in this point of view. The accused stated in a letter to
his honor the chief justice, that the time had arrived when he
thought it was prudent to have the prisoners who had been
arrested, surrendered upon the writ issued by the chief justice,
and that he had ordered their surrender. We offer these pro
ceedings in connection with other facts and circumstances to
show that he did not write that letter to the chief justice of hie
own free will, but that he was driven to do so for fear of the
action of the federal judge.
Mr. BOYDEN. Mr. Chief Justice, .it strikes me that the
papers have no such bearing on the question before the court.
I look upon them as wholly incompetent to affect any issue
11

104 doulW Of IMPEAOHMENTS,
in thli case, and ni nut hearing njion any point faUed by tlie
answer- of the respondent, Be for im I etui Hee, they are wnelly
Irrelevant, nnd If ttilmittett they can have no tendency whulevei1
to establish the ftiets whfeh the counsel fop tlie managers allegei
It seems to me that they are clearly incompetent
Mr. RRAftO, Mr, Ahlef Justice, we think that tlie evidence
Is not only competent hut Is very material to some of the Issues
which have been joined in tills proceeding, It is ft roto of
evidence that what takes place between other parties is not
ovldonce, That ia tho general rule, and we admit its force.
But we say that, upon some of the charges here, these proceed
ings before the United States distriet judge now offered in
evidence are not only competent, but are very material to one of
the issues which are involved in this case. We shall show
by evidence that there were certain proceedings on habeas
corpus pending before the chief justice of the supreme court
of this state for the release of certain parties who were held in
custody, and that the respondent refused obedience to the man
date of the chief justice, which called upon his agent to cause
the prisoners to bo brought before that judicial officer. We
shall show that the accused detained those prisoners and con
tinued to detain them ; and wo expect to show that after he had
refused to yield obedience, which it was his dnry to yield, by
the constitution and laws of tho state, steps wore taken, (which
will appear in thoso proceedings,) for tho release of those
parties before another judge, and that thereupon tho accused
appealed to tho president of tho United States directly
to aid him in is refusal to obey tho mandate of the judge of
tho United States district court for the district of North Car
olina ; and then, finding that ho was not sustained in that
appeal and receiving a message to the effect that it was his duty,
as wo expect to show, to yield obcdlenco to tho judgo of tho
district court, after the tlmo had olnpsod which was allowed
undor tho act of congress, to wit, toil days, for tho return of tho
writ of habeas ooipus issued by tho district judgo— at tho last
moment— the accused discovered that " tho tlmo had come "

TRtAL 0«* WILLIAM W, ltoLDttN, 100
for him to hrlng the primmer* hefhre the chief Justice in uhe<
dlence to the wrlti
It has heen stated In the opening of the chairman of the
hoard of managers that, In what the accused there stated, he did
not state the twth--that the statement In the letter that the
time had come when it was sale to surrender the prisoners, was
a mere pretext— an after-thought | that, in point of feet, he
had no alternative but to obey the writ of the chief justice i
that he preferred to bring them before the chief justice rather
than go before another judgo ; and that he did so, not because
he was disposed to do his duty and submit to the laws of tho
land. We offer this paper as evidence showing that ho held
out as long as he could ; that he first refused to yield obedience
to the chief justice of tho supreme court of our own 6tate, and
that he then endeavored to get the sanction and support of tho
president of the United States to resist the mandate of the
United States district judge ; and that failing in that) at the
eleventh hour he made a virtue of necessity and said the time
had come for him to yield obedience to tho civil authorities of
the state. We ask, therefore, that those papers l>e admitted
as throwing a flood of light on tho real motive which actuated
the accused ; and in that view, we think they are entirely rele
vant and proper.
Mr. BOYDEN. Mr. Chief Justice, it will be recollected
by the court that there is not one word said in the articles ot
impeachment about writs ot habeas corpus issued by the federal
judge. And what is the ground which they now urge for tho
admission of this testimony ? It is that the chairman of the board
of managers in his opening speech has stated that this was not
fair dealing, that the accused did not surrender these persons
in obedience to the mandate of tho chief justice ot the su
preme court, but that he surrendered them because a certain
other judicial authority had issued a writ commanding him to
bring these prisoners before it, and that the accused waited aa
long aa the law permitted him to wait before producing tho
prisoners. Waa there anything wrong in that ? Had he not

156 COURT OF IMPEACHMENT.
tho right to wait as long as the law stated he might wait before
making his return ? He made it in due time to the proper
authority. How can that, I should like to know, establish a
motive in tho accused ? How can it have any tendency to
show the motive which, they allege, caused him to surrender
tho prisoners ? It is totally inapplicable. It is a transaction
before another court wholly disconnected with the proceedings
here, and with any charges which aro preferred here. The
managers might as well go into other transactions of tho re
spondents life to show his motive in surrendering thoso
prisoners, as to attempt to givo tho proof which is now pro
posed. The proof offered is totally irrelevant, and I cannot see
how such a question can bo pressed before tho court of such
intelligence as that which now sits on tho trial of the respondent.
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. Chief Justice, in regard to Betting
forth in the articles of impeachmont, statements in referenco
to theso proceedings on habeas corpus before tho federal judgo,
I answer that it is not to bo expected that tho managers would
state in theso articles ovory item of ovidenco they expect to in
troduce. It is sufficient that they sustain tho charges by bucIi
ovidenco ns is pertinent to tho issuo which has boon joined.
The respondent has identified himsolf with this man Kirk. Wo
havo tho ovidenco to show that ho brought him hero and
invested him with a command, nnd that when tho law was
attempted to be applied to Kirk by a judge of a court in this
Htato, tho respondent justified him in resisting tho mandate.
Anything, therefore, that took place between Kirk and
anybody else, after we have fixed upon the respondent
the responsibility of Kirk's acts, in evidenco against
the respondent. We will show that the respondent tele
graphed to tho president of the United States in relation to
theso very proceedings before Judge Brooks, thathe got no
countenance for the course which he was taking, and that
then it was he determined to obey the writ issued by the fitato
court. We say that if this writ of habeas corpus, issued by
Judge Brooks, was served upon Kirk, it was the same

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W- HOLDEN. 157
thing as if it were served upon the respondent, for Kirk
was his agent his emissary, brought here to do certain acts, and
that anything that took place between Kirk and any other
person, whether in the nature of a judicial proceeding or com
munication of any sort, is competent evidence against the
accused. The evidence is pertinent also in another point of view. It
is part of the res gestm of this drama which was being enacted
in North Carolina for months in the imprisonment of citizens
of the state by Kirk. . This proceeding on the part of the
respondent was nothing more nor less than a pretence ot per
forming his duty after ho had stood out with persistency as
long as he saw there was nothing but the authority of the state
of North Carolina to control him. We offer to show that
another authority for which he : had a greater dread, if not a
greater respect, was behind him pushing him on with its bay
onets, and compelling him to perform his duty, and that that
was tho reason Avhy he finally did perform his duty, and allow the
men whom he held to come before Judgo Brooks , and that it
was to cover his retreat from the position in which he had
placed himself, he got up this proceeding of informing tho
chief justico of the state that he was then ready, ns he always
had been, when, in his judgment, the proper time had arrived
to surrender these men.
Notwithstanding the earnestness of the honorable gentle
man on the other side [Mr. Boyden] we have every confidence
that tho evidence offered is competent, and that this court has
a right to consider it in determining the question of the guilt
or innocence of the respondent upon the charges preferred
against him.
Mr. SMITH. Mr Chief Justice, this case now stands upon
the allegations made in the articles which are before the senato
and the proofs ought to be in support of those allegations. I
say here that there is not one allegation from the beginning to
the end in these articlea in reference to the subject matter to
which this proof ia offered. It ia an. attempt in advance to dis-

158 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
prove exculpatory evidence and not to establish the truth of
the charges, which ia all that the proaecution can now do. It
ia an effort to anticipate with a view of defeating ovidenco
which may be offered on the part of the reepondent.
Again, air, it ia alleged hero that a writ of habeas corpus
wub issued by a diatriet judgo of tho United States which waa
obeyed ; and it ia proposed to offer tho fact of the obedience of
tho accused to that writ as evidence going to prove his diBO-
bedienco of another writ for which disobedience ho ia here
arraigned. In other worde, an act of duty ia offered here aa
evidence allowing the fact of a disobedience of law on
another occasion. Has that any relation to the controversy
hero 1 Dooa it tend to ehow tho acts which wo are now
enquiring into to be right or wrong that tho accused
recognized and obeyed the authority of tho United States,
or if you pleaso, that ho has obeyed tho authority of
this senate in citing him hero to aiiBM-er theBO charges?
Does it tend at all to show his guilt aa to the charges which are
made against him in the articlea of impeachment which wo are
trying ? The •effort ia to prove that he acted elsewhere in
obedience to the law. Tho point which the respondent makes
here is that there is nothing in the allegations throughout the
various articles authorizing the introduction of any such
evidence as this. There is no issue now pending upon which
they can rightfully offer it. It will be sufficient for them
to offer it when some affirmative evidence is offered on the
part of the accused to which the proof is responsive. Our
objection, therefore, Mr. Chief Justice, is that this evidence is
not warranted by any charge contained in the articles, and is
not authorized by anything averred; and nothing is clearer
than that the proof must be warranted by the allegations.
And, in the next place, it is totally immaterial how obedient
and respectful the respondent may have been to one officer, in
trying him upon a charge of violating of his duty to another.
For these reasons, the counsel for the respondent regard this
testimony as inadmissable.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 159
Mr. MERRIMON. Mr. Chief Justice, every single chargo
with respect to theee arrests contains an allegation that the
arrests were made willfully, corruptly and for the purpose of
oppression on the part of the accused. He denies that, and
alleges in his answer that his action was not willful and not cor
rupt. He says that he was acting in the honest discharge of
his duty ; and he says that when the time came when it was
prudent, proper and safe for him to surrender the prisoners
from custody he did so of his own free will and in the exercise of
an honest judgment and from pure motives. That, sir, becomes
a material question. Will the learned gentlemen contend that
it is not competent for us to show any fact which will illustrate
the motive of the respondent's acts in surrendering these pris
oners at the time he did ? And this evidence is offered with the
view to show the motive of the accused in making that surren
der to the chief justice of this state, and to satisfy this court
that the surrender was not made in the honest exercise of his
judgment. We contend that the proof offered tends to show
that he was forced to do as he did, and that he would not have
made the surrender if he could have avoided it. It tends to 6how
the corrupt motive which actuated his mind at that time, and
it seems to me clear that, in that point of view, in addition to
the considerations suggested by my associate counsel, that the
evidence is, beyond question, competent.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer is of the
opinion that the papers offered are admiseable as showing the
motive, and also the animus of the accused at the time of
the detention.
Senator MOORE. Mr. Chief Justice, I desire that the
point raised shlla bo decided by court. To that end I ask
for the yeas and nays.
A sufficient number seconding the call, the yeaa and naya
were ordered.
The CLERK proceeded to call the roll of members upon
sustaining the decision of the chief justice.
Before the vote was announced Senator Graham, of Orange,

160 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
roee to a question of order, stating that the rulea required that
every aenator ahould vote upon queationa submitted for deter
mination unless excused therefrom. He asked therefore that
the namo of the senator from Wake [Mr. Olds] rhould again
bo called.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. Was th© aenator within tho bar
when the roll was called.
Senator GRAHAM, of Orange. I ao understand.
The CLERK again called the name of Mr. Olds, wherenpon
he voted yea.
The CLERK announced the vote.
Thoso who voted in the affirmative, are r
Messrs. Adams, Albright,. Barnott, Battle, Boasley, Brog-
don, Brown, Cook, Council, Crowell, Currie, Dargan, Edwards,
Eppes, Flomming, Gilmer, Graham, of Alamance, Graham,
of Orango, King, Latham, Lodbottor, Lehman, Linnoy, Love,
Maunoy, McClammy, McCottor, Merrimon, Morohoad^ Murphy,
Norment, Olds, Robbins, of Davidson, Robbins, of Rowan,
Skinner, Speed, Troy, Waddoll, Wan-en, Whiteside, ;Worth
—41. Those who voted in the negative, are :
Messrs. Bellamy, Flythe, Moore, Price. — 4.
So the decision of the chair was sustained.
Mr. MERRIMON. Mr. Chief Justice, we propose to put
these papers in evidence, but not to detain the court by reading
them now. I would suggest further, that as these papers
belong on tho files of the United States district court under the
order of its judge and the clerk desires to retain the originals,
ho leave the copy, which I suppose will be the regular
course. CHIEF JUSTICE. That will be the regular course.
Mr. MERRIMON. Do the counsel for the respondent
insist that we shall read the originals now \ One is a sample
of the whole.
Mr. SMITH. Before the papers aro read in evidence we
would like to cross-examine the witness briefly.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. That is in order.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. IIOLDKN. 101
WILLIAM L ARKIN — Cross-examination.
By Mr. Smith :
Q. Where did those papers produced hero come from ? A.
They came from the records of tho Cape Fear district court at
Wilmington ?
Q. Where did you get them ? A. I got them from tho
attorneys on tho occasion of the trial at Salisbury.
Q. Thoy wore handed to you by some attorneys at Salisbury '(
A. Yes, sir ; the papers came into tlie hands of tho clerk.
Q. Woro you there acting as clerk at that time ? A. I was.
Q. Tho court was sitting in tho Capo Fear district?
A. A special torm was hold in August and September at
Salisbury. Q. This is not a record of any thing that occurred before
tho court — it was a proceeding in chambers? A. No, it was
not a proceeding in chambers, it waa a regular torm of tho
court. Q. Was tho judgo Bitting as a court wlion those proceedings
took plnco with theso papers ? A. I understand him to havo
boon sitting and holding a court.
Q. Was ho holding a district court at tho time theso' pro
ceedings took place, or was he sitting in chambers? A. I
understand the court was in session, and that the judgo was
presiding. Q. Aro these papers recorded among your records? A.
Yes sir.
Q. Are they not merely filed? A. Yos sir; they are filed.
Q. Had not the district court adjourned, and the judge
returned for tho purpose of taking up theso habeas corpus
cases? A. There was one term of the court held at Salisbury,
and then the judge went from there to Morganton and held
another term, and thon came back to Salisbury, where these
cases were heard.
Q. When ho returned from Salisbury, did he hold a district
court or was ho not merely sitting in chambers? A. Ho held
a district court — as I understand it. I may bo mistaken about

162 court of impeachments.
that. That is a legal question. It might have been in cham-
bera. The CHIEF JUSTICE. I suppose tho papers tell whether
he was holding a court or setting in chambers. . ,
Mr. MERRIMON. As we understand it, the judge was
sitting in chambers and tlie clerk was along with him. The
clerk therefore supposed that the judge was holding a regular
term. We simply desire to read one case.
Mr. BOYDEN. Ii' you read one you should read the wholo.
Mr. MERRIMON. We only ask to put in evidence one
case ; that of Adolphus G. Mooro, Jamea E. Hunter, and
James S. Scott — tho petition, writs, return and order. There
will be no necessity of putting in the others.
Mr. McCORKLE. Mr. Chief Justice, I did not understand
this consent to be that these petitions and returns were to be
admitted as evidence unless the proof of the genuineness of
them had been fully established. In this case, we insist that
the managers must prove by the clerk here if the petition was
taken out before him, that it was issued, and if the return was
made by some other person it must be proved by that person,
because it was not a matter of record. Suppose now it turns
out, as I seo by the papers, it does, that the return of Col. Kirk
was not sworn to nor mado before tho clerk but before a United
States commissioner, then it is patent that, as these proceed
ings wero not before a court of record, they cannot be intro
duced until they offer proper evidence as to the genuineness of
the documents. They must produce tho parties before whom
they wore sworn to.
Mr. MERRIMON. The Chief Justice aud BenAton will
notice that wo have offered tliis ovidenco out of its ordor bo-
c'uubo a witness wo designed to call had gono to his dinner.
Wo beg leave to withdraw the offer for tho present and wo
will renew it to-morrow, selecting such parts as we want to put
in evidence.
Senator GRAHAM, of Orange, submitted the following
order :

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 163i
Ordered, That on and after Monday next, February 6th
1871, the hour for tlie sitting of the senate as a court of im
peachment shall be 11 A. M. i
JOHN B. NEATHERY, a witness on behalf qf the Man
agers being duly sworn testified as follows :
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. What is your business ? A. lam the private secretary
of Governor Caldwell at the present time.
Q. Look at this book produced here and state if you havo
seen it before and if so, stato what it is ? A. That is the letter-
book of the governor.
Q. What governor ? A. Governor Holden.
Q. Is that kept in the custody of the private secretary ? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. Do you recognize that aB the governor's letter book ? A.
Yes, sir.
Mr. MERRIMON. We desiro to Btato that we shall call
this witness again. We simply called him at the present timo
to identify the book. We now offer in evidence the letter of
tho respondent to President Grant asking for a suspension of
the writ of habeas corptis, &c.
Mr. Manager DUNHAM read the letter.
Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chief Justice, the letter which has been
read turns out to be subject to a grave objection. It refers
to some accompanying documents which wo think are part of
that letter, and wo contend that tho letter is not admissiblo
without tho production of thoso accompanying documents which
may be, and I Biippoao are explanatory of its statements.
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. Chief Justice, nothing has been road
but tho letter itself, for tho obvious reason that tho accom
panying documents are not aocossiblo to ua. Tho oxocutivo
letter-book was placed in the hands of tho managers but re
cently, and thoy havo read so much aa thoy havo found. If tho
accused has not chosen to keep copies of tho accompanying docu
ments in his office, or if he has kept them and has not chosen
to send them to this body, that is no reason for excluding the

164

COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.

letter. This letter ia evidence of the admissions made by tho
accused which we aro entitled to, to that extent.
Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chief Justice, unquestionably this origi
nal paper is in tho executive office in Washington city. Our
objection is that a portion of that correspondence — a fragment
of it only has boon read, taken as it is from the letter-book in
the executive office in tliis city, when it is apparent that the
letter is but part of the communication addressed to tho Presi
dent of tho United Statos. I take it, this copy of tho lotter
would bo as competent as tho original would be competent
woro it hero ; but oven if tho original letter wore bore instead
of tho copy, wo should Bti-11 insist that tho documents accompa
nying it, and explanatory of it, wero a part of it, and that in its
presont mutilated form, it would bo inadmissible. Tho fact
that the letter has been transcribed into tho book kept in tho
governor's office and is secondary ovidenco of tho contents of
the original document, cannot dispense with the necessity of
producing the other parts of tho letter any more than they
could be dispensed with if tho original were oftbred here.
I think this point was raised on the trial of President John-
eon, where the veto message of the president wag offered in
evidence with some accompanying documents, and in that case
not only the message but the documents were produced. I
submit that unless we have the accompanying papers to that
letter before this body, this court will be unable to determine
really what was said by the respondent in that communication
to President Grant, and therefore I insist that the letter which
has been read is inadmissible.
Mr. BOYDEN. Mr. Chief Justice, the suggestion of my
associate has another illustration in the case of the impeach
ment of Johnson. It was the case where a letter was written
by the president to the secretary of war, Mr. Stanton, in which
he refers to recollections and statements of two or three mem
bers of tho cabinet accompanying that letter. The point was
raised that those statements formed a part of the letter, and
that the letter could not be read without them, and so it was
decided.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 166
Mr. BRAGG, Mr. Chief Justice, the only documents refer
red to in this letter not already in evidence are a copy of the
state law under which proclamation was issued (and I suppose
there is no difficulty about that, it being a public law,) and a
pamphlet containing the testimony of witnesses in a preliminary
examination in Lenoir. I do not see that the document is at all
material here. At all events it rests with them to produco it.
Tho law requires tho governor to keep a copy letter book sub
ject to the inspection of the legislature, and that letter book
contains the official correspondence. That they have pro
duced it hero in response to our call. If there is anything else
in connection with that letter it is for the respondent to pro
duco it.
Mr. MERRIMON. Mr. Chief Justice, suppose that the
respondent had said in his letter, " I enclose herewith a letter
from A. B. to C. D.," having no connection whatever with
this matter ; does anybody pretend that we should bo
obliged to produce that letter from A. B. to CD.? I insist
that from the very language of the letter, it is manifest that
the accompanying documents, were not intended to be part
and parcel of the letter, and were not germain to it in any
sense whatever. It was just like a statement " I enclose five
" dollars" or " I enclose somebody's speech." The letter is a
complete document in itself, and therefore it is competent with
out the production of the other papers which were incidentally
referred to in it.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. Tho presiding officer is of the
opinion that the effect of introducing that letter, will be to per
mit the other side to introduce the papers referred to, which
otherwise might not be competent.
Mr. MERRIMON. Mr. Chief Justicee, we ask leave for
the present to withdraw our offer of the letter. We think we
can prove tlie facts in some other way, but we reserve the right
to offer the letter again if we shall see proper. We offer now
in evidence a letter from the accused to members of congress,
which will be read.

166 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Mr. Manager DUNHAM read the letter in the words fol
lowing : State of North Carolina,
Executive Department,
Raleigh, March 14, 1870.
To the Senators and Representatives in the Congress of the
United States from North Carolina.
Gentlemen : I have been compelled to declare the county of
Alamance in a state of insurrection. I have called on the
President for aid, but he is restricted by the right of the writ of
habeas corpus. We want military tribunals, by which assas
sins and murderers can be summarily tried and shot, but we
cannot have these tribunals unless the president is authorized
to suspend the habeas corpus in certain localities. Please aid
in conferring this power on the president as the only effective
mode of protecting life and property in Alamance and other
localities in this state.
Very respectfully,
[Seal.] W. W. Holden, Governor.
True copy :
J. B. Neathery, Private Secretary.
Mr. MERRIMON. We also offer in evidence a certified
copy of a telegram from the respondent to Mr. Abbott, United
States senator.
Mr. Manager DUNHAM read the telegram in tho words
following : (Telegram.) State of North Carolina,
Executive Department,
Raleigh, Maroh 17, 1870.
Hon. J. C. Abbott, U. 8. Senator, Washington, D. 0.
What is being dono to protect good citizens in Alamanco
county ? We have federal troops but we want power to act.
Ia it poesiblo the government will abandon ita loyal people to

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 167
be whipped and hanged? The habeas corpus ahoidd bo at
once suspended. Will write you to-morrow.
[Seal] W. W. Holden, Governor.
True copy :
J. B. Neathery, Private Secretary.
WILLIAM H. BAGLEY, a witness called on behalf of
the managers, being duly sworn testified as follows :
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. What is your business ? A. lam clerk of the supreme
court of North Carolina.
Q. Look upon the papers before you and Btate what they
are ? A. I have before me the several applications in the case
ot James E. Boyd, Jsmes S. Scott, James E. Hunter and
Adolphus G. Moore, of the county of Alamance, and Jolin
Kerr and others in the county of Caswell for writs of habeas
corpus, and the writs in each case and the rulings of the chief
justice. Q. How did you become in possession of them ? A. They
were deposited with me by the chief justice for safe keeping.
Q. With you as the clerk of the supreme court ? A. I am
not prepared to Bay that they were deposited with me as clerk
of the supreme court. I suppose they would not have been
deposited with me if I had not been clerk. I do not consider
that tho care of them comes within the discharge of my clerical
duties. Mr. MERRIMON. We ask leave to read the papers in
evidence. Counsel for the respondent objects to the introduction of
tho papera aa not properly proven.
Q. Do you know the handwriting of the chief justice? A.
I do. Q. Have you seen him write ? A. Yea sir, I have seen him
write a good deal.
Q. Look at the signature purporting to be the signature of

168 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
*
tho chief justico and say whether it is his? A. Which ono
do you mean ?
Q. To all of thorn ?
Senator MOORE. Mr. Chief Justico tho hour has arrived
for adjournment.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The rule is peremptory, the
court stands adjourned until to-morrow at 12 o'clock.

. •

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 169
•HVETJTH DAY.
Senate Chamber, Feb. 8, 1871.
Tho COURT mot at 12 o'clock, M., pursuant to adjourn
ment, Honorable R. M. Pearson, Ohlof Justice of the Supromo
Court, in the chair.
The proceedings were opened by proclamation made in duo
form by the doorkeeper.
The CLERK proceeded to call the roll of senators, when a
quorum was found to be present.
Senator GRAHAM, of Orange, moved to dispense with
the reading of the journal.
The CHIEF JUSTICE put the question on the motion of
Senator Graham, and it was decided in the affirmative.
WILLIAM II. BAGLEY, a witness called on behalf of
the managers, {direct examination resumed.)
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. State whether you have the papers now which were be
fore you yesterday when you left the stand ? A. They are the
same papers.
Q. Have you examined them ? A. I have.
Q. Have you examined particularly the signature purporting
to be that of the chief justice ? ' A. I have.
Q. At every place where his signature purports to be that
of the chief justice, is it his genuine signature? A. I am satis
fied of it.
Mr. MERRIMON. Mr. Chief Justice, we propose now to
read these papers in evidence.
Mr. BOYDEN. Mr. Chief Justice, if the managers merely
propose to read what you, sitting in your judicial capacity,
have signed, we have no objection. We made the objection
yeBterday that they could not read the returns without proving
the officer before whom the returns was made and sworn to. I
12

170 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
suppose that they propose to read the whole of the papera and
therefore we raise the point now. '
Mr. MERRIMON. We propose to read from a copy aa it
is more convenient.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer will announce
that he has received a communication from Messrs. Abbott,
Pool and Dockery in reference to the subpoena served upon
them. The clerk will read it in order to put tlie communica
tion in possession of the court.
The CLERIC read the communication in the words following :
Washington City, D. C,
January, 30th, 1871.
Chief Justice Pearson, Presiding in the Court of Impeachment at
Raleigh, N. C.
Sir : We have been shown a Bummona purporting to be
signed by the clerk of the senato of North Carolina, for us to
appear and testify before tho court of impeachment.
Wo aro members of tho congress of tho United States now in
session and are in attendance upon its sittings. Our official
duties, especially in theso closing weeks of the session, require
our uninterrupted presence at the capitol.
We therefore respectfully request that the usual and pre
scribed mode of obtaining the testimony of any member of
either house of the congress of the United States, while attend
ing upon it3 sittings, be pursued. We will cheerfully give
evidence in the case before the court of impeachment, either
upon interrogation in writing or before any commissioner, or
other person authorized by the court to take it,, in this city.
Most respectfully,, John Pool,.
Joseph C. Abbott,
O. H. Dockery.
Mr. Manager DUNHAM proceeded to. read the petition of
John Kerr, in words following :

trial of wtlliam w. holden. 171
State of North Carolina,
To the Honorable Richmond M. Pearson, Chief Justice of •the
Supreme Court of North Carolina :
The petition of John Kerr, Samuel P. Hill, N. M. Roane,
Robert Roan, F. A. Wiley, James 0. Williamson, William B.
Bowe, Yancey Jones, A. G. Yancey, Thomas J. Womack, James
R. Fowler, J. C. Griffith, A. A. Mitchell, J, T. Mitchell, M.Z.
Hooper, John McKee, J. M. Neal and Barzillian Graves, respect
fully showeth unto your honor that they are each citizens of the
county of Caswell in, said state; that on Friday, the 18th day
of July, A. D. 1870, while each of them wa6 about his lawful
business and in no way violating tho laws of tho land, he was
arrested by a body of armed men purporting to act under tho
command of one George W. Kirk, who claimed to act as a
military officer ; that they were each delivered by said body of
armed men into tho custody of the said George W. Kirk, and
he gave them to understand that they were arrested by his
order ; that the said George W. Kirk now has your petitioners
in his custody and holds and deprives them of their liberty in
the court house in Yanceyville in said county ; that they de
manded to know by what authority each had been arrested, and
no authority was given ; that they arc each informed that no
warrant or legal process issued by any lawful officer, or indeed
any one commanding their arrest ; that their said arrest was
without authority of law ; that they each speaking for himself,
6ay that they are not aware of any cause for such arrest ; that
they are civil and law-abiding citizens ; that said arrest was
without warrant or authority ; that such arrest and detention
is illegal because made without any lawful precept, and for no
alleged offence or any offence so far as petitioners know ; that
the matter of their said arrest has not been examined and adju
dicated upon any writ of habeas corpus heretofore issued to the
knowledge of your petitioners ; that each of your petitioners
has been so arrested and is so detained by the said George W.
Kirk and deprived of his Uberty and against his will ; that said

172 CORUT OF impeachments.
arrest was made without cause so far as each knows and with-
outf any process of law.
In consideration of the premises may it please your honor
to grant unto each of your petitioners, the writ of habeas corpus,
to bo directed to the said Goorgo W. Kirk, commanding him
to produco each of your petitioners before your honor, together
with tho causo of such arrest and detention, to the end that each
of your petioners may be restored to his rights and liberties, as
a citizen of tho 6tate.
(Signed,) Bragg, Battle, Moorb, and Merrimon,
Atty's. for Petitioner.
Mr. MERRIMON. We now read the affidavit of Emory
B. Holden.
Mr. BOYDEN. Sworn to before whom %
Mr. MERRIMON. Before L. D. Harrison.
Mr. BOYDEN. We submit that it should first be proven.
Mr. GRAHAM. We do not so understand the rule. We
understand that where the return is made before a judicial
officer and there is no objection at the time that it is not mado
upon proper evidence or upon proper service, and an adjudication
thereon takes place by that judicial officer, that every thing
ho has ratified is ratified elsewhere. Otherwise in offering evi
dence of a judicial proceeding it would bo necessary to produco
all tho witnesses before the reviewing tribunal that were pro
duced before tho original. Wo say that tho judicial magistrate
before whom the proceeding takes place, being satisfied that It
wan based upon euihViont evidence, that fact concludes tho matter
and It becomes a quasi record ; that his approbation of tho mat-
tor Is to bo taken as showing that it was based upon what was
satisfactory to him and it satisfactory to him it is not to bo on-
quired into elsewhere.
Mr. BOYDEN. Mr. Chief Justice, wo understand that to
bo tho case as to a court of record, but wo do not understand that
tho doctrine at all applies to anything but to proceedings in a
court of record. It is well known to the chief justice and to
most of the senators that the rule has been totally different in

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN* 178
our court. Our courts have always required when a suit is
brought upon a judgment before a majistrate — at least that has
been my experience — that you prove the handwriting of the
magistrate who issued the warrant. If it is returned before a
different magistrate and that different magistrate gives judg
ment it has always been required to prove his hand writing.
We do not turn to a decision and say " here is a quasi re
cord." That law has never been sustained in North Caro
lina. It is contrary to the principles of the common law. I
know of no ground whatever upon which this return can be
made evidence in this case except by taking the original and
proving the handwriting of the party signing it and of the
magistrate who swore him to the return.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. It is not the return that is offered,
it is the affidavit necessary to take out the writ.
Mr. BOYDEN. I was laboring under a mistake. I thought
the offer was to read the return. However my remarks will
apply to tho offer of the return when it. shall be made. We
do not object to the affidavit.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. It is the affidavit which the chief
justice passed upon before lie issued the writ.
Mr. Manager DUNHAM read in ovidenco tho affidavit as
follows. State of North Carolina,
Wako County.
Eminory 11. Holden, attorney for tho petitioners named in the
foregoing petition makes oath, that ho line hoard read tho eaid
petition ; that ho Haw eaid petitioners In tho custody ot the
said Goorgo W. Kirk In tho court house at Yancey ville, and
knows that tho aald Kirk so holds and dotalns each of said
potltlonora, that ho vorlly bollovos that tho facts Btatod In the
potition are substantially true as stated ; that ho knows tho pe
titioners and learned the facts as stated from actual observation
and what he heard from them and others.
(Signed) E. B, Holden.

174 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Sworn and subscribed before me the 21st day of July,
A. D. 1870.
(Signed) L. D. Harrison, [J. P.]
Mr. Manager DUNHAM read in evidence the petition of
Peter II. Williamson in tho words following :
State of North Carolina,
To tho Honorable Richmond M. Pearson, Chief Justico of the
Supremo Court of North Carolina.
Tho petition of Peter H. Williamson rospoctfiilly shows to
your honor that ho is a citizen of tho county of Cnswell in said
State— that on Thursday tho 21st day of July, 1870, ho was
arrested in said county by armed mon purporting to bo acting
under tho authority of ono Goorgo W. Kirk, and that ho is now,
and has booh over sinco detained in custody in said county by
tho said Kirk or by persons undor his authority, against tho
will of your petitioner and without any lawful authority on
tho part of said Kirk so to do — that your petitioner had com
mitted no off'enco against tho laws of tho Stato, nor dono any
thing so far as ho knows to warrant his arrest. A writ of ha
beas corpus had been theretofore issued to the eaid George W.
Kirk by tho Hon. Andrew Mitchell, one of the judges of the
superior courts of North Carolina, commanding him, tho said
George W. Kirk to bring before him, the 6aid Mitchell, tho
bodies of John Kerr and others then alledged to be unlawfully
detained in the custody of him, the said Georgo W. Kirk,
which said writ was placed in the hands of your petitioner to
be served upon the said Kirk, and your petitioner did 6erve the
same by delivering it to the said Kirk.
The said Kirk thereupon, in the presence of your petitioner,
tore up the said writ, and your petitioner left and had got
some mile and a half from the village of Yancey ville, when he
was overtaken and arrested by a party of Baid Kirk's men and
carried back to Yancey ville, where he has since been detained
in custody, as he has understood and believes, by the orders of
the said George W. Kirk.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 175
Your petitioner further shows that he is ignorant of any
other charge against him than the serving of the said writ, and
that he was arrested, as he is informed and believes, without
any order or warrant from any magistrate or judicial.officer —
and that the matter of the said arrest has not been examined
and adjudged upon any writ of habeas corpus heretofore issued,
to the knowledge of your petitioner.
In consideration of the premises, may it please your Honor,
to grant to him a writ of habeas corpus, to be directed to the
eaid George W- Kirk, commanding him to produce the body of
your petitioner before your Honor, together with tho cause of
his arrest and detension, to the ond that ho may bo restored to
his right and liberty as a citizen of tho state.
(Signed) Battle, Merrimon and Bragg,
Atty's for Petitioners.
Mr. Manager DUNHAM also read inevidenco the affidavit of
George Williamson in the words following^
State of North Carolina,
Wake county.
George Williamson being duly sworn says : that he has no
personal knowledge of the fact set forth in the foregoing peti
tion, not having seen the petitioner in actual custody.
But he has heard from one Stokes, who saw the petitioner in
custody, that it was so, and that tho petitioner was arrested and
ia detained for tho reasona stated in tho petition. Ho further
swears that he has been credibly informed that the facts set
forth in tho petition are true, aud affiant has every reason to
believe that they are true, and that he has reasons to believe,
and does believe that the petitioner is yet held in the custody
of the said George W. Kirk, having heard nothing to the
contrary eince he waa arreated.
(Signed) George Williamson.
Sworn and subscribed before me.
(Signed) R. M. Pearson, Ch'f J. S. C. at Raleigh.
July 24, 1870.

176 court of impeachments.
Mr. MERRIMON. Wo now, Mr. Chief Juatlce, offer the
return in evidence.
Mr. BOYDEN. We object to the admission of tho return.
Mr. GRAHAM. We submit that it is equally competent
where it has been taken cognizance of by a judicial officer.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer thinks that
it would bo better first to read the writ.
Mr. GRAHAM. It would be more orderly. In the copy
of the proceedings which has been furnished here the proper
succession has not been preserved.
Mr. Manager DUNHAM read the writ in the words fol
lowing : State of North Carolina.
To George W. Kirk — Greeting :
We command you, That the body of John Kerr being con
fined and detained in your custody, as it is said, together with
the day and cause of his capture and detention, by whatever
name he maybe called you have before me, Richmond M. Pear
son, chief justice of the supreme court of the state aforesaid, at
the chamber of the supreme court in the city of Raleigh,
immediately after the receipt of this writ, to do and receive
what shall be then and there considered in his behalf.
Witness, Richmond M. Pearson, Chief Justice of the Supreme
Court, this the 23d day of July, A. D. 1870.
(Signed,) R. M. Pearson,
Chief Justice Supreme Court.
Mr. Manager DUNHAM then read the order appended to
tho writ in the words following :
David A. Wicker, Marshal of the Supreme Court is hereby
authorized and commanded forthwith to make service of this
writ on G. W. Kirk, aa provided by law In such caeca, and
make return how ho haa executed tho aame at Raleigh.
(Signed,) R. M. Pearson,
Chief Justice Supreme Court.
July 80, 1870.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 17T
Mr. MERRIMON. Wo now road the return of tho officer.
Mr. BOYDEN. Mr. Chief Justico, upon reflection it strikes
me that this is not tho return of any officer — of any sheriff' or
constable — but of a private individual. We admit that if it
were a precept directed to any known officer of the land, his
return would be evidence, but being directed to a private indi
vidual it cannot bo admitted. Who is it directed to ?
Mr. MERRIMON. It is directed to the marshal of tho
Biiprcmo court.
Mr. BOYDEN. I suggest that even if it is directed to tho
marshal, it still comes within tho rule, it being no part of tho
ordinary business of tho marshal of tho supremo court to servo
writs of habeas corpus hence tho samo rule will apply. It his
rotura was mado in any case ponding boforo tho supremo court as
a court of record and honco within his duty, it would bo ovi
denco. But this was not before tho supremo court at all. It was a
preceding before tho chief justico at chambers ; andjthoreforo ho
is not an officer in tho sense in which that word is used and his
return cannot bo taken or proved.
Mr. BRAGG. Mr. Chiof Justico and Sonators, tho chief
justico had a right to designate any ono to execute this
process, and having designated Mr. Wicker, who was
at that time a marshal of tho supremo court, ho is pro
haio vice an officer to oxocnto this process, and his return hav
ing boon received and passed upon by tho chief justico, it i»
sufficient without any further proof. Tho chiof justico well
know hifl duty at that timo under the law, and having desig
nated Mr. Wickor who wob an officer of the court, that officer
served tho writ, and having served it, mado his return, as it
was his duty to do, and tho chief justice having received and
passed upon tho return as valid, as appears nothing further cnn
be Baid.
Mr. BOYDEN. Mr. Chiof Justice, tho gentleman has not
met my point at all. It is not denied that tho cfiief justico
had a right to appoint any man to serve the writ, but that
judicial officer was not sitting as a court of record and Mr.

178 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Wicker did not act as an officer of a court of records and there
fore the return must be proven. That is the point in the case.
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. Chief Justice, we think we under
stand the point and it is this, that when an officer is especially
•deputed and his action is recognized by the tribunal which is
to act upon his return, that recognition does give it the same
credit wherever the proceedings may be examined as if he had
been a regularly appointed officer. The judicial magistrate
who gives the deputation confers an authority for the execution
¦of the writ, and when the return is made and is treated as a
valid return by that judicial officer, where is the authority that
holds that such a return is not to be treated elsewhere precise
ly as if it had been made by an officer appointed originally by
law. In this instance the judge made the officer — constituted
him as an officer for that purpose — and his action is the 6ame
us if Le had been an officer whose business it was to execute
eu ch process.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer is of the
opinion that tbe return made to the chief justice may be read
without further proof, the chief justice having passed upon it
at the time.
Mr. MERRIMON. Mr. Chief Justice, the ruling having
been made we put these papers in evidence. We have read
a specimen.
. The CHIEF JUSTICE. You had better read the return
made by the marshal who served the writ.
Mr. Manager DUNHAM read the return in the words fol
lowing :
I executed the within writ by leaving a copy thereof with
Geoige W. Kirk, at the court-house in Yanceyville, Caswell
county, N. O, this first day of August, 1870.
(Signed) David A. Wicker, Marshal.
Mr. MERRIMON. Mr. Chief Justice :
We now offer in evidence a case which will raise the point
which the defendant's counsel desire to raise.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 179
Mr. Manager DUNHAM read the petition of Adolphus G.
Moore in the words following : State of North Carolina,
To the Honorable Richmond M. Pearson, Chief Justice of the
Supreme Court :
The petition of Adolphus G. Moore, a citizen of the county
of Alamance, in said state, respectfully showeth unto your honor,
that on Friday morning, the 15th day of July, A. D., 1870,
while he was about his daily and lawful business in said county,
he was arrested and detained by a squad of persons purporting
to be soldiers ; that ho was informed that ho was arrested by
the order of one Georgo W. Kirk, claiming to exercise authority
as a military officer ; that he was forced by the said squad of
soldiers to proceed to the headquarters of the said George W.
Kirk, who informed him that he was arrested by the order of
him, the said George W. Kirk, and that he acted under the
order of his superior officer, but who that superior officer was
he did not state ; that the 6aid George W. Kirk so seized your
petitioner and holds him since in custody, and deprives him of
his liberty and refuses to allow him to go at large as he has a
right to do ; that he demands of the said George W. Kirk to
know for what cause he was so arrested, but he refused to state
any cause for such arrest and detention, and to allow petitioner
his liberty ; that petitioner offered to give bail in any reasona
ble sum of money that might be required ; that he was denied
such bail, and the said Kirk declared he would not take bail in
the sum of one million dollars ; that he has no knowledge of
the cause of his said arrest, and in fact, there is no cause for the
same ; that petitioner is a quiet, peaceable and law-abiding cit
izen, and has not committed any offence to his knowledge ; that
eaid arrest was made without any proper warrant or lawful au
thority to the knowledge of petitioner ; that he has made de
mand of the process of law, and copies of the same, authorizing
bucIi arrest, and none has been given or produced , that eaid
arrest is illegal because it was inade without warrant of law^ or
any lawful authority ; that the said matter of the said arrest and

180

COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.

detention has not been adjudged upon any prior writ of habeas
corpus heretofore granted.
In tender consideration of the premises, your petitioner prays
your honor, to grant unto him, the writ of habeas corpus to bo
directed to the said George W. Kirk, commanding him forth
with to produce your petitioner before your honor, together
with any cause for such arrest and detention, to the end that
your petitioner may be restored to his rights and liberty as a
citizen of the State. E. S. Parker,
A. S. Merrimon,
Attorneys for petitioner.
Mr. Manager DUNHAM also read in evidence the affidavit
of E. S. Parker in the words following: State of North Carolina.
E. S. Parker makes oath that he has heard read the foregoing
petition, and that the same is substantially true ; that he, as
counsel for the said petitioner, saw the said George W. Kirk,
and asked him for the authority for such arrest and detention ;
that tho said Kirk gave his authority as stated in tho foregoing
petition, and affiant knows that ho, tho said Adolphus G. Moore,
is bo held and detained by. the said Georgo W. Kirk, who stated
to affiant that he had no warrant or process, other than a mili
tary order for tho arrest and detention aforesaid of the said
Adolphus G. Moore. E. S. Parker.
Sworn and subscribed before me, this 10th day. of July, A.
D., 1870. Wm. II. BAolky, Clork.
Mr. Manager DUNHAM also road in ovidenco tho ordor
that tho writ issue in tho words following:
State of North Carolina.
To Georgo W. Kirk, Greeting:
Let the writ issue as prayed for in tho above petition.
R.M. Pearson, Ch'f J. S.O.
At Chambers, 16th July, 1870.
Mr. Manager DUNHAM also read the writ issued in the
case of Adolphus G. Moore in the words following :
State of North Carolina.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 181
To George W. Kirk, Greeting :
We command you, that the body of Adolphus G. Moore, being
confined and detained in your custody, as it issaid, together with
the day and cause of hie capture and detention, by whatever
name he may be called, you have before m.e, Richmond M.
Pearson, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the State afore
said, at the chamber of the supreme court in the city of Raleigh,
immediately after the receipt of this writ, to do and receive
what shall be then and there considered in his behalf.
Witness, Richmond M. Pearson, Chief Justice of the Su
preme Court, this the 16th day of July, A. D. 1870.
Richmond M. Pearson, Ch'f J. S. C.
Mr. MERRIMON. We now, Mr. Chief Justice, offer to
read the affidavit of McAllister.
Mr. BOYDEN. On what ground do you offer it ?
Mr. MERRIMON On the ground that he served the pro
cess. Mr. BOYDEN. It seems to me Mr. Chief Justice, that
that cannot be evidence in this case, unless it is proven.
Mr. McAllister was not an officer. He was a private individual,
and we do not know whether he served it or whether he ever
made the return. This suggestion about a quasi record does
not help the case. Quasi records are not records. RecordB
prove themselves ; quasi records do not prove anything. We
cannot see how this testimony can be allowed here against this
respondent without proof. |
Mr. MERRIMON. Mr. Chief Justice and Senators, suppose
that tho chiof justice had said, on the occasion of issuing this
writ, as furthor action in that behalf had by him, " It appears
" to me that the writ heretofore issued by mo to George W.
" Kirk has been duly delivered to him by A. 0. MoAllister,"
and that thereupon the chief justice should go on and take
action, I ask the gentlemen on the other Bide if they could
question that act The chief justice has decided the matter
and has determined in a judicial way according to law. that the
particular facts exist, and according to every ride of law they

182 COURT OF IMPEAHMENT8.
can not be questioned in this collateral way. This memorial
made by your honor must speak for itself. It must speak
every where. It cannot bo attacked collaterally ; and if the
gentlemen desire to invalidate this proceeding they must in-
stituto a proceeding directly for that purposo. It stands as a
memorial mado by a proper judicial officer and is to bo read as
true wherever it is material it should bo read whether in ono
oourt or in another court. This is not only so, sir, aa it acorns
to ''me, on principle, but it is so on authority. While I
havo been sitting hero, I have turned to the general mlo
as laid down in Roscoo on criminal evidence, page 1.
Tho language used is that, "upon tho samo principle,
" the records and proceedings of courts of justico existing in
" writing are primary ovidenco of tho facta thore recorded."
It ia tho highest evidence ; and therefore, sir, if it woro needed
to prove what McAllister did as to making a return, it would
bo only nocessary to produco this paper as part and parcel of
tho proceeding before your Honor.
But, sir, we have a decision in our own courts upon this sub
ject in which it was solemnly adjudged that a return of this
sort, when it is adopted and recognized by the court, is p,'ima
facie true. That was in tho case of a special deputy sheriff',
and the return was received by the court, which held that it was
prima facie to bo taken as true because a court had received it
and acted upon it ; but it was held in that case that the return
might be contradicted. But, sir, I go further here and say
this return here was not material — I mean so far as thoso
records are concerned, for it must havo appeared to tho Chief
Justice that Kirk had boon served with tho writ.
But, sir, it is well enough to come to tho point and see ex
actly how this matter stands. At the time this first writ was
issued by the chief justice, neither he nor the counsel wero
aware of the fact that our new act upon tho subject of habea»
corpus prescribed who should servo tho writs. It was sup
posed that the law was, aa it was imder the common law, that
anybody could aorve the writ, and it was', therefore, that Col.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 188
McAllister, a man who was not an officer but merely a citizen
of the State, was charged with these writs to deliver them to
Kirk. Col. McAllister did so deliver them and made an affi
davit which we now propose to have read as part and parcel of
the proceedings before the chief justice. After that it turned
out, on looking at the new statute, that tho law provided that
" the writ of habeas corpus may be served by any qualified
" voter of the state thereto authorized by the court or judge
" ordering the same." The material point was that McAllister
had not been specially deputed by tho chief justice to de-
livor this writ although ho was an elector and did sorve it.
But tho service was recognized by the chief justico and acted
upon. McAllister made the affidavit, which wo now propose to put
in'ovidence, and tho chief justico, in his opinion, in speaking of
the fact, said that " upon proof of service, and the failure of
" Col. Kirk to return the writ, the counsel of the prisoner sub-
" mitted two motions." So that the chief justice, before he
proceeded to deliver an opinion at all, determined that the
writ had been duly served. But suppose it were material that
it should have been served by some elector of the State, spe
cially deputed, I take it that that does not exclude the common
law method. The statute does not provide that the writ shall
be served in that way, and in no other. It is merely directory,
and I take it that the chief justice took that view, because it
was not contended at the time that the service was not sufficient,
and all the action that was had was based upon it.
This much, sir, upon the merits of the question which the
gentleman presents by way of opposition to the affidavit. And
now to get back to where we started, without reference to the
merits, we contend that the chief justice having adjudged that
it was duly served and have adopted it as a part and parcel of
the proceeding before him, the affidavit of McAllister, it must
be read as part and parcel of the proceedings and it cannot be
questioned in this collatant way.
Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chief Justice, I cannot at this moment
lay my hand upon it, but my impression is that the chief

184 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
justice hold during tho progroaa of thoae caaes before him that
tho writ could not bo served by any but ono of tho lawful offi
cers of the stato without tho previous designation of tho porson
by whom It was to bo oxocutod. Whether I am correct as to
that point having boon ruled or not, It ia very clear —
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. You will find It In tho opinion In
tho case of Korr.
Mr. SMITH. It Ib very clear to my mind that that is tho
correct ruling whether made, as I understand it, or not. A
writ of habeas corpus ia not directed to any officer whatever.
It is a command directed expressly by tho authority issuing it
to the party alleged to be illegally detained a prisoner. The
habeas corpus act expressly requires, as we understand it, that
tho court or judge issuing the writ, if it be directed to any
othor than tho officer, shall designate the person to servo it.
Section 82 of tho act of 1868 and 1800 provides that "a writ
" of habeas vorjuts may bo solved by any qualified elector of
"this etato thereto authorized by tho court or judgo allowing
the aauio."
I have now in my hand tho opinion of tho chief justice de
livered in tho caso referred to.
"Georgo Williamson was not authorized by mo to make
" sorvico of the writs upon Col. Kirk. In the case of Mooro
" and others, when the writs were Bigned, I asked the counsel,
"/shall I ordor witnesses to bo summoned?' the reply was, 'we
" will attend to that matter.' I added, ' whom shall I author-
" izo to servo tho writs?' and was answorod, ' tho sheriff of Ala-
" manco Ib under arrest ; wo will got some ono to servo thorn,
" and mako affidavit of sorvico.' I was thinking about the old
"habeas corpus act, and supposed tho late act had changed tho
" law. Why the counsel of tho petitioner did not ask to have
" some elector authorized to serve the writs, is a matter not
" known to me. Far bo it from me to believe that the omis-
" sion was of purpose to bring about a collision. On the con-
" trary, I believe it was a bona fide inadvertence on their part

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 186
" as it was on mine, in not looking at the provisions of the new
" habeas corpus act.
" But eo it is — the matter passed, and on the application for
"the writs in favor of Kerr and others, I signed the writs, and
" nothing was said about the service.
" It thus has happened, that the person who served the writ
" for Moore and others, and the person who attempted to serve
" the writs for Kerr and others, wero not authorized to do so ;
" and Colonel Kirk was justified in treating Williamson as an
" intruder into his camp, the more aggravated because Wil-
" liamson was ono of tho insurgents of the county of Caswell."
I read that much of the opinion of the chief justice upon
the trial of these matters, because it fully establishes what we
think to be the plain interpretation of the statute on that sub
ject, that where a party goes outside of the sworn officer of the
law to deliver copies of an important process issued by a judge,
it is necessary that the party. so acting, should be first designated
and appointed by the judge to execute it. If that bo so, we
should object to the reading of his paper, if it were shown to
have been on affidavit, or in any other form, because of the
service of tho process being void ; and as was said by the chief
justice, Col. Kirk was not required to obey it, or to permit the
party to approach his camp.
But in addition to what I have said, (and it applies to all
those cases,) I take it that those returns have no validity at all,
except ao far as thoy illustrate what follows. Thoy are no ovi
denco except against parties and privies of any fact which is
stated in any one of them. Thoy are evidonco of thorn-
solves, of thoir existence ; aud whatoverflows from the ex
istence of such a papor or results from It; may bo Inforred
by the production of the papor, but no fact can be inferred
of tho truth of anything contained In it, to tho prejudice of
any one, whatever, outside of the proceedings. But we in-
sist further, that this, of all papers, ought to be shown to bo valid
when producod in evidence. Can it be possible that it is neces
sary, to havo proof, to give validity, as evidence, to tlie act of
12

186

COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.

the chief justice of the state, and yet we can produce a paper exe
cuted by a subordinate officer without any proof of ita genuine
ness at all ? That you are required to show — that the papers
purporting to havo been Bigned by the chief justice, was in fact
Bignod by him ; and yot it is contended that you are not requir
ed to show that the act of some officer before liim was genuine-
That is the argument of the other side.
Wo desiro also to interpose our objection to the competency
of tho evidonco produced, so far, to bo heard at all. It is is fair
that wo understand for what purpose tho gentlemen offer the
testimony beyond the proof of the existence of it, aa a paper con
nected with the proceedings takon before the chief justice. It
it is offered with tho view of establishing any fact whatever
which is recited in any of the proceeding*, then we must object
to it, in that point of view as inadmissablo evidence.
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. Chief Justice and senators, the ques
tion here is, what did the chief justice do on this occasion ?
His proceeding we pro inquiring into. Ho issued a writ. Mc
Allister comes into court with tho writ, or a copy of it, and
makes a return. Did the chief justice recognize that return ?
I suppose there is no doubt about that. If ho did, it is tho
same thing, sir, as if ho had deputed him in the beginning. I
do not know that I can repeat the old maxim in Latin, but it is
in English that "everything which is recognized as done, is
" considered as having been ordered from the beginning." And
hero, sir, the judge before whom this return was made, recog-
nizod the return as having boen mado by a proper person, whe
ther officor or not, and proceeded to act upon that return. No
objection was taken in the proceedings to the return at tlio
timo, or if there was it is now res ad judicata just as much as
tho fact that the writ issued. That being the case, it does not
matter who made the service, and it is just the same thing as
if tho chief justice had deputed this man from the beginning to
servo this writ.
Mr. BRAGG. I desire to add a few words to what has been
already said. It seema to me, Mr. Chief Justice and 'senators,

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. IfOLDEN. 187
that this whole discussion is out- of place — at least upon the
part of the gentlemen on the other Bide — for the respondent
has here expressly admitted that tliis writ was issued by tho
chief justice in the case of Moore and others and was served.
Ho cannot bo allowed to controvert the fact now. We take
tho ground that it is unnecessary to road this affidavit, that tho
chief justico has entertained jurisdiction of tho wholo matter
and delivered his opinion in the case after notifying tho gov
ornor, who appeared before him by counsel and as wo expect to
show, and when tho attachment was naked for against Kirk, tho
chief justice directed a copy of this opinion to bo served upon
tho governor, and that thereupon the governor declined to
cause tho prisoners to be surrendered to tho civil authorities.
That is tho point of this whole matter. Let us see what the
respondent says in his answer, for I say that he has admitted
service. " And this respondent further admits, that George W.
" Kirk, Colonel commanding the said body of militia in Ala-
" mance county, did, for good and sufficient cause, arrest and
" detain the said Adolphus G. Moore, named in said fifth
" article, and that the said arrest and detention was approv
ed of by this respondent as governor of North Carolina.
" Furthermore this respondent admits that the said Adolphus-
" G. Moore applied to the honorable Richmond M. Pearson,
" chief justice of North Carolina, for the writ of habeas corpus,
" to the end set forth in the fifth article, and that the said chief
"justice caused the said writ to be issued and directed to the
" said George W. Kirk, commanding him to produce the body
"of said Moore at the time and place alleged in said fifth
" article, and this respondent further admits that the said writ
" was served on the said Kirk, and that the said Kirk made no
" return thereto and refused to obey the same, and that this
" failure on the part of 6aid Kirk to make return to said writ
" and to produce the body of the said Moore in obedience
"thereto, was done by the order of this respondent aa governor
«9f North Carolina." f - :, ' -

188 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Mr. BOYDEN. I do not understand how that reading
helps thoir oaso. In tho first place, Mr. Chief Justice, I take
Ills objection, that they have no right to take up the time of
this honorable court In proving' mattora that they aay are ad
mitted, and even If thoy havo, there is no rule of law that thoy
can prove facts in an illegal way. That is all I wieh to say.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer is of the
opinion that the paper may bo read aa far'aa it proves the service
of the writ of the habeas corpus, but not in regard to the other
matters which were added for the purpose of founding a motion
against Kirk individually. That would be outside of this case.
The return can be read so far as to show the service.
Mr. Manager DUNHAM read as follows :
"A. C. McAllister makes oath, that on Sunday the J 7th of
" July, 1870, between the hours of 10 and 11 o'clock A. M., in
" the county of Alamance on the highway leading from Com-
" pany Shops in said county, to Yancey ville, in the county of
" Caswell, in said state, about nine miles from said Company
" Shops, he delivered to Georgo W. Kirk who was at that
time " 

Mr. BOYDEN. We object to anything further. We admit
that McAllister executed the writ and made the return.
Mr. MERRIMON. We desiro to prove it.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. That is admitted. The presiding
officer is of the opinion that it cannot be read except for that
purposo and not for other matters which are irrelevant.
Mr. BRAGG. If it is admitted independent of the answer
wo do not wish to put the whole answer in evidence.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. That, I suppose, is your object.
Mr. MERRIMON. Do the counsel consider these papers
in ? Thoy havo raised the point.
Mr. BOYDEN. No, sir; we consider them in as thoy are
introduced and admitted.
Mr. MERRIMON. The court will perceive by looking at <
the certified copy that this is a very long document. It con
tains the petitions and the writs of habeas corpus issued by the

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 189
chief justice, and the returns made to the writs^ and the opinion
of the chief justice in the several matters before him. We have
offered to put the whole in evidence. The question is whether
they shall be considered in evidence or whether we shall detain
the senate by reading all these papers now.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. You put the whole in including
the affidavit of service ?
Mr. MERRIMON. Yes, sir.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. That has been withdrawn upon
the admission of the service of the writs on Col. Kirk which
was all that the affidavit proved, in the opinion of the presiding
officer. Mr. MERRIMON. If that is admitted, we withdraw the
offer of the affidavit — if it is admitted that it was served.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. Better consider it withdrawn and
put in the paper except the affidavit. That can be done with
the consent of the counsel for the respondent.
Mr. BOYDEN. We'insist upon its being read.
Mr. MERRIMON. Mr. Chief Justice, we insist that it is
competent for the senate to admit the paper without its being
read. We think it is trespassing too much upon tho court
to insist upon the reading of this long document.
Mr. GRAHAM. In regard to the affidavit, Mr. Chief Jus
tice, we think that in lieu of reading it, there should be an
entry of an admission of the regular service of tlip. writ.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. Certainly. The presiding officer sup
poses that the counsel should make that admission to be entered
in place of the affidavit. But he is of the opinion that it is the
right of the respondent to have all tho papers offered read.
Under the constitution an accused party is to be confronted by
his accuser and witnesses, and if tho counsel for the respondent
desire it, there is no alternative but to put in the whole.
Senator MERRIMON. Mr. Chief Justice, I understand
this testimony is admitted to save time, that it is to be printed
and the reading dispensed with for the present.
Senator MOORE. I object, Mr. Chief Justice, as a member

100 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
of this court, to dispensing with the reading of thoso papers,
I have got my opinion to render as a juror on tho ponding
questions, and I desiro to do so intelligibly. I think  ¦
Senator GILMER. I submit aa a question of order that by
the rules of this court, no question is debatable by senators
except by the consent of the senate.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The gentleman from Craven is
not in order unless the senate allows him to be heard. The
presiding officer is of the opinion that to print the wholo of tho
documonts as suggested by the senator from Guilford, would be
to print the same things in thirty or forty cases.
Senator GILMER. It was not I that mado the suggestion
about printing, it was the senator from Buncombe [Mr. Mer
rimon.] Senator MERRIMON. I made the suggestion, Mr. Chief
Justice, to save the time of the reading these documents. We
will have the opportunity to read them when they are printed
and laid upon our desks to-morrow. I cannot see the necessity
of consuming 60 much time.
Senator MOORE. I rise to a question of order. Tho ques
tion is not debatable.
Mr. BADGER. Mr. Chief Justice, it may be that there aro
cortnin parts of these papers which are not evidence and it
docs seem to mo that the respondent has a right to hear them
read before thoy are printed as a part of tho evidence in tho
case, in ordor that ho may object to such portions of them as
aro incoinpotont; and I now solemnly protest in tho namo of
the respondent against any portion of thoso papor« bolng put
In ovidenco except such as shall bo found to bo admissible, as a,
violation of section 11 article I of tho constitution which pro
vides that "in all criminal prosecutions every man has the
" right to be informed of the accusation against him and to
" confront the accusers and witnesses with other testimony," «fec.
Senator MERRIMON withdrew his motion.
Senator MOORE. Tho motion having been withdrawn, I
desiro to hoar tho papers offered read. I think this is tho

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 191
¦proper place. It would give us a better understanding of the
issues involved if we could hear them.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The clerk will read.
The CLERK proceeded to read the opinion of chief justice
Pearson in the case of ex pante John Kerr and others, in the
words following :
The counsel of the petitioner, on the affidavit of George
Williamson, who is a qualified voter and a citizen of the county
of Caswell, submitted a motion for an attachment or rule against
G. W. Kirk, for not making return to the writ of habeas corpus,
if, upon the facts set out, it be considered that the writ was
duly served, or for an attachment for wilfully obstructing and
preventing service, or for any other writ to which upon the
facts disclosed the petitioner may be entitled.
I deelare my opinion to be that there is no ground for an
attachment, or for a rule, to show cause, but that the petitioner
is entitled to have an order, authorizing some qualified voter of
the state to make proper service of the writ ; for that purpose
I shall designate the marshal of the supreme court.
By the habeas corpus act, sec. 32, it is provided, " The writ
of habeas corpus may be served by any qualified voter of the
state, thereto authorized by the court or judge ordering the
same." George Williamson was not authorized by me to make ser
vice of the writs upon Col. Kirk. In the case of Moore and
others, when the Avrits were signed, I asked the counsel, " shall
*" I order witnesses to be summoned ? " the reply was, ".we will
41 attend to that matter." I added, " whom shall I authorize to
serve tho writs ? " and was answered, " the sheriff of Alamance
is under arrest ; we will get some one to serve them, and make
affidavit of service." I was thinking about the old habeas cor
pus act, and supposed the late act had changed the law. Why
the counsel of the petitioner did not ask to have some elector
authorized to serve the writs, is a matter not known to me.
Far be it from me to believe that the omission was of purpose
to bring about a collision. On the contrary, I believe it was a

192 COURT OF IMPEACHMENT.
bona fids Inadvertence on their part as it was on mine, in not
looking at the proviaiona of the new habeas corpus act.
But so it ia — the matter passed, and on the application for
the writs in favor of Kerr and others, I signed the writs, and
nothing was said about the aervice.
It thus has happened, that the person who served the writ
for Moore and others, and the person who attempted to serve
the writs for Kerr and others, were not authorized to do bo ;
and Colonel Kirk was justified in treating Williamson as an
intruder into hia camp, the more aggravated because William
son was one of the insurgents of the county of CasweU. I Bay
" insurgents, " for although Mr. Battle, in his remarks in mov
ing for an attachment against the govornor, on the coming in
of his reply to the proceeding had by the marshal, took occa
sion to say, that while he agreod generally with the conclusions
in tho opinion filed by me, he differed on tho question, that all
of tho citizens of a county declared to be in a state of insurrec
tion are to be doomed insurgents. I adhere to that opinion —
thoy are all to bo taken as being insurgents, until the insurrec
tion is suppressed aud some chango in their relations iB made.
Indeed, I did not enter into a discussion of tho question, and
took tho priiiciplo to bo Bottled— on the plain ground that os
long as a man remains in the county he must be taken to bo an
liiHitrgont ; because, In the nature of thlngB, It is ImpoBsiblo to
make any distinction. Who Ib to decide whilo a county ia in a
state of insurrection, whether this man or that man is well
affected, or disaffected? This inquiry can only bo mado after
tho insurrection is suppressed.
Mr. Battlo put this case: The county of Guilford is de
clared to bo in a state of insurrection,— Is justice Dick to bo
doomed an insurgent ? Certainly, unless he " comes out from
among them," or his status be fixed by proceedings had after
insurrection is suppressed. lam glad to find that Chief Jus-
tlco Chase, in Mra. Alexander's cotton caao, takea tho same view
(2d Wallace, page 404.) He says, " We must be governed by
tho principle of public law so often announced from this bench,

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. VJ3
as applicable alike to civil and international wars, that all the
people of each State or district in insurrection against tho
United States, mu6t be regarded as enemies, until by the legis
lature and the executive, or otherwise, that relation is thor
oughly and permanently changed."
This principle goes as far back as our Ang?o-Saxon ances
tors. By the common law, every inhabitant of a " hundred "
or township, was liable for the value of any goods stolen within
its bounds, unless the thief was apprehended and brought to
justice, " or hue and cry made." Hence the cry, " stop thief."
Justice Dick, who is curious in such matters, informs mo that
the word " neighbor " is derived from two Saxon words, mean
ing " near, pledge ;" — every man being a pledge for those who
lived in the same " hundred," and all being liable, as " the rain
falleth on the just as well as the unjust."
It, would have been well, and saved much cost, and much
danger of civil strife had the " neighbors " or citizens of thb
county of Caswell considered every man as a " pledge " for tho
good behavior of all of the other inhabitants, nnd seen to it,
that the perpetrators of a murder, committed in tho court house,
on the day of a political meeting, and in the day timo, were
brought to justice, or a " hue and cry " made, if the murderers
fled. Col. Kirk seems to be, in some measure, justified in not pcr-
miting nn insurgent, who was not authorized by me, to mako
service of the writs.
But I have declared my opinion to be that tho writ of habeas
corpus is not suspended, {Ex parte Moore,) and I feel it to bo
my duty to enforce tho writ, or exhaust tho power of tho
judiciary. The writ will bo handed to David A. Wicker,
marshal of the Supreme Court, with authority to mako service
in pursuance Of the liabeas corpus act.
Mr. McCORKLE. Mr. Chiof Justice, it may be that wo
are misunderstood by the court. It is not our intention to re
quire that all these petition, and all of the returns made thereto
should be read by the learned counsel for the managers. We

104 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
havo had no opportunity of looking Into those papers. Our
object is not to consume the tlmo of tho court, and therefore, I
would suggest tho propriety of suspending tho further reading
of thorn. If, upon inspection, they are all regular, of course
wo shall ralso no objoctlon to thorn at all. So far as tho peti
tions and so far as tho returns woro made by the proper officers,
wo do not object to thoir being road hero at all.
It inny bo proper, Mr. Chief Justice, to understand what was
meant by tho ndmlHsion of tho couhhoI for tho respondent that
thcHo writs had boon oxocuted. I take it, and such Ih tho view
•of my associates, that wo admit only that Mr. McAllister did
execute this writ. Wo did not mean to Bay thereby that it was
a legal service or a legal return. Wo desire tho gentlemen to
understand ub on that point.
Mr. GRAHAM. Wo insist that it is a legal return, and
was so Admitted at tho time. If thero bo nny doubt on that
point, wo winh tho question settled at once.
Mr. MERRIMON. That is admitted in the answer.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. Tho presiding officer is of the
opinion that tho chiof justico having acted upon tho return as
legal, it is to bo taken as ouch, but you cannot go outside of tho
fact, that the writ was served. Counsel were required to re-
ducoto writing on admission that it was eorved. Tho presid
ing officer would suggest that the parties look over the papers
and see what they want to read and consider that as read.
Mr. GRAHAM. As I understand it the clerk has gone
through with the reading.
Mr. BOYDEN. We desire this matter about the admission
determined. If the court admits that this was a legal service
by a proper officer, we certainly do not admit any such thing.
The opinion of the chiof justice in the case shows that he did
not admit it as a service at all after the return was made. We
liavc not said anything about the admission except in one case.
Mr. GRAHAM. There are several returns of McAllister
and as we understand it, it was admitted they were all made in
a valid manner.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 195
Mr. BOYDEN. We desire it distinctly understood, Mr.
Chiof Justice, that we make no such admission. We spoko
about ono caso before tho court. Wo never offered to admit
that thoy woro Borvod In a legal manner.
Mr. GRAHAM. I understand that to have boon ruled by
tho presiding officer, and if there be no further proceedings in
tho matter, it Ib to be taken as valid service and return.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. That was the ruling ot the pre
siding officer, that for the purpose of that writ the chief justice
had acted upon it as if it was properly served, but not as to tho
truth of the mattor set out. So, for the purposes of the writ,
tho chiof justico hold that it had been properly served, but, for
tho purposo of affecting Kirk, ho decided that it was not
properly nerved by Williamson.
Mr. GRAHAM. It is not Williamson's matter under con-
sldoration now. It is McAllister's caso. Wo havo no objec
tion to lotting tho papers bo put in ovidenco, and lot the coun
sel interpose their objection hereafter.
Mr. BOYDEN. Wo desire it understood, Mr. Chief Jus
tice, that they aro admitted by the ruling of the court, and by
no admission of ours.
Mr. GRAHAM. Do you desiro us to proceed with the
reading? Mr. BOYDEN. No, sir, only let ua see them to boo if
thoy aro right.
Mr. MERRIMON. Wo are content to withdraw evory affi
davit of servico if it is conceded that the writs wero served.
Mr. BOYDEN. Tho court has a right to say that, but it is
not our concession..
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The .suggestion is that the further
reading be dispensed with and that the parties look over the
papers and see what part it is necessary to have included in the
printed proceedings.
Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chief Justice; let us look for a moment
at the manner in which this question has arisen. It will be
seen at once what is the position occupied by the counsel of

190 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
respondent. The managers were about to read this return of
McAllister. Objection was made by us on the ground that he
was not an officer authorized to execute a writ. The chiet
justice held that so much of the return as related to the service
was admissible and no more. It was to so much that our
concession related and to no more. We dispensed with the
reading of that affidavit so far as it was necessary to establish
what the chief justice admitted it was competent to establish.
We are not now trying the legal results arising out of the evi
dence but simply its admissibility. That is our position, and
all we intended to concede. Whatever concessions are made
in the answer the gentlemen may used in the final hearing of
the case.
Mr. GRAHAM. It is desirable, Mr. Chief Justice, to place
the matter in form now, or at some stage of the proceeding, so
that we shall be able to know what is evidence in the ca6e.
The suggestion of the chief justice that ii is quite unnecessary
to print such a voluminous mass of papers as very pertinent,
when one or two forms would be amply sufficient. I think we
might save considerable expense and time in considering the
testimony by taking that course.
Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE. The counsel for the respondent
can put in writing what they admit to be the purport of the
affidavit. COUNSEL for the respondent submitted the following ad
mission :
It is admitted by the counsel for the respondent, that the
writ in tho case of A. G. Moore was served by Mr. McAllister,
but not tho legality of such service.
Mr. GRAHAM. That is a kind of protest against the de
cision made by the presiding officer of this court.
Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE. The counsel proposed to make the
admission before the decision.
Mr. GRAHAM. It the record shows that the court so
decided, wo, on behalf of the managers, are content.
Mr. BADGER. We desire, Mr. Chief Justice, on behalf of

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 197
the respondent to state that the admission in the form in which
it was made may apply to each one of the returns. The admis
sion as written applies only to the return of Adolphus G.
Moore. We are willing that the same admission shall apply to
all the othor cases.
Mr. BRAGG. Mr. Chief Justice, it seems to me that we
make but little progress, if after questions are raised and deci
ded we are to go back and have them raised again. By this writ
ten admission certain facts were conceded, but now we find our
selves back where we were an hour ago, raising a question which
has been decided by the presiding officers. How often are quest-
tions to be raised and decided again. I thought for the purpose
of entertaining jurisdiction in the matter of Moore, the presiding
officer had decided that he regarded that service as sufficient, —
had passed upon it and recognized its validity as chief justise
for the purposes of the former proceeding — not that it was ab
stractly proper for McAllister to serve that writ — and that as
the matter stood here, we could not go back now and enquire
into the validity of that service.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The counsel seems to misunder-
etand the gentleman, He merely wishes that the same ad
mission attach to each case as Jthe one which attaches to the
case of Moore and others instead of having a separate admission
in every case.
Mr. BRAGG. I am not speaking of that now, Mr. Chief
Justice. I am speaking of what the counsel desire to be in
corporated with their admission, I desire to object to their put
ting it upon the record in the way they seek after it has been de
cided by the presiding officer that that service so far as this pro
ceeding is ^concerned was valid. The chief justice having taken
action upon the return of McAllister and delivered his opinion
upon it, and there having been other proceedings in accordance
with that opinion and a service of the opinion on the governor
and a refusal by him to cause the surrender of the prisoners
pursuant to that opinion, it is not now competent for tlie gen
tleman' to go back and enquire whether the writ was duly

198 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
served or not. I understand the preeiding officer to have de
cided that point that the counsel of the reapondent cannot go
behind what waa done.
Mr. BADGER. You will have noticed, Mr. Chief Juatice,
that the respondent in this case is charged in nearly all of tho
oight articles with having made arrests of different people, and
with having refused to obey tho writs of habeas corpus issued
by the chief justice of tho supreme court. We eimply want it
to appear on tho record that though we admitted the service of
the writ, we do not admit there was a proper legal aervice in
any case.
Mr. BOYDEN. Unless there is an admission in the answer.
Mr. GRAHAM. I do not understand, Mr. Chief Justice,
that any admission has been made. The paper they propose
to put in is rather a protest against the decision made by this
court than anything else. The record, I suppose, will state
that an objection was mado to the validity of the service of
this writ, that the objection was overruled.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer is of the
opinion that the counsel for the respondent have the right to
have this admission attached to each caso of the four or five
that came up in the first instance. The first will be attached
to the case of Moore and the same will be attached to each of
the others — the presiding officer does not now recollect how
many there wero.
Mr. GRAHAM. The record will show that the objection
was overruled to the extent of flaying that the service was
sufficient. WILLIAM LARKIN, the witness previously examined)
being recalled on the part of the managers, testified as follows :
By Mr. Merrimon.
. Q. I believe you stated yesterday that you were clerk of the
United States district court ? A. I stated I was clerk of the
district court of Cape Fear district of North Carolina.
. Q. Look at these papers and state what they are ? (produe

trial of William w. holden. 199
Ing papers to witness.) A. This is a petition of Josiah Turner,
Jr., for a writ of habeas coipus. This next paper is tho writ
of habeas corpus issued upon such petition by Judge Brooks.
This other paper is the answer of George W. Kirk to that writ.
Q. Is the ordor of Judgo Brooks discharging Turner thero
also ? A. I havo the order of the Judge discharging Josiah
Tumor, Jr.
Q. How did yon come in 'possession of those papers?
A. I was acting as clerk of the Cape Fear district court at
Salisbury last August, and they came into my possession at tho
sitting of the court when these parties were discharged.
Q. You brought them from your office ? A. They have been
in my possession ever since.
Q. Lodged in your office ever since ? A. Yes sir.
Mr. MERRIMON. We now propose to read these papers
which have been produced by the witness.
Mr. McCORKLE. Mr. Chief Justice we object to the read
ing of the papers for this reason. Yesterday, it appeared by the
evidence that these proceedings were had at chambers. What
tlie counsel has got to do is, to prove as was done in tho
cases where the writs were taken out and acted upon by tho
cliief justice of this state, the signature of Judge Brooks.
Surely in thiB proceeding the managers have no right to read
returns that Colonel Kirk made to these writs, the service of
which was made by third parties, and why ? because, as it is
not a court of record, the papers cannot be entertained unless
the handwritings of the parties are all 6hown. To illustrate
tliis proposition, under the old attachment law of North Caro
lina magistrates were authorized to issue attachments for certain
sums, a hundred dollars, where it was based on a note or 6ixty
dollars if it was upon an open account. Suppose that there
after litigations should arise as to the validity of the action of
the justice of the peace, I submit to the honorable managers-
whether under the laws of North Carolina it could be pre
tended that after the action of the magistrate after proving his
signature to tho attachment to the conditional judgment and

200 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
then to the final judgment, they could read tlie return of the
constable ? Most clearly not. As these proceedings were not
before a court of record the fact must be estabhshed in the
same way as you would establish the genuineness of the sig
nature of the magistrate.
Mr. BRAGG. Mr. Chief Justice and senators, I under
stand this witness to say that these papers which we propose to
put in evidence now were proceedings in the habeas corpus
cases heard before Judge Brooks at chambers. It will not be
pretended that they were not cases heard at chambers, and of
course these papers are the record. And the question is
whether the papers are evidence upon it being shown that
these were the papers upon which the judge acted. I do not
understand the counsel to say that these petitions were not filed
before Judge Brooks and sworn to before him. If they deny
that —
Mr. MoCORKLE. We do not deny or admit anything about
it, we require you to prove your case.
Mr. BRAGG. Some things, Mr. Chief Justico, ought to
bo conceded when we all know and when tho papers them-
solvea show tho facts upon thoir face. I admit that wo have to
show that there wore papera of this kind. We propoao to allow
that the potltlons woro sworn to before a competent offlcor —
boforo Judgo Brooks himself. We expect to show that upon
these petitions writs of habeas corpus wero issued retumablo
before Judge Rrooks, that they purport to have been served by
the marshal and were acted upon by the judge when the return
came in, and then we propose to show what was done in tho
cases. We admit that there is no record, strictly, because the
business was dono at chambers. I understand the gentleman
to object to these papera on the ground that these papers
have not been proven. Sir, a similar objection was made on
the trial of President Johnson, before the senate of the United
States, and the matter was discussed at pages 612 to 516 of the
report of the trial. The matter • was this, General Thomas,
the adjutant general, had been appointed secretary, of •<•">»•

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 20l
aid interim, and he had attempted to take possession of the
office of Mr. Stanton, who was then the secretary of war.
Mr. Stanton went before Chief Justice Cartter of the district of
Columbia, and sued out a wan-ant against Thomas, upon an
affidavit which is set forth in this volume. Judge Cartter acted
upon that matter pretty much in the same manner in which
Judge Brooks did» A part of the proceedings were entered
by the clerk in memoranda and the recognizance taken was
entered upon one of the dockets which the clerk kept — the
criminal docket. The warrant and affidavit were offered in evi
dence. The .managers objected to their admission. I will not
lumber up this case by reading largely from the proceedings on
the impeachment of Johnson, but only a brief extent.
" We offer a warrant of arrest of General Thomas, dated
" February 22d, 1808, and the affidavit on which the warrant
" issued." Objection was takon aud then by a vote of thirty four to
three the evidence was admitted. Then follows the affidavit
sworn to before Judge Cartter, and the warrant issued by
him under which General Thomas was arrested and brought
before him. On a auuHoquont day it bo Ing objected that
thoro was somo record of theso proceedings, tho clerk was
directed to bring tho memoranda that ho had made upon somo
dockot as was stated before the senate, and thon a further objection
was made that the transcript of that docket being a reaord waa only
odmifisable in evidence upon the principle which we all under
stand perfectly Well that a record can only be proved by exem
plification in the proper way. But the senate allowed the.state-
ment of tho clerk as to the manner in which the case was tried
before Judge Cartter, and then admitted the entry made
by tlxe clerk to show.. Vtohat disposition had been made of
the matter. Subsequently Mr. Cox who had been sent for by
the president and retained for the purpose of attending to this
matter of General Thomas was called upon to state by the res
pondent's counsel what he did, the purpose being to show that
he had instructions from the president to try and get this mat*
14

£02 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
tor before tho oourt, either by a proceeding in the nature of ft
quo warranto, or If they failed In that, by having General
Thomas put inoustody and thon to sue out a writ of haleat corpus.
And It was allowed by tho senate aftey full defcate to go intcnll
those matters that took place feoforo the judge. But that docs-
not bear bo particutoriy upon tHe matter now before tlie court
as docs tiro other point in relation te the admissibility of the
affidavit of Mr, Staunton and the warrant; that waa issued.
No objection was made- to thoir ndmiesift*. I suppose t>int
they had not as astute gentlemen there- as. we have in this case,
although they do enjoy some reputation in the profession. Cer
tainly no objection waa made that the-offlcer who served; the war
rant was not an officer. The whole poiuii in controversy Beemed
to be — the judge having- acted' upon this matter, and taking it
for granted that tl»« proceedings were legally instituted before
him, and the process duly served — as to its admissibility, first,
of the affidavit and' warrant, and then eff ttho memoranda mado
by the clerk ; and ia both instances it was ruled by-. an over
whelming majority that the pspffr^ were in fact a record and
admissible. I call it a recoup tfcaugh it waa not. It was
merely a memorial of what Judga Cartter had. done ©n that day,
and was what was done unden tho direction ȣ the alwefi justice
of this state, by the clerk of the supreme court, hi tlie habeas
corpus eases which are referneiirt to- here. I eannot see any
valid objection to the admission t*i lflM*pup<BU
Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chief Justice,. 1 dball make no reply tc*
the suggestion of the learned comma! as t* the extraordinary
astuteness of the gentlemen who may be engaged in conductinc-
the case for the respondent. It is euo«gh for us t© say that
wo desire to secure for the respondeat » fail asd impartial
trial, and our Bole object is and will be- to ser that auch evidence
as by the laws of this state is admissible, shall be admitted and
none- other with our consent. . ,
I desire to' call the attention at the 'chief, justice and th*
senate to the misconception upon which the gentleman has-
introduced a reference to the decision made in th«)trial ol An-

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 208
drew Johnson. In that' case there had already been introduced
ovidenco by tho managers to which that warrant related, and
this ovidenco was offered in further explanation, of thoso facts.
I read from pago 610.
" Mr. Evarts. Mr. Chief Justice and Senators, the arrest
"of General Thomas was brought into testimony by tho mana-
" gers and thoy argued, I beliovo, in thoir opening, before they
" had proved it, that that was what prevented General Thomas
" from using forco to tako possession of tho war office. Wo now
" propose to show what that arreat waa in form and subatanco by
"the authentic documonts of it, which are tho warrant and tho
"affidavit on which it was based. The affidavit, of course,
" does not prove the fact stated in it, but the proof of the affi-
" vit shows tho fact upon which, as a judicial foundation, the
" warrant proceoded. Wo then propose to follow the opening
" thus laid of this proceeding, by showing how it took place,
" and how efforts were mado on behalf of General Thomas by
" habeas corpus to raise the question for the determination of
"the supreme court of North CaroUna in regard to this act.
" Mr. Manager Baker. I understand, Mr. President, that
" if this affidavit goes in at all, it is then evidence of all that it
" states, if the gentlemen liave a right to put it in.
" Mr. Evarts. I said otherwise ; but you can havo your
" own conclusion. Wo do not admit it to be bo."
A rcferonco to tho examination of the witness will show that
these papers had on them tho seal of tho court. I read from
page 608.
"Mr. Stanbery,
" Q. Have you with you tho affidavit and warrant under
?' which Lorenzo Thomas was arrested ? A# I have (producing
" some papers.) "" '
"Q. Are those the original papers? A. The original
"papers. ''
• tt Q. Did you affix the teal of the oourt to the warrant ? A.
"Idid. •• -•' •'• ¦¦".{¦> ¦ '< •
" Q. On what day? A; On tho 22d of Feb. last, &c."

204 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Now the question that was raised there was not as to the
proof of these being the original papers which had been of
fered in evidence but as to the evidence itself supposing the
proof to be full and ample that they were the original papers.
The objection was still taken as to their admissibility,
Mr. BRAGG. We understand that question to have been
decided yesterday.
Mr. SMITH. I am stating this to illustrate what I said a
moment ago. Our objection is that we have not here any
legal evidence that theso are tho original papers that were before
Judge Brooks. We 6ay that we are entitled to evidence of the
genuinonness of these papers in the ordinary way in which tho
gonuinenness of the papers is proved. Our objection touches
that point and not the effect of the evidence. In other words
wo object to the mannor in which this testimony is proposed to
go before tho court, rather than to the testimony itself, if prop
erly introduced.
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. Chief Justice, the question is in what
manner the proceedings before Judgo Brooks of the district
court of tho United States ahall bo verified. It ia proposed
hero to bo dono by producing tho papers and to prove by tho
custodian of thoso papers as we havo proved that he was
tho person who was with the judge at tho proceedings and that
tho judicial action of the judgo was recorded by him undor
tho judge's direction.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. Do you propose to prove tho
handwriting of the judge.
Mr. GRAHAM. We do not propose to do that. I do not
know that the handwriting of the judge will appear at the end
of the proceedings. It appears that the judge issued a writ
and wo propose to prove that the judge required the clerk to
attend him as an amanuensis to record his proceedirigs, and
that the papers which he has were before the judge, that the
returns were made to the judge, that the judge acted upon them
and that his action was recorded by the witness under ' the
judge's direction. ' > > <

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 205
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer supposes
that you can prove.that the judge adopted the witnesses, writing
as his own, it being not a matter of record of proceedings at
chambers. Mr. MERRIMON. We will examine the witness upon
that point.
WILLIAM LARKIN, {examination resumed.)
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. State whether you attended Judge Brooks, and if bo wlkt
you did ? A. I attended at the session of the court for tho
hearing of these cases at Salisbury, and was directed by Judgo
Brooks to make such record as was necessary on that occasion.
Q. Have you that record here now ? A. Yes sir, I have it
here present.
Mr. MERRIMON. Mr. Chief Justice, we can prove tho
judge's hand-writing as to the issuing of the writ but we do not
deem it necessary. We offer to read the papers as identified
by this witness.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. It is tho opinion of tho presiding
officer that tho papers can bo read.
Tho CLERK proceeded to road tho potition of Josiah Turner,
In the words following: United Stateb of America,
District of North Carolina,
To the Hon. Goorgo W. Brooks, Judgo of the District Court in.
and for tho District of North Carolina :
The petition of Josiah Turner, Jr., respectfully , shows to
your honor that ho is a citizen of the county of Grange in tho
State of North Carolina, and that on the 5th day of August,
1870, while engaged in and about his lawful business, at or
near Hillsboro', in said county, he was suddenly arrested by a
file of armed men under the command of one Honneycut, and
was placed, upon tlie cars of the Norths Carolina rail road and
taken to a place called Company's SlixDpe, and was from thence
sent to Yancoyyille, in the county of Caswell, where he was-

200 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
plaoed and is now confined, in tho court house in said town,
and is now thero detained and guarded, among many others,
by a body of armed men undor tho command of one Goorgo W.
Kirk ; and that his said capture and detention and restraint of
his liberty are In violation ot tho constitution and law of tho
United States. Your potitionor furthor showa that bo far as ho
knows, haa been informod or bolloves his said oaptlon and de
tention was without any warrant or authority but he has boon
informed and believes that tho said Georgo W. Kirk profossoB
to detain him as ho does in close custody under the ordora of
William W. Iloldon, Govornor of tho stato of North Carolina ;
Wherefore, your petitioner prays that a writ of habeas cor-
pus from your honor, may issue to be directed to the said
George W. Kirk and whomsoever may hold your petitioner in
custody, commanding him or them to have the body of your
petitioner before your honor immediately or at such other timo
as in the said writ may be specified for the purpose of enquir
ing into the cause of his caption and detention and to do and
abide such order as your honor may make in the premises, and
your petitioner will ever pray, &c.
Moore, Battle, Graham,
Bragg, and Merrimon,
Att'ys for Petitioner.
The CLERK next read the affidavit of J. II. Moore in the
words following : State of North Carolina,
Wake County.
James H. Moore makes oath that he has heard. read the fore
going petition and knows tho contents thereof — that he haB no
personal knowledge of the arrest and detention of the peti
tioner as therein stated but from reliable information received
in this place from persons who had personal knowledge of the
fact of the petitioner's arrest and detention he verily believes
that the facts touching the same are truly Bet forth in this
petition. James II. Moore.

TRIAL 'OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 207
Sworn to and subscribed before me this 6th day of August,
1870. G. W. Brooks, Dia't Judge.
The CLERK next read the writ of Judge Brooks in the
words following:
The Ptresidemt of tlie United States of America 1w> George W.
Kirk <xc «wch persou aeimayhave the person herein named:
We command you, that the body of Josiah Turner, Junior,
being confined and detained in your custody, as it is said,
together with the day and cause of his capture and detention,
bj' whatever name he may be called, you have before mo, Geo.
W. Brooks, Judge of the District Court of the United States
for the District of North Carolina, at the court house in Salis
bury in the county of Rowan, in the state of North Carolina,
forthwith after the receipt of this writ, to do and receive what
ehall be then and there considered in his behalf.
Witness, George W. Brooks, Judge of the District Court of
the United States for the District of North Carolina, this the
sixth day of August, A. D. 1870.
G. W. Brooks, U. S. Dis't Judge.
Tlie CLERK next read tho return of Geo. W. Kirk in the
words following:
To tlie Hon. G. W. Brooks, Judge of the District Court of the
United States for the District of North Carolina.
For ueturn to the foregoing writ of habeas corpus, I state
that after the counties of Caswell and Alamance were, by the
proclamation of his Excellency Governor W. W. Holden, declar
ed to be in a stateof insurrection. Xt. CoL Burgen, of the second
regiment of detailed militia of the state of North Carolina,
was ordered to arrest Josiah Turner, Jr., for alleged violations
of law, and that the said Josiah Turner was arrested by Lt
CoL Burgen, of the second regiment as aforesaid, and is now
detained by me on the charge of conspiring with divers other
citizens of the state to overthrow tho government of the State
of North Carolina,
Salisbury, Aug. 18th, 1870. Geo, W. Kibe.

208 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS*.
Sworn to and subscribed Aug. 1870. -v
Mr. BOYDEN. That is sworn to before whom ?
The CLERK. There is no signature.
Mr. BOYDEN. Does the court ride that in ?
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer had ruled
it was admissible under the supposition that it was sworn to.
The CLERK next read the minute made by the clerk of tho
court. Mr. BOYDEN. Is that signed by the judge ?
Mr. MERRIMON. No, sir.
Mr. BOYDEN. We wish to be understood as objecting tc*
the paper unless signed by the judge.
WILLIAM LARKIN, [examination resumed.']
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. Did you make the entry which has been read under the
direction of the judge? A. I made the entry which was
read to his honor and corrected by him.
Q. You were directed by him to make it? A. Yes, sir;
the words "of the prisoner" were inserted there by his
direction. The CLERK then read from the reeojd the words following.
United States District Court for tlie- Cape Fear Distriot of
North Carolina, before his Honor George W. Brooks.
No cause being shown for the caption, and detention of the
prisoner, it is ordered by his honor that he be discharged and
allowed to go without day and that George W. Kirk pay the
cost of these proceedings to. be taxed by the clerk of this court.
Witness Cross Examined.
By Mr. Boyden.
Q. Does it appear that any time was asked ? A. There is a
date to it, Friday, the 19th of August.
Q. Does it appear upon the entry' that time was asked, for by
Kirk to produce witness I A. It does not.. .

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 209
Re-Direct examination.
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. Look at. the papers in your hand and state what they aro ?
A. I have tho petition of John Kerr and others andean affida
vit thereto, signed by Thomas Bragg; also the writ of habeas
corpus issned upon the petition by Judge Brooks, with the re-
tnrn, &c.
Q. How did they come into your possession? A. They
came into my possession on the same occasion at Salisbury.
Q. What time ? A. On Friday, August 19th.
Mr. MERRIMON. We propose now to read the papers in
the case of John Ken*.
Mr. McCORKLE. We do not require you to read them.
Mr. MERRIMON. We ask that the clerk of the court
leave a certified copy of them instead oi leaving the originals.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. Leave will be granted unless
objected to.
The witness produced a certified copy which ho left with the
clerk. Senator GRAHAM, of Orange. Mr. Chief Justice, I move
that tho sitting of tho court be extended to half past threo
o'clock, unless the managors shall have finshed the testimony
they desire to introduce to-day before that time, on which I
call the yeas and nays, and I hope the motion will be seconded.
A sufficient number seconding tho call, the yeas and nays
were ordered.
The CLERK proceeded to call the roll of senators on thc-
motion of Mr. Graham, and it. was decided in the affirmative..
Those who voted in the affirmative, are :
Messrs. Adams, Albright, Barnett, Battle, Beasly, Brogden,,
Brown, Cook, Council, Cowles, Crowell, Dargan, Edwards,
Flemming, Flythe, Gilmer, Graham, of Alamance, Graham, of
Orange, Hawkins, Hyhian, King, Latham; Ledbetter, Lehman,.
Linney, Love, Mauney, McClammy, McOotter, Morriinon,.
Morehead, Murphy, Olds, Robbins, of Davidson* Robbins,, of

210 : COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Rowan, Skinner, Speed, Troy, Waddell, Warren, Whiteside,
Worth— 42.
Those who v>ted in the negative, are:
Messrs. Bellamy, Edwards, Moore, Norment, Price — 6.
Mr. McCORKLE. I desire to ask tlie witness a question.
WILLIAM LARKIN — re-cross examination,
By Mr. McCouklk.
Q. I a«k whether your memorandum shows that in the pro
ceedings before Judgo Brooks, tlmo was asked on tho part ot
Colonel Kirk to produce evidence as to the guilt of the petition
ers ?
Mr. GRAHAM. Wo object to the question on the ground
that that matter has been ended. Tho question was upon the
admissibility of this paper, aa tho memorial of tho proceedings
made under tho direction of the judge. That question was
objected to, debated, and settled and I do not see tliat tlie ques
tion asked has any relevancy after that.
Mr. McCORKLE. The gentleman misapprehends the object
of my cross examination. The witness informs me that he
kept this memorandum of tho proceedings, and I propose to
ask him whether certain other things did not take place before
Judge Brooks, and if 60, whether he made any memoranda
of them or not. As it was not a court of record before which
tho proceedings were heard, 1 think clearly we have a right to
go into tho matter. We propose to ask the witness whether
if, on this examination, the defendant Kirk did not ask the dis
trict judge for time to produce evidence to sustain the truth of
his return. That is all wo desire. It certainly is competent. If
tho minute wero made in a court of record, then it could not
be contradicted, because the record imports absolute verity
itself. Surely tho proceedings which took place before a mag
istrate or a judge at chambers are competent to be proven, and
Col. Kirk certainly would not be bound by mere memoranda tak
en by a clerk, but would have a right to show that upon any sub
sequent proceedings or trial what really did take place. And if

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. nOLDEN. 211
Col. Kirk would have that right, how much greater would bo
the right of the respondent to come into court and show it.
Mr. GRAHAM. Ab we understand it, Mr. Chief Justice,
this is a proposition to prove that a motion was made for a con
tinuance upon certain reasons stated, and to amend the me
morial which the judge left of his proceedings by putting in
the matter which is sought to be proven. I say that this me
morial is conclusive as to what action was taken on that
occasion. It any other motion wero made which was not set
down, it was the fault of those conducting the proceedings that
they did not think proper to have anything else recorded. If
you are to go outside of the record which the judge has left —
I speak of it as a record, but not in its technical 6ense — outside
of the memorial which the judge has left of these proceedings,
there is no end to the introduction of parole proof for the
purpose of determining what is the legal effect of proceedings.
Mr. BADGER. Mr. Chief Justice, I am a little surprised
to hear the learned counsel object to this evidence on the ground
that those who conducted the proceedings did not have facts re
corded in a court, which was no court of record in memoranda
over which they had no control. Tho counsel must know that
Colonel Kirk and his counsel had no control over the memo
randa which Judgo Brooks had made of tho proceedings which
took place before that officer. Governor Holden certainly, who
is the party now on trial, had no such control. To speak of these
memoranda kept by the clerk as a record is not speaking of a
record in such a sense as is known among lawyers.
Mr. MERRIMON. We waive our objection.
WILLIAM LARKIN. Cross examination resumed,
By Mr. McCorkle.
Q. I ask if Colonel Kirk did not request the court to give
him time to produce witnesses to sustain the truth of his return
in all tho cases except probably that of Josiah Turner ? A.
I think that on Thursday afternoon tho counsel did ask for an
extension of time for reasons which I do not now remombcr,
but I think it related particularly to making their returns. I
do not remember that it referred to the production of witnesses.

212 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. I ask whether tho counsel did not expressly request time
to get witnesses to prove tlie truth of Colonel Kirk's return 1
A. I do not remember that witnesses were specially named.. I
remember that great stress was put upon the fact that it would
b- almost impossible to have the return prepared the, next day.
Q. I ask if time was not asked the first day until. the next day
following to make the return ? A. Time was asked until the
next day.
Q. I ask you if you don't remember that when the case was
called Colonel Kirk's counsel didjnot ask in each case that they
might be allowed time to produce witnesses to prove the truth
of the return ? A. My recollection is not very clear, but it
may have been so.
Q. I ask you to refresh your recollection, and to state if Judge
Brooks did not announce that we had taken all the time allowed
by law and he would not give us any timo to enable Colonel
Kirk to get witnesses. A. I remember that ho objected on
that ground to extending the timo.
Q. He had already extended the timo to make tho return, had
ho not ? A. No further than tho next day.
Q. Did not ho refuse to give us further time to get witnesses ?
A. Do you mean on Friday ?
Q. Yes, sir, when the caso was called up :
Mr. BOYDEN. The case of Josiah Turner? A. I don't
remember very distinctly that it was asked for.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. I don't see that tliis testimony
has any relevancy.
Mr. McCORKLE. This paper which they have read is not
a perfect transcript. It simply says that thero being*nb evidence
against A. B. and C. D. the petitioners are discharged. We
desire to show that there were some grounds for their deten
tion and that Colonel Kirk asked for time to enable him to get
witnesses to prove the truth of his return. ' • '¦
Mr. MERRIMON. There were fifty things, said -in that
proceeding which they did not ask to have noted. • • i
' Q. You Bay you do hot remember whether that motion !wa»

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. i HOLDEN. 218
made or not ? A. There were several appeals made by counsel
for time. I did not pay very much attention to' everything
that was said by them. < • >
Q. Do not you recollect now, that the first cause called up
was that of Mr. Turner, by Governor Graham ? A. I am not
sure that it was the first, I don't recollect; ¦¦ ¦
By, Mr. Merrimon. i
Q. You put down in the minutes what the judge told you
to put down ? A. I made the order as directed.
Mr. MERRIMON. We now put in evidence the certified
copy of a telegram from the accused to the President of the
United States, in reference to the action of Judge- Brooks.'
The CLERK proceeded to read the telegram in words fol
lowing: State of North-Carolina,
Executive Department,
Raleigh, August 7th, 1870.
To tho President of tho United States :
Sir : Tho chief justico of tho supremo court of this stato,
sustained by his associate justices, has decided that I havo a
right to declare counties in a stato of insurrection, and to arrest
and hold all suspected persons in such counties. This I havo
done. But the district judgo, Brooks, relying on the fourteenth
amendment and the act of congress of 1867, page 885, chapter
28, has issued a writ of habeas corpus, commanding the officer
Kirk to produce before him the bodieB of, certain prisoners
detained by my order. . , .
I deny his right thus to interfere with the local laws in murder
caaes. I hold these persons under our state laws, and under the
decision of our, supreme court judges who have jurisdiction of
the whole matter, and it is not known to Judge Brooks in what
manner or by what tribunal the prisoners will be examined
and tried. • ,.- .» ut/r
The officer ,wijl b^jd^ct^,tovre^ th^t be Jwlds

214 COURT OF IMPEACIIm^Io.
the prisoners under my order, and that lie refuses to obey tho
writ. If the marshal ahall then call on the posse ccmmitatus
there may be conflict, but if he should call first on the federal
troops It will bo for yon to say whether tho troops shall be used
to tako prisoners out of my hands.
It is my purposo to detain tho prisoners, unless tlie army of
tho United States under your orders, shall demand them.
An early answer is respectfully requested.
W. W. Holden, Governor. •
True copy :
[Seal.] J. B. Neathery, Private Secretary.
Mr. MERRIMON. We next put in evidence the reply of
the secretary of war to the telegram just read.
The CLERK read the letter as follows :
Washington, 1870.
Gov. W. W. Holden :
In connection with your telegram, August 7th, to the presi
dent, the attorney-general submitted the following:
Attorney General's Office,
Washington, August 8, 1870.
I do not see how the United States district judge can refuse
to issue, the writ if the petition makes out a case for it under
the habeas corpus act of 1867, 14 statutes, 385. If the return
^incontroverted, or the facts appearing on proof to the judge
after a denial by the petitioner show the arrest to have been
made under lawful state authorities, he will remand the pris
oners. In determining whether the laws- of the state authorize
the first, he will respect' the decision of the state judge. I
advise that the state authorities yield to the United States
judiciary. (Signed,) , A. F. Akerman, Att'y General.
, The President directs me to communicate to you the fore
going opinion of the attorney general.
Wm. W. Belknap, Secretary of Wait
True copy: . ' ":
[Seal.] J. B. Neathery, Private Secretary.

TRIAL of WTLLIAM" w. holden. 215
. Mr. MERRIMON. W© offer in evidence a certified copy
of tho letter from the accused to Judge Bond, United State?
circuit judge.
The CLERK proceeded to read the paper in the words fol
lowing: State of North Carolina,
Executive Department,
Raleigh Aug. 29, 1870.
Hon. II. L. Bond, judge circuit court of tho United States .*
Sir : Capt. Wenner, the bearer hereof, will lay before you
the papers in the habeas corpus case of Lt. Col. Burgen, of the
2d regiment North Carolina militift.
The petition of Col. Burgen for relief does not overstate the
facts as to the existence and atrocious character of the ku klux
klan, in this state.. It was to disperse this klan so that the
civil law could not be enforced in certain localities, that tho
militia was called out. Col. Burgen was employed m the mili
tia, and is now in prison for offences alleged to have been com
mitted by him.
I shall not A-enture to intimate to your honor any opinion as
to the law in this case, but I would be much gratified if
your honor could spare the time to come to Raleigh, and try
the case here. I would respectfully suggest that your honor, by
being here, could obtain a dear view of that state of feeling
and the Burrounding circumstances, whatever y©ur opinion as
to the law in the ca6o may be. ' .7(1
With great respect,
Your ob't. servant, < " '
W.-W. HOLDEN, 'Governor.
True- copy: •"¦ ' '
...jiSeaLJ *.>" J. B. Neatsbry, Private Secretary.
, Mr.; BOYDEN; I think that' the dork* read the letter
wrong. The word "not" is Inconsistent "With the language of
the • letter, will the clerk read) ill again. •
. The CLERK read the following; < .<.,.(. „.^-
" It Was to dispone thhvklan so that the civil law could not

21^ COURT OB! IMPEACHMENTS..
bo enforced in certain localities, that the militia Was called out.-'
Mr. BOYDEN. It is evidently a mistake. .¦ ,r-.- «¦-
The original letter book was produced and handed to the
counsel for the respondent. >..- ¦ • * • .
Mr. MERRIMON, We now offer in evidence, a transcript
of the records of the proceedings in the superior court of Ire
dell county: In the Superior Court, Iredell County,
Richard M. Allison, on behalf of himself and the other
property holders and tax-payers of the state, plaintiff, against
David A. Jenkins, treasurer of the state, and A. D. Jenkins,
paymaster of the state troops and assistant treasurer, defen
dants.The plaintiff complaining of tlie defendant, alleges—
I. That he is a citizen of said county, and as such is one of
the tax-payers and property holders in the state of North Car
olina, and has property on account of. which he is bound by
the laws of said state to pay taxes tor its support and to carry
on such business and enterprises as it may lawfully engage in,
and as such tax-payer he is interested in all questions in respect
to the increase of its debts in the use, disposition, and disburse
ment, and administration of its funds in hand.
II. That the property holders and tax-payers in said stato
and liable like himself to pay taxes, are many thousands in
number, so that it is impracticable for them to join in this suit,
wherefore he brings the same in his own name to protect not
only hid own rights and interest, but the same of all peraona
interested in like manner with himself.
III. That Wilham W. Holden ia governor of the atate of
North Carolina, and plaintiff is informed and behaves, and so
avers the facts to be that under color of his said office, and in
prostitution of the came he has assumed to himself tha power
to j£3u<* his ordsr to 6undry persons, and by and through them to
recruit, organize, drill, arm and equip an armyofm3n,c;i::-"tii»g
of a thousand men and moreland hcs; so .recrri'xd, cr;;inized,
drilled, armed and equipped such army forthe. unlawful purpose

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 217
of arresting and depriving of their liberty the free citizens of
said state without any warrant or lawful authority, and by no
authority save only his own order, that in pursuance of such
purpose he has arrested and deprived of their liberty many of
the people and unoffending citizens of said state, and detained
them in custody of said army for many days and still so detains
and deprives them of their liberty, that he so arrested, detained
and detains them without any lawful warrant or authority and by
his own order merely, that he has so arrested and deprived said
citizens of their liberty not only without any legal sanction,
but in defiance and subversion of the constitution and laws of
said state and the United States.
IY- That the army so recruited, organized, drilled, armed,
equipped and used do not purport to be the militia or of the
militia of said state, nor are they such, but they are called by
said Holden "state troops," and are a recruited body of men
in pursuance of orders issued by said William W- Holden to
one George W. Kirk, a citizen of the state of Tennessee, and
perhaps other persons ; that 6aid George W. Kirk and ono
Bergen and one Yates, and at least a part of the men so re
cruited are not citizens of the state of North Carolina, but aro
citizens of the state of Tennessee ; that the said stato troops
and army were so recruited and without reference to any
statute or lawful authority of said state of North Carolina ; that
thoy were selected and designated by no rule or authority ot
Jaw, but to answer the lawless purpose bred in men by said
[Holden. V. That plaintiff is advised and believes that said William
jW. Holden as aforesaid issued his said orders and in manner
and by and through the means aforesaid recruited, organ
ized, drilled, armed, equipped, transported and UBed the "state
troops" and army aforesaid without any lawful authority but in
violation of the constitution and the laws of the stato of North
Carolina and the United States.
VI. That the said William W. Holden under color of and in
prostitution of his office of governor as aforesaid has made
15

218 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
his warrant nnd ordor upon tho defendant as treasurer of said
Htato for largo buiiib of money, to-wlt fifty thousand dollars and
moro belonging to and In tho treasury of said state, to bo used for
the purpose of bo recruiting, organizing, arming, eqnipping,trans-
porting, paying and using said " stato troops " and army; that
tho defendant as treasurer hns recognized such and said war
rant and orders for such sum of money from timo to time and
paid the same out of the money in the treasury of the state,
and said Iloldeli has used tho said money for the purposes
aforesaid. VII. That said William W. Holden persists in keeping said
"state troops" and army in operation for the purposes aforesaid
and is about to make his further warrant and order for large
sums of money, for the purposes aforesaid on said defendants ;
and said defendant is about to recognize the same and pay such
sums of money out of said trensuiy as may bo so required, of
him for the purposes aforesaid.
VIII. That the plaintiff is advised that tho legislature of
said state has made no appropriation of any money for tho pur
poses aforesaid, and that there is no statute or lawful authority
authorizing such use of the money so in the treasury of said state.
IX. That the plaintiff as a property holder and tax payer in
said state is interested in having the said defendants restrained
by injunction from so recognizing such warrant and orders for
the money in the treasury and paying the same.
• The plaintiff therefore demands judgement —
I. That the said defendant as such treasurer be enjoined
from recognizing any and all warrants, and orders of said Wil
liam W. Holden, or any other person for money in the treasury
for- the puipose or purposes aforesaid, • or for the purpose of
paying pr transporting such "state troops" and army. '•
¦ " II. That the plaintiff is also informed and believes that ono
A. D. Jenkins, the assistant clerk of the treasurer, and acting
ns paymaster for said " stato troops," has already drawn largo
shins of money from tho treasurer of tlie atate, and now holds
the same, to wit : about sixty thousand dollars, ready to pay

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 219
over to tho said troopa ; and plaintiff prays that ho also bo
onjoinod from paying out any money in his handa hold for such
purposo upon tho warrant or ordor or demand ot any porson
whatever. III. That tho plaintiff recover his coata in this behalf.
Bragg, Battle, Graham, A. 8. Merrimon,
Atty's for Plaintiff.
State of North Carolina, )
Iredell County. j
R. M. Allison makes oath that ho has read tho foregoing
complaint and that tho same is true so far as it purports to bo
of his own knowledge and as to all other matters and facts
therein stated ho believes it to bo true. R. M. Allison.
Sworn and subscribed before mo, tho 24th day of August, A.
D. 1870. A. MrronELL, Judge.
Superior Court, Iredell County.
Richard M. Allison and all tho property holders and tax-payers
of tho stato of North Carolina, plaintiff,
against
David A. Jenkins, treasurer, and A. D. Jenkins, defendants.
Whereas, tho plaintiff is about to apply for an injunction
restraining the above named David A. Jenkins, treasurer, and
A. D. Jenkins, from paying any further sums of under the
warrant and order of William W. Holden, governor, &c, or
any other person for tho purpose of using, paying, organizing,
equipping or arming an body of mon raised by said Holden and
by him called state troops, &c.
Now therefore, we, Richard M. Allison and Hugh Reynolds'
Thomas H. Allison, C. A. Carlton, undertako in the sum of
five thousand dollars to pay, to the said David A. Jenkins and
A. D. Jenkins such damages as they may sustain by reason o
such injunction if the cotirt shall finally decide that the nlain*

220 court of impeachments.
tiff is not entitled thereto, the damages to be ascertained by a
reference or otherwise, as the court may direct R. M. Allison,
Thos. A. Allison.
;. H. Reynolds,
0. A. Carlton.
"•*" 0' *S°™, } AtOham^Aug^mO.
Upon the plaintiff entering into an undertaking in the sum
of five thousand dollars, with approved security, payable to the
defendants, the clerk of Iredell superior court will issue in
junctions as demanded in the eomplaint, restraining David A.
Jenkins, treasurer of the state, from recognizing any and all
warrants and from, paying the same, issued by Wilham W.
Holden, governor of the state, for the purpose of paying for
the recruiting, transporting, drilling, supplying, clothing, arm
ing and paying the troops mentioned in plaintiff's complaint
and commanded by George W. Kirk, one Bergen, one Yates,
and that A. D. Jenkins, paymaster of William W. Holden, be
enjoined from any way disbursing the sum of sixty thousand
dollars and all other sums of money received by him on the
governor's warrant, from D. A. Jenkins, treasurer, or from
tho governor, for tlie purpose of defraying tho expenses of re
cruiting, transporting, proviaioning, arming, and for the aervi-
coa of the troops herein mentioned and described, and the in
junction will be continued in force until the further order of
the court. A. Mitchell, Judge
10th Judicial District. s'"
Iredell County, in the Superior Court.
R. M. Allison and all the property holders of the state of
North Carolina, plaintiff summons for relief,
Against
David A. Jenkins, treasurer of the state of North Carolina
and A. D. Jenkins, defendants.

trial of william w. holden. 221
State of North Carolina.
To the Sheriff of Wake county, greeting :
You are hereby commanded to summon David A. Jenkins
and A. D. Jenkins, the defendants above named, if they be
found within your county to be and appear before the judge of
our superior court to be held for the county of Iredell at tho
court house in Stateaville on the 2d Monday after the 3d Mon]
day of March, 1871, and answer the complaint which will be
deposited in the office of the clerk of the superior court for
said county within the three first days of the term, and let the
said defendants take notice that if they fail to answer the eaid
complaint within that time the plaintiff will apply to the court
for the relief demanded in the complaint.
Heroin fail not and of this summons make due return.
Given undor my hand and seal of said court, this 24th day of
August, 1870. CL. Summers,
Clerk Superior Court Iredell county.
On tho back of the aforesaid is tho following endorsement,
to-wit :
Received August 25th, 1870.
Served August 25th, 1870.
By leaving a copy of this summons, and copy of the order
of injunction with D. A. Jenkins, publio treasurer. T. Fv Lee,
Sheriff of Wake County.
R. M. Allison and all the property holders of the State of
North Carolina, plaintiffs,
Against
David A. Jenkins, treasurer of the atate, and A. D. Jenkins
paymaster of tho state troops and assistant treasurer, defendants.
To the Sheriff of Wake county, greeting :
In pursuance of the foregoing order of A. Mitohell, judge of
the 10th judicial district, 24th August, 1870. at chambers, filed
in the office of the clerk superior court in this case,'' •-/• i" >' '
You are hereby commanded to notify the defendants, David

222 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
A. Jenkins, treasurer of the state, and A. D. Jenkins, paymas.
ter of tho troops and assistant treasurer, to desist and cease
from recognizing any and warrants and from paying the same
iseuod by Win. W. Holden, governor of the stato, for purpose
of paying or the recruiting, transporting, drilling, supplying,
clothing, arming and paying tho troops mentioned in plaintiff's
complaint and commanded by Goorgo W. Kirk, ono Burgin
and ono Yates, and that A. D. Jenkins, paymaster of Wm. W.
Iloldon, bo enjoined from any way disbursing tho sum of sixty
dollars and all othor sums of money secured by him on tho
governor's warrrant from D. A. Jenkins or from tho govornor
for tho purposo of defraying tho expenses of recruiting, trans
porting provisioning, arming and for the services of tho troops
herein mentioned.
Witness. C. L. Summers ot our said court, at office in Statcs-
villc, the 2nd Monday after the 3d Monday in March, 1870.
Issued 24 August, 1870. C. L. Summers, C. S. C.
Iredell County, in the Superior Court.
Richard M. Allison and all tho property "
holders and tax payers of tho stato of

Summons for relief.

North Carolina, plaintiffs,
Against,
David A. Jenkins, Treasurer of the
state of North Carolina, and A. D. Jenkins,
defendants. State of North Carolina,
To the Sheriff of W ake county, greeting :
You are hereby commanded to summon David A. Jenkins,
treasurer, and A. D. Jenkins, tho defendants above named, if
thoy bo found within your county, to bo and appear before the
judge of our superior court to be hold for tho county of Iredell
at the court houso in Statosville, on tho 2nd Monday after tho
5th Monday of March, 1871, and answer the complaint which
will bo deposited in tho office of the clork of tho superior court
for eaid county within tho throe first days of tho torm, and lot

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 223
tho said defendants take notice that if thoy fail to answor the
said complaint within that timo, the plaintiff will apply to tho
court for tho relief domandod in the complaint.
Heroin fail not and of this summons mako duo return.
Given undor my hand and seal of said court 24th day of
August, 1870. 0. L. Summers,
Clork superior oourt, Iredell county.
On the back of tho aforesaid summons is tho following indorse
ments to wit :
,.; Received August 25th, 1870.
Served August 25th, 1870, by leaving a copy of this sum
mons and a copy of tho order of injunction with A.D. Jenkine.
T. F. Lee, Sheriff
By J. J. Nowell.
R. M. Allison, against David A. Jenkins, treasurer of the
and A. D. Jenkins, Paymaster of State Troops and Assistant
Treasurer, Defendants.
To the Sheriff of Wake county, greeting :
In pursuance of the foregoing order of A. Mitchell, judge
of the 10th judicial district, 24th August, 1870, at chambers,
filed in the office of the clerk of the superior court in this case,
you are hereby commanded to notify the defendants, David
A. Jenkins, treasurer of the state, and A. D. Jenkins, pay
master of the 6tate troops and assistant treasurer, to desist
and cease from recognizing all warrants and paying the same
issued by William W. Holden, governor of the state, for the pur
pose of or the recruiting, transporting, drilling, supplying, cloth
ing, arming, paying the troops mentioned in the plaintiffs com
plaint and commanded by George W. Kirk, one Burgen and
one Yates, and that A. D. Jenkins, paymaster of William W.
Holden, be enjoined from any way disbursing the sum of sixty
thousand dollars, and all other sums of money received by him on
the governor's warrant for the purpose of defraying the expenses
of recruiting, transporting, provisioning, arming and for the
eorvices of the troops herein mentioned. i
Witness, C. L. Summers, clerk of our said court, at office in

Undertaken on
apppeal.

224 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Statesville, the 2d Monday after the 3d Monday in March, A. D.
1870. C, L, Summers, 0. S. C.
Issued 24th August, 1870. Superior Court, Iredell County.
R. M. Allison for himself and the other '
property holders and tax payers of the
state of North Carolina, plaintiff,
Against
D. A. Jenkins, treasurer, and A. D.
Jenkins, defendants.
Whereas, on the 24th day of August instant, 1870, the
plaintiff obtained from his honor Judge Mitchell, at chambers
in the superior court of Iredell county, enjoining the defendants
from paying certain money to certain persons and on certain
accounts, as therein specified, and whereas, the defendants intend
to appeal therefrom to the supreme court.
Now, therefore, we A. D. Jenkins, of Raleigh, and C. Dewey
and J. 0. Blake, undertake in the sum of five hundred dollars,
that the Bald defendants shall pay all costs and damages that
may be awarded against thorn on such appeal. A. D. Jenkins,
D. A. Jenkins,
D. Dewey,
John 0. Blake.
Copy served on R. M. Allison this Oth day of September,
1870.
State of North Carolina, )
Iredell County. j
Be it remembered that a superior court of law was opened
and held for the county of Iredell, at the court house in States
ville, on the 2d Monday after the 3d Monday in August, A. D.
1870, the honorable Anderson Mitchell judge of said court
present and presiding. i
The following recorded appears, to wit :
R. M. Allison and Others H
D. A. JetffSud A. D. \ IredeU 8uPerior Court.
Jenkins.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 226
The plaintiff, R. M. Allison, maketh oath and saith that he
is informed and believes that the Baid A. D. Jenkins, since the
service upon him of the injunction issued by the court, in this
case and in disregard and defiance thereof, has turned over
or disposed of the funds in his hands, as set forth in the com
plaint for the benefit of troops mentioned therein. R. M. Allison.
Sworn to and subscribed before me, this 6th day of Septem
ber, 1870. C. L. Summers, C. S. C.
R. M. Alfison, plaintiff, against D. A. Jenkins, treasurer of
the state, and A. D. Jenkins, paymaster and assistant treas
urer, defendants.
On motion and on affidavit of the plaintiff that the de
fendant, A. D. Jenkins, has disposed of the funds in his hands
for the bonefit of the troops mentioned in tho complaint in dis
regard of the ordor of this court, it ia ordered by the court
that notice of a rulo bo served on tho aaid A. D. Jenklna, com
manding him to appear before tliis court on Saturday, tho 10th
Instant, at 10 o'clock, A. M., to show cause why ho ahall not
bo attachod for a contempt of this court. Notice to issue.
R. M. Allison, plaintiff, against David A. Jenklna, treasurer,
and A. D. Jenkins, paymaster and assistant treasurer, de
fendants. On motion and on affidavit of the plaintiff that the defendant,
A. D. Jenkins, has disposed of the funds in his hands for the
benefit of the troops mentioned in the complaint in disregard
of tho orderof this court,
It is ordered by the court that notice ot a rule be served on
the said A. D. Jenkins, commanding him to appear before this
court on Saturday, the 10th instant, at 10 o'clock, A. M.,
to show cause why he shall not be attached for a contempt to
this court.
Witness, C. L. Summers, clerk of our said court, at office in
Statesville, this 6th day of September, A. D. 1870.
[Seal.]

220 COURT OF IMFSAOnMUNTS.
On the back of the foregoing notice is tho following endorse
ment, to wit :
To hand Sept. 7th, 1870.
T. F. Lee, Sh'ff.
v By J. J. NowKtt, D. S.
Executed Sept. 7th, 1870. ,
By dollvoring and leaving with A. D. Jotlklns a true copy
of tho within notice T. F. Lee, flh'ff.
By Alhekt Maonin, Dpt.
September 10th, 1870.
R. M. Allison, plaintiff, "j
against >¦ Rulo to show cause in contempt.
A. D. Jenkins, defendant. J
Tho following is the answer of defendant, A. D. Jenkins :
Superior CouHt, Iredell county,
R. M. Allison, Plaintiff,
vs.
D. A. Jenkins and A. D.
Jenkins, defendant.
For answer to the rule against him iif, the above cause mado,
tho defendant A. 1). Jenkins saith :
1. That ho disclaims all purpose of committing a contempt
of this honorable court or of any order, by it made.
2. That he was notified, for tho first time upon the 25th
day of August last, of an order in tlie above cause enjoining
him as paymaster of the state troops, and as assistant treasurer
from in any way disbursing any suUls of money received by
him for the purpose of defraying the expenses of recruiting,
transporting provisions, arming, alid for the service of such
troops. 3. That sinco tho tlmo of such notification this defendant
httH Intended to, and has in all rcftpoeta observed and kept Ita
injunctions In all roMpoets bo far as ho has been aware.
4. That ho has never boon UHHlntant treasurer of tho state,
or had any connection with funds In tho complaint mentioned,
except as stated below.

»>

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 227'
6. That at tho time when ho was notified of tho above order,
ho had in his hands as acting paymaster of said troops, $40,-
480,12 and no moro.
0. That his duties as paymaster wero under a written order
of William W. Iloldon, governor of the stato, dated July 11,
1870, to him as ono of his aids-de-camp (with the rank of col
onel) detailing him for such service, and ho had at no time any
other authorization.
7. That upon the 3d day of September last, Governor Holden
by a written order to that effect relieved this defendant, from
qucli duty and ordered him to " turn over at once " to Major
John B. Neathery all the money in his possession by virtue of
his offico as paymaster, and to send to the office of the adjutant
general a final statement of all his accounts.
8. That this defendant being thereby discharged from his
office, it became his duty as he was advised, to turn over to
whomsoev he might be directed anything held by him in
virtue thereof, and accordingly on the next day he delivered
over to said Neathery the sum mentioned above. (5)
9. Such discharge of this defendant from the duties to which
he had been detailed as above Avas made by Gov. Holden
without suggestion from and without consent upon the part of
this defendant ; he was advised and believed that he could not
resist it; and after a careful consideration of the terms and spirit
of the order of injunction, this defendant was unable to see
that he was thereby ordered not to settle with any successor
who mght tako his office, ho having taken an oath at the timo
of his detail which bound him (at least in tho abseneo of an
injunction to tho contrary) to make such disposition of the funds
in caso ho were relieved.
10. If this defendant hath disobeyed said ordor in any
respect ho submits that ho has done bo in ignorance, only
intending at all times to bo obedient thereto. A. D. Jenkins.
Subscribed and sworn to before mo in open court, 10th Sep
tember, 1870. 0. L. Summers, 0. S. C.

228 COURT OF IMPEACHMENT.
The above rule coming on to be heard, the defendant files
his answer thereto. .
Thereupon, after argument by counsel on both sides, it is
considered by the court that euch rule be discharged.
State of North Carolina, )
Iredell county, f
1, 0. L. Summera, clerk of the superior court of Iredell county,
do hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true and perfect
transcript of the records on file in my office in the above reci
ted action.
In testimony whereof I hereunto subscribe my name and
affix the seal of said court, at office in Statesville, this 6th day
of January, A. D. 1870. C. L. Summers, C. S. C.
Mr. McCORKLE. Mr. Chief Justice, we would like to
know from the managers for what object the return to the bill
in equity is introduced — whether it is as evidence of the
facts contained therein so far as the respondent is concerned ?
If that bo their object we object to it as incompetent.
Mr. MERRIMON. We offer it for every purpose that it
would be lawful, and particularly for the purpose of showing
that the injunction issued to A. D. Jenkins was served upon
him. Mr. McCORKLE. We do not object to that.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer is of the
opinion that it is only competent to show that there was such
a proceeding but that it is not competent to prove the facts
set forth.
Mr. MERRIMON. Does the chief justice hold that it is
evidence of the fact that an injunction was served.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. Yes, sir, but not as evidence of
* tho facts set out. i
AARON D. JENKINS, a witness called on behalf of the
managers, being duly sworn, testified as follows :. -,< ,
By Mr. Merrimon : . ,, *
Q. What is your business ? A. I am at present teller in the
treasury department.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. nOLDEN. 229
Q. How long have you been such ? A. I went into tho
treasury department aa assistant clerk. The office of teller was
created after that — I do not recollect at what time.
Q. Have you been there for several months ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. How long? A. At least 15 months as teller.
Q. Look at the papers in your hands and state what they
are ? A. These are warrants of the governor and auditor on
the treasurer.
Q. Where did you get them ? A. We got them from the
governor. Q. I mean where did you get them from recently ? A. Out
of the treasury department.
Mr. MERRIMON. We shall desire to call this witness
again. We now offer in evidence the warrants in the words fol
lowing :
$1,000. State of North Carolina, No. 318.
The Public Treasurer : Pay to the order of A. D. Jenkins,
paymaster of state troops, the sum of one thousand dollars
under an act entitled " An act to organize a militia of N. Car-
" olina," ratified Aug. 17th, 1868, and " An act to secure the
" better protection of life i and property," ratified Jan. 29th,
1870. Given under my hand and seal of office, this July 11th, A.
D. 1870. W. W. Holden, Governor.
Countersigned, H. Adams, Auditor.
Endorsed on back, A. D. Jenkins, paymaster.
$5,000. State of North Carolina. No. 828.
The Public Treasurer : • >
Pay to the order of A. D. Jenkins, paymaster and distri
buting officer, five thousand dollars, under "An act to organize
a militia of N. 0.,M ratified August 17th, 1868, and "An act to se
cure the better production of life and property^ ratified , Jan
uary 29th, 1870.

280 COURT OF impeachments.
Given under my hand and seal of office this .July 14tli, A.
D. 1870. W. W. Holden, Govornor.
Countersigned, A. Adams, Auditor.
Endowed on back, A. D. Jenkins, Paymaster.
$00,000. State of North Carolina. No. 881.
Tho Public Treasurer :
Pay to tho ordor of A. D. Jenkins, paymaster and distri
buting officer, sixty thousand dollars, undor " An act to organ
ize a militia of N. O." ratifiod August 17th, 1808, and "An act
to secure the better protection of lifo and property" ratifiod
Jan. 29th, 1870.
Given under my hand ond soal of office this July 22d, A.
D. 1870. W. W. Holden, Governor.
Countersigned, H. Adams, Auditor.
Endorsed on baok, A. D. Jenkins, Paymaster.
Mr. MERRIMON. Wo ask loave to allow cortifled oopios
of these warrants to be produced so that the original war
rants may be returned to the treasurer.
THOMAS G. McLEAN, a witness called on behalf of the
managers, being duly sworn testified as follows :
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. Where do you reside? A. In Graham, Alamance
county. Q. What is your business ? A. I am register of deods.
Q. Look upon the papers that I now hand to you and soo
if you havo seen thorn before, and if so, whoro? A. I have
seen these papers before. I found them in the court houso
in Graham.
Q. What particular part of tho court house? A. In a
• small room just bade of tho judgo's seat botweeu tho two
jury rooms. There is a jury room on each side of tho house
and this small room was between them.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 281
Q. When did you find them? A. It was the morning
after Col. Kirk left Graham — after he left there last.
Q. Who had possession of the court house just before he
left it ? A. Kirk had possession.
Q. How? A. Ho camo there and demanded the keys of
the court houso from me and I turned them over to him.
Q. Who was with him ? A. There was a large number of
soldiers. Q. Do you know the handwriting in these letters which
have been shown you ? A. No, sir, I do not know the hand
writing but I think I know tho signature, having seen the
same signature frequently.
Q. Whose signature is it ? A. William W. Holden's.
Q. Have you seen much of his signature — havo you Been it
many times % A. I have seen it frequently.
By the Chief Justice.
Q. Did you ever see him write ? A. No sir ; I never saw
him write.
Q. What business do you follow which induced you to seo
his signature often ? A. I am register of deeds and clerk of
the county commissioners.
Aaron D. Jenkins, being recalled on behalf of the managers
testified. By Mr. Merrimon :
Q. Do you know the handwriting of Governor Holden ?
A. Yes sir. •-. >
Q. Look upon these papers which have been just produced,
and aee if they aro in the handwriting of Governor Holden ?
A. [after examining.] I think they aro. ¦ ' t ,
Mr. MERRIMON. We ask to have thoso letters read in .
evidence. , , . ... u
The CHIEF JUSTICE. Thoy may be- read. > < . -. »
The CLERK proceeded to road the lottors in tho words fol
lowing t

232 court of impeachments. Executive Department,
State of North Carolina,
Raleigh, July 30, 1870.
Col. G. W. Kirk :
Dear Sir : This will be handed you by Mr, J. B. Neathery,
who has my full confidence.
An officer directly from Chief Justice Pearson will accom
pany him to serve a writ of liabeas corpus on you. You are
instructed to receive tlie officer with courtesy and endorse upon
each writ as follows : Yanceyville, July, 1870.
Service accepted. John Kerr, named within, was arrested
and is now detained in my custody by order of my commander-
in-chief, W. W. Holden, governor of North Carolina. There
fore I cannot obey the writ.
With deference, G. W. Kirk,
Col. 2d Reg. N. C. Troops.
Executive Department,
State of North Carolina.
Raleigh, July 28, 1870.
Col. G. W. Kirk,
Dear Sir : I have just learned from citizens of Buncombe
that it is important to have a detachment of troops in Asheville
on the day of the election. It is also important to have a
detachment in Shelby, Cleaveland county. Can you spare twenty
or thirty men for each of those places? If you can I would
urge that you send them at once.
Col. Clarke has sent detachments to Hillsborough, Chapel
Hill, and Carthage, Moore county. The object of all these
detachments is to preserve order and to secure a fair and free
election. You will have made out and forwarded to me as early as
possible a Hat of all the persons under arrest, with a statement
of the reasons for arrest in each case.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 233
I have thought it best mainly on account of the pending
election, to postpone the court martial until the 8th of August.
It will certainly be held at that time. I will notify you in
time as to the necessary arrangements.
I see and hear of nothing in your action that is not deserving
of commendation. The edifice of crime is tottering and will
soon fall, I expect to-morrow to receive important confession
from Mr. Bovd, Mr. Basin and other leading Alamance Ku
Klux. . Very respectfully, W. W. Holden, Governor
nnd Commander-in-chief
Executive Department,
State of North Carolina,
Raleigh, July 17, 1870.
To Col. G. W. Kirk, commanding post at Yanceyville :
Dear Sir: This will bo handed you by Col. Albright and
Col. Ray in whom I have full confidence.
I learn that Mr. Boyd proposes to mako a full confession,
and then retire from public life and all connection with tho Ku
Klux. I leave the matter in your hands, after a full conference
with Cols. Albright and Ray, and after Boyd shall have done
all that may be required of him. If his action is entirely satis
factory he may be released on his parole, and if he plays false
he can be again arrested.
There are many more arrests to be made, but the next list
will be furnished to the judge advocate. The court must as
semble on Monday, the 25th July. Some of the Caswell crim
inals are escaping. I want you to exercise a sound discretion as
to such arrests in Caswell not on the list you have, as may be
necessary. The company in Dallas, Gaston, will be under your Com
mand, W; S. McKee, captain. He will be mustered in to-mor
row. It woidd be well to let them remain in Gaston, as their
votes will be needed,and they Cauhavo control over Gaston,
16

284 COURT OF impeachment*.
Llnooln and Catawba. Twonty or thirty of your mon should
bo sent to Shelby, Clcavoland county, to keep an eye on Plato
Durham's friends and prevent intimidation of voters.
Our friends in tho mountain counties aro very much concern
ed about tho loss of votes by tho absence of your men. Send
as many as you can spare to Ashvillo Marshall, at Burnsville,
so that they can voto and return. Somo men will be actually
needed in Ashevillo, at Burnsville, to ensure a free election.
I would be glad to havo a full report of
Tho lawyers aro exhausting evory expedient, but thoy will
fail. This is thoir Inst movement. It is important that tho
Chiof Justico, who is substantially sustaining mo, should be very
courteously treated in the person of his messenger.
You can confide fully in Mr. Neathery, and I wish- you to
send me list of prisoners and witnesses together with the proofs
in each case. I want to know the evidence in advance of the
court. With my best wishes for yourself and tho officers and men
under your command, I am, respectfully,
W. W. Holden, Governor
and Commander-in-chief.
Mr. MERRIMON. We next offer in ovidenco the hotel
register of tho National Hotel.
Mr. BOYDEN. For what pm-poro?
Mr. MERRIMON. Wo will call the witness.
Adolph J. Rutjeb, a witness called on behalf of the man
agers, being duly sworn testified as follow y
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. What is your business ? A. A hotel keeper;
Q. What hotel ? A. Tho National Hotel.
Q. Is this book now produced your register? A. Yes, sir.
Q. State what tlmo It embraces? A. From the 29th of
January, 1870, wo aro using it yot.
Q. From that tlmo until now? A. Yes.

TRIAL, OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 235
Q. Look at tho signature purporting to bo that of Georgo
W. Kirk at tho placo oponod to you. Have you Boon that sig
nature boforo — has it boon callod to your attention ? A. I
havo seen it boforo.
Q. State what yon know about it — did you seo Kirk write
it ? A. I believe I did.
Q. Was he at your houso at that timo ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you seo the name of B. G. Burgon there immediately
below it ? A. It is above it.
Q. Was he at your hotel at that time ? A. I believe he was.
Q. What does it state there ?
Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chief Justice, wo object to the question.
It calls for tho declaration of a party not the respondent. The
declarations of Burgen and of Kirk are not admissable in this
prosecution against the respondent.
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. Chief Justice wo submit that they
are evidence. We have proven that Kirk was sent out with
this command under the orders of the governor, and have laid
the foundation for the introduction of the declarations which
Kirk made either in writing or otherwise. Wo say that in
this view those declarations are competent evidence against the
respondent. Tho acts of Kirk wero encouraged, if our
evidence is to bo believed, by the respondent, and we hold that
he stands upon tho footing of a co-operator with Kirk in the
transactions which Kirk was carrying on. That being the case
any evidence of declaration mado by Kirk either in words or
writing, are competent to be given in evidence as against the
respondent. Senator GILMER. Mr. Chief Justico, that the question
now raised may be settled to day, I move a further extcntion
of our session for 15 minutes.
Senator PRICE. On that I call the yeas and nays.
Not sufficient number seconding the call, the yeas and nays
woro not ordered.
The CHIEF JUSTICE put the question on the motion of
Senator Gilmor and it was decided in tho affirmative.

286 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Mr. MERRIMON. If it meeta with the approbation of the
court, Mr Chief Juatice, we propoee to put in tho register of
the Yarborough House, and leave the question raised as to the
competency of the proof offered to be discussed in the morning.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. What is the date of the entry?
Mr. MERRIMON. The date in the register of the Yar-
brongh House is June 20th. That in the National Hotel is
June 22d.
Mr. SMITH. There is also an entry in the book, showing
that Kirk waa registered from North Carolina, which we deeiro
to put in evidence, if it should bo decided that tho others are
to como in.
Mr. BOYDEN. Under date of July 10th, thoy are regis
tered as North Carolinians.
Mr. GRAHAM. Wo submit, Mr. Chief Justico, that wo
cnn offer thoso declarations In connection with tho respondent,
but that tho respondent has no right to provo such declarations
in his own behalf.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. You offer only thoso two entries.
Mr. MERRIMON. Only thoso two.
Mr. BOYDEN. But you have not proven that thoy wero
made. JAMES M. BLAIR, a witness called on behalf of the man
agers, being duly sworn, testified as follows :
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. State to the court whether you wero proprietor of the
Yarbrough IIoubo at any time, and If bo, when. A. I Mas
proprietor of it from March 19th, 1807, to July 10th, last year.
Q. Look at the book now shown you, and seo if you ever
saw it, and it so, what it is? A. I have seen it a thousand
times, I reckon.
Q. What is it ? A. It is the hotel register.
Q. Is there a signature in it any where purporting to be that
of G. W. Kirk and another purporting to be that of B. G.
Burgen ? A. I saw Colonel Kirk in the hotel on the morning

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 237
after he came. I was off to Baltimore. He got in on the one
o'clock train. I saw him after breakfast in the hotel, the next
morning. Q. When ? A. On the morning of the 20th of June. As
the trains were running then, the western train came in at one
o'clock. He staid for breakfast and left ; I don't know where
he went to. He just had a lodging and one meal. I was off
at Baltimore and came in the night before or that morning, I
don't remember which.
Q. State in reference to B. G. Burgin ? A. I don't know
him and would not if I were to see him.
Q. Whether he was at your hotel or not you don't know ?
A. I don't know. I never saw him to know him at all. My
nephew was up at tho timo thoso gontleinen came in. I don't
know anything about it.
Q. Whore is your nephew now ? A. lie is in Charleston.
AARON D. JENKINS, a witness recalled on behalf of tho
managers, testified, as follows ;
By Mr. Meuuimon.
Do you know the handwriting of B. G. Burgon. A. J
have seen his signature and I think I have seen lain write, but
I do not know whether I am well enough acquainted with his
signature to swear to it.
Cross examination.
By Mr. Boyden.
Q. Have you formed from seeing him write, such a knowl
edge that you would know his writing if you were to see it ?
A. Do you mean the signature of Colonel Kirk or Burgen ?
Q. I will put the question in reference to Kirk first ? A.
Yes, sir, I would know it.
Q. How is it, as to Burgen— I understand you expressed
a doubt about that? A. Yea sir, I doubt , whether I would
know it.
Q. You ean't say whether you know his handwriting ? A.
No, sir.

288 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer is of tho
opinion that the witness is not qualified to speak of the hand
writing of Burgen.
On motion of Senator Graham of Orange the court ad
journed until 12 o'clock to-morrow.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 289
EIGHTH DAY.
Senate Chamber, Feb. 4, 1871.
Tho court met at 12 o'clock pursuant to adjournment, the
honorable R. M. Pearson, chief justice* of the supreme court, in
in the chair.
Tho proceedings wero opened by proclamation made in due
form by tho doorkeeper.
Tho CLERK proceeded to call tho roll of senators, when the
following senators answered to their names :
Messrs. Adams, Albright, Barnett, Battle, Beasley, Bellamy,
Brown, Cook, Council, Cowles, Crowell, Currie, Dargan,
Eppes, Flemming Gilmer, Graham of Alamance, Graham, of
Orange, Hynian, Lassiter, Latham, Ledbetter, Lehman, Linney,
Love, Mauney, McClammy, McCotter, Merrimon, Moore,
Morehead, Murphy, Norment, Olds, Price, Robbins, of David
son, Robbins, of Rowan, Skinner, Speed, Waddoll, Warren,
Whiteside, Worth— 41.
Senator MOORE. I move, Mr. Chief Justice, that the
reading of tho proceedings of yesterday be dispensed with.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE put the question, on the motion of
Senator Moore and it was decided in the affirmative.
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. Chief Justice and senators. The point
which the court was considering yesterday at the time of the
adjournment, was whether the hotel register of the National
Hotel should be introduced in evidence, it having been proved
that there w«s an entry on that register made by George W.
Kirk and B. G. Burgen of their names. We submit that it
is competent evidence on ono of the issues now pending.
These articles alleged by way of aggravation of the
offenses imputed to the respondent, that he brought from
the state of Tennessee, Kirk, Burgen and others as instru.
ments for tho execution of the orime which ho was about to
oommit. The answer of the respondent at page 41 " denies
" that the men composing said volunteer militia were many of

240 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS. ;
" them the most reckless, desperate, ruffianley and lawless
" characters from the state of Tennessee ; on the contrary this
" respondent declares that the said men were citizens of North
*' Carolina at and immediately before the organization of said
" militia and were of good deportment and behavior, and were
" receivod and organized strictly according to the provisions
" of said act and not othorwiso ?." Ho further says '• that tho
" said Goorgo W. Kirk, B. G. Burgon and H. C. Yatos, officers
"in command of said volunteer militia, wore at tho time of
" tho organization of the naid militia and Immediately boforo,
" citl/.ons of North Carolina and woro duly commissioned and
" sworn," That, wlr, 1h tho Ibhuo botwoon the parties. Now in ordor to
support tho allegations on the part of tho malingers, wo havo
offered to exhibit to tho court tho declarations In writing of
Kirk and Burgen on tho 22d day of June, 1870, that they wero
citizens of East Tennossoo. Wo say, in tho first place, that tho
ovidenco is admissible upon tho ordinary practice of legislative
bodies in relation to contested elections. Tho seat of a member
is contested. The contestant offers to prove that certain
persons who voted were not citizens of the county where they
cast tlieir votes. What is the ordinary mode of proof? It is
to prove that ante litem motem — before the election — the man
said he was a citizen of another county. I say that evidence
of that kind is ordinarily and I think universally received in
contests of that nature.
But we say in addition to that, that upon the doctrine of
agency, of complicity, of conspiracy, this evidence is compe
tent to be received here. We have identified the respondent
with Kirk. We have shown that he brought Kirk here and
that he sent him upon this unlawful expedition and that Kirk's
acts and declarations are evidence against him as they would bo
against himself if he were upon trial.
This point was raised on the trial of President Johnson be
fore the Senate of the United States. It may be necessary to
state that General Thomas, who was on an occasion attempted

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 241
to be substituted for Mr. Stanton as secretary of war, was
prior to tho time of his appointment, adjutant general of tho
army of the United StateB ; and the declarations of Thomas
made before he received the appointment of secretary of war
and before ho attempted to oust Stanton from the office wero
offered in evidence. It was objected to but the Senate, after
full discussion, voted that the evidence was admissible. On
page 211 of tho reported proceedings, this question was put to
a witness :
" Q. Shortly before this conversation about which you havo
" testified, and after tho president restored Major General
" Thomas to tho offlco of adjutant general, if you know tho
" fact that ho was ho restored, were you present in the war do-
" partinont, and did you hear Thomas make any statements to
" tho officers and clerks, or either of them, belonging to tho
" war office, as to the rules nnd orders of Mr. Stanton of tho
" office which he, Thomas, would revoke, relax or rescind in
" favor of Biieh officers and employees when he had control
" of the affairs therein ? If bo, state when, as near as you cnn,
" it was such conversation occurred, and state all he said ns
" nearlv as vou can ?"
Tho question was objected to and discussed and on page 214
of the records, occurs this language :
" The Chief Justice. Tho question is, shall the qucs-
" tion proposed by Mr. Manager Butler be put to the witness.
" Mr. Howard. On that question I ask for the yeas and
"nays. The yeas and nays were ordered; and being taken,
" resulted, yeas 28, nays 22.
So it was the ruling of the senate that the declarations of
Thomas prior to the time when he was appointed secretary of
war, and when he held the position of adjutant general should
be admitted, upon the ground that the president intended to
appoint him to the office of secretary, and that what Thomas-
said was admissible as evidence against the president.
But I say, sir, that, independent of that decision, upon the ordi
nary principles of common law (which this court is to accept

242 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS,
so far as it boos proper to adopt them) a co-trospasBor is bound
by tho acts of tho man who commits tho trespass and not only
by liis acta, but by his declarations, and it dooa not matter
whether it was before tho trespass or whether it was after tho
commission of it. How does that apply here ? Here theso
fellows have imprisoned citizens. They did so with the ap
probation and by the command of tho respondent and the re
spondent is bound by what Kirk said. Tho declarations of
Kirk are material to support tho allegations contained in the
articles, and aro compotont to bo givon as against tho respon
dent. In 12 English Common Law Roports, page 504, this question
aroso in the caso of Wright vs. Court, Bolton and Chambers,
and as tho caso is short I will road tho wholo of it.
Tho marginal note is as follows :
"If theso defendants have jointly imprisoned the plaintiff,
" tho declaration of ono of the defendants, made some weeks
" after, in the absence of the others, tending to show that the
" imprisonment arose from malice, is admissible in evidence, in
" an action for false imprisonment brought against all three."
I now road tho statement of the caso and the opinion of the
court :
" Tho dofentdant, Court, was the constable of Tardcbig, in
" tho county of Worcester, and tho other defendants were necdlo
" manufacturers at that place, who, having been robbed of a con-
" aidcrablo quantity of needles, with tho assistance of the other
" defendant, took the plaintiff into custody on tho 3d day of
" November, 1824, and locked him up in tho cage at Redditch,
" and thero kept him till tho Gth of November, without taking
" him before any magistrate. However, on the Gth they took
" him before the Rev. Lord Aston, a magistrate, who remanded
" tho plaintiff for two daya longer, when he was discharged.
" The plaintiffs counsel wished to give in evidence, that
" several weeks after all tho defendants had locked tho plaintiff
" up in the cage, tho defendant, Court, said, "I will take care that
"neither of the Wrights shall have a bed to lio on before ¦1,<»

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 243
" end of six months." At the same time this was eaid the
" other dofondants were not present.
" Juris, for the defendants, objected, that this declaration of
" the dofendant, Court, ought not to be received in evidence,
" because it was mado in tho absence of the other defendants.
" In this action the plaintiff proceeded for an alleged injury com-
" mittcd on him by tho three defendants jointly ; now this at most
" was only a manifesting of individual malice in tho defendant,
" Cant, and not at all connected with the other defendants, or
" having any relation to the joint act done by all of them. He
" would submit that there could not be a stronger case to show
" the hardship of receiving such evidence than the present. Tho
" damages, if any would be joint against all the defendants, and
" those damages would be much increased if this expression of
" individual malice was received in evidence. Now it was quito
" clear that if a verdict passed for the plaintiff, as one of the defen-
" dants was only a constable and the others highly respectable
" manufacturers, the plaintiff would sue out his execution for
" the whole damages against the latter, although the amount of
" them was much swelled by the individual declaration of the
" former. Garrow, B. I am of opinion that this declaration of
" the defendant, Court, is evidence. It is necessary, that the
" plaintiff shold connect all the defendants as joint trespassers
" in the fact of imprisonment, and having done so, I must
" receive in evidence anything that either of the defendants
" said relative to tho trespass, though in the absence of the oth-
" ers, so much as to the law. On the hadship of the case, I
"need only say, that if the law were not so, a man going to do
" another an injury might proclaim his malice in the market
" place, and yet shut out evidence of such malice from the con-
" sideration of the jury, by only associating himself in the trans-
" action with persons a shade less guilty than himself; and per-
" sons may always avoid the declarations of the malice of these
" co-defondanta operating againat them, by taking caro not to

244 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
" be concerned in the doing of things which they cannot after-
" wards justify."
^That, Mr. Chief Justice, is a general decision to the effect
that defendants being connected together in a trespass, a
sufficient foundation is laid for the purpose of introducing tho
declaration of any one of them agahiBt the rest. Here, we say,
we have laid the foundation by showing various acts and corres
pondence of tho respondent with this man Kirk added to
which are the admissions of the respondent in the answer that
he appointed Kirk to this office. The respondent denies in
his answer that Kirk was a Tennesseean a fact which we hero
affirm and offer to prove by tho fact that at, about tho timo
ho received his commission from tho stato government of
North Carolina, whither he had como for tho purposo of cm-
barking in this business, ho advertised himself as a citizen of
Tennessee. Wo say that the evidence is competent.
Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chiof .lustice, thero are two grounds
upon which the managers propose to introduce the evidence
objected to. One is, that this is in tho nature of a declaration
connected with an act establishing residence, and is compe
tent as against any body. The other is, that it is in tho nature
of a declaration of one of two conspirators, and is admlssiblo
against tho other as well as against himself.
Now, sir, in regard to the first point, it is very clear that this
is a mere naked declaration itself, — an entry in writing upon
a hotel register of residence, and it is precisely in the nature
of a declaration made in the street at that time by some party
in the absence of the accused. It is, furthermore, a declara
tion having relation to no act which, by qualifying the act,
might make it admissible.
Now, is it competent as against this accused, to show a dec
laration made by a subordinate officer of his of a fact not mate
rial to the accusation ? This entry was made upon 20th of
June. The first communication established between the accused
and this officer I believe was on the 21st or 22d.
Mr. GRAHAM. The entry offered is on the 22d of June

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 245
The other on the Yarborough House register is not yet proven.
Mr. Manager SPARROW. He first went to the Yar
borough House and then to the National Hotel.
Mr. SMITH. I supposed, from conferring with my brother
Merrimon, the first entry was on the 22d, but I misunderstood
him. But in regard to that entry, it is in no sense one of those
declarations which can deprive a citizen of one of his first rights.
If the question of residence is a material one it must be shown
in tho way in which any other fact is to be shown. Where a
person's place of residence is, is not to be determined by his
declaration but by proof of where, in fact, his home is. This
sort of proof can only bear against tho party making the decla
ration and not against the respondent.
But, sir, tho main ground upon which this entry is offered
)S that it is a declaration of one of several conspirators and is,
therefore, competent against all. Whatever may bo eaid in
reference to the rulo in the case cited from Carrington and
Payne quoted by tho counsol for tho managers, and also refer
red to in tho trial of President Johnson, it is, in the judgment
of the counsol for tho respondent, unsound law if it is cited for
tho purpose of authorizing the introduction of this proposed
evidence. We think that the rule of law in all the authorities
on evidence is that whatever is said or done by one of several
conspirators in furtherance of the object of that conspiracy ia
evidence against all. Nothing that is said by one of them out
side of the scope and purposo of tho conspiracy is admissible
against either of tho other conspiratora. In other words the
declaration must bo at tho time, dum fervet opus — while tho
work is being prosecuted, and is thereby in the nature of an act.
It then becomes admissible because the common purpose is
arrived at by the declaration and acta of each one. The rule is
laid down in 1 Greonleaf, section 111, as follows:!
" Tbe connection of the individuals in the unlawful enter-
"prise being thus shown, every act and declaration of each
"member of the confederacy, in pursuance of i lie original

240 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
t' concerted plan, and with reference to the common objeot,
41 is, in contemplation of law, the act and declaration of them
"all ; and is therefore original evidonce against each of them.
" It makes no differenco.at what time any one entered into the
" conspiracy. Every one, who does enter into a common pur-
" pose or design, is generally deemed, in law, a party to every
" act, which had before been done before by the others, and a
" party to every act, which may afterwards be done by any of
" the others, in furtherance of such common design."
Further on this language is used :
" And here, also, care must be taken that the acts and
" declarations, thus admitted, be those only which were made
" and done during the pendancy of the criminal enterprise,
"and in furtherance of its objects. If they took place at a
"subsequent period, and are, therefore, merely narative of
"past occurrences, they are, as we have just seen, to be
" rejected." Again in the third volumn Greenleaf uses this language :
" The principle on which the acts and declarations of other
" conspirators, and acta done at different times, are admitted in
" evidence against the persons prosecuted, is, that by tho act
" of conspiring together, the conspirators have jointly assumed
" to themselves, as a body, the attribute of individuality, so far
" as regards the prosecution of the common design ; thus ren-
" dering whatever is said or done by any one, in furtherance of
" that design, a part of the res geske, and therefore the act of
" all. It is tho same principlo of identity with each other, that
" governs in regard to the acts and admissions of agents. When
" offered in evidence against theso principals, and of partnors,
" aa against tho partnership, which has already boon considor-
" ed. And hero, also, as in thoso cases, tho evidence of what
" waa said and done by the other conspirators must bo limited
" to their acta and declationa mado and dono while the con
"apiracy was pending, and in furtherance of the design ; what
" was said or done by them before or afterwards not being
" within the principle of admissibility."

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 247
In addition to these authorities, air, we, have a decision in
our own courts that settled tho principle in the samo way. It
is the case of the State vs. -Honey, in 2 Devereaux and Battle,
page 395, in which Judge Gaston states the rule thus :
"But when a privity and community of design has been
" established, the act of any one of those who havo combined
" together for tho samo illegal purpose, done in furtherance of
" the unlawful design is in the consideration of law, the act of all.
" The cases in which this doctrine is most frequently applied,
" are thoso of treason and conspiracy, when it is perfectly settled
" that after proof of tho association for a traitorous or illegal pur-
" pose, the declarations, acts and conduct of all tho associates,
" in furtherance of their common purpose is evidence against
" each and every of them."
So that, as we understand tho rule of law to be, words aro
sometimes more than declarations they are in the nature of
acts, and are a part of the res gestae, and are, in reality, if they
relate to a common object, tho acts of all engaged at the timo
in its prosecution. It is analagous to the doctrine, of principal
and agent. It is perfectly clear that no declaration or act of
an ngent, outsido of his authority, is competent to affect tho
principal. Tho agency has its limitations, and oufside of those
limitations tho acts of the ngent are no moro admissible against
tho principal than If tho relation did not exist at all. For all
othor purposes than thoso tho agency contemplates, tho rela
tion does not exist ; ao that in regard to conaplracy, If there bo
any hero tho relation botwoon these parties does not exist for
any othor or further purpose than tho accomplishment of the
illegal purposo which thoy havo in view.
How, thon, in tho light of theso authorities, does this entry on
a hotel register made by Kirk tend to show anything in refer-
once to tho oxocution of a common design of conspiracy ? Is it
a declaration liko that admitted in the case reported, In Carring-
ton 6s Payno, showing tho malicious purpose of thoso engagod
in Imprisoning tho plaintiff? Have the words entered' In the
hotel register any relation to a conspiracy ? They are totally

248 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
outBide of this enquiry into the legality of the acts of this
respondent, and we think that, in no point of view, can the
entries be introduced for the purpose of violating what we
regard as a well settled and clearly established rule of law that
no person is to be impeached or punished by evidence With
which he was not confronted or by evidence not upon oath,
unless it falls within some clear principle of law making it
virtually his own declaration or his own concession.
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. Chief Justice and senators, the
declaration is admissible within the narrow principles to which
the gentlemen wishes to confine the doctrine. I have pro
duced and read an authority from the English Common Law
Reports which he does not deny except to question its correct
ness. I submit that that authority itself in the absence of any
thing to overrule it is decisive on the question.
But, sir, within the restricted limits to which he seeks to
confine the doctrine, the declaration is admissible in evidence
as a part of the unlawful design of tho respondent to bring here
men from East Tennessee, as we allege, of desperate and lawless
character. That we have connected the repondent and those
men together, the fryers of fact in this court will not fail to
discover. The arrival of these men on the 20th of June was
not without previous correspondence. This court cannot fail
to recognize that as a matter of common inference. On the
21st of June there is a communication in writing passing
between them. On the 22d day of June this man, believing
that he had a name that would inspire terror in North Caro
lina by the announcement of his presence, records himself in a
public hotel in the city of Raleigh at the seat of government as
" Colonel G. W. Kirk, East Tennessee." It is the same as if
he had gone out saying, " I have been commissioned by the
" governor to go and chastise the people of Alamance and Cas-
" well counties, and I will do it by fire and sword." If he had
made such an announcement coidd we not prove the fact ?
Then, considering the allegation here made against the respon
dent which we shall expect to verify, it will be seen that the

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. nOLDEN. 249
declaration of Kirk is made in pursuance of a common design,
that by the announcement of Lis name the people of the state
were to be terrified and put in fear.
This matter of residence is very often a question of quo
animo, and the declarations of parties are admissible upon that
ground also. A man may makea change if he pleases but he
must do it in a certain way ; but so long as he declares himself
a citizen of a particular place, if it be ante litem motem — before
this expedition went and before the arrests were made, the dec
laration is competent to be received in evidence.
Mr. BRAGG. Mr. Chief Justice, I am free to confess, sir
that, as a general rule, declarations of third persons aro not evi
dence against any party who is on trial in any case in which
he is concerned. But thero are exceptions to that rule, as you
well know, in regard to hearsay evidence, affecting many mat
ters, and especially the question of domicile.
Here sir is a question of fact. It is averred by the prosecu
tion that George W. Kirk was a citizen of Tennessee and not
a citizen of North Carolina. On the other 6ide it is averred
that he was a citizen of North Carolina ; and we offer in evi
dence the declaration of George W. Kirk himself as to the fact
which is to be passed upon by this court, as a jury which passes
upon both the law and the fact. The question is whether, as
independent evidence, the declaration of George W. Kirk can
be given to show where his domicile really and in fact was. I
have several authorities on that question and I am happy to say
that my friends on the other 'side have furnished me one in
Greenleaf, section 108, under the head of " hearesay evidence."
I read :
" There are other declarations, which are admitted as original
" evidence, being distinguished from hearsay by their connection
" with the principal fact under investigation. The affiairs of
" men consist of a complication of circumstances, so intimately
" interwoven as to be hardly seperable from each other. Each
" owes ita birth to some preceding circumstances, and, in its
" turn, becomes the prolific parent of others ; aud each, during
17

250 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS".
" its existence has its inseperable attributes, and its kindred facts',
" materially affecting its character, and essential to be known,
" in order to a right understanding of its nature. " These sur-
" rounding circumstances constituting parts of the res gestee,
" may always be shown to the jury, along with the principal
" fact ; and their admissibility is determined by the judge, ac-
" cording to the degree of* tlieir relation to that fact, and in the
" exercise of his sound discretion ; it being extremely difficult,
" if not impossible, to bring this class of cases within the limits
" of a more particular description ! The principal points of
" attention are, whether the circumstances and declarations
" offered in proof were contemporaneous with the main fact
" under consideration, and whether they were so connected
" with it as to illustrate its character ? Thus, in the trial of
" Lord Georgo Gordon for treason, tlie cry of the mob who ac-
" companied tho prisoner on his enterprise, was received in
" evidence, as forming part of tho res gesice, and showing the
" character of the principal fact ! So, also, where a person
" enters into land to take advantage of a fort'eiture, to foreclose
" a mortgage, to defeat a disseisin, or the like ; or changes
" his actual residence, or domicil, or is upon a journey, or
" leaves his home, or returns thither, or remains abroad, or
"secretes himself; or, in fine, (Toes any other act, material to
"be understood; his declarations, made at the time of
" tho transaction, and expressive of ita character, motive, or
" object, aro regarded au " verbal acts," indicating a present
«' purpose and intention, and aro therefore admitted in proof,
" like any othor material facts ; so, upon an enquiry as to tho
"state of mind,- sentiments, or dispositions of a porson at any
" particular period, his declarations and conversations are admis-
" slblo. Thoy aro parts of tho res gestae."
I havo another caso reported in 1 Iredell, page 805— Flem
ing vs. Straley, which was of this character. It was an action
for debt brought in Burke county against a defendant residing
in Yancey county. Tho defendant alleged that the plantiff
was a resident of Yancey and not of Burke and that hence he

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 251
had no right to bring an action. Judge Daniel delivered the
opinion of the court in which he used this language :
" The defendant had not proved any declaration made by
" the plaintiff of his then abandoning his domicile in Burke,
" but he had offered in evidence certain facts from which he
" wished the jury to presume an abandonment by the plaintiff
" of his domicile in Burke at the date of the writ. To repel
" an inference of that kind from the facts proves by the de-
" fondant the evidence objected to was offered by the plantiff
" to show how the family in which he was then living re
garded this movement of his. How the witness derived his
" knowledge' of the impression of the family, is not Btated.
" He may have so understood it from the conversation which
" passed between the plantiff and the members of the family,
" at the time of his setting off for Yancey, or from the conduct
"of the plantiff and family, or from the plantiff's leaving
" necessary articles of property, &c. It does not appear that
''the witness came to this knowledge by the ex parte hearsay
" of any of the members of the family."
So in the case of Home vs. Home. The question in
volved thero was whether a party who had made his will was
domiciled in South Carolina or not, the will having only two
witnesses, whereas, by the laws of South Carolina, it was re
quired to bo attested by three. It was alleged that he was dom
iciled in South Carolina when tho instrument was executed.
The whole question is gone into in that caso aa to what consti
tutes a domicile. It is a matter hereafter for invest igation whcthrr
the change of place by Kirk was equivocal. There are other
matters which wo expect to put in evidence to show that ho
was a citizen of Tennessee. That question will come up
before the court passes upon tho question of fact. But. in the caso
of Home, the declaration of the testator was put in evidence.
It was stated by tho judge that tho question of domicile was a .
question of intent and, to got at the intent, the declaration of the
party was admissible as evidence— whether in fact the party

252 COURT OF TMPEACHMENTS. '
had changed his domicile — a mere change of place being
equivocal. ¦ ' ' ' '•'
Mr, BOYDEN. Mr. Chief Justice, I am not a little sur
prised that this case of Wright vs. Court and Bolton and Cham
bers, should be read as an authority upon the proposition of
the gentleman. What is the case ? Three men are sued for
assault and battery and false imprisonment and the gentleman
says that the court gravely decided that what one of the
defendants said is evidence against the others. Did anybody
ever doubt about the admissibility of such declarations in
Mich a caso like that ? Sir, that is correct. Let me read the
head note of the case.
"If three defendants have jointly imprisoned the plaintiff
" tho declaration of one of the defendants made eome weeks
" after, in the absence of the others, tending to show that the
" imprisonment arose from malice, is admissible in evidence in
" an action for false imprisonment brought against all three."
Who would hazard his reputation by asserting that that was
not good law? But does the entry offered here — what
another man said about his personal residence — have the slightest
tendency to show the guilt of the respondent now on trial ?
I admit that if a conspiracy had been proved and the re
spondent was on trial on a charge of conspiracy, and his
declaration had any tendency to show the nature of the con
spiracy or was in any shape or form in furtherance of the con
spiracy, that entry would be evidence. But how, in any manner
does this fact of the residence of this man Kirk connect the
respondent with the conspiracy, if it were charged ?
And, sir, the case of Horn has no more application to this
case now on trial than the case of Wright vs. Court, cited by
the gentleman from the English Common Law Reports.
What a man says about his own residence, when he makes his
will, is without any doubt competent testimony.
The residence, they say, is a matter of intention. The man's
residence depends upon his intention. There were two parties
in the case of Horn, claiming that estate, one under the will

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 253
and another an heir at law. Who could doubt that the decla
ration of the testator as to his residence was competent
evidence ?
And this case cited, from Devereaux and Battle, I have forgot
ten the title, has just as much relevancy as tlie case of Horn to
establish the proposition, and not a whitmore, according to my
judgment. They might as well read any case in the books as
going to show authority that this was evidence, aa to read the
cases they have. The doctrines laid down in those cases thoy
havo read are good law, and all that the court decides in this
English caso is that what a man says is evidence against himself.
That is, all there is in it — there is nothing moro and nothing
less. In that English case three were sued. And waa it ever
held in a court of law and will it ever be contested by any one who
has read Blackstone that what any ono of those defendants said
was not evidence in the case against all ?
And the authority read by the gentlemen last up from
Greenleaf is perfectly good law. It holds the same doctrine
contended for on our side that the declaration must be connected
with and in furtherance of the common design. It seems to
me there is nothing clearer in law than that principle, and
under it, this proof offered here certainly is not evidence, first,
because there is no connection between it and the common de
sign, and again, if this fact of residence is to be proven it is be
proven in another way and not by this declaration. .
I admit, Mr. Chief Justice, that if Kirk were on trial and a
question was raised as to his residence, this would be good evi
dence against him ; but it is no evidence against the respondent
because it is not in. furtherance of any common design what
ever. ¦<• ,;,.
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. Chief Justice, the gentleman who
last addressed the court I think is very easily surprised, but it
appears to me that the surprise struck the different counsel on
the other side in a rather different way. The first gentleman
[Mr. Smith} states that the ease decides /What 1 1 have, alleged
and; then he says that it is a wrong decision. > The lastgentjeman

254 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
[Mr. Boyden,] undertakes to narrow tho decision to small limits
and then admits that It decides all I contended for ; for tho
very point in the case was whether the declaration made by one
of the defendants was to effect anybody but himself. There Is
no evasion — no quibble, but the learned judge meets the ques
tion fairly and says it is to affect the others just as much as the
man who uttered it by his own mouth.
So that the question comes back simply to this, whether the
declaration made by Kirk in writing, after the conspiracy had
been established between him and respondent can be proven
as an act in furtherance of the common design. His name
and residence were entered on the register to publish to the
people that the man who was the terror of East Tennessee had
been brought here to be a terror to the citizens of this state.
We Bay that the evidence is competent, therefore, upon the
ground that the act was in furtherance of the common design.
' The CHIEF JUSTICE. In the opinion of the presiding
officer, the evidence offered is not admissible. When a combi
nation is proved, any act or declaration of one is evidence
against all, provided it be done or said in furtherance of the
common purpose. A combination to put a military force in
active service has been proved, but the written declaration of
Col. Kirk and Col. Burgen was not calculated or intended to
aid in carrying out tlie common purpose. The question of
domicile, does not, in the opinion of the presiding officer, form
a part of the res gestce. The question is not as to a change of
domicile or the animus or intention of the person making the
written declaration in regard to his domicile, so that the doc
trine of res gestae is not relevant.
Mr. Manager SPARROW. Mr. Chief Justice, the mana
gers would be glad to have the opinion of the senate upon* this
question. 
The CHIEF JUSTICE. Does any senator call for the vote
of the esnatef "¦ ''  ' i <.,•; .1
Senator GRAHAM, of Orange. I call for the vote and I
would submit, MK Chiof Justice, whether the eviderice offdred

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 255
ia not admissible to contradict that part, of the answer that
these men were not from the state of Tennessee ?
The CHIEF JUSTICE. That was considered by tho pre
siding officer in giving his opinion-
Senator ROBBINS, of Rowan. I call for the yeas and nays.
Senator GRAHAM, of Orange. The vote ia to be taken by
yeas and nays under the law.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. But tho call has to be seconded.
A sufficient number seconding the call, the yeas and nays
were ordered.
The CHIEF JUSTICE put the question on sustaining the
opinion of tho chair.
The CLERK proceeding to call the roll. Before the vote
was announced 
Senator MOORE. Mr. Chief Justice, I would like to havo
the vote of the senator from Sampson.
Senator MURPHY. Mr. Chief Justice, this is a question
of law which I cannot decide myself and I beg to be excused
irom voting.
Senator MOORE. I insist opon the senator voting. ,
The CHIEF JUSTICE. I believe the senator is required
by the rules to vote.
Senator ROBBINS, of Rowan. I move that the gentleman
from Sampson be execused. , ,
The CHIEF JUSTICE. Is the motion seconded f
Senator DARG AN. I Becond the motion.
Senator SPEED. I ask for the yeas and nays. 
Senator ROBBINS, of Rowan. I withdraw the. motion
to excuse the senator to save time.
Senator MOORE. The withdrawal is too late.
Senator ROBBINS, of Rowan. I rise to a point of order
that it is in order to withdraw the motion at any time before the
vote is taken,, , • , , , ,, .,., ¦ ,\ ¦;,- <„ ¦\'\\'\\
The CLERK proceeded to call the name of senator Murphy,
whereupon the senator voted yea. .<¦< \ , , y /; » i
Tho CLERK announced: tlie vote as follows I

250 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Those Who voted in the affirmative are :
Messrs. Albright, Barnett, Battle, Beasley, Bellamy, Brown.
Cook, Council, Cowles, Crowell, Currie, Dargan, Eppes, Flem
ming, Flythe, Gilmer, Hyman, Latham, Ledbetter, Lehman,
Linney, Love, Mauney, McClammy, McCotter, ¦> Merrimon,
Moore, Murphy, Olds, Price, Robbins, of Davidson, Robbins,
of Rowan, Skinner, Speed, Waddell, Warren, Whiteside and
Worth— 38.
Those who voted in the negative are :
Messrs. Graham, of Orange, and Norment — 2.
So the opinion of the chair was sustained. '
Senator MERRIMON. Mr. Chief Justice, there is nothing
in tho rules which requires that any senator shall vote if he
shall not desire to do so.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The question raiaed is not relevant,
as tho senator has voted.
Senator ROBBINS, of Rowan. I would suggest that tho
rules of the senate apply to this court wherever they are appli
cable, and one of tho rules of the senate requires that every
senator shall vote if he is within the bar, unless he ia excused.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer would sug
gest that the proposition of the senator has no application now
because the senator from Sampson has voted.
Senator ROBBINS, of Rowan. I am aware of that; I was
only speaking to the point raised by the senator from Bun
combe, [Mr. Merrimon.]
Senator GRAHAM, of Orange. Mr. Chief Justice, to de
cide the question, I move that the rulea of order of the senate, as
far as they are applicable, be the rules of this body. ' -
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer would sug
gest that while the managers and counsel are trying their case
before the court these motions are not properly in order. Any
action like that proposed should be determined in tllO morn
ing before the commOncement of the proceedings bn trial.
The presiding officor simply throws out the suggestion, subject
however to the approval of the court.' > ' ' ¦'• '" -;

TRIAL OF WDLLIAM W. HOLDEN. 257
Senator GRAHAM, of Orange. I will not insist upon th©
motion now.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer observes,
that in the impeachment of President Johnson, the counsel re
tired when the senate desired to consult.
Senator GRAHAM, of Orange. The purpose, Mr. Chief
Justice, in this proceeding, was to have all proceedings conduc
ted in open session.
Mr. MERRIMON. We next offer in evidence the ral
lying proclamation of George W. Kirk, printed in the form
commonly known as a " poster ," and we propose to follow this
by showing that the proclamation was written by the accused.
Mr. BOYDEN. We object to the admission of the paper
offered unless it is proven.
.CORNELIUS B. EDWARDS, a witness called on belwlf
of the managers, being duly sworn, testified as follows :
By Mr. Merrimon :
Q. Where do you reside ? A. In the city of Raleigh.
Q. What was your business in the months of June and July
last ? A printer.
Q. Where were you employed ? A. In the job department
of the Standard office.
Q. Where was the Standard printed ? A. In the city of
Raleigh. Q. Look upon the paper now produced and state where it
waa printed [handing the witness a printed poster] ? A. It
was printed in the Standard office.
Q. Under whose directions ? A. I am unable to say posi
tively under whose directions.
Q. State all you can about it? A. I do . not know who
brought it there. ,..(•.
Q. Who superintended the printing and gave you directions
about it ? A. I superintended the printing hut I,do not know
who brought the order, nor by. whose authority iVwa# printed,
I think it came from the executive office.. ;, ... < . 'y

258 OOCBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Mr. McCORKLE. You will speak of your own-knowledge.
Q. State the usual course of business in papers coming from
the exective office to be printed, if you had any business of that
sort 2 A. They generally have written directions on them.
Q. Did you know the clerks about the executive department
personally ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were the papers sent from the executive office to the
printing office by clerks through messengers ? A. They were
generally brought by messengers.
Q. When a paper was brought you knew it was from the
executive officer by the messenger who brought it ?
[Question objected to.]
Q. State how that is ? A. I generally understood it in that
way. By the Chief Justice :
Q. Do you know or do you infer it? A. I merely infer it.
Q. If a messenger brought a paper to your office to be
printed you infered it to come from the executive office ?
Mr SMITH. We object, Mr. Chief Justice, to this evidence.
Q. Was it usual or otherwise to send work to be printed
from the executive office to your office? A. Yes sir.
Q. Waa the printing of the executive office done at your
office ? A. All the state printing was done there.
Q. Was the manuscript from which this poster was printed
sent to your office by any one from the executive office ? A. I
do not remember. ,
Q. You do not know who brought it there ? A. No, sir.
Q. State whether it was George W. Kirk who brought it
there. >
Mr. SMITH. I suggest, Mr. Chief Justloe, that the witness
is speaking with reference to the manuscript and not the printed
paper which the gentleman has introduced. We object to any
proof whatever in reference to tho absent papor on the ground
that the paper should be produced. ¦.; ,,i i i
Mr. MERRIMON. I shall aak about that dlrectiry,, i(. k. -
Q. Did George W. Kirk give you any directions, about that

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. nOLDEN. 259
printing ? A. There was a man called for it who I afterwards
heard, was Georgo W. Kirk, but I did not know him myself. •
Q. Did you see him afterwards ? A. I have never seen him
6ince. |
Q. Where is the manuscript of that printed paper? A.
The manuscript was usually kept on a file ; I do not know
whether it is now or not.
Q. Do you know the handwriting of Gov. Holden. A. I
know his signature and I presume I -would know his general
handwriting. Q. Was that manuscript in his hand writing? --¦ i.
Mr. BOYDEN. We submit, Mr. Chief Justice, that the
question is clearly incompetent, that the paper itself must be
produced. Mr. MERRIMON. We do not ask the question to get at
the contents of the paper. We offer to prove the independent.
fact that the manuscript was in his handwriting. > i
Mr. BOYDEN. It is very clear that that cannot be dono
There is no better rule known than the one upon that subject.
A witness is called, " look upon this paper and see if it pur-
" ports to be in the handwriting ot A B." " Are you acquaint
ed with his handwriting by seeing him write so that you
"would know his handwriting when you saw it?" "Is
" this his handwriting ?" We submit that that is tlie • legal
method of proof.
Q. Have you been summoned to produco the manuscript of
this paper? A. Yes, eir.
Q. Why have you not produce it ? A. Because it ia not in
my possession. I have no control of the job department, at
present. " <> : i j/
Q. Who has ? A. I presume Sheriff Lee, The office was
sold on an execution sometime ago. :i;n- >i" •>;. n ¦.,< dm!-, y, ,
Q. Who has the books and papers in that office ? "A* I do
not know. * '¦ •¦ '.; ¦¦" i-11' "'-• y--\>y->^ .»<*'.!:
Q. When did you aee the- manuscript of MiA pape* last?
A. It was printed some time in June I think, y i " ' t >. i> x \ *

200 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. Have you not seen it to-day ? A. I have not got it.
Q. Have you not seen it to-day \ A. Yes, sir, I have seen
it to-day. ¦
Q. Why did you not bring it ? A. Because it waB in the
Standard office and I had no right to take it out.
Q. Did anybody prevent you from bringing it ? A. No, sir.
Q. Did anybody toll you not to bring it ? A. No, sir.
Q. Did not the subpoena direct you to bring it ? A . It sum
moned me to produce it.
Q. You had it in your hands, you say. What did you
do with it ? A. I presume it is at tho Standard office.
Q. What did you do with it — that ia tho quostion ? A. I
stated just now that I loft it at the Standard offloo.
Q. Who lot you into the Standard office this morning? A.
My brother is working there.
Q. Who showed you where the paper was ? A. In all job
offices they usually keep a file of all work done.
Q. Was this paper on file there ? Yea, sir.
Q. Was it taken off the file when you saw it.
By the Chief Justice.
Q. Was it taken from the bundles where it was rolled up
when you saw it ? A. It was not rolled up.
Q. Was it not tied up in bundles like this ? A. No, sir ; it
was inserted on a wire.
By Mr. Merrimon, (resuming.)
Q. Was it taken off the wire ? A. Yes, sir ; I took it off.
Q. Did you put it back on the wire ? A. I did not, but I
ordered it to be put back. ¦>/ , i
.. Q. Who did you order to put it back? A. My brother.
Q. Did you see him put it back. A. No, sir.
Q. Do you know where it is now ? A. I presume it is there.
Q. Are you sure about that? A. No, sir.. ¦(-, .-.-
. Q. Are you sure you have not got it in your pocket? : A.
Yes, sir. ,t ,,, ,
Q, You i know yoq have not- got it in your pocket ?. „ A.
Yes, sir. , , ¦ i .

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. nOLDEN. 261
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. Chief Justice and senators, I move
that the witness be required to produce the paper in twenty
minutes, or be committed for contempt of this court.
Mr. McCORKLE. I suppose, Mr. Chief Justice, that such
a motion as that cannot be entertained. There must be some
ground work laid first for the granting of such an application.
The managers must show that this witness was the proper cus
todian of that paper before they can compel him to produce it.
Sir, the proposition is a monstrous one, that if I were sum
moned to produce a paper that does belong to me and over
which I have no control, a court at any moment may punish
me for not producing it in response to its subpoena. Unless
this witness was the custodian of that paper, no such mo
tion can be entertained. Further than that, even if he had
it in his possession the fact would havo to be shown by evidence
before this motion could be granted. What is the proposition
on the part of the managers ? They notify the witness to pro
duce a certain paper. He says, " I have no control over that
" paper, I saw it this morning but it does not belong to me
" and therefore I had no right to take it from those to whom
" it does belong." And now, sir, simply because the witness
does not forcibly take that paper out of the hands of the
proper custodian in obedience to the subpoena the proposition
is to commit the witness for contempt. Sir, the proposition is,
as I said before, monstrous and cannot be entertai ned tor a
moment. Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. Chief Justice, this is not a matter of
form or ceremony. It is a question whether this court will
permit itself to be trifled with in the important matter of the
production of evidence. A subpoena duces tecum is served in
this witness. He goes and gets the paper in the place where
it is deposited, reads it and satisfies himself of its identity, ia
forbidden by no one to bring it here in response to the man
date of the court, leaves the paper where he found it and then
comes here without producing it, and "after a1 good deal of
•f'j I ''.'y J i,

262 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
evasion admits all those facts. The question is whether ho
shall not hlmsolf be compelled te produco it.
Mr. MERRIMON. If this witness had not come hero and
depoaed to the facts, ho has it would he be proper as stated by
the counsel to have an affidavit upon which to base our motion.
But it is unnecessary here because he has come into court and
stated that he has not brought the paper, that he saw it to-day,
that he took it from tho file, had it in his custody and that after
having it in custody he declined to bring it but directed his
brother who was present at the time to put it back on the file.
Now, sir, I do not understand the rule of law to be as laid
down by the gentleman on the other side in respect to the
duty of the witness in the premises. Suppose I have a letter
in my possession which belongs to A B and not to me. It is
handed to me for temporary purposes, and a subpoena comes to
me while it is in my possession charging me to produce that
letter before this court or any other court of competent juris
diction, will it be pretended that under such circumstances I
would not be able to produce it ? This witness says that he
had the paper to-day, that he had control of it, and having
control of it he handed it back to another person.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. Ho did not say he had control of
it, but that ho had it in his hand.
Mr. MERRIMON. And he ordered it to be put back on
tho file
The CHTEF JUSTICE. He stated that ho told his brother
to put it back oil the file.
Mr. MERRIMON. Having done that he cornea into
this court and aaya he haa not got it. Let me recur to tho
illustration I mado. I have tho letter of A B at tlie timo
when a subpoena comes to mo charging me to produce it boforo
this court. Another party to whom tho letter belongs < sayB,
t* I want that letter— hand it back to me." I humbly submit
that if I were to give him the letter and. not produce it in
evidence to the order of this court I would be subject to an
order of attachment for my disobedience.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 203
Examination resumed.
Bv Chief Justice:
Q. Could you have got that papor and brought It here if
you had wanted to ? A. I could havo got the paper but I was
under the impression that I could be indicted for a forcible
trespass. Q. If you took it out of its place ? A. Yea, sir.
Q. Who has the keeping of that paper —
Mr. BADGER. I can perhaps explain the matter. The
Standard office was sold at public auction somo thirty days
since, and has been exclusively under the control of the sheriff'
of Wake county from that time until the present. There are
several suits now pending in regard to it. I know nothing
about the witness getting the paper.
The Witness. I stated to the party who served the
subpoena on me, that I did not feel at liberty, as the sheriff can
testify, to enter the office and take that paper out. The ques
tion was asked me who was in control of it by Judge Merri
mon and I told him that I supposed it was under the control
of the sheriff, and he said he would have him subpoened.
By the Chief Justice.
Q. How did you come to go and look at the paper this morn
ing ? A. There was a subpoena served on me and I found it
was in regard to this poster, and I went to satisfy my mind.
Q. Who did you go to to get the manuscript ? A. I went
to my brother.
Q. What has your brother to do with it ? A. He ia at pre8ent
working In tho job offlco.
Q. You got him to go with you and take it off tho wire to
look at it? A. Yea, sir.
Q. And you handed It to him to put it baok? A. Yes, sir.
Q, Do you tell this court that you cannot, without commit
ting trespass, produco that paper, or can you without it ? A.
That ia a legal question which I am unable to answer.
Q. You havo nothing more to do With it than I have ? ' A.
I have no control over that office' whatever.

264 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. No more than I have ? A. No; sir, none whatever.
By Mr. Graham. i •
Q. Have you not power to ask for the paper, and if you did
ask would there be any resistance to your taking it ? A. I
do not know as there would under ordinary circumstances.
Q. You were served with a subpoena to produce this paper
yesterday ? A. No, sir.
Q. Were you not served with a subpoena yesterday to produce
tho paper in court ? A. To produce this [the poster] but there
was nothing in it about tho manuscript. That was this morn
ing — after 12 o'clock.
Q. You went and saw the manuscript this morning?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Would there be any difficulty In getting the paper from
you brother if you wore to go to the offlco ? A. No, sir, pro
vided I would be protected in case of there being any difficulty
arising. I do not know as there would be any resistance.
By Mr. Merrimon :
Q. What is your brother's name ? A. W. J. Edwards.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer is of the
opinion that a case for an attachment and for contempt of
court has not been made out against this witness. He says he
has no more control over this paper than one of you, that he
went to look at the paper out of curiosity, that his brother
allowed him to examine it, and that he told his brother to
put it back. If that be true he has no more right to send for
the paper than any gentlemen in this court. The sheriff seems
to be the man who ought to be put in contempt if he does not
produce it when called for if the paper is in the office,
Examination resumed.
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. Ib sheriff Lee here ? A. I stated to you this morning
that I did not think he was. I heard last night in a conversa
tion that he was not in town.
Mr. BADGER. I think his deputy Mr. Ball is in charge of
the office. He was sometime ago.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 265
Q. Did you aay your brother waa in charge of the printing
office? A. Hovworka there. v
. Q. Ia he the aiiporintendont ? A. Yes, sir, I presume he is.
.. He works in the jobbing department, but Mr. Ball, as Mr.
> Badger states, has tho oflico under charge
•»•<$. [By the Chief « Justice.] Could your brothor, without
tho betrayal of confidence, tako any paper out of the office ?
A. Tho papor is among tho private papers of the office for
future reference.
By Mr. Graham.
Q. Who told you that yon would bo liablo for trespass if
you took tho papers out? A. I do not think any ono did, but
I was undor that impression. I consulted a friend about it.
Whon jobs aro printed tho original copy is on filo for future
roforonco. It is tho property of tho office.
. Tho CHIEF J USTICK. ' I do not think you havo a right
to press the question.
Q. [Hy Mil Mkimhmon.] You say that this poster was printed
at tho Standard office? A. I say this was.
Cross-examination, waived.
Mr. MERRIMON. Wo have sent for tho original manu
script of the proclamation, and wo will now examino a witness
from tho state of Tennessee upon •another point.
ISAAC E. REEVES, a witness called on ^behalf of the
managers, being duly sworn testifies.
». By Mr. Merrimon:
Q. Whoro do you reside? A. in tho state ofTonnosseo,
Washington county.
Q. What is your business? A. Tho law is my profession.
Q. State to tho court whether or not you know a porson in
your state by tho namo of Goorgo W. Kirk, and if bo state what
you know about him ? A. Yes sir, I havo known him per
sonally since the close of the war. I knew him during the war.
I knew him during the war by reputation only.
Mr. BOYDEN. What do you propose to prove by tliis
witness. , . ,
18

266 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Mr. MERRIMON. We propose to prove that George W.
Kirk reaides in the etate of Tennessee.
Q. Stato what you know about the domicile of George W.
Kirk ? A. He has been residing in the same town in which
I reside — Jonesborough, for about two years I think. He
resided in the county before that time,.but he moved to Jones
borough about two years ago, I think.
Q. Has ho a family ? A. Yes sir, he has a family.
Q. State whether he resided there during last summer?
A. Yes, sir, he resided there last summer. He left about the
29th or 30th of June, I think, with his family. He removed
his family from Jonesborough about the 30th of June.
Q. To what point? A. I do not know to what point. I only
understood that he moved his family into the country.
Q. InTennessoo? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Ho left tho villago and went into tho country in the state
of Tonoessee ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do yon remember whether ho was absent from the state
about that timo nnd if bo how long? A. I rcmoinber that he
left Jonesborough for Washington City — so he reported —
about the middle of June— I think tho 10th or 15th— I don't
remember the precipe tlmo. Ho and two or three others went
to Washington City— co they reported.
I}. When did they return i A. Thoy returned In tho hitter
part of . I uny nnd remained a day or two, I think. I remember
Colonel Kirk was very Ihmv making preparations to move lily
family from the town. I saw them ns they started.
Q. How long was ho absent then ? A. JIo was absent until
some time in December, I think. I saw him get off the train
and I spoke to him, lie told me he had returned.
Q. Ho left there in June you Bay. To what point did he
Bay ho was going ? A. He did uot toll me where he was going,
Q. When he returned did ho tell you where he had been ?
A. I had a conversation' with him in reference to where he had
been. I said to him, that he had got his name connected with
the newspapers a good deal 6ince he left, or I made some such

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 267
remark, and he laughingly remarked he had. I only talked to
him five minutes after he got off the train.
Q. Where did he say he had been ? A. He eaid he had
been in North Carolina — I don't know that he said ho had
been in North Carolina, but that waa what we were talking
about, his being there. I don't remember what the statement
was, whether he said he had been in North Carolina, but I
know we mentioned his being over here.
Q. [By the Chief Justice.] That was the understanding?
A. That was the undrstanding, that ho had been in North
Carolina. I forget his exact statement.
Q. Where has he resided since tho timo you havo mention
ed ? A. I don't know the point,
Q. Is it in Tenncssoo ? A. It is in Tennesse, and my im
pression is that ho is in that county,
Q. In what county? A. Washington county. The samo
county that ho resided in before ho left there.
Q. Do you wish the court to understand you as sajing that
he has resided since 18G8 in the county of Washington in tho
atato of Tomiesaeo? A. That Ib what I intended tho court
to understand.
Q. Do you know tho reputation of George W. Kirk?
Mr. BOYDEN. 1 don't think that question Is competent,
For what purpose do you ask It ?
Mr. MERRIMON. Tho articles charge that Goorgo W.
Kirk Is a violent and desperate man, and a man of notorious
desperate and violent diameter, especially in tho management
of Boldlora or armed persons, and wo propose to prove tho fact
aa alleged.
Mr. BOYDEN. I can't boo how tho evldenoe ia admlssablo
even If tho facta aro alloged, Suppose that Kirk wero one of
the parties charged here, could the managers prove his charac
ter ? He is not offered bore as a witness and unless he is, they
cannot attack his character. I know of no other principle upon
which a person'a character can be attacked except he is offered
as a witness, and certainly, there is no principle of law by which,

268 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
because the fact is alleged, the question of the character of
a man who is not a witness can be gone into.
Mr. MERRIMON. It is on the general principle, Mr.
Chief Justice, that whenever a material allegation is made in
an indictment or in a declaration or in any other proceeding
before a judicial tribunal, it is competent to introduce testi
mony which tends to support the allegation. Now what are the
allegations hero? One of the allegations, that runs through
nearly all these articles of impeachment is that tho respondent,
the Governor of this stato sent to tho state of Tcnncsecso and
procured a notoriously desperate and violent man, George W.
Kirk, to come here and perform the nets of violence and out
rage which this respondent desired to accomplish. Then, sir,
is not the character of Kirk for violence a material part of this
allegation ? Is not that allegation in reference to the character
of Kirk put in the articles to show an aggravation of the
offence of tho respondent — to show the alleged purposo of the
accused to stir up internal strife and civil war in the state of
North Carolina ? There is no moro material part in the allega
tions in the several articles of impeachment than tho one in
which we charge the respondent with having procured this
notorious and desperate character from the state of Tennessee
to come here to take command of this armed organization.
And proof of that is admissible upon strict legal principles.
But I wish to state another ground, at which I hinted the
other day, and which I think is proper to be considered here.
This court is not bound by all the rules of evidence that apply
to a superior court upon a trial before a jury. You are an
inquisitorial tribunal ; every senator is a judge and is en
titled to hear just such evidence as a judge would be entitled
to hear in a proceeding for a bench warrant issued against A.
B. for perpetrating some crime. Therefore, I say that, because
it is an inquisitorial body and because the accused is not to be
convicted of crime, as would be the case in a criminal trial
before a superior court, the ordinary strictness of the rules of
evidence do not apply but this court may enlarge those rules

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 269
to such an extent as to enable its members to put themselves
in possession of additional evidence as a judge might do, if ho
were enquiring whether a crime had been committed.
But, sir, wo do not need to rest our claim for tho admissi
bility of this proof upon that doctrine. It is clear on the gen
eral principle that wo have a right to introduce all evidence
that tends to support the allegations contained in the articles.
Mr. BOYDEN. Mr. Chief Justice, I am not a littlo sur
prised at tho doctrines which havo been laid down by the
learned counsel. He says that this is an inquisitorial tribunal.
There never was a greater mistake. Sir, tho inquisitorial
tribunal is the House of Representatives. Tho members of
that body art in place of tho magistrate or tho judgo out of
court. They hear tho testimony and they do not act without
testimony. They have no more right to proceed to prepare
articles -of impeachment without testimony, than a judge him
self sitting in court would have to issue his wan-ant. As an
inquisitorial body they hear testimony, solemnly made upon
oath before them, and even if one of the inquisitors himself — a
member of the house of representatives — were cognizant of a
fact, that body could not act upon his statement except he made
it under oath before them. This is no more an inquisitorial
court, than the superior court is an inquisitorial court. This
tribunal is governed, as we have the most abundant authority
to show, by all the rules and analogies which govern in other
courts. It has been stated that this court " is a law unto
itself, " and it has been said here that it can make just
such rules as it pleases in respect to the character of the testi
mony to be admitted. In other words it is contended that this
court can exclude just what it pleases and can admit just what
it pleases. Sir, that. is a fallacy. This, sir, is a high judicature
in which you must be governed, as Mr. Cliarles Lee, the attor
ney general of the father of his Country said, by the rules
which will enable you to do justice, and by the analogies which
govern in courts of law. Sir, what is to become of my client
or of any man, situated as he is, if this is to become a mere

270 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
inquisitorial court? What is to be the fate of any man
against whom articles of impeachment have been preferred, if
the court for the trial of impeachments is to inquire into any*
thing it pleases? No, Mr. Chief Justice, this ia no such
court, and no such proof as is sought to be introduced is ad
missible, certainly, until it is shown that the respondent knew
that Col. Kirk had the character which is alleged.
Mr. BRAGG. Mr. Chief Justice and senators, it seems to
me that this is a Very simple matter. This court is not sitting
to try the chief executive officer of this state, upon an indict
ment preferred against him. He is to be tried upon articles ef
impeachment and for offences which are impeachable. What are
they ? We have the law before us stating that the governor of the
state may be impeached for " corruption or other misconduct
" in his official capacity," or for " any criminal matter, the con.
" viction whereof would tend to bring his office into public con-
" tempt." We all know — at least we who are lawyers aro sup
posed to know-— that when a defendant is on a trial before a
court of law, you cannot go into proof of his character unless he
himself opens tho question. The justico of that we all can bco.
But hero, one of the acts of official misconduct which we
charged against this respondent is that he sent to the state of
Tennessee and procured a man of notoriously bad character,
cruel and remorseless ; and yet it is argued here that we are not
to bo allowed to show that fact as an element of proof to estab
lish tho misconduct of tho respondent in office. Sir, the ques
tion Ib too plain te demand any extended argument.
Tho proposition, air, Jb not like that presented by tho gentle
men on the other s'ido of an attempt to go into a defendants
character when ho is on trial upon an Indictment. Here the
accused stands before this body charged in articles of impeach
ment. He may be impeached for offences which constitute
official misconduct, though the acts with which he is charged
do not amount to an indictable offbnee. Nobody will dispute
that with the law before us. Therefore, we say that, upon these
articles and upon the law, the matter is too plain te admit of

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W.* HOLDEN. 271
serious dispute that this is a part of the case against the accused
that he sent to Tennessee and procured a man of desperate
character and put him over certain troops to execute his unlaw
ful purposes.
I submit, therefore, that the evidence is clearly competent to
sustain the allegation.
Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chief Justice and senators. I suppose the
accused would be guilty of no offence if he commssioned Kirk,
unless the appointment were followed by acts in keeping with
the reputation which they propose to establish. It seems to
me to be rather reversing the order of proof to enquire into
the character of a party to whom the commission was given,
To lay a foundation for the charge at all, it would seem to be
proper to show first, that, by virtue of that commission, acts of
lawlessness and unwarrantable character were committed, then
that the accused knew the character of the man he was to ap
point, so that he could be justly charged with the acts of his
agent whom he should commission. The fact of Kirk's previous
lawless character, if such was his character, would not make a
case out against the respondent at all ; for thongh he possessed
the character described, it may very well be that his conduct
in this state has been irreproachable since the commission was
awarded to him. What I mean to say is, that in advance of
proving the bad character of Colonel Kirk, it must be shown
that his character was within the knowledge of the executive
when the commission was issued, and that then, after he waa
commiasioned, ho was guilty of acta not in keeping with the
character of a commiasionod officer. It aoems to me that these
facts should be proven before it ia admiaaible to prove the char
acter of Colonel Kirk in Tennessee. He is not on trial. If he
were, proof of his character would not admissible in evi
dence to his prejudice, for he would have to be tried by hie
acta irrespective of the character which he beara ; and still less
ia thia reapondent to be affected by the evidence of the char
acter of an agent when it would not be competent to prove the
character of the accused himself.

272 COURT OP IMPEACHMENTS.
And in this connection, I desire to enter my dissent from
tho view taken on the other side in reference to the rnlea of
' evidence applicable to this trial. Whenever a court organized
and sworn, departs from a just conception of duty, it is at sea,
and instead of itsboing an instrument by which justice is vindi
cated, it may become a more instrument of oppression in the
hands of thoso who control it. I do not understand how tho
court can ignore tho principles of ovidenco recognized in"- all
courts with out hazarding tho causo of justice itself. The con
stitution makes this senate a judicial body like tho supremo
court nnd its judges. It has all tho attributes ns well as tho
name of a j udicinl body. Senators are sworn to docide this cause
as a judge would havo to decido it if brought before him ; and,
sir, this court has no more right to admit improper ovidenco
or to eject proper ovidenco than you havo to try this respon
dent by your own notions of what should be dono and not in
accordance with tho laws of tho land.
This, siiyis a criminal proceeding. It is traea judgment of con
viction would not be followed by the loss of tho worldly goods of
this respondent, but it would be followed by personal and official
degradation andincapacity in the future to hold any office of honor
or emolument within the state of North Carolina. The supreme
court of the United States has held, since the war closed, in the
case of ex parte Garland, that an act of congress imposing per
sonal disabilities upon one of these officers, was an infringement
of his vested rights, and that no legislative act could deprive
him of rights which existed before it was passed. Nor can this
general assembly, still less one branch of it, by a species of ex
post facto law enacted and executed on the spur of the moment,
deprive this accused of any of the rights he has and would
have before any other body. This is essentially a criminal
charge. The respondent is on trial for an official crime, which
is to be followed by degradation if he is convicted, and he is
here insisting upon the same rights which are accorded to any
one else on trial before a legal tribunal.
I am aware that language like that used by the counsel waB

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 278
used on tho trial of Andrew Johnson and I remember, sir,,
with what a withering rebuke it was received by the eminent
members of the senate and by the eminent counsel for the re
spondent in that case, and, sir, ns an appropriate result, the
proposition was never sustained by that body. I am sure that
tho senate of North Carolina is disposed in this case, (and their
acts have shown it,) to givo to this accused every right that bo-
longs to any man on trial ; and if this ovidenco would bo in
competent and improper in a court of justice wo insist that tho
rights of this respondent aro not abridgocl by the nature of tho
tribunal boforo which ho now appears. If this statement bo cor
rect, thon wo insist that, n* tho testimony offered hero would not
bo competent upon tho trial of tho accused upon an indictmont, it
would not bo admissible in this proceeding. Anything that
ligitimatcly tends to establish the guilt of this respondent, we
admit is competent ovidenco ; but wo do submit that it is no
crimo to issuo a commission to a man as an officer, independent
of some evidence of knowledge on the part of the respondent
that would unfit tho man for tho appointment.
Senator GILMER moved to extend the session of tho court
this day for one half hour.
A sufficient number seconded the motion,
The CHIEF JUSTICE put the question on tho motion of
senator Gilmer, and it was decided in the affirmative.
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. Chief Justice and Senators, I have
but a few words to say in reply to my honorable friend who has
just taken his seat. The discussion has assumed a very wide
range on tho other side, and one that I do not think is at all
important to follow. The practical question before the senate
is whether the evidence offered bears upon the issues raised
between the impeaching body and the accused. The prosecu
tion charges that the respondent was guilty of a great tibuse of
political power. It is not a question of the acts of the individual
but the acts of the publio officer. It is alleged that the gov
ornor, in order to effect an illegal purpose, mado uso of as his
instruments these desperate men. It ia distinctly charged

274 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
in the articles of impeachment, that these men were of a law
less character. The respondent denies theso allegations in his
answer, and upon that we have joined issue, and that is the
question now.
Is not the fact sought to be proved an important element in
the determination of that issue ? If the respondent had em
ployed a citizen of North Carolina, a man possessing weight of
character, and recognized as a man just and pacific in his dis
position, and indisposed to abuse power conferred on him, it
would have been a circumstance greatly in his favor. But he
having made use of men such ns are described in these
articles of impeachment, it is a circumstance greatly against
him. The character of the agent employed and what he had
done in the past, is evidence bearing on the question of what he
was expocted to do, and is one of those matters which this court
ought to inquire into, if it intends to ascertain the facts in the
case. It is therefore simply a. question of whether the aver
ment made in the articles shall be allowed to be proved as it is
averred. The object of pleading is to apprise an accused^party
of the character of the evidence expected to be given, and to
enable him to come prepared, if he can, to contradict it ; and
if ho does not contradict it, the proof on the part of the prose
cution will stand. We shall expect to prove that this man was
a desperate and lawless character, remarkable for his cruelty in
the exercise of power, and possessing the attributes of what is
ordinarily called a " bushwhacker " in tho vernacular of war-
faro. Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. Tho presiding officer is of the
opinion that the evidence is competent and admissible, to bo
confined, however, to tho character of the party, such as it
would bo likely to be heard of by the respondent when he Bent
to employ him. The court cannot go into the particular acts
of his life.
ISAAC E.- REEVES. {Examination resumed.)
By Mr. Mrrrimon.
Q. Do you know the general character of Kirk ? A. Yes.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 276
Bir, the general character and reputation he made during the
recent war. I have known him personally since.
Q. What is that general character ? A. He had the charac
ter there of. being a desperate man — notorious.
By the Chief Justice.
Q. Explain what you meen by desperate. A. Merciless.
Q. Criminal ? A. Criminal — that is while he waa a military
officer, I am speaking of.
By Mr. Merrimon, {resuming.)
Q. Was he a violent man ? A. Yes, sir, he had that reputa
tion ?
Q. You say that his reputation was notorious ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. State whether you knew a person of the name of B. G.
Burgen, and if so, state what you knew of him? A. I know
him. He came first to Jonesborough sometime during the
winter of 1869 and 1870. I do not know whether it was De
cember or January. lie came there as an attorney and was
admitted to the bar as a practicing attorney. He brought his
family with him. lie made no investment there in real estate
but ho lived in the town of Jonesborough, and claimed that as
his homo and said he intended to make it his future homo.
Ho remnincd there until Juno sometime, nnd loft leaving his
family. Ho left nbout tho middle of Juno and was absent
several days nnd returned and remained a day or two nnd then
ho loft again and was absent until December, lie returned
in December sometime and removed his family from Jones
borough. I do not know whero ho now is.
Q. He is not there now ? A. No, sir.
Q. Stato whothor you knew a person by tho name of Yates ?
A. Yes, sir, I know him.
Q. II. C. Yates? A. II. 0. Yates. He is known as Clay
Yates. Q. State what you know of him, whero he resides, his age,
and any thing you know about him In that respOct ? A. I do
not know exactly his age, but I suppose he is about 22 years
old. Ho is a voter — I remember he was a voter last summer.

276 COURT. OF IMPEAOnMENTB.
In may, I think it was, he announced himself as a candidate to
represent the county in the legislature.
Q. What county ? A. Washington county. He withdrew,
however, as a candidate before the election. ( That is the way
I suppose him to be of age. He has a rather boyish appear
ance. t
Q. What county did ho reside in ? A. He resided in Wash
ington county. * ' '
Q. Do you know him personally? A. Yea, sir,'* I know
him personally.
<). State whothor you know another Kirk called S. S. Kirk ?
A. 1 know him when I boo him. I remember of fleeing him
only twico. I had a conversation with him in July — about tho
10ih of July, and in that conversation ho told mo ho was going
around to his brother's command in North Carolina.
Q. Whero does bo reside ? A. I do not know his place of
residence, but I havo always understood that he was living in
tho county.
Q. Washington county ? A. Yes, sir, the same county
Q. Have you often seen him there .? A. No,'6ir; I do not
remember of seeing him more than twice.

e>

¦\

Cross examination. • > <
By Mr. Boyden.
Q. How long have you known George W. Kirk ? A. I
have known him four or five years.
Q. You did not know him before the war ? A. Not per
sonally. Q. Did you know his character before the war ? A. No, sir.
I did not know his general character before.
Q. This character which you give him is a character that he
acquired during the rebellion ? A. During the rebellion — or
war. Q. You know nothing about him except what occurred in
his conduct during the war ? A. Well, I don't know that I
could answer that affirmatively. I have heard of some —
Q. I speak of his general character. A. No, sir.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 277
^ Q. I ask you if he was a United States officer ? A. Yes
Bir. I understood that he was colonel of a regiment in the fed
eral service.
Q. When you speak of this man being desperate and re
morseless you mean with reference to the character he acquired
during the, war? A. Yes, .sir; during the war. Since the
war I do not know of any outrageous acts at all. His behavior,
as far ns I have Been, has been that of a comparatively quiet
citizen except —
Q. A quiet citizen ? A. Except a few moutliB when he was
in the militia sorvico. He made some reputation during that time
for cruelty.
Q. There wero very difficult times over there ? A. Yes, sir,
rather turbulent times.
Q. All you hoard of him in respect to hie character referred
to when ho was in tho sorvico. A. Yes, sir ; when he was in
tho service.
Re-direct examination
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. You say that he was in the militia service after the war ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What was this reputation as a militia officer there?
A. It accorded veiy well with his reputation during the war
while he was in the federal service, except that I do not know
of murders perpetrated. I know he was a terror of the people
of Middle Tennessee; I mingled with them a good deal there
while he was in the service.
Senator MOORE. Mr. Chief Justice, I send to you a question
in writing which I desire to be propounded to the witness. I
merely state in explanation of it, that I desire to know whether
when Kirk came to North Carolina in June 1870, as testified
to by tho witness, the witness knew of his own knowledge that
it was or was not his intention to make this state his residence.
Mr. GRAHAM. We object to' the question. Kirk is not
to judge of his own intentions. He cannot decide that ques-,

278 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
tion for that is, in effect, allowing him to prove that his residence
was changed.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. I have not yet read the question.
The clerk will read it.
The CLERK read the question in the words following :
Q. Do you know of your own knowledge whether George
W. Kirk moved his residence to North Carolina in June, 1870,
or not ?
The CHIEF JUSTICE. Anything that Colonel Kirk told
the witness when he left would be a part of the res gestae.
SENATOR MOORE. I desire to say, Mr. Chief Justice,
that I ask this question, having understood by this investigation
that it is designed to prove whether Kirk was a citizen of
Tennessee. Senator GRAHAM of Orange. Mr. Chief Justice I object
to debate on the part of senators.
Senator MOORE. I am not debating the question. I was
stating the object of my inquiry.
Mr. GRAHAM. The question is a little different as read
from what it was stated by the senator verbably. I under
stand the question to be confined to whether he knows of Kirk's
having removed his residence, To that I think there is no ob
jection. The CHIEF JUSTICE [to the witness]. The question is
whether you heard Colonel Kirk say when —
Mr. GRAHAM. Wo would prefer to havo the Chief Jus
tico read tho question to tho witness, as it calls for tho witness'
knowledge of whether Kirk moved.
Tho CLERK again road tho quoation to tho witness.
Q. Do you know of your own knowledge whothor Georgo
W. Kirk moved his residence to North Carolina in June, 1870,
or not ? A. No, sir, I don't know of his moving it. I said in
my testimony before when the question was asked me, that I
understood he had moved his family into the country. I think
they are yet a few miles from Jonesborough.
Q. [By Mr. Sparrow.] A few miles from Jonesborough

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 270
in Tennessee ? A. A few miles from Jonesborough in the
countiy. I never heard him express any intention of moving
to North Carolina or of changing his residence.
By Mr. Graham.
Q. He had a family ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. That family never came to North Carolina that you un
derstood ? A. No sir, not that I heard oL I understood that
he moved them a few miles into the country.
WILLIAM M. COCKE, a witness called on behalf of the
managers, being duly sworn testified as follows :
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. Where do you reside ? A. I reside in Asheville in this
State. Q. What is your profession ? A. I am a lawyer by pro
fession. Q. State whether you know by reputation or otherwise a
person called George W- Kirk ? A. I know him by reputa
tion. I have seen him two or three times, but I have no per
sonal acquaintance with him. I know his reputation in Wes
tern North Carolina.
Q. What is it ? A. I suppose I could not better describe
it than it was described by tho witness who preceded me. He
has the reputation there of being a cruel, merciless man — I
think more than that — his reputation in Western North
Carolina during tho war, as I understand it, was more that of a
plunderer in his operations. I am not permitted to speak ot
instances ?
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. No.
Q. I understand you to say that ho was a violent, deeperate
and cruel man, and had the reputation of a plunderer ? A.
That is his reputation in Western North Carolina.
Cross-examination .
By Mr Boyden:
Q. Did you know anything of his character before the war?
A. I was not acquainted with him and never knew him before

280 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
tho war. I have heard something in regard to him before the
war. Q. Speak generally? A. I have only heard special facts,
Q. You don't know his general reputation before the war?
A. I can't say that I have heard enough said of his charaoter
before the war to speak of it. I have heard instances that I
could speak of.
Q. I ask you if there was not during the rebellion a great
deal of violence on both Bides in that part of the country ? A«
That is my understanding. I did not livo in that part of country
during tho war. I resided in Tennessee a part of the timo. Per
haps 12 months before tho close of tho war — about that time —
I removed to the county south— Cleveland county. In Octo
ber, 1869, 1 removed to Asheville, and I havo lived there ever
since. I understand that acts of violence were perpetrated on
both sides in that region.
Q. Retaliating upon each other ? A. I understand bo.
WILLIAM M. MURDOCK, a witness called on behalf of
the managers, being duly sworn testified as follows :
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. Where do you reside ? A. Raleigh, North Carolina.
Q. What is your business ? A. I am an insurance agent.
Q. State whether, at any time, you knew a person called
Georgo W. Kirk, and if you know him, state where he resided.
A. I knew him in East Tennessee in 1867 and 1868.
Q. Did'ho reside there? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Whero ? A. East Tennessee.
Q. Do you know his reputation ? A. I know his general
reputation. Q. That is exactly what wo want. What was it ? A. He
was a man of very violent character. During the war he com
mitted a great many outrages.
Mr. BOYDEN. You will speak of his character generally, '
and not acts.
Q. What would you say his character was ? A. Very bad.

TRIAL OF W1UJAM W. HOLDEN. 281
Q. Describe in what respect? A. In the commission of
deeds — outrageoua deeds and murders.
Mr. BOYDEN. You aro not at liberty to speak of
offenses. Q. What Is his character for cruelty or humanity or in
humanity 3 A. That he was very cruel.
Q. State whether you knowhis reputation in Western Nor h
Carolina as well as Tennessee? A. He had that reputation in
Tennessee and North Carolina.
Cross Examination.
Hy Mr. Boyden.
Q. Have you lived in Western North Carolina? A. I havo.
Q. When did you live there? A. I lived there during the war.
Q. The whole time ? A. No, sir, I was in the army in the
western portion of the United States, during a portion of the
war — the early part.
Q. What side wero you on? A. The confederate side.
Q. There was a good deal of fighting — one side against the
other in that country — western North Carolina — between the
two parties? A. There was none except by those who had
been in the federal army coming in there and capturing some
of 'the confederate troops.
Q. And the confederate troops captured the federals, did
they not? A. There were no federal troops in there except
" bushwhackera" until the latter part of the war.
Q. The confederate side called them " bushwhackers" ?
A. I think the federals did too.
Q. Do you know that? A. I only know what I have heard
since the war.
Q. Do you say that both Bides did not retaliate upon ono
another ? — were there not a great many union men who did
not go Into the war — who did not approve of. the war? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. Wero there not conflicts between the two sides — was not
that tlie reputation of the country there ? A. Yes, sir, I
l>elieve it was. 10

2tf2 COURT OK IMPEACHMENT.
Q. And there woro very considerable oruoltlos practised on
both sides ? A. I have no doubt there were.
WILLIAM J. EDWARDS, a witness called ox behalf of
the managers, being duly sworn testified as follows :
By Mr. Merrimon, S. C.
Q. Where do you reside and what is your business ? A. I
reside in the eastern ward of this city and am a printer by
trade. Q. What are you in charge of, if anything. A. I have
charge of the Standard job office at present.
Q. Look upon the paper now produced [manuscript] and say
whether yon have seen it before ''. A. Yes, Bi'r, I have Been it
before. Q. Where did it come from t A. It was brought to tho
Standard office in April — I would not bo certain about the
date — by Colonel Kirk to be printed.
Q. Do you know the handwriting of Govornor Holden ? A.
Yes, sh\
Q. Look upon tho papor and Bay if that ia not his hand
writing '( A. Yes, sir, that is it.
Q. Look on the poster and say if you recollect whore it was
printed? A. I think it was done in the Standard office; I
wnfl not in charge of the offlco at the timo it was done ; my
brother was there at the timo.
Q. Do you know tho print? A. I think that is the print.
Q. Is that poeter a copy of the paper which yon previously
produced and hold in your hand < A. I think it is; it is
signed the same, and has the same heading on it — the same
title. Cross examinatum waived.
Mr. MERRIMON. We now propose to put the poster in
evidence. The CLERK proceeded to read the poster in the following
words :

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 288

RALLY UNION MEN
IN DEFENCE OF YOUR STATE!

i

i

RALLY SOLDIERS OF THE OLD , ,
N.CAROLINA, 2n AND 3d FEDERAL TROOPS:

Rally to the Standard of your old Commander I

Your old commander has been commissioned to raiso at once
a regiment of state troops, to aid in enforcing the laws, and in
putting down disloyal midnight assassins.
Tho blood of your murdered countrymen, inhumanly butch
ered tor opinion's sake, cries from the ground for vengeance.
The horrible murders and other atrocities committed by
rebel K. K. K. and " southern chivalry," on grayhaired men
and helplesB women, call in thunder tonea on all loyal men to
rally In defence of their atate. The uplifted hand of justico
N. Carolina 2d and 3d Federal Thooph 1
must overtake these outlaw*. 1000 RECRUITS
aro wanted immediately, to serve six months unless sooner dis
charged. These troops will receive the same pay, clothing and
rations as United States regulara. Recruits will be received at
Asheville, Marshall and Burnsville, North Carolina.
For further information address or call on me at Aah-
villo, N. 0. George W. Kirk,
Colonel 2d Regiment State Troops.
Mr. MERRIMON. We now propose to have the manu
script read.
Tho CLERK proceeded to read the manuscript produced by
the witness, which wbb in the same words as the, poster with
the addition in pencil at the close of the words "500 hand
bills, print at once." > •< ....,:,
Mr. MERRIMON. I ask leave of the court, that the
witness last sworn mav l>e allowed to withdraw the original

284- count nv impeachment.
manuscript of this proclamation and loavo a verbatim copy
with the clerk.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE, Loavo will bo granted.
Senator GRAHAM, of Orange, moved that tho tlmo of tho
session ho extended for fifteen minute*.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE put the question on tho motion of
Senator Graham and It whs decided In the affirmative.
WILLIAM W. VOCKEww'torWfm behalf 'oj the managers,
being recalled, testified a* follow*'.
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. Look upon this poster and see if you ever saw ono liko it
in the mountains and if so, where and under what circum
stances? A I have heard the poster read and I havo seen
them at Asheville — I think during last summer.
Q. You saw them up ? Yes, sir.
Cross-examination waived)
Mr. MERRIMON. We will now call Mr. Johnson, one of
the managers.

¦¦»'¦

THOMAS B. JOHNSON, a witness called on behalf of
the managers, being duly sworn, testified as foil (nos •
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. State whether yon have seen a paper like this poster in
the mountains and if so, under what circumstances ? A. I
had a copy of this or very much like it — I know it is a copy of it.
I used it last summer in the campaign. I think I saw more
than one copy — I do not know how many.
Q. Where did you find it ? I saw one copy in the post
office at Asheville lying upon tho counter, and I wanted to
get it 'and it was refused. I rhen got a friend of mine
to go down and pretend he was a good union man and he got
one. We wero to have a meeting the next day, and I got the
copy to use in making a speech and carried It with mo.
On motion of Senator ROBBINS, of Rowan, the court
adjourned to moot on Monday at 1 1 o'clock.

TRIAL OV WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 285
Senate Chahiikb, Feb. 0, 1871.
Tho court mot at 19 o'olock, pursuant to adjournment, Hon
orablo Richmond M. Pearson, Chief Justice of the Supremo
Court, In tho chair.
The proceedings were opened by proclamation made in due
form by the doorkeeper.
Senator GRAHAM, of Alamance, moved to dispense with
the reading of the journal of the proceedings of Saturday.
The CHIEF JUSTICE put the question on the motion of
Senator Graham, and it was decided in the affirmative.
Mr. BOYDEN. Before the trial is proceeded with we
desire to aak Mr. Reeves and Mr. Cocke a few questions.
ISAAC E. REEVES, a witness for tho managers, being
recalled, testified as follows :
Cross-examination.
By Mr. Boyden.
Q. You speak of the state of feeling in the mountain region
between the different parties, one retaliating upon the other.
To which party did you belong I A. I was in the confederate
army. Q. You were a confederate ? A. Yes, sir.
By Mr. Graham.
Q. You were not in service at that place— the scene of Kirk's
operations t A. No, sir, I was in the western array, and was
not there except at times on leave.
Q. You were under Gen. Bragg, who commanded in the
southwest? A. Yea, sir.'
WILLIAM M. COOKE, a witness for the managers, heing
recalled, testified as follows :
Cross-examination*
By Mr. Boyden. .
90

$&6 COURT OF JTM*EACHMENTS7 '
Q. We wish' to know what side you' took in the rebellion,
whether in favor of th¥" %frrtec^&raWfer against them ? A.
I was a Union' man up to the time of Mr. Lincoln's proclama
tion hi April,' 1861; "When the-" conflict waa inaugurated I
tbok side with my own section.
Ql You were' a -confederate during the war? A/ I warnot
a member of the army. , ' "
Q. You were very decided on that side after the- proclama
tion?' A. Yesj sir, and so continued until the close of the
war. Q. Was that the reason why ydu left Termesseey on account
of the difficulties there ? A. The reasons I left TenneSBee were
this ~~ ¦ , ¦ ¦' ' ¦¦¦¦¦,¦ i i j , •
Q. I don't care about the objects. A. I prefer to give
give them'. ' I was a non-combatant and remained at hon^e after
Gen. BiirnBide came in.' I remained home six months after he
came into Tennessee with Ih'b army, and «b I understood from a
reliable source that I was to be arrested, not for anything I had
dono but arrested as a non-combatant and held as a hostage for* tho
good bohavior of tho confederates who had arrested somo union
men,— I waa botweeu the confederate nnd federal lines— Ires!-
ded botweon tho two— eight miles out ot Kno.willo — the federals
being throe miles west of mo and tho confederates about fire
miles east of me, when I got the intelligence that I was to l*>
arrestedj got my family and left home one morning about
daylight afoot, and came wthin the confederate lines, vi camo
into North Carolina in October, 184U; I went to Cleaveland.
I remained in Cleaveland twelve months and after the war waB
over, I went home, determined to go home and remained
there. When I got there I found there was such a disturbed
and violent state of public affairs that I concluded to come
back to North Carolina, and I went to Asheville and settled
there, and have' remained there' over since. ' That ha"s b'een
my lio'mo. ' ' > • ,-> .,,,
Mr. JiRAG'G. Mr. Chief Justice thero was somo question
as te what' parts' of tlie proceedings In certain ' havedt corpus-

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 287
cases that were tried before you '• at 'chambers should be
printed. We have examined a certified copy of the record
which was left here by the clerk and have separated from 5t
those portions which we desire to [have -printed-T-jthe case's .of
Adolphus G. Moore and John Kerr which we propose to! sub
mit to the other side and .then, if they agree, to transmit' the
manuscript to the printers and let the matter be .printed, in the
appendixthesamea8otlierpapeJsareto.be. 'iA
Mr. BOYDEN. We ask for brief time to look oven tlie
papers and if there is nothing we want other than What .the
counsel propose to have printed we shall acquiesce. > i . < .>• : t >'
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. Chief Justice and senators, we beg
leave to offer in evidence certified copies of the records of the
superior court of Alamance county showing that the courtd of
justico were regularly held in the fall term, of 1869 and the
spring torm of 1870, immediately anterior to the invasion of
the county by the armed forces of Kirk. . '{'¦]''¦
The CLERK read the papers produced in the Words' fol
lowing: . J> '• ' '¦'•
State of North Carolina, ) g . Co ^ p n T ¦ ^
Alamance County. \ ,l , '. ^ , \ .,
Bo it reinomberod that a superior court, begun and hold, for
tho county of Alamance, at the court house in Graham* qn,tho
14th Monday after tho 1st Monday in September, 1809, it be
ing tlie 13th of December, 1869. Ilia Honor, A. W. Tonrgoe
Judge, present and presiding, the Hon. J. R. Bulla, Esq,, Sfrato
Solicitor, appearing in behalf ot the Btate,. the following p;<>
ceedings are had : i •/
. When Albert Murray, Esq,,, sheriff of said county, returns
that he has summoned tlie following good and lawful meii, as
jurors for tho fir6t week of the term,. viz: ,. v 1
Michael D. Shoffher, Felix G. Crutchfield, Alex. Siimmers,
Alfred Newlin, Wm. Troxfor, Ruffin P. Mitchell, Wm. Foust,
Brice Carter, Martin Slioffner, Johnson Turner, Milton Loy,
Robert B. Stubblefield, G. V. Thompson, George W. Dowdy,
Martin V. Boon, Wm. S. Tate, Alfred Sharp, Wm. S. Walker,

96ft. vMPW* °* ntPKAoamiNTt.
E. A. Foster, John W. Duke, Joseph Chisman, JoelTickley
^ib^kl1 AlbrigH^idlivorMoPherson, James X. Berber, James
Hs^r, John Fouci, Wm. A. Thompson, Stephen White, W.
CJ,l?^nell, Jos^h W, JHobnes, Jacob Michael,, Pete* FonsV
J^lf^ Foster, Marion Hcssse, M.J. Hughes.
,A$3oftheqid good and lawful men the following were
dr^wn> sworn, and charged as grand jurors tor the term, via ;
, Alfred Newlin, W. S. Tate, Felix G. Crutohflold, Johnson
Turner, Jacob Michael, John W. Duke, J. H. Foster, Peter
Foi^t, M. J. Hu^hss, Marion Heacoe, Stephen White, Jas. T.
Barber, Joseph Chrisman, Wm. S. Walker, Michael Albright,
Georgo W. Dowdy, Alfred Sharp, Martin V. Boon, Felix G.
OruteMold is appointed foreman of the grand jury.
i^rrcon Andrews, is appointed and sworn as an officer to wait
upon, the grand jury. t
And the following good and lawful men were sworn as a
petit jury for the first week of the term, viz :
W. A. Thompson, Joseph N. Holmes, Martin. Shofiher,
Robert B. Stubblenold, Joel Tickle, C. 0. Thompson, Oliver
Mcpherson, James Hunter, Ruffin F. Mitohell, Alex. Sunv
mors, Wm. Troxler, Michael D. Shofihor, Milton Loy, John
Eoust, F. A. Foster, Wm. Foust.
,, W, 0. Donnell, Juror, excused for the term.
" # * . # # # #
I, W. A. Albright, clerk of the superior court of Alamance
county and state aforesaid, do certify that the foregoing is a
true and perfect transcript of and from the minute docket, as
appears of record at fall term, 1869.
I further certify that said oourt, as organized above, was
open, from day to day for the transaction of business up to and
including the 16th day of December, A. D. 1869.
In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand, and
affiled the seal of said court, this 6th day of Feb'y, A. D., 1871.
W. A. Albright, Clerk.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. $i&
State of North' Carolina:) 'j-, -,'n J^o" ' f ¦ W,K* »"'r ^ ^'T
• Alamance County. f $UP r °°^ &*#« $m* *r%
Be it remembered that at a superior couft, begun 'and Iteld
for the County of Alamance, at the court-house in Griahfenvon
the 14th Monday after the 1st Monday in Ma¥ehj 1870, 'il being1
the 13th day of June, 1870, his honor A. W: Tourgee' Jtidge.
present and presiding, and the Hon'l J. R. 6ulla, State SolfoU
tor, appears on the part of the. State. The 'following proceed
ings were had. !J ' <' Hn" '
When Albert Murray, sheriff of said county returned' thidt
he had summoned the following good and lawful men aa jutorfe
for the first week of the term, viz : " "' J-: -:' •*
Joshua Whitsell, J. G. Moore, Peter Garrison, OriasrMke,
Jesse Rippey, Dan'l Tickle, Levi Tenett, Thonias MnrrafttD.
W. Kerr, Joseph W. Thompson, John A. -McCauley, ' AbranY
Boyd, Peter Ruffin, D. W. M. Huffman, JaniCsM:' Thompson,
Benj. White, Levi Fossett, Hi M. QuackefiduBh^ SoY<ktomr
Tickle, Hiram Wills, Benrtett Hazell, Joseph 'Wyatt, Thonlas
P. Smith, Enoch Yackery, George C. PickWd, DaVid Mckj
Wm. McPherson, Wm. S. Morrill, Joseph; Barber;" Peter'
Summers, Wm. Mahan, Wm. M. Roscoe, Charles PattersOn',f:
if. -i. - v •' W( +- ?
Constantine Sellers, John A. Bryant and Wm. Lewis. ' ; <^:,,K'
And of the aaid good and lawful men ' the following are
drawn, sworn and charged as grand jurors for the term, viz :
Abram Boyd, Wm. M. Roscoe, Wm. Lewis, Johii' A: 'Bry
ant, Constantine Sellers, Joseph Barber, H.'M.'''Qtiack^rimftlij
Levi Faucett, Wm. Mahan, Peter Ruffin, Peter Summers; "&.'
W. M. Huffman, Charles Patterson, Wm. McPherson) DaW
Black, James G. Moore and Hiram Wills. ' '0 ' ' ; " /' J " ! ' ui l
James G. Moore is appointed foreman of thegraiid Jury? ''^
Greene Andrews is appointed and sworn as' ah officer to Vait
upon the grand jury. l;iW,(s' M*,;i;^5
And the following good and lawful men are sworn as petit
jurors for the first week of the term, viz :
Peter Garrison, Dan'l Tickle, Thomas Murray, Nias Pike,
Solomon Tickle, Thos. P. Smith, John A. McCauley, Jesse

200 C0tTHT OF nn»BAOHMENTS. '» ''
^ippevj.Wm. P., Morrill, LeviFaucett, Joseph' W. Thompson,
Benj. White, Joseph Wyatt, ' James M. Thompson;' D. W.
Kerr and Joshua Whitsell.
Bennett Hazel excused by' the court. / ' • ''
...:¦# <T * '• # # ' ;¦' #
I, W. A. Albright, clerk of the superior court of Alamande
county, and state aforesaid, do certify that the foregoing is a
truo and perfect transcript from tho minute docket ns appears
of record at aprlug term, A. D. 1870. I further certify that
said court as organized above, was opon from day to day for
tho transaction of business, up to and including the 16th of
June, A. D. 1870.
In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand, and
affixed the seal of said county, this 6th day of February, 1871.
W. A. Albright, Clerk.
Mr. GRAHAM. We offer similar transcripts of the pro
ceedings of tho court In Caswoll county.
The CLERK procoedod to read tho papers offered In tho
Words following. Minute Docket, Sui'miiiou Court, Fall Term 1869,
Static ok North Carolina, \
Caswoll County. J
Be It remembered, that at superior court begun and hold for
tho county of Caswell at tho court houso in Yancoyvlllo on tho
fourth Monday after the first Monday in Soptoinber, 1800.
Ills honor A. W. Tourgee, judge 7th judicial district not
having arrived by four o'clock P. M. to open said court, J. O.
Griffith, sheriff of said county adjourned said court until Tues
day morning 5th October at ten o'clock.
Tuesday Morning, October 5th, 1869.
Court met according to adjournment and was opened by his
honor A. W. Tourgee, judge presiding. . J. R. Bulla, solicitor
7th1 judicial district appears and prosecutes in behalf of the
Btate. J J C. Griffith, sheriff of said county, returns the following
hat of jurors by him summoned to serve for the first week of

TRIAL QF; WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 291
eaid term; Livingston II. E. Hodges, Wm. Rv Worsham,.Wm.
R. Cooper, E. B. Holden, L. L. Crawley, James C. Thompson,
B. F. Thompson, Nath'l Covington, E. P, .Hines,. Crawford
Sledge, John W. Slade, C. M. Hendrick, R. M Price, II. II.
Gordan, George A. Smith, Abert Fuller, L. T. Roberts, James
Compton, A. S. Williamson, Thos. Slade, Jr., R. T. Blackwell,
James Malone, Drury Burton, W. H. Bolton, W. R. Fnlling-
ton, W. F. Smith, Joseph Moore, D. W. R. Richmond, N. V.
Pearce, J. G. Lea, W. H.. Roberts, John Culbreth, James H.
Tally, W. E. Stephens, J. J. Clendenen.
The following list of jurors was returned as summoned to
servo the second week of said term to wit :
T. A. Wilson, A. Boynes, James Jones, John D. Hames, J.
G. Warren, Andrew P. Orr, T. D. Hubbard, N. J. Palmer, J.
F. Harelson, James A. Warren, John W. Minis, Wm. II.
Ilatchell, J. L. Goodson, Wm. Paylor, Jr., n. S. Thaxten,
Thos. G. Rice, W. II. Murphy, A. D. Willis.
Tho following named persons wore excused from serving as
Jurors to this term ; Nath'l Covington, L. Brown, W. H. Bolton,
W. Paylor, Jr.
Tho following named persons wero drawn to serve as Grand
Jurors, to this term, to wit :
W. R. Worsham, »L. T. Roberts, A. S. Williamson, Albert
Fullor, J. C. Thompson, L. L. Crawley, R. T. Blackwell, John
Culbroths, John W. Slade, James Compton, 0. Slcdgo, W. R.
Fullington, James Malone, W. II. Roberts, R. W. Price, E.
B. Iloldon, W. E. StophonB, John G. Lea.
James Malone is appointed foreman of tho Grand Jury, te
this term.
T. N. Jordan is appointed to wait and attend upon the Grand
Jury to this term. , ,^ (
The following, is the original panel for the first week of the
term, to wit? , , A, # ,, <t ,( ' '_ K. , (|.,,
J. J.. Clendenen, Geo. A. Smith, N. V, Pearce, Jatnes H.
Tally, II. E. Hodges, C. M. Hendrick, H. H. Gordon, Joseph
Moore, E. P. Hines^ Sam'l 8,.. Harrison,' 'Xlios. ,felad"e jTr.,' B. F.
Thompson.

292 . K',«( COTJBT OF nrPEACHMENTSU > •¦:
•State of Nofrnai Carolina,: ) ™v..j.>:- ¦¦.•>''-<' i <V - •
, Caswell County. j ...... ¦-¦ ,„ ¦., \ .. < ¦ T ;>- .-•¦>
; ... I, F. H. Brandon, Clerk of the Superior court of Caswell
county, aforesaid, do certify that the foregoing is a true and
perfeot transcript from my docket, of the organization of the fall
term of the superior court of the county aforesaid, as the same
remains on record, and I farther certify that the said court con
tinued in the regular discharge of its duties until Wednesday
evening, October 18th, 1869, when having disposed of the busi
ness of the term, the court adjourned, all of which is shown by
my record.
In testimony whereof, I hereunto set my hand and the seal
of said court, the 4th day of February, 1871.
H. F. Brandon, C. S. 0.
Minute docket tojapring term, 1870
State of North Carolina, )
Caswell county, j
Be it remembered that on the 4th Monday after the first
Monday in March, 1870, a superior court was begun and held for
the county of Caswell, at the court house in Yanceyville, Hon.
A. W. Tourgee, judge 7th judicial district presiding, J. R.
Bulla, solicitor of said district, prosecuting in behalf of the
state, his honor not being present to Open and hold court
the sheriff adjourned court until to-morrow morning at ten
o'clock. Tuesday Morning, April 5th, 1870.
Court met according to adjournment. Present his honor
A. W. Tourgee, judge presiding.
v , The following named persons were drawn and sworn to serve
as grand jurors to this term, to wit : James G. Drury, Greensby
.Carter, Rufua Stampa, John G. Wilson, John E. Robertson,
W. T. Hodges, George W. Price, A. S. Badgett, R. B. Thorn
ton, George S. Fitch, G. I. Farish, W. H. Stainback, R. A.
Blackwell, 0. D. Vernon, Abner Walker, Samuel I. Covington,
E. J. Orr, Sidaey L. Stephens.
, , Wm. Irvin and John Worsham are excused from serving aa
grand jurors te this term.

TRIAL Or WILLIAM W. HOLDER. 298
George W. Price is appointed and sworn foreman of the
grand jury for this term. .,,*.¦//
Tho following is a list of the petty jury for the first week of
the term, to-wit: Jas. T. Mitchell, James M. Rollins; Ibzan
Rice, W. Thacker, 0. 0. Gatewood, W. J. Aldrido, Warren M.
Miles, Daniel Y. Tally, W. 0. Gillespie, W. H. Johnston,
Samuel B. Holden, R. M. Gwyn, L. P. Hatohwell, R. D. Stad-
lor, Thos. L. Lea.
T. N. Jordan is appointed to wait and attend on the grand
jury for this term. '
State of North Carolina, I
Caswell County f
I, II. F. Brandom, clerk of the superior court of the
county aforesaid, do certify that the foregoing is a true tran
script from the minute docket of the superior court of said
county, at apring term, 1870, and I further certify that the aaid
court continued in the discharge of the business of the term
until Wednesday evening, April 13th, 1870, when having dis
posed of the business of said term, adjourned, as shown by
said docket.
In testimony whereof I hereunto set my hand and affix the
seal of said court the 4th day of February, 1871.
H. F. Brandon, C. S. C.
State of North Carolina, )
Caswell County. J '
Be it remembered that on the 4th Monday after the 1st
Monday in September, 1870, (it being the 8d day of October,
1870,) a regular term of the superior court waa begun and held
for the county of Ca8well at the court house in Yancey ville,
Honorable A. W. Tourgee, judge of the 7th judicial district
of North Carolina, presiding, J. R. Bulla, solicitor, appeared
and proaecuted for the state. • '
The following named persons were drawn fo aerve as grand
jurors for this term, tcwit : T. L. Evans, W. S. Yarborough.
Philemon Simpson, Yewell F. Hodges, James R. Aldridge, R.
P. Wilson, W. S. Bryant, M. A. Turner, Thomas 0. Teal,

294 court or impeachments. ¦ ., ,
Daniel Ganison, E^JSUulte, P..BL Williamson, W..M. Watkins,
W. B. James, Sterling Gunn, J. G. Eullingtoo, W. B.uStadler,
W.B.,Wynn. ., ¦¦> ; ,; ;r<. • » li i » ;-¦, . •; ^ ;•.•.,..<:'.-,' •• ' i
W. B. Wynn.is appointed foreman of the grand jury to
this term. i < ..>,-,¦ . I
T. N. Jordan is sworn to wait and attend on the grand jury
to/ this term.,
The following named persons were called and sworn as the
original panel, to-wit : Geo. G. Richardson, L. M. Johnston,
John B. Blackwell, W. S. Hatchell, Thomas J. Stubblefield,
Stephen Underwood, John W. Allen, James O. Peterson, Q.
T. Anderson, H. W. Cobb, J. R. Fowler, W. H. Smith.
Thomas J. Mills, B. Harelson, James M. Smith and A. J.
Walters excused from serving as jurors to this term.
Court adjourned to meet tomorrow morning at 9 o'clock.
State of North Carolina, )
Caswell county, j
I, II. F. Brandon, clerk of the superior court of Caswell
county aforesaid, do certify that the foregoing is a true trans-
script from the minute docket of the superior court of the
county aforesaid at fall tenn, 1870 ; and I further certify, that
the said court continued in the discharge of its duties until
Thursday evening, October Oth, 1870, when having disposed
of its regular business, adjourned, which is shown by docket.
In testimony whereof, I hereunto set my hand and affix 'the
seal of said court, the Oth day of February, 1871.
II. F, Brandon, C. S. C.
WILLIAM J. MURRAY, a witness called on behalf of
the managers, being duly sworn testified as follows : ,
By Mr. Graham.
: Q. Do you reside In the county of Alamance ? A. I do,, sir.
Q. Do, you. hold any off)ce there? A. I act as ( deputy
sheriff., ,i ¦ .-.I.,,. ,( -., , , v p t! ,,
Q. Have you been high sheriff of the county ? A. I have sir.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOXDEN. 20£'
Q. During what years— for how many years? A^ I Was
fclected in 1860 I think ; from that time up to 1868 I believe?
Q. You are well acquainted in the county ? A. Yes,' sir.1
1 Q. State whether you have transacted the principal business
of the sheriff's office during the last two years since yod have4
been deputy. A. I have done a good portion of it: '' 'J
Q. State whether or not you have collected the taxes ?';<,iAiJ
I have. ' ' ' '
Q. Served processes in various ways ? A. Yes, sir. I i, >.
Q. Been extensively through the county in the execution of
these duties ? A. I have been all over the county.
Q. During 1869 and 1870 ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. State whether or not the court of probate and the registra
tion of deeds went on as usual during those years ? A. I think
so, all of the time.
Q. County supplied with magistrates in the various town
ships? A. Yes, 6ir. i .
Q. Magistrate's courts held indifferent parts of the county
to your knowledge during the period since the township system
has been in operation ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were there or not constables in those townships ? A.
Yes, sir, constables in all the townships, I think sir. »
Q. Stato whether or not, to your own knowledge, there has
been any reflistenco to tho law in the execution of any process
or in the execution of any duty of any officer in the county of
Alamanco during the period of 1869 and 1870 ? A. Not at
all, to my knowledge.
Q. Did you find it at all necessary to Biimnion assistance to
mako the arrest of any body ? A. I never did in my life— all
the time. ; •¦ '
Q. In the execution of the duties of sheriff while you held it
and since you have been deputy you have never found it
necessary to summon a posse to aid you in making arrests ? .' >A.
I dont think I summoned any body to help me, make (any
arrest during the whole time that I was an officer of the county.

98ft >¦ count ot m?s ACHMBNTB. • '
H'Qi' Superior courta were regularly held at thes* terms, were
th©ynot?> A;iYes,sir. ' ¦< '-""•. •'!:«' •»•
1 Q. The June term, 1870, according to the clerk's records,
seems to have begun on the 18th of the month. Wal that
term hold! A. Yes, sir, ' ' >¦*
Q. Tho Fall term was hold also, was it, sir ? A* Yes, sir, I
think so.
Q. And tho torm preceding, in 1869 ? A. Yes, sir
' Q. I understand you to say that you never knew of any
resistance to the exocution of any process, or to the execution
of any law in tho oounty ? A. I never did, sir.
>' Q. You say you have no knowledge of any resistance ocenr-
ripg to any of them ? A. I never heard of an officer being
resisted in serving a legal precept.
Q. Are you acquainted with the officers of the county gen-
drally? A. I am.
Q. The constables and magistrates and officers of the
bounty— you know them all ? A. I do.
Q. You havo no knowledge of there being any resistance to
them 1 A. I havo no knowledge of any resistance to serving
any precept in tlie county.
'¦ Qi [By tho Chief Justice.] You do not believe there were ?
A. I do not.
;:Q. You don't believe that there has been any resistance to
any one whatever? A. No, sir.
Q. Do you know when Kirk arrived there in command of
troops ? A. I think it was in June, I am not poaitive aa to
dates,— June or July.
Q. Had there been troopa there before the arrival of Kirk's
troops? A. There had been federal troopa.
Q. What time did they come ? A. I think they came there1
tlio latter part of February or the 1st of March.
Q. 1870? A. 1870.
<Q, Company of federal troops ? A. Yes, sir } I understood
it to bo a company { there were a good many men. - 1 don't
know whether thoy were a full company er not.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 2ftfc
Q. What number of men would you suppose there were in
the command ? A. I suppose, sir, not knowing exactly, fifty
or sixty; it may be more or it may be not quite so many* ; I
don't remember tho number. .,y,<<\ •..!
Q. Those federal troops you say, arrived' the latter part of
February or early in March. Did those troops or other
federal troops oon tinue there from that time on word? A.I
think they were there, with somo interval— -one company would
go, and another would come. There may have been a few days
they were not there. , , 1
Q. The garrison was kept up with the slight intervals you
have mentioned from their arrival in February or March down
to what period ! A. I don't remember when the last troopa
left there. t ?
Q. Since Kirk's troops were discharged ? A. Yes, sir. < ,
Q. They were there during the whole time Kirk was there ?
A. Yes, sir. >
Q. The federal troops came there four or five months earlier?
A. Yes, sir, I think they were there in March. «
Q. Where were they quartered or stationed? A. They
were quartered at the court house in Graham.
Q. And continued there from February or March down
until after Kirk left the place ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you ever have occasion to call upon, those federal
troops for aid in the execution ot your duties i A. I did not.,
Q. They were there when Kirk arrived ? 'A. . Yes, sir. >
Q. And continued during his whole stay J A.i Yes, shv •<<-:?
Cross examination. ni. ¦¦.-. .,>,: ,. ¦¦•n.n
By Mr. Boyden. , ,; '¦')
Q, I understood you that you have been the principal sheriff.!
From what time ? A. I was elected ml I860., t ( . r ,i . , < . i. >i
Q. And continued principal sheriff until when?> A. I think'
it waa in 1868. i» . • ;, m > O
Q. What time in 1868 did you cease to be sheriff? A.
August, 1868, I reckon, or September. The election came off
in August.

298 . v, t COURT, OF TMPEA0HMENTS.
¦i. Q. Whon didyon qualify? .A. >1 did not, qualify. 1/ v
vi Q. Imean when you gave up your office. < A. In September.
. Q. Since that you have dono the principal business of sheriff ?
A. I have done a good portion of it. ,' . ,)  r- n. ,
i. > Q. A largo portion? A. Yes, sin, . > •¦ ,i! .','
< Q. We will now come to tho courts which you i say was held
iin June 1860. I think you said it was hold in June ? A, Yes,
sir, I think so. < . . -
Q. Was that boforo or after Kirk camo there ; the court ? . A.
It was before. < < ' <
Q. The court was held before Kirk camo there ? A. I think
so, sir. ' i
: Q. But at that time there were federal troops there 1 A.
Yea, sir. . ¦¦< it
Q. How long did the court ait ? A. I don't know that I can.
lanswer that question intelligibly, sir. I think it sat tho most
of the first week. I think until Friday. I am not certain about
! the time it adjourned. ;•,,.•
• Q. It adjourned the first week, but what day you cannot say,
but think it was Friday ? A. I think it waa Friday*-^! am not
positive about that. ' i ,
.. Q. What day did the tenn. commence? A. I think it. com
menced on Monday. , , .: ,
Q. Did the judge get there Monday ? A. It striked me he
did. There was one term he did not get there Monday, but
whether it was that term I am not positive. <¦.>¦> .y
Q. We will now come to the fall term of 1870. What day
did the judge arrive at that time? A.. I cannot apeak posi
tively as to that, whether it waa that. term or not I don't
think he ever missed being there on Monday but once, and
I do not know which oourt that waa. . . . ( r,
Q. How long did the court continue open at the fall terra
after the judge came? A. I cannot apeak possitivey as to
that I think about four days. ,, ,1( „«.
Q. You think about four days, but you cannot say i positively
as to that? A. No, sir. . ,.,., , ,

, TRIAL 'OF1' WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 299
Q. Was there much business on the docket ? ' A. Yes1, sir,
a right smart civil docket. I do not think the atate dccket
Was very large.- ;- """ ''" " - " •>'' •"""• --"'<' .'. •
Q. Do you recollect whether the business 'was all gone
through with at that fall term? A. I think it Was all called
over arid those that were ready were tried, some 'were not
ready. ¦• y< . \ \ < r... ¦ , »!'•: tmi: .. . ¦
Q. You say the state docket waa very small? A. I do not
think that it waa very large. '¦''¦' ¦ ' " >r * '
Q. I understood you to say it was small. Was that your
answer ? A. I do not think the state docket was a large ono.
Q. I underatood you to say it was small ; is that your anstotor ?
A. Yes, sir: ¦ ' •,•••:"./ ¦ ,'r ,
Q. What part of the county do you reaide in!? At' About
•four miles from the court house. ¦' i '• '/ ,.i.7 ,», >
Q. You reside about four miles from the court housflj ' Were
you Often in Graham, the county seat ? A. ' Yes,- sir J < • '
Q. Nearly every day ? A. I was there 'as ; much as twice 'a
week, sometimes eveiy day. j '¦•¦
1 Q. Wore you the week that Outlaw was hanged there I' A.
I don't know. I suppose I was in Graham a part of the time,
I do riot remember exactly. -;' "• ¦¦ "'!• •',>
Q. Did you see his dead body? A. I did not, sin ¦> ' : ' ;
Q. You recollect the day or the night that he was hung?
\A Yes, sir. I recollect it was Sunday, the morning after' 'he
was hung. The night I was at home. ' ! • " '"¦' "
¦' ' Q. He was hung Saturday night ? A. Yes, sir. ;<¦•• •"
Q. When did you first hear of it? A. There was a messen
ger sent ott to my house Sunday morning. ' '¦ > > .«,/.',»'
Q. Informing you of the fact? « A. Yes* Bir. •>, mi. < j
Q. Did you go up, air? A. I did not, my brotlter wont.'
Q. Who Was your brother? ' Ai Albert Murray. >'» : ¦>,>
> • Q.' Is he principal aheriff? ' A:- Yesyair. • '¦ • •' ' " "
Q. When did you go up^-how soon ? ' A. I do not tlnni I
wasln Graham for two or throodaya after.* <"!' ' <¦ v
Q. Recollect as accurately as you can how- soon ' you went

800 - OOCBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
there f A. I do not remember exactly the first day I was
there after that
Q. It waa some time that week, you say t A. Yes, sir,
some time the week after. I was there some day during the
week ; but I do not remember what day.
Q. I understood you to say that you were there the same
week that this body was found ? A. That was the week before,
I spoke ot.
Q. You don't understand me. I understood you to say his
body was found on Sunday morning as you learned ? A. Yes,
sir. Q. That was the first day of the week. I understood you to
say that you were in Graham that week ? A. I meant the
week before he was hung. I did not understand the question.
Q. You were in there the week before he was hung? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. What day of the week ? A I think I was there on
Thursday, I am not poaitive, previously to the time he was
hung. Q. I ask you if you were not there on Saturday ? A. I
think not.
Q. Have you a distinct recollection about that ? A. No,
sir ; the only thing I speak from is, the sheriff had made
appointments to be in Graham on Thursdays and Saturdays.
Sometimes I went and sometimes he went. We both lived at
the same place. I think I went on Thursday as well as I
remember, and I rather think he went on Saturday. I am not
positive of that, but am pretty positive that I did not go.
Q. Give us the reaaon which makea you think you did not
go Saturday but went on Thursday ? A. The appointment was
made for the convenience of tax payers, to meet them there.
Q. I did not ask you what it was made for ; I ask you the
reason which makes you rather think now that you went on
Thureday instead of Saturday ? A. I generally did the busi
ness through the week ; the sheriff went towards the latter part
of the week and looked over what was done.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 301
'''.;' I ' t ,,< 'I ,'t r' *' t
Q. Then you havo no recollection whether , ypu wero thoro
on Saturday or Thursday, only the principal slier ifflookcd over
matters tho hitter part of tho week to see what waa done; t)int
is all tho reason you havo for stating that you woi/o not there
on Saturday? A. Ho generally wont once, n week. ,' _ r
Q. Do I understand you to say that all tho reason you have
for stating that you were thero on Thursday' ami not on
Saturday is because he generally looked ovCr tlie business, the
latter part of tho week? A. I don't know that,liis lookiinj
over tho business was the reason of it. ..' ",• .
Q. I have asked you for yoar reason. Tl'iat is tho question
I put to you, why you stated you thonght ypu were there., on
Thursday and not on Saturday, as you .sometimes, went on
Thursday and sometimes on Saturday if I understand yo/u ?
A. Yes. sir. I can't give any particular .reason 'only- my im
pression is, I was thqrc ori Thursdav. \ " ..
Q. That is all tlie answer you can give that you have smne
kind of impression you were there on'Tlmrsday,and, not pu
Saturday? A. Yes, sir. '..,.,
Q. Is that all? A. Yes sir. .. , .. ''"*'
Q. Did you not go on both days, Thursdays' and Saturdays ?
A. Sometimes when there was a jmblic gathering ; ori Saturday,
and I went sometimes otherwise. ,,'"',
Q. You said these appointments were made for the, benefit
of tax payers and of course you expected fo be there the daj?£
vou appointed ? A. That is one reason, thai I think my bro
ther or I was there on Saturday, but I don t think I was there
that Saturday. , , ?.¦,., : . .
Q. That is the reason for your belief tiist one' of 'you were
there? A. Yes, sir. " ' '" ,.','.,'
Q. You don't know whether your brother was there on. Sat
urday or not ? A. I don't. ,'„•"- , " *
Q. You can't say with any degree of certainty whether you
were there or not ? A. I cannot. ','' . ,r.
Q. What position, if any, did Outlaw hold thejre? "A. lie
Was elected one of the commissioners' of the towfi. I don't
21' " ' "¦," '¦"¦  "M"

302 COURT OFt IMPEACHMENTS.
know whether he held the position at the time «f his death
'or not.
Q. I ask yon if you don't know that, at the time of his
murder, he was one of the commissioners of the town of
Graham ? A.I believe he was, but I am not positive about it ?
Q. Can you tell us when he was elected — how long before
the murder? A. The commissioners of the town of Graham
are elected on the first Monday in January.
Q. What was the time that he was murdered ? A. I think
it was in February — the latter part if I was not mistaken.
Q. His term of office had only commenced about a month
before I A. Only about a month and a half or two months.
Q. I ask you whether you know the fact that there was great
indignation felt against him because he accepted an office,
among the citizens of tho town, generally ? A. I do not
know. '
Q. You heard nothing said about it? A. No, sir; I
heard nothing said about it.
Q. What was his color? A. He was a black man.
Q. I ask you if before his murder you had heard anything
said about chastizing him and driving him off or murdering
him ? A.I had not.
Q. Not from any human being? A. No, rir,
Mr. GRAHAM. I don't think the question a competent
ono but the answer is made.
Q. Do you know of any secret organizations in tho county
ot Alamance known there as tho " Kuklux Klan," tho " White
Brotherhood," the "Constitutional Union Guard" or the
" Invisible Empire V
Mr. GRAHAM. Wo object to the question.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The court will hear the objection.
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. Chief Justice aud senators, the ques
tion involved in this inquiry is whether there was an insurrec
tion in the county of Alamance ; and before any evidence is
admitted upon that subject, it is necessary to show some overt
act of resistence to the government. Insurrection is one form

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 303
of treason and before any plots of a treasonable character can
be shown it is necessary first to show a levying of war — some
treasonable act ; in other words, before there can be any evi
dence adduced in regard to the existence of a treasonable con
spiracy, there must be proven some overt act of resistence to
the government, which is levying war, and any combination of
any 6ort, not for the purpose of resistence to law is not treason —
is not insurrection.
These articles charge that the respondent falsely proclaimed
an insurrection. We say that no such insurrection existed.
He states by his answer that an insurrection did exist and it is
necessary, if any attempt to show an insurrection be made,
that there should be proven some overt act. of resistence to the
government before any other evidence is competent. The
question arose in the trial of Burr and one of the grounds upon
which he was acquitted was that the chief justice of the United
States then presiding, having held that it was necessary to show
an overt act of levying war, it was necessary to show a levying of
war in the district whore the court sat which took jurisdiction
of the offence, and no such evidonce having been given, the
prisoner was acquitted.
Sir, combinations for any other purpose than resistance
to the law, do not constitute insurrection or treason.
There aro various authorities on that subject. I havo only a
single ono immediately at hand ; but it is laid down in Hale's
Pleas of the Crown that if parties combine for the purpose of
slaying or of beating or otherwise maltreating a person on ac
count of any hostility to him, but do not seek resistance to
the government, it is a riot, but is not insurrection or treasoi .
That same doctrine is sustained by Foster in his Crown Law.
It is sustained by Lord Campbell in a case to bo found in tho
English Common Law Reports aud which we can produce ; and it
is laid down by Judge Chase in the trial of Fries. And, sir, it
is nothing but the common law of treason as regulated by the
constitution of tlie United States and of this state.
Prior to the commencement of the late war, the constitution

304 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
of North Carolina had not determined what waa treason against
the Btate but loft it to bo established by the etatute of Edward
III ; and Bryan a tory colonel, who raised a regiment in the
Forks of tho Yadkin, was tried for treason at Salisbury and
convicted on the ground that ho had raised a regiment and gono
into tho British service against the United States at that time.
Tho record of that is brought forward by Governor Swain in
his researches into tho history of this state and will be- found
in a small volume entitled Revolutionary History of North
Carolina. But tho doctrine is well established that, in order to
mako a combination an insurrection, which is treason, it is
necessary that it should distinctly appear that the combination
is for the purpose of resistance to the law. I will read to tho
court ono or two passages from Foster which I havo here.
" Lord Chief Justice Hale, speaking of such unlawful assein-
" bles as may amount to a levying of war within the 25 E. Ill,,
" taketh a difference between those insurrections which have
" carried the appearance of an army formed nnder^ leaders, and
" prided with military weapons, and with drums, colors", &c,
" and those other disorderly tumultuous assemblies which have
" been drawn together and conducted to purposes manifestly
" unlawful, but without any of the ordinary shew and apparatus
" of war before mentioned.
" The true criterion therefore in all these cases is, Quo
" Annuo, did the parties assemble? For if the assembly be
" upon account of some private quarrel, or to take revenge on
"particular persons, the statute- of treasons hath already detcr-
" mined that point in favor of tbe subject. If, saith the statute,
" any man ride armed openly (so the Avord descovert ought to
*' have been rendered), or secretly with men of arms against
"any other to slay or rob him, or to take and keep him until
" he make fine for his deliverance, it is not the mind of the
"king or his council, that in such case it shall be judged
" treason"; but it hIihII bo judged felony or trespass according to
" the law of the hind of old time used and according us tho case
" roquireth.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 305
" Then immediately followoth another clause, which reachetli
" to (he end of tho statute, and providcth that, if in such caso
"or other like the offence had thontofore been adjudged treason,
" whereby tho lands ot tho offenders had came to tho crown as
"forfeit, the lords of the foe should notwithstanding havo the
" escheat, of such lands, Having to the crown the year and waft.
" 1 will make a short observation or two on these clauses :
" 1st. The first clause is evidently declaratory of tho common
" law : It shall be adjudged felony or trespass according to the
"law of ihr land of old time «.W, the second hath a retrospect
" to some late judgements in which the common law had not
" taken place ; and giveth a speedy and effectual remedy to
"lords of tho fee who had suffered bv these judgments.
"2dly. The words of the first clause descriptive of the
" offence, ' if' any man ride armed, openly or secretly with men
" of arms,' did, in the language of those times, mean nothing
" less than the assembling bodies of men, friends, tenants, or
"dependants, armed and arrayed in a warlike manner in order
" to effect some purpose or other by dint of numbers and supe-
" rior strength ; aud yet these assemblies so armed and arrayed,
" if drawn together for purposes of a private nature, were not
" deemed treasonable.
" Sdly. Though the statute menticneth only the cases of
" assembling to kill, rob or imprison, yet these, put as they are
" by way of example only, will not exclude others which may
" be brought within tbe same rule ; for the retrospective clause
" provideth, that if in such case, or other like it, hath been
"adjudged. What are the other like cases ? All cases of the
"like private nature are, I apprehend, within the reason and
" equity of the act. Tho caso of tho Earls of Gloucester and
" Hertford, and many other cases cited by Hale, Borne boforo
" the statute of treasons, and others after it, — those assemblies,
" though attended many of them with bloodshed and with tho
"ordinary apparatus of war, wore not holden te bo treasonable
" assemblies ; for they were not, in construction of law, raised

300 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
" against the King or his Royal Majesty, but for purposes of a
" private personal nature.
" Upon the same principle, and within the reason and equity
"of the statute, risings to maintain & private claim of right, or
"to destroy particular inclosures, or to remove nuisances which
" affected or were thought to affect in point of interest the par-
" ties assembled for these purposes, or to break prisons in order
"to release particular persons without any other circumstance
" of aggravation, have not been holden to amount to levying war
' within the statute.
"And upon the samo principle, and within the same equity
" of the statute, I think it was very rightly holden by fivo of
" tho judges, that a rising of the weavers in and about London,
" to destroy all engine-looms, machines which enabled thoso of
"tho trade who made use of them to undersell thoso who had
" them not, did not amount te levying war within the statute,
" though groat outrages were committed on that occasion not
"only in London but in the adjacent counties, and tho nuigis-
" trates and peace officers were resisted and affronted."
Lord Hale states that question at length. Some new inven
tion for a loom had been Introduced in England, and the
peoplo ongaged in the employment of Bpinning and weaving
found that ono man could do the work of a dozen by that
invention, and they determined to destroy it. For that pur
pose thoy raised a mob that went about destroying all they
could. The peace officers attempted to suppress the riot, and
persons were identified and arrested and brought to trial.
That was held to be no insurrection, no treason, no resistance
of the government* although the officers were confronted and
were resisted.
The author proceeds to show why the judges did not regard
the offence as an insurrection :
" For those judges considered the whole affair merely as a
"private quarrel between men of the same trade'f.bout the use of
" a particular engine, which those concerned in the rising
" thought detrimental to them. Five of the judges, indeed,

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 307
" were of a different opinion ; but the attorney general thought
" proper to proceed against the defendants as for a riot only.
" Sec. 3. But every insurrection which in judgment of law is
" intended against the person of the king, be it to dethrone or
" imprison him, or oblige him to alter his measures of govern-
" ment, or to remove evil counsellors from about him, — these
' risings all amount to levying war within the statute, whether
" attended with the pomp ' and circumstances of open war or
" not, and every conspiracy to levy war for these purposes,
". though not treason within the clause of levying war, is yet
41 an overt act within the other clause of compassing the king's
"death." So the book goes on in tho samo strain, making the distinc
tion that unless tho purpose is resistance to tho law it is no
treason— no insurrection. Such parties are indictable, to bo
dealt with in tho courts of law, according to the ordinary course
of proceeding, but they are not in any mannor to bo considered
traitors or insurgents.
In this country have boon mado great advances in tho law of
treason. During the long disputes for tho succession to tho crown
of England, thero wero a great many constructive treasons, and
numbers of men were sacrificed not only in tho wars between
the houses of York and Lancaster for supporting one King or
the other, but down to later periods this " conspiring and im
agining the king's death," has sent many a man to the scaffold
or the gibbet who was innocent of any purposo to commit the
crimen Icvsw magistatis. Treason is an offence against the
very existence of the government itself — an attempt to over
throw it, to change its form or to prevent its particular meas
ures from being carried into effect. In the authority I have
quoted there ia given the form of an insurrection, which I will
read :
" The jurors for our present Sovereign Lord the King, upon
" tlieir oath present, that John Hamilton late of tho city of
" Carlisle, in the county of Cumberland esquire, otherwise
" called John Hamilton late of the same place gentleman,

308 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
"Alexander Abornothy late of the same place gentleman,
" otherwise called Alexander Abornethy late of the same place
" surgeon, and George Abemethy late of tho same place
"gentleman, being subjects of our said present most sorono
!' sovereign Lord George tho second by the grace of God of
" Great Britain, Franco and Ireland King, Defender of the
" faith and so forth, not having tho fear of God in thoir hearts,
" nor having any regard for the duty of thoir allegiance, but
" being moved and seduced by the instigation of the devil,
" as false traitors mid rebels against our present sovereign Lord
" the king that supreme, truo, natural, lawful and undoubted
" sovereign lord, entirely withdrawing that cordial love, and
"that true and duo obedience, fidelity and allegiance, which
"every subject of our said present sovereign lord the king
" should and of right ought to bear towards our said present
" sovereign lord and king : and also devising and (as much
"as in them lay) most wickedly and traitorously intending to
" change and subvert the rule and government of this king-
" dom duly and happily established under our said present
" sovereign lord the king, and also to depose and deprive our
" said present sovereign lord the king of his title, honour and
" royal state, and of his imperial rule and government of this
"kingdom, and also to put and bring our said present sovereign
"lord tho king to death aud final destruction, and to raise and
"exalt the person pretended 'to be Prince of Wales, during the
" life of James the second, late king of England, and so forth,
"and since the decease of the said late king, pretending to be,
" and taking upon himself the style and title of king of England
" by tho name of James the third, to the crown and to the
" royal state and dignity of king, and to the imperial rule and
" government ot this kingdom, upon the tenth day of October,
"in the nineteenth year of the reign of our said present sover-
" eign lord the king, at the city of Carlisle aforesaid, in the
" county of Cumberland aforesaid, with a great multitude of
" traitors and rebels against our said present sovereign lord
" tho king, (to wit :) to tho number of three thousand persons

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 300'
"(whoso names aro as yot unknown to the said jurors) being
"armed and arrayed in a warlike and hostile mannor, (to wit :)
" with colors displayed, dm ma beating, pipes playing, and with
"sword:!, clubs, guns, pistols and divers other weapons as well
" offensive as defensive, with force and arms, did falsely and trai-
" torously .assemble and join themselves against our said present
"sovereign lord tho king, and then and there with forco and
" arms did falsely and traitorously, and in a warlike and hostile
" manner array and dispose themselves. against our said present
"sovereign lord the king, and then and there with force and
" arms, in pursuance and ^execution of such their wicked and
" traitorous intention and purposes aforesaid, did falsely and
" traitorously prepare, order, wage and levy a public and cruel
"war against our wild present sovereign lord the king, then
"and there committing and. -perpetrating a miserable and cruel
"slaughter of and amongst tlie faithful subjects of our eaid
"present sovereign lord the king."
So that this of 1'on co of insurrection is purely a crimen lma>e
maji-xtalls — it is of resistance to tho government. Au unlawful
assemblage for the purpose of murder, is a felony, and liable
to be punished as such. But to make an insurrection, thero
must be treason. There must be a design to resist, the execu
tion of (lie law by its appointed agents and officers.
In the trial of Fries,- ono of the Pennsylvania insurgents in
170!),— subsequent, to the earlier trials in the whiskey insur
rection, this was the form of tho indictment.
"The grand inquest of tho United States of America, in and
"for the Pennsylvania district, upon their respective oaths
"and affirmations, do present, that John Fries, late of thei
" county of Bucks, in tho state and district of Pennsylvania,
" yeoman, owing allegianco to tho United States of America,
" wickedly devising, and intending tho peace and tranquility
" of tho said United States to disturb, and to prevent tho oxe-
" cution of the laws thereof within the aame, to wit, a law of the
'* said United States entitled an act to provide for the valuation
" of lands and dwelling houses, and the enumeration of slaves,

310 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
"" within the United Statea and also, a law of the said United
¦" Statea, entitled "an act to lay and collect a direct tax within,
" the United Statea" on the seventh day ot March, in the year
" of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and ninety-nine, in
41 the county of Northampton, in the State and district afore-
** said, and within the jurisdiction of this court, wickedly and
4i traitorously did intend to levy war against the said United
" States, within the same, and to fulfill and bring to effect the
" said traitorous intention of him the said John Fries. He the
4i said John Fries afterwards, that is to say, on the seventh day of
" March, in tho said year of our Lord one thousand seven hun-
"dredand ninety-nine, in tho said state, district and county
" aforesaid, and withiu the jurisdiction of this Court, with a
" great multitude of persons, whoso names aro to tho said great
" inquest unknown, to a great number, to wit, to tho number of
"one hundred persons, and upwards, armed aud arrayed in a
" warlike manner, that is to say, with guns, swords, and other
"warlike weapons, as well offensive and defensive, being then
" and there unlawfully and traitorously assembled, did traitor-
" ously assemble and combine against the said United States,
" and then and there with forco and anus, wickedly and trai-
" torously, and with the wicked and traitorous intention to op-
" poso and prevent, by means of intimidation and violonco the
" execution of the said laws of the said United States, within
" the same, did army and dispose themselves in a warlike and
" hostile manner against the said United States, and then aud
" there, with force and arms, in pursuance of such thie trai-
" torous intention, ho the said John Fries, with the said persona
" so as aforesaid, traitorously assembled, armed and arrayed in
" manner aforesaid, wickedly and traitorously did levy war
" against the said United States."
And so it goes on in the other counts.
Then, sir, comes the charge of the judge which is also given
in this appendix of the trial :
" By the constitution of the United States, article 3, section
" 3, it is declared, that treason against the United States shall.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 311
" consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to
" their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. By the 6ame
" section it is further declared " That no pereon shall bo con-
" victed of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses te
" the same overt act, or on confession in open court," and the
"congress shall havo power to declare the punishment of
treason. " Too much praise cannot be given to this constitutional
" definition of treason, and the requiring such full proof for
" conviction ; and declaring that no attainder of treason, 6hall
" work corruption ot blood or forfeiture, except during the life of
" the person attainted.
"This constitutional definition of treason is a question of law.
"Every proposition in any statute (whether more or less dis-
"tinct — whether easy or difficult to comprehend,) Ib always a
" (jucstion of law. What is tho true meaning or true import of
"any statute, and whether the caso stated comes withiu it, is a
"(jucstion of law and not of fact. The (jucstion In an indict-
" ment for levying war against, (or adhering to tho enemies of)
" tho United States, is whether tho facts stated do or do not
"amount to levying war," within tho contemplation and con-
" struction of tho constitution. It is tho duty of the court on
"this case, and in all criminal cases, to stato to tho jury, their
"opinion of the law arising on the tacts ; but the jury are to
" decide on the present and in all criminal cases, both the law
" and the facts, on their consideration of the whole case.
" It is the opinion of the court that any insurrection or rising
" of any body of people within the United States, to attain or
" effect, by force or violence, any object of a great public
"nature or of public and general {or national) concern, is a
" levying of war against the United States, within the contem
plation and construction of the constitution.
" On thi6 general position the court are of opinion that any
" such insurrection, or rising to resist, or to prevent by force or
" violence, the execution of any statute of the United States,
" for levying or collecting taxes, duties, imports or excise* ; or

812 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
" for calling forth the militia to execute tho laws of tho Union,
"or for any other object of a general nature or national con*
"corn, under any pretense, as that the statute was unjust, bur-
"thensome, oppressive or unconstitutional, is a levying of war
"against the United States, within the contemplation and con
struction of tho constitution.
" The reason for this ojiiuion is, that an insurrection to resist
•' or prevent by force the execution of any statute of tho United
"States, has a direct tendency to dissolve all tho bonds of
"society to destroy all order and all laws; and also all security
"for the lives, liberties and property of tho citizens of the
" United. States.
"The court aro of opinion that tho assembling bodies of
" men, armed and arrayed in a Avarlike manner for purposes
" only of a private nature, is not treason ; although tho judges
" or other peace officers should be insulted or resisted, or even
" great outrages committed to the ]>evsons or property of our
" citizens. " The true criterian to determine whether acts committed are
" treason, or a less offence, (as a riot) is the quo animo or the
" intention with which the people did assemble. When tbe
" intention is unive fal or general as to effect some object of a
"general public nature, it will be treason, and cannot bo con-
" sidered, construed, or reduced to a riot. The commission of
" any number of felonies, riots, or other misdemeanors, cannot
" alter tlieir nature so aa to make them amount to treason — and
"on the other hand if the intention and acts combined amount
" to treason, they cannot bo sunk down to a felony or riot. Tho
" intention with which any acts (as felonies, the destruction of
" property or tho like) are done, will show to what class of
" crimes tho case belongs.
"The court are of opinion that if a body of peoplo conspire
" and meditate an insurrection to resistor oppose the execution
" of any statuloof the United States by force, that they aro only
"guilty of a " high misdemeanor, but if thoy proceed to carry
" such intentions into execution by forco, that they are guilty

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 313
" of the treason of levying war, and -the quantum of tho forco
" employed neither lessons, nor increases the crime, by one
hundred or one thousand persons is wholly immaterial.
" The court aro of opinion that a combination or conspiracy
'to levy war against the United States, is not treason, unless
' combined with an attempt, to carry such combination or con-
' spiracy into execution ; — some actual force or violence must be
' used in pursuance of such design to levy war — but that is al-
' together immaterial whether the force used is sufficient, to
' effectuate the object ; any force, connected with the intention,
' will constitute the crime of levying war.
" To support the present indictment against the prisoner at
' the bar, two facts must be found to your satisfaction — First,
' that some time before the finding of the indictment, there was
' an insurrection (or rising) of a body of people in the county
'of Northampton, in this state, and with intent to oppose and
' })revent, by means of intimidation and violence, the execu-
' tion of a law of the United States, entitled " an act to provide
'for the valuation of lands and dwelling houses — the enumera-
' tion of slaves within the United States ;" or of another law
' of the United, States, entitled "an act to lay and collect a
' direct tax within the United States," and that some acts of
' violence were committed by some of tbe people so- assembled,
' with intent to oppose and prevent, by means of intimidation
' and violence, the execution. of both, or of one of the said laws
'of Congress.
" In the consideration of this fact, you are to consider and
'determine with what extent the people, assembled at Bethle-
'hern, whether to effect by force a public or a private measure.
" The intent with which tho j">cople assembled at Bethlehem
' in Northampton, is a necessary ingredient to thefactof assem-
'bling, to bo proved liko any other fact, by the declarations of
' thoso who assembled, or by acts dono by them. When tho
' question is what is ' a man's intent,' it may bo proved by a
' numbor of connected circumstances, or by a single fact.
" If from a careful examination of tho evidence, you shall bo

814 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
" convinced that the real object and intent of the people assem-
"bled at Bethlehem, was of a public nature, which-it certainly
" was, if they assembled with intent to prevent the execution
" of both the above mentioned laws of Congress, or either of
" them, it must then be proved to your satisfaction that the
" prisoner at the bar incited, encouraged, promoted, or assisted
" in the insurrection or rising of the people at Bethlehem, and
" the terror they carried with them, with intent to oppose and
" prevent, by means of intimidation and violence, the execution
" of both the above mentioned laws of congress, or either of
" them ; and that some force was used by some of the people
" assembled at Bethlehem.
But, sir, the construction given on the trial of Fries, to tho
language of the clause of the constitution of the United Statee,
establishes the construction to be given to tho language in the
constitution of North Carolina, the words used being the same.
Treason or insurrection here, against the government of the
state under our constitution, is precisely tlie Bamo as treason or
insurrection against tho government of tho United States undor
tho federal constitution. So sir, I object to any ovidenco such
its Is proposed to bo elicited by tho question, until It shall bo
shown, or was required to bo shown In tho trial of Burr, whore
it was alleged that there was a conspiracy to commit treason,
that there has been some overt act of treason committed. On tho
order of introducing evidence, it waB hold on the trial of Burr
that the party should show some overt act, — levying war and
that until thoy had dono that it was futile to consume the time
of tho court in talking about a conspiracy. If the conspiracy
was to levy war they must first show an overt act of insurrec
tion and then the evidence might be permitted to prove that
the conspiracy was not intended for any private purpose but
was intended for the broader purpose of resisting the authority
of the government. I say therefore that this is an important
question in this case.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer would atate

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 315
to the counsel that the half hour prescribed by the rules is
concluded. Senator WARREN. Mr. Chief Justice I think that the
discussion can not be confined within the time allotted by the
rule ; and as this is one of the most important questions that
Will arise in the progress of the trial, I move that the time for
discussion be extended indefinitely. For my part I desire to
hear a full discussion of the subject.
A sufficient number seconding: the motion. I
The CHIEF JUSTICE put the question on the motion of
senator Warren and it was decided in the affirmative.
Mr. GRAHAM, [resuming.] I merely desire Mr. Chief
Justice, to call attention to. some other authorities which I have
not here at this moment but they will bo here during tlxe
course of the discussion. We are very confident in the opinion,
that we can maintain the position upon authority that insurrec
tion is treason and that unless an overt act of resistance to tho
government by armed force bo shown, there can be no pretence
of insurrection, no matter what offences may have been com
mitted in tho way of riots, murders, or any-thing else. They
amount to nothing in an investigation ot whothor there was
or was not an insurrection, without the other evidence.
Mr. BOYDEN. Mr. Chiof Justico, I concur with the coun
sol for tho managers who has j ust addressed you, that this is a most
important question and I feel under obligations to the court for
having extended the timo for its discussion indefinitely. I
look upon it aa tho counsel does as the great question in fhe
cause. In order to comprehend the purport of the point raised I
desire that you, Mr. Chief Justice and senators, should under
stand the ground on which the interrogatory is asked the witness.
It is alleged on the part of the respondent, that there were
secret societies or organizations in the county of Alamance,
consisting of hundreds of men — perhaps the majority of the
voters ot that county — that their object was as we allege, not
to take vengeance upon any particular individual, but to defeat

Si 6 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
tho execution of the laws. One waa known by the name of tho
"White Brotherhood." That name is Mgniflcant and, na ono
can fieo, nIiowh fo you what wa* itw object. Ah wo allege and
expect, fo prove lis 'object was that the laws In force, giving
rights to tho colored peoplo woro to bo annulled and destroyed
by tlm operation of tlilw secret organization, Another ansoolatlon
was called tho "Constitutional Union Guard," and wo expect
lo show that in this association tho momborsworo sworn by tho
most solemn oaths when thoy camo into it, to stand by the
constitution of the United States and tho constitution of the
state ofjNorth Carolina as those instruments existed previous
to the acts of reconstruction ; that thoir object was in -fact to
resist all those laws touching reconstruction so far as they exist
in Nort)i Carolina and to deprive tho colored race of their
rights as secured under our present constitution and laws.
That we say was Avhat the Union Guard was sworn to do
tinder most solemn oaths. Then there was the " Invisible Em
pire." That name itself is very significant. The Invisible
Empire was to be an Empire within an Empire. Its mem
bers were to act secretly and their object was to set up an
Empire 'to overthrow and resist all these laws of reconstruction
and destroy their effect by this secret combination. Wo
expect to offer full testimony before this court to show that
these influences existed ; and tho first point in this case
is to show that these three secret organizations did exist
in the county of Alamance. I j)ut tho question expecting to
pvovo not only that they organized theso societies bore, but
with th$ very objects which I havo stated and that they
attem]">ted to carry out their objects by force — seizing white
men, who were standing by the reconstruction laws, aud bang
ing them ; by, seizing colored men and chastizing them ; by
fifties if not by hundreds they committed these act of violence,
and their solo object was to annul the reconstruction laws and
the amendment of the state constitution of North Carolina bv
which colored men were given political rights. ' '
Tho qucettion I say was asked with that view, and how aro

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 817
wo mot \ Wo aro met by reply that this would not constitute
" treason." To that I respond by laying that thero woro largo
numbers engaged In those soorot organizations and. thoir very
objoot was te ovortlirow tho laws of tho country and provont
their execution. It Is true, those men went In companies of
fifties and hundreds and endeavored to carry out their unlawful
purposea in auch a way as to prevent deteotion, Bnt that, they
say, does not constitute treason as they understand the lawa
of the United States and does not constitute treason against the
Btato of North Carolina. I contend that it does.
But I have another answer which I will make first. It is
no matter whether this constitutes treason or not. The act of
January 29th, 1870, provides " that the governor ia hereby
"authorized whenever in hia judgment the civil authorities in
" any county are unable to protect ita citizens in the enjoyment
" of life and property, to declare such county to be in a state of
" insurrection and to call into active service the militia of the
" state to such an extent as may become necessary to supjiress
" such insurrection ; and in 6uch case tho governor is further
" authorized to call upon the president for such assistance if any,
"as, inhis judgment, may bo necessary to enforce the law."
Now whether what we expect to show comes up fully to the
definition of treason under the laws of tho United States, is not
tho main question in this case. Tho question is whether it is
insurrection under the definition contained in this act. For
the legislature have made a definition of what is to bo termed
insurrection in North Carolina. Tho gentleman shakos bin
head. He may dissent when his time cornea ; but, sir, I say
that North Carolina has undertaken to determine by its legisla
ture what ahall conatitnte insurrection in North Carolina, and it
is indifferent whether It be treason according to the lawa of tho
United Statea or not. And aa tho question is whether it is insur
rection, the great question now is, ( and we expeot to satisfy
tho court boyond a doubt of tho fact,) whether that very stato
of things existed in Alamenco whloh was contemplated by act
of tho legislature, and which authorized the governor if, In his
22

818 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
opinion, there was such an insurrection to call forth the militia
to suppress it, and if necessary, also to call upon' the president
to aid him.
There can be nothing clearer to my mind than that the leg
islature had the power to make this definition of insurrection,
and it is a matter of perfect indifference to my client, so far as
this case is concerned, to determine whether it would amount
to treason under the laws of North Carolina, or under the laws
of the United States, for I take it for granted, that no man, no
governor, or offioer, is to be impeached for attempting to carry
out an act of the legislature ; in other words, no officer is to bo
impeached for an honest mistake in judgment. I say, thon,
that this act of the assembly contemplated the very state of
things which existed in the county of Alamanco at the timo
the proclamation was issued and at tho timo tho govornor took
military possession thereof, as I say he had a right to.
I will first call tho attention of tho court to this distinction :
according to tho constitution of tho United States, It is congroaa
which has tho power to call out tho militia or call for troopB to
put down Insurrection. Our constitution makes it different.
This power is entrusted to the governor by our organic law,
and he had a right undor it as well as by this act, when in his
judgment there was an insurrection, to call out tho military as
he might have done without the aid of the legislature. But he
saw proper to do no such thing ; he waited until the legislature
had defined what would constitute insurrection in North Car
olina and what would authorize him to declare the county in a
state of insurrection, to call for the military ; so that whether
this be treason strictly so called, is a matter not necessary to be
determined here. But, in my judgment, we shall bo able to
show beyond all controversy, I think, that this was treason
under the laws of the United States and as defined in the laws
of North Carolina. What do we allege was the object ? It was
to prevent the enforcement of that part of the constitution which
secured to the colored race their1 political rights. That was the
object aa we allege. And what is tho anBwor they givo to this ?

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. ,810
Why, if hundreds or thousand8 combine and attempt tho
accomplishment of this object, in disguise and in the night time,
it does not amount to treason. Can the law be so unjust to
itself as to adopt such a definition as that? Instead of its
being a definition in favor of these insurgents, it is directly
against them. The reason of the law would make it worse for
them and make it a still stronger case of insurrection that they
should attempt to do it by hundreds and thousands in the right
time and in disguise, by which their persons could not be
known and could not bo identified. Bear in mind that the
object is resistance to the laws, not individual vengeance;
for that is not what we allege at all.
This question of treason, Mr. Chief Justice, has been sprung
upon us, and we aro not prepared to argue it at this moment.
It is tho great question — the all-important question of the case,
and I trust it will not ba settled hero to-day by the decision of
this tribunal ; that we will have an opportunity not only to
discuss it until tho time arrives for an adjournment to-day,
but that this will be tho business of to-morrow, and that wo
will bo enabled to look fully into tho subject and be allowed to
produco our authorities.
, Tho whole caso turns upon tho decision of this question. If
wo aro not porniittod to show that there were thoso secret
combinations, and that thoy were entered into for tho purposes
which I have declared in this case, the balance of the timo
occupied must be" short ; so that, it being the main point of tho
case, I trust every indulgence will be granted to the respondent,
that each of his counsel may have full time to examine and
to submit to this high court his views upon the subject.
These are off-hand remarks, made without any expecta
tion that the case was to come to this point to-day.
Mr. MERRIMON. Mr. Chief Justice and senators, I join
in the regret of the learned counsel ^hat we were not advised
, Bv some means that the point now under consideration would
be raised to-day, ao that the authoritiea might bo produced in
support of sneh arguments as may be submitted on either side.

820 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
With all respect to ray venerable friend who has- Addressed!
tho court, I can but wish that he had argued the case a little
more and not atated quite so much. He luas made a very good
speech, but he has consumed nearly flit tfw* time lit Btating what
he expects to prove. I do not want to anticipate what he expects
to prove, but I desire to debate the naked question before
the court.
In the first place, ft is alleged in tho first two articles of
impeachment that the accused proclaimed tho inhabitants of
Alamance and Caswell counties in a state of insurrection. Tho
articles declare that that act on his1 part was wilfully and cor
ruptly false — that in fact there was no insurrection in either of
these counties. According to the general principles of law,
any evidence, tending to show that there was an insurrection is
competent, and it is equally manifest that no other evidence in
the first instance, is competent in that respect. In this view,
it becomes a matter of the gravest importance to determine
what is insurrection ; for if the respondent here offers evidence
to show that there were combinations in the counties of Ala
mance and Caswell, or to show that offences were committed
which do not constitute insurrection, I apprehend that it is
very clear that such evidence is not competent, and there cat*
be no pretence that it ought to be heard in court.
It seems to me, sir, with all respect to my brethren on the
other side, that they misapprehend what is meant under ^the
constitution of the United States and the constitution of the
state of North Carolina by insurrection, and that they are
comfounding insurrection with other offences known to the
laws as well as to the constitution of both governments. There
is, sir, such an offence as a " rout." When three or moro
porsons assemble together for the purpose of doing some unlaw
ful act, and they disperse without doing it, it is a rout. Then
too, there is a " riot." When three or more persons assemble
to do some unlawful act and they proceed to do that unlawful
act, that is a riot.
It is important, sir, in view of the argument I propose to

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 821
submit, to keep these distinctions in view. There is a "rout"
— an assemblage to do an unlawful act, and the offenders dis
perse without accomplishing it. There is a " riot" — an as
semblage to do an unlawful act, which they proceed to accom
plish. If the unlawful assemblage is to kill a man, and they
do kill him, the act is a riot and the offenders may be tried for
that offence. So, if there were an organization to kill one
party, to drown another, and to whip and scourge fifty others,
and persons assembled to do this did not accomplish their pur
pose, bnt dispersed without, tlieir act is a rout. But, sir, no
lawyer would say, if instead of dispersing, they had gone on
aaid killed and drowned and scourged, their act would be an
insurrection. The offences of riot and insurrection are entirely
distinct, as much so as night and day, and the rules of law ap
plicable to insurrection are as well laid down by courts as are
any other rules which obtain.
What then is an insurrection ? An insurrection is where
there is a combination for the purpose and with the view to
resist the government ; for insurrection is a crime leveled at
the government directly. I apprehend that the technical dis
tinction between insurrection and treason is about this:
where there is a combination to resist a particular law, as
for the collection of taxes, and that particular law is
resisted by force and open violence, that is insurrection. If
there is a general movement against the government, with the
purpose of overturning it or destroying any of its absolute
powers aa a government, and force is employed to that end,
then it amounts to treason. The distinction between treason
and insurrection is a very nice one indeed. I do not know of
any other difference than the one I havo stated, if there be any.
Where there is opposition to a particular law, or a part Millar
class of laws, and there is a combination of citizens to prevent
their execution, and they proceed to resistance by force and
violence, that resistance does not go to the life of the govern
ment, And the offenoe ig only insurrection. Bnt where tlie
unlawful combination is to resist the government in a matter

322 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
that is vital to its existence, then the act of resistance becomes'
treason. This definition of insurrection, it seems to me, is not
only in accordance with the common sense view, but it ia that
which ia understood in this country and in England. And I
beg to refer to two authoritiea which happen to be at hand,
and the first ia that of Webster as found in his unabridged
dictionary in these words :
" A rising against civil or political authority ; the open and
" active opposition of a number of persons to the execution of
" law in a city or state. It ia equivalent to aedition, except,
" that aedition expresses a less extensive rising. It differs from
" rebellion, for the latter expresses a revolt, or an attempt to
" overthrow the government, tfce."
That seems to mo to embrace tho distinction I Insisted upon
a moment ago. Then he adds :
" Insurrection is, however, used with such latitude as to com-
" prebend either sedition or rebellion."
It is manifest that Webster, in determining upon his defini
tion, has drawn upon the legal definitions contained in the
books and from the decisions of the judges, in order to make
it as he has. I read next from one of the highest authorities.
Vattel on the Laws of Nations, 288 :
" H the rage of the malcontents be particularly leveled at
"the magistrates or other officers vested with the pnblic
" authority, and they proceed to a formal disobedience or acts
" of open violence, this is called sedition ; when it spreads,
"when it infests the majority of the inhabitants of a city or
" province, and gains such strength that even the sovereign
" himself is no longer obeyed, it is usual, &c, to distinguish
" such disorder by the name of insurrection."
I apprehend that in all of the authorities in England or in
this country, whether we have reference to the authorities of un
der the federal government or under state governments, a no!
more thorough and precise definition could be given of irisurrec-
tionthan is contained in these two which I have cited from Web
ster and from Vattel. "' ' '"" ¦ ' '¦'

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 323
In order- to determine what insurrection is in the eye of our
state constitution, whero else should we go but to the constitu
tion of the United States and to the authorities which have ex
pounded it ? Where else shalL we look other than to England,
that country from which we derive our notions of law mainly,
to seek an exposition of what is meant by that term as incorpo
rated into our own constitution ? I apprehend no where else.
When we see the word in our constitution we treat it there as
meaning exactly what iB meant by the term in the constitution
of tho United States and as used in England for the same pur
poso for which it was used when it waa incorporated in the
constitution of tho United States. Thon how lias it been treated ?
How has it been understood in the constitution of the United
States ? There have boon various insurrections in this country,
There was tho Shay rebellion which was an open defiance of
tho authority of government, by the rising up of an army
of men [numbering somo ten thousand to subvert the law,
prevent the courts from being held, and drive lawyers from
the exercise of their' profession. It was not a combination to
do it merely, but an actual army, and the proceeding on the
part of this army was to prevent the holding of the courts,
and to prevent the doing of such acts as .they desired to pre
vent. Take the case of insurrection in Rhode Island. There
was Doit claiming to be the true governor, and those un
der him claiming to be the lawful officers of the state. They
assembled in force to the number of thousands, organized for
the express purpose of subverting the government which was
organized under the old. charter' — claiming that it was not the
lawful government of that state. They said that the people
had held a convention, that that convention was lawfully organ
ized, and that Dorr was the lawful governor of the state,, and
that he and his followers appeared in open resistance to the
chartered government.
Then, sir, take the case ot the Whiskey Insurrection in west
ern Pennsylvania, that occurred in the days of Washington, and
when I say that, it means something, because he and his compeers

824 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS. •
made the constitution and they understood what was meant by
it, end above all other men they wero the ones to explain its
meaning. That insurrection went on for weeks and months,
and its supporters sought to drive tho revenue officers from the
Btate of Pennaylvania and prevent them from exercising their au
thority to collect the taxes. They assembled in armed force for the
purpose of resisting the law, and this was permitted for months
before the region was declared to be in a Btate of insurrection.
The civil authorities were allowed to exercise their powers
as best they might, and it was not until months had passed and
the civil power had exhausted itself in its efforts to carry out
the law that the proclamation of insurrection was issued. Then
the military were called in aid, but officers were specially 6ent
along to have the charge of the military, so as to see that they
co-operated with the civil authorities in the execution of their
processes. That was the exposition given by Washington.
There was another insurrection in Pennsylvania of a similar
character. There was an open and violent rising up against
the officers of the law, an open, notorious' declaration that the
law should not be executed. And, sir, every case in this
country and every case in England that can be cited for the
purpose of showing insurrection, will show beyond all question
or equivocation that invariably where the offence was termed
insurrection thero was a rising up against the government to
subvert the government or some particular law.
So here, inaurrection under our constitution, moana a com
bination — and not only a combination, but a combination to
subvert some particular law or laws, or to subvert the govom«
ment ; or, to make reference to the suggestion of my friend on
tho other side, to subvert the reconstruction act, and tho state
govornment organized in pursuance of that 5 and there must
be not only a combination to do it, but an aotual rising up and
exercise of force to that end. That is what the constitution
means by " insurrection." Insurrection meGM, with reference to
the statement the gentleman makes, that there should .not only
bo a purposo to subvert the reconstruction acta and our new

TRIAL OF' WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 828
government under them, but that the party actually proceeded
to the execution of their purpose with anned force in resistance
of the law. If they can show that the question they 'ask is
perfectly competent. , > •
Now my learned and venerable friend on the other side has
said that they expect to show there were certain secret organi
zations in the counties of Alamance and Caswell for the pur
pose of subverting this government. If they can 6how any
thing of that sort, it is competent for them to show it, provided
they show first, some act of insurrection. They must show,
6ir, what amounts to a levying of war. They must show
that these secret organizations there, in the nigh ttime or in
the day time, appeared in great numbers and exhibited, in a
violent way, a purpose of resistance to the laws. They
cannot show that A B was killed, that C D was drowned,
and that E F was whipped, until they first show an overt act
on the part of this combination or some of its members for the
purpose of resisting the execution of the law, or of subverting
the state government under the reconstruction acts. That doc
trine was expressly hold by Chief Justice Marshall in the case
of Burr, refered to by my learned associate a few moments ago.
The existence of an insurrection is the point hero at issue. If
they fieek to show an insurrection, they must first show the in
itial steps in it — tho existance of an overt act, and thon it is
competent for them to prove what particular acts were done in
furtherance of that insurrection, aa that a certain party was
killed, that another was hanged, another drowned, aud others
whipped and scourged. But in the offer of the counsel on the
part of the respondent, they only propose to show that there
was a combination to whip poor colored men, or scourge a
particular class of white men and to kill others. I say it is
utterly inoompetent to show that, unless they show at the same
time that this was done in aid of an insurrection; and when
they have shown the existance of the insurrection, those acts
become a part i of •« the insurrectionary' movement, > and are, ad
missible* They Are not competent until then, because they

826' COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
are not germaln to the charges made in the articles of impeach
ment, v
My venerable friend seeing the force of this argument and
understanding the law as we understand it seeks shelter for the
accused behind the act of the legislature known as the insurrec
tion act of North Carolina. He says that " if we cannot show
" there was an insnr rection there, as understood within the
" terms of the constitution of the United States and Englan d
" nevertheless the legislature of North Carolina has undertaken
" to interpret what is an insurrection ; thoy have passed an act
" conferring on the governor certain powers and he must be gov-
" erncd by that act and these legal notions of insurrection
" as understood by the framors of tho constitution and tho
' makerB of our laws and by courts of justice must be ignored."
I apprehend that that idea will not go down with any lawyer.
I say that such a suggestion shocks the moral sense of any man
who has any regard for the constitution of his country. I ap
prehend tliat the executive haa too much intelligence to think
that such an explanatory act of tho legislature would confer upon
him one mite of power. I give him credit for too much eenso
to suppose that he could act upon such a flimsey pretense or
Biiggostion. Suppose, to show how absurd the idea is, that
this act called the insurrection act should say that if two or
three men should assemble together and agree to whip C D
that shall constitute an insurrection and the governor shall have
power to call out the militia to put down that insurrection ;
would my learned friend pretend that that was an insurrection
contemplated by the constitution and that it conferred one par
ticle of power upon the executive. Yet what they contend for
here goes the whole length of that absured proposition.
They say that the passage of this act was in contemplation
of the fact that there were unlawful assemblages in Alamance
and Caswell counties whereby colored men were abused, and
certain white men were abused in various ways, aud that the
act was passed to prevent that particular, class pf offences,
and that they called those offences insurrection; and they

TRIAL OF WILLIAM tfc HOLDEN. 327
empowered the governor to bring out the militia to sup
press this crime. That is the length and breadth and
essence of the proposition laid down by my learned friend
on the other side. It ia too loose. It will not do. It is
ignoring tho constitution. It is such a manifest ignoring of
tho organic law, and prostitution of the power, if it were
intended on the part of tho legislature, that it amounts to noth
ing, and would protect nobody. Who would undertake to
exorcise power undor it ? It would bo absolutely null and void.
But my friend says ho oxpeots to show that those orgalza-
tlons to which ho alludoa woro for the purposo of aubverting
public authority. I Bay that ho may prove their acts, but ho
must first tako the Initial stops hy showing that there was an insur
rection — opon violonco to resist tho law, and thon ho can go on
and show thoso particular acta, but not until that time. Ilo
saya that tho issue hero is, whether or not there were these
particular organizations which he has mentioned ; and if that
be doterniined then it conBtitutes an insurrection there, ns
understood in the United States and England, and under thie
act in North Carolina, that then their case is made out and
they mako good thoir defense. I deriy it squarely and abso
lutely. I say, that if the senate will allow them to go into evi
dence of that sort, the respondent can prove anything.
But, sir, let us consider this act a moment. I undertake to
say that this act confers no such power, that it does not under
take to confer any such power and that it bears no such con
struction. Let us look at the question under the light of the
legislation that has been had theretofore ; and in the first place
let us read the provision about insurrection.
" The governor shall be the commander-in-chief knd have
"power to call out the militia to execute the law " — that is
the first thing for which he may call out the militia— "to sup
press riots "— that is what I was talking about awhile ago— <* or
insurrection' and to repel' invasion." He may use tho militia
for theft' purposes, first to execute tho law, second to suppress
riots, third to 'suppress' insurrection, and fourth to repel invito

82S

COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.

sioa. I beg to call the attention of the senate to the fact that
the act in its very term8 makea a distinction between a riot and
an insurrection. The framers of the constitution themselves
well knew the distinction between tlie two and therefore the
instrument which they made provides that the governor shall
not only have the power to call out the mihtia to suppress
insurrnction, but to suppress riots as well, if there should be
any in the state that the civil authority could not put down.
Suppose there were a secret combination to whip colored men
and white men or to commit murder — to kill every man of a
particular class, sir, who would pretend that that was
an insurrection. No man who understands anything about
the terms used in our constitution, would pretend that
such a combination was insurrection. It would bo absurd
to do so. But suppose such a combination existed in Alamance
and Caswell. In the first place the civil authorities must
exhaust their power to suppress it. There is no right to call the
military out to suppress it until the civil authorities are unable
to execute their offices. Whenever that riot becomes so pow
erful by reason of the numbers engaged in it, whenever
they resort to such force by way of resistance to the civil
officers — the judges, magistrates, sheriffs, constables or police
officers — as that the processes of the court cannot run and that
the officer with his ordinary posse cannot arrest tho rioters,
then, sir, and not till then, the governor must, in the exercise
of a sound, honest and patriotic discretion, use tlie militia for
the purpose of suppressing the riot. So in the case of an insur
rection. When tho insurrection is in tho embryonic state,
when those engaged in it are simply combining for an unlawful
purpose, he cannot call out the militia to suppress it as an insur
rection. Such a thing as a secret insurrection was never heard
of in this country nor anywhere else. I say that • while it
remains secret and inactive, yea, I go further, and eay if it is
inaugurated by open violence for an insurrectionary purpose,
even then the governor shall not call out the militia until tho
civil authorities have exhausted their power and the forces of

TOTAL OF WTLLTAM W. HOLDEN. 829
the insurrectionists have become so great that the civil authority
cannot operate ; then it is his right and his duty to fall back
upon the armed forces of the state to maintain the majesty of
the law. And even then, sir, that the military authority must
only come in aid of the civil authority. Why do I say that %
Became by provieion of our constitution martial law and the
absolute suspension of tlie civil authority cannot prevail in
North Carolina. Those who framed this constitution provided
that under no contingency was the writ of habeas corpus
to be suspended. Martial law is the absolute suspension of
civil authorit. Whatever is the will of the military com
mander, if martial law is proclaimed in Alamance and Cas
well, becomes the law for the time being in that locality.
But under our constitution, martial law cannot be proclaimed,
for in terms, it states that the writ of Jiabeas corpus shall not be
suspended. What is that writ ? It is a mandate running from
a judge, commanding a person who holds a person in custody
to bring that party before the judge to the end that his deten
tion and arrest be enquired into and he be turned loose if he
is unlawfully held, or remanded into custody if he is justly
held by warrant of law. It runs everywhere. It runs abso
lutely. There is 110 qualification about it in North Carolina.
If there be no suspension of it how can the will of the governor
prevail under martial law, for he is bound to obey the writ of a
judge to bring a party before him. Is it not manifest to every
North Carolinian, that if the writ of habeas corpus shall never
be suspended, martial law can never prevail within the limits
of this state? I say, therefore, that when an insurrection
becomes so formidable 'as that it undertakes to resist the author
ity of the officers of the law and when the militia ia ealled in,
it cornea in aa an aid to the civil authority and only aa an aid
because our constitution has placed this limitation upon the
powers of the executive and veiy wisely, sir, aa the eventa of
last summer have shown. That ja not ao under tho govern-:
ment of the United States. The ordinary writ of habeas cor-.
pus runs in the United States^ but martial law mayprevail when*

«?30 . COURT OF .TMPEACnM^ENTS.
the congress of the United States shall provide by law, that the
writ may be suspended, in parti 3ular localities or that it may be
suspended all over the, Union ; but it must be by the .express
authority of the representatives of the people,; When, that is
attained the president may issue his proclamation,, declaring
under the constitution and by virtue of the act of congress, that
martial law shall prevail. Thereafter the writ of habeas corpus
is silent and the civil voice is not heard. But that is not the
case under the constitution of the state of North Carolina, aB I
have already remarked.
I desire to detain you but a few moments longer to call your
attention to this Insurrection act. I want to read that act in
connection with tho milltury act to show its intent and meaning.
Lot It bo bo understood that at tho timo our government under
tho reconstruction acts of congress went into operation, tho
militia of tho Btate was absolutely disorganized. Wo only had
a militia unorganized as defined by tho constitution itself, and
that reorganization of it was difficult when it is considered that
our free population was greatly enlarged by tho liberation of tho
slaves of the state ; and legislation was necessary in order to
reorganize the militia under the new government, bo as to consist
of colored militia in their place and white militia in tlieir place,
as the constitution provided that the militia of the state should
consist of all men in the state whether white or black over 21
and under 40 years of age.
At tho first session of the legislature after the constitution
went into operation, an act was passed for the purpose of
organizing the militia, which is chapter 22, page 135, acts of
1868. It goes on to provide how the militia shall be organized,
and apprehending, it seems, some disorders under the new
government, it provided for a detailed militia— that is, upon
- tlie certificate of five magistrates in any particular county, the
governor may order a detail of so many men tOjgo, into that
particular county for the purpose of aiding, the cjyijl, authorities.
This act provides in terms that this detailed militia, shall only
be used in aid of the civil authorities. . Jn, tba,t , respecjt the act

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W.1 HOLDEN. '$31
(
ia only in affirmance of the constitution which providee in the
same language that it shall only be used in aid of the civil
authorities, for martial law cannot prevail for any other purpose.
It goes on to provide furthermore how this detailed militia
shall be organized, how it shall bo .paid, that it shall wear a
particular badge, and how it Bhall cooperate with the civil
authorities in the execution of their duties. It is manifest that
it waa intended it ehould harmonize with the constitution, and
that it was enacted in pursuance of the constitution in that
respect. Ib it not natural to infer, and is it not the rule of
construction that where an act is passed by the legislature it
shall bo presumed that the legislature intended to mako it con
form to tho constitution ? It ia not only a rule of courtesy
between co-ordinate branches of tho government, but it is a mlo
of law that whoro an act of tho legislature will boar -a construc
tion that conforms to tho constitution, that that act shall receive
that construction, and that another construction which cornea
in conflict with the constitution Bhall be ignored and repudiated.
Therefore, if this insurrection act, chapter 27, page 04, acts of
1809 and '70, will bear any such construction as will make it
conform to the organic law in reference to insurrection that
construction must be put upon it, and that is the only ono
which this court can put upon it.
But let us see if this act will bear such a construction as to
make it harmonize with the provision of our organic law. In
order to make it conform to the provision of the constitution to
suppress insurrection, there must bo actual insurrection. Will
anybody deny that proposition ? I say that in order that the
governor may be authorized by the general assembly to call
out the, militia to suppress insurrection, there must be insurrec
tion as defined by tlie constitution of this state and of the United
States. That is bo manifest that I suppose it will not be denied.
But let ua see what this act provides : - >¦' ¦'¦ ¦
TTho governor 'is hereby authorized and empowered when-
" everdn his judgment the civile authorities* in any county are
" tukabhvto protect its- citizens in ! the enjoymentvof 'lifo'and

832 COURT ,OFv,lMBKAi)HMEN{r*,

C

"property, tofdeclare such county to* bo in<Mteto#f jnaurrec-
" tion, and to call into active service, thei militia of the, atate to
"such an extent as may )become necessary, to suppress auch
"insurrection." . . . . >;:,. ..,-,,. . ¦ .,„. ..•<;•. ...
What does that mean? What construction, must be., put
upon these words ? Every senator here sitting in his place is
a judge. According to the rule I have just laid down tliis
court must make the act harmonize with the constitution if it
can. It provides that the governor shall have power to call out
the military to suppress insurrection. Tho fact that the words
are inserted " whenever in his judgement the civil authorities
" in any county are uuable to protect its citizens in the enjoy-
' " ment of life and property" cannot alter the definition of the
word insurrection and why ? Because, sir, if you give those
words the force and effect of what is meant by " insurrection,"
then you put this act without the pale of the constitution
which you have no right to do if you can give any other con
struction which will make it harmonize with the constitution. I
say thon, that this aection of the act ahould have (and mani
festly it was ao Intended and no othor construction can bo given
to It than that) tho construction contemplated by tho constitu
tion. And what Is that t That whom tliuru wiu such a demon
stration on tho part of any portion of thu people that tho civil
power could not HHscrt haulf, in that contingency It would bo
proper for the governor to call out tho mllltla to sustain tho civil
authority nnd bring liiHiirroutioiiUta to nnswur for tho offences
thoy had committed, not against tho Individual but against tho
government. I Hay that this act, If you put any construction upon
it which U to conform it te tho constitution, provides that only
in caso of insurrection shall tho govornor call out troops.
And I may add a suggestion hero, though it is not
material, that this act shows anothor thing ; that it was framed
upon tho mllltla act and upon another act In roferonce to going
masked, ^c, and that it was intended that tho militia should
oooporato with the civil authorities in executing tho law, .
So, I say, sir, in tho first place, tho roopondout must show an

TRIAL OF WTLLIAM W. HOLDEN. 333
act of insurrection — an act of rising up against the government
or against the law or a particular class of laws of the govern
ment, in such force that the civil authorities cannot operate and
perform their functions without the aid of the military ; and '
when they have shown that the sheriff was resisted and the
judge was resisted, and the magistrates were resisted, and
the police were resisted by such force that the posse comitatus
could not execute a process, then, sir, they have shown such an
insurrection in that locality as would warrant the governor
issuing his proclamation. I say " locality " for he cannot
proclaim a " county " in insurrection. There is no phrase
ology in the constitution that authorizes a proclamation of a
county in insurrection.
Let me repeat : after they have shown that there was a combina
tion to resist the law, that there was an overt forcible act to resist
the civil authorities and that were unable by a posse comitatus to
make the insurgents obey the law, then I say the governor
may by virtue of the constitution and by virtue of this act,
(though the act is unnecessary as it only conforms to the con
stitution) call out the the military in aid of the civil authorities
and restore order and the supremacy of tho law.
I wish to advert to another matter. Tho ground taken by my
learned friend Is that tho executive Is tho solo judge of when
there ia an insurrection, that his action shall not be questioned
hy any co-ordinate branch of the government. Sir, tho lan
guage of tho act Is only In affirmance of tho constitution and
doo* not enlarge tho governor's powers beyond what thoy aro
In tho constitution, and I thank God that neither- tho legisla
ture nor any other authority In this Btate havo the right to
confer upon tho executive any snoh power. Tho idea, I sup
pose, grew out of the ruling of tho chief justice in the aev- .
eral matters of habeas corpus bofore him. When these
cases were pending he would not hear discussion as to
whether there was insurrection in the countiea of Alamance
and Caswell. He said that he could not enquire in this col
lateral way whether there was or Was not an insurrection there
23

834 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS. ,
as proclaimed by the executive. I apprehend that if the chief
justice had gone further and had undertaken to decide whether,
or not this court for the trial of impeachments have power he
would have said, without any hesitation, that it was the tribunal
to determine that question. If the position assumed of the
irresponsibility ot the governor under this act be true, then it
ia in the power of the executive, if a portion of the people are
distasteful to him, to forthwith declare them in a state of insur
rection and by military power crush out their liberties; and
thoy could never call him to an accouut for the wrongs ho had
committed. If tho position assumed bo correct, the governor
is an absolute despot accountable to nobody. This, I Bay, is a
a doctrine that is most distasteful to American citizens, and
especially to North CarolinianB, who havo too great a bohbo of
the value of personal freedom to consent to have thoir liberties
thus placed in danger. It may bo accepted undor the des
potisms of Europe, but it Can never be tolerated for ono mo
ment in North Carolina.
What I wish to say, sir, is, that the govornor, while ho
is invested with these high powers, is likewise invested with
a high responsibility. If he shall violate and prostitute this
high power the constitution has provided this very tribunal to
bring him to an account for the lawless exercise of the power
which had been given him for legitimate purposes ; and
although the constitution did give the executive the power to
call out the militia, yet if he shall do it wilfully or arbitrarily —
if he shall do it for the purpose of oppression, as alleged in this
case, thank God the constitution has also provided a court by
which he may be tried and deposed from the office which he
has prostituted and disgraced ; and, sir, the insurrection act
does not enlarge and does not purport to enlarge the pro
visions of the constitution in that respect ; and therefore if it
shall unhappily appear that the governor of this state during
last summer exercised power for the purpose of oppression, ot
crushing out public liberty to gratify political or personal
malice, we have this tribunal to try him for it, and if he aha!

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 885
be found guilty he will be.deposedfrpm tho office that he has
thus outraged. ,
I beg to add, sir, that I had no idea this discussion would be
sprung upon us to-day. I had not even collected the authori
ties which can be produced and I shall ask leave to-morrow to
hand in such as I deem pertinent if the discussion shall not
be concluded to-day.
Mr. BRAGG. I am informed that the witness desires to
make a correction.
WILLIAM M. MURRAY. Examination resumed.
By Mr. Merrimon :
Q. What statement do you desire to make? A. I desiro
loavo to correct tho statement I made about Outlaw's holding
a commission. IIo held a commission in 1800, but he was not
an officer in 1870.
On motion of Sonator Merrimon, the senate adjourned till
to-morrow at eleven o'clock.

886 court or mpxAonuxim.

VSS2OT DAY.
Senate Chamber, Feb. 7th, 1871.
The court met at 12 o'clock pursuant to adjournment,
honorable R. M. Pearson, chief justice of the supreme court, in
the chair.
The proceedings were opened by proclamation made in due
form by the doorkeeper.
The CLERK proceeded to call the roll of senators when the
following gentlemen were found to be present :
Messrs. Adams, Albright, Battle, Beasley, Bellamy, Brogden,
BrowD, Cook, Council, Cowles, Crowell, Currie, Dargan,
Edwards, Eppes, Flemming, Flythe, Gilmer, Graham, of Ala
mance, Graham, of Orange, Hawkins, Hyman, Jones, Latham,
Ledbetter, Lehman, Linney, Love, Mauney, McClammy,
McCotter, Merrimon, Moore, Morehead, Murphy, Norment,
Olds, Price, Robbins, of Davidson, Robbins, of Rowan, Skinner,
Troy, Waddell, Warren, Whiteside, Worth — 40.
Senator FLEMMING off'ered the following order :
Ordered, That this court adopt for its government the senate
rules of order so far as the same may apply.
Senator GRAHAM, of Orange, off'ered the following as a
substitute for the order proposed by Senator Fleinming.
Rule  . Every senator who shall be within the bar of the
senate when a question is stated by the presiding officer or who
shall come into the bar before the vote on tho question is
announced by the presiding officer, shall record his vote upon
such question.
Senator JONES moved to amend tlie rule proposed by
adding thereto the words, " unless excused by a majority of
the senators present."
The CHIEF JUSTICE put the question upon the amend
ment offered by senator Jones, and it was decided in tho
affirmative.

TRIAL 07 WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 887
Hie CHIEF JUSTICE thon put the question on adopting
the substitute as amended, ' In 'place of the order offered by
Senator Flemming, and it was decided in tho affirmative.
The question was then announced on adoption of the rule
as„ one of the rules of order of the court.
The CHIEF JUSTICE put the question on adoption of the
rule and it was decided in the affirmative.
Senator ROBBINS, of Rowan, moved to dispense with the
reading of the journal.
The CHIEF JUSTICE put the question on the motion of
Senator Robbins, of Rowan, and it was decided in the affirma
tive. The CHIEF JUSTICE announced that the court was ready
to proceed with the trial. .
Mr. CONIGLAND. Mr. Chief Justice and senators,' my
associate, Mr. Boyden, propounded this question to the witness
on the stand :
" Do you know of any secret political organizations in the
" county of Alamance known by the name of the ' Ku Klux
" Klan,' ' the White Brotherhood,' ' the Constitutional Union
"< Guard,' and the ' Invisible Empire?"'
The learned connselin behalf of the managers, [Mr. Graham,]
has objected to the question for the reason, that he states it
does not prove the existence of an insurrection, if it be admit
ted, and consequently, I auppose, that any queation the anawer
to which doea not prove an insurrection ia not admissible on
thla trial. The distinguished gentleman in his remarks, pro
ceeds upon tho ground that insurrection includes treason— In
other words, that the loss offence includes the greater. Let mo
read from his remarks that it may be seen that I do not mis
represent. " An unlawful assemblage for the purpose of murder Is a
" felony, and liable to be punished as such. But to make, an
" insurrection there must be treason. ' There must be a deBign
« to resist the execution of the law by its appointed agents and
"officers." •¦•!

838 °£URT »PVA JMPBApHMENTS,.
Sir, we assert that there is not a law hook extant which
defines treason and insurrection as synonymous terms, Trea
son, yet not always, includes insurrection, but every insur
rection does not include treason. And I would like to ask the
distinguished gentleman where he can find, in the authorities
which he has quoted, the words " insurrection or treason " thus
coupled together. I apprehend that the word " insurrection "
as synonymous with treason, is not to be found in the authori
ties which he quotes, and that he alone is the authority which
usee thei words " insurrection or treason " in the relation in
which he used them in his argument. But from his remarks
we might be led to infer that the authorities make no distinc
tion between insurrection and treason. Insurrection for certain
purposes is not treason, but for certain other purposes is treason,
and the authorities are full of recognitions ot this distinction.
But the learned associate of the gentlemen [Mr. Merrimon]
differs in toto from him. He defines treason thus, " where
" there is a general movement and force is used to overturn the
" government or to distroy any of its absolute powers ; " and he
says insurrection " is where there is a combination and forci-
" ble resistance to a particular law or class of laws." The first
gentleman [Mr.Graham] says that insurrection is treason. His
associate [Mr. Merrimon] sayB that insurrection is not treason.
Who is the authoritative exponent of their views of the law ?
I desire that they compose their differences, for I do not
want to follow out different avenues of discussion. One calls
for one defence and the other for another, and I desire to know
to whom I am to reply on this point.
Mr. MERRIMON. Mr. Chief Justice, the learned counsel
misunderstands my position. He inadvertently assigns to me
a position I do not occupy. I conceded the doctrine which my
learned friend states, and I went on to speak of a certain tech
nical distinction which had been drawn, and stated that such a
construction might be admitted in determining the significance
of the two words, and that it was a very nice distinction which

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 339
might exist. I think there can be no question about the posi
tion I assumed.
Mr. CONIGLAND. Mr. Chief Justice, my deafness pre
cludes me from hearing the learned gentleman'e remarks, and
his speech is not yet in print ; but referring to the abstract
furnished by my associates, I am led to suppose that the dis
tinguished counsel differ, as I have stated. I say that they
should compose their differences, consult their briefs, and
reconcile their inconsistencies, before they call upon us to
reply. I apprehend that the learned counsel [Mr. Graham]
has been answered by his associate [Mr. Merrimon] who has
stated that insurrection does not include treason. I am thus
relieved of the necessity of making any reply to the propos
ition that it does include it.
Tho honorable manager, Mr. Sparrow, has given us a some
what different definition from either of his distinguished asso
ciates. He quotes (page 114, of the printed journal of the pro
ceedings of this court,) from Webster's dictionary, as follows :
" Arising against civil and political authority, the open and
" active opposition of a number of persons to the execution of
" law in a city or state. It is equivalent to sedition, except
" that sedition expresses a less extensive rising. It differs from
" rebellion, for the latter expresses a revolt, or an attempt to
•' overthrow the government, &c.
Page 1 14 Record.
We propose to introduce to this court testimony showing
the existence and the acts of those secret societies, and that
their object is a subversion of the law. The distinguished
counsel, [Mr. Graham,] in his argument seemed to admit that
if we prove an overt act we may prove the existence of the
organization. Certainly, if I am not greatly mistaken, that is
admitted in his argument ; but let me read, in order that'I may
be certain of the language he used. I quote from page 302 and
303 of the printed journial of proceedings :
'"The question involved in this inquiry is whether there was
•' an insurrection in the county of Alamance ; and before any

840 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
" evidence is admitted on that subject, it is necessary to show
" somo overt act of resistance to the government. > Insurrection
" is one form ot treason, and before any plots of a treasonable
" character can be shown, it is necessary to- show a levying of
"war — some treasonable act ; in other words, before there can
"bo any evidence adduced in regard to the existence of a
" treasonable conspiracy, there must be proven Borne overt act
" of resistance to the government, which ia levying war, and
"¦ any combination of any sort, not for the purpose of resistance
" to law is not treason — is not insurrection."
Docs not that admit, Mr. Chief Justice and senators, that if
we prove an overt act, we may prove the existence of these
secret organizations 1 But, ia it not very frequently the case,
in tho course of judicial proceedings, that evidonco is intro
duced—to bo connected with what may follow to mako it
admisslfelo, but to bo oxcludod if tho condition bo not fulfilled.
Tho manugors brought their witness and we askbd him a quos-
tlon for tho purposo of facilitating this trial. Wo might havo
told him to stand aside and call him again, but wo asked him
tho question with tho purpose stated, and tho question was
objected to because it was attempting to introduce evidence out
of its orde r1
Now, sir, we propoae te connect that organization with tho
overt act, and it can make no difference in what order wo take
up the evidence. We propoae to prove the existence of these
organizations, te carry tliem through all tlieir ramifications and
tlieir acts agaiust the law. When we make that proposition
the distinguished chairman of the board of managers shakes
over us tho ferule of tlio Massachusetts school master, a great
loxicograplier, I .admit, as if we were boys taking our flrat les-
Bons in Webster's spelling hook, and tlio strangest tiling of all
is that ho socks to impose upon tills court tho definition of
Webster's dictionary, and rejects tho dofinitlon given by the
legislature of our own state. We road in our constitution that
" tho governor sliflll be commander Jiwihief and have powor to

trial of William w. holden. 841
"call out the militia to execute the law, suppress riots, or insur
rection and to repel invasion."
Now, sir, what is. the course of argument ? It is seeking for
a definition of insurrection in order to ascertain whether we
have acted under that clause of the constitution : and to show
that we have not acted under the clause they quote upon us
Webster's dictionary, and reject the definition of a body of
which the distinguished managers are members 1 Let me read
to you the legislative definition which is sought to be set aside
in order that the respondent may be convicted upon the defini
tion in Webster's dictionary. Taking out some of the words it
is this :
" Whenever the civil authorities in any county are unable to
" protect the citizens thereof in the enjoyment of life and
" property, such county is in a state of insurrection."
This is the clear legislative definition. This is the definition
of the body winch the managers represent, and it is the defini
tion of this body, a co-ordinate branch of the legislature ot this
state, and yet this definition is sought to be set aside as
nnauthorativo and unconstitutional.
Mr. Chief Justice, what can be higher authority on the point
in question than our own legislative enactments, save the de
cisions of our own supreme court ? I recollect in my earlier
days at the bar, I enquired of a great lawyer, who happily yet
lives, why he laid bo much stress on the decisions of our su
preme court, he said, " because our own decisions are the highest
" authority in our own courts." When this body seeks to ex
pound the constitution, the decisions of our supreme court are
as binding upon them in tlieir public capacity as they are upon
you or me in our private capacity. I may bring here decisions
of the court of Queen's Bench, the court of King's Bench, the
court of common pleas and the court of exchequer ; I may bring
decisions of the House ot Lords, and of the highest courts of New
York or Virginia, and yet the decisions of our supreme court
overrule them all. <•¦ If it were not so we would stultify ourselves,
and we might as well abolish our supreme court, not only as in-

042 oouct of impeachments.
efficient, but as useless. Whilst I insist that the authority of our
supremo court ii of binding obligation in the state of North Car
olina by a party of reasoning I hold that an act of this legislature,
until it ii repealed or doolarod unconstitutional, has upon, suc
ceeding legislatures An equally binding forco, and I 'submit, as a
principle of kw that a succeding legislature cannot deny the con
stitutionality of an act passed by a preceding one. They are as
much estopped to dony its validity as a man is estopped to
deny his own deed. This legislature cannot assume judicial
functions and attempt to interprate the law. They cannot be
hoard to say that this act is unconstitutional because it is an
act that cornea from themselves, which they thomselvoa havo
enacted ; thoy may repeal, but until thoy do repeal they cannot
come in and doclaro their own acts void. If a legislature had
any such power thero would bo no safety for oxocutlvo officers
holding positions in tho state.
What position do tho counsol for the managers occupy ? Wo
propose to glvo thorn a legislative dofinitlon of the languago of
tho constitution. They say " it is true the reapondent obeyed
" the law, the very law which we ourselves made, but we shall
" punish him because he did obey it." They enact a law and
ask submission to its authority, and because an executive officer,
on whom a judicial power is conferred, obeys that law, they
propose to punish him therefor. Tho chief executive officer of
the state is impeached for obeying the acts of the impeaching
body, but when they propose to convict him, they condemn
themselves, because thoy can only convict him by admitting
that thoy thomsolves are tho violators of tho organic law.
Let us put this caso by way of illustration of my idea. A
bill has recently passed both branches of this general assem
bly known as the convention act. There are serious doubts
entertained as to the constitutionality, of the mode in which
that act was passed. Suppore that the ?ieutenant-governor,
who is governor for the time being, shall refuse to issue his
proclamation calling an election under that act on the ground
that tho law is unconstitutional, will the house of representa-

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 843
tives impeach him ? If they do so they will impeach, him for
not obeying one law, whereas they have impeached the respon
dent for obeying another law — in the one case they would
allow ,the executive officer to judge of the constitutionality of
an act, in the other they would not allow him, and perhaps
should the governor issue the proclamation as required by the
act a subsequent legislature may impeach him therefor, if the
position which the counsel contend for is sustained. It is the
provence of the judicial branch of the government to expound
the law, as it is the province of the executive officers to admin
ister it. The judiciary have the right under the constitution to
decide upon tho validity of a law, but the governor of the
state has no authority to assume that function. If any other
doctrine is to hold good there is no safety for hiin who admin
isters the law. If we are not to tako a law as constitutional
which the legislature bas enacted, how is an executive officer to
protect himself? Governor Iloldon could not call upon tho
supreme court of North Carolina to'give a judicial construction
of the act in question. He had to take it as he found it nnd
it is alike shameless and unheard of that the body which passed
the act shall come in now and condemn the respondent because
he has obeyed it.
Mr. Chief Justice, a precedent of the sort is not, in my
opinion, to bo found in the history of judicial proceedings in
England or America. Well indeed may I quote the honorable
managers and say this Ib a spectacle without precedent, and I
trust that it may remain so. 4
We propose to prove that there existed in the counties of
Alamance and Caswell at the time they were declared by the
respondent to be in a state of insurrection, secret organizations
known as the " White Brotherhood," an association of white
people to prevent the operation of the reconstruction acts aud
the constitution, of North Carolina in so far as they confer suf-
frago 0» the colored people,, , „.<
, ,, We, propose to proyo tho. existence of a secret organization
called ,tj»ej" Constitutional ./Upion.Guw-dVvthe members of

844 ' COURT OF rMPE ACHMENTS. ' ''
which were bound 'by an oath to support thO constitution of the
United States ond of North Carolina as 'they 'were ni forco
boforo the war and to resist by intimidation, by outrage and by
force, all subsequent amendments to either, enlarging popular
suffrage. * ! '
We further propose to prove the existence of a secret organ
ization called the "Invisible Empire," an association .of men to
forcibly carry out. by intimidation, outrage and murder and
the exercise of force, the behests and commands of the "White
Brotherhood " and the " Constitutional Union Guard."
We propose also to prove that all these societies were known
under the general name of the "Ku Klux Klan."
We propose likewise to show that these three organiations
had a common purposo and a common design, to subvert the
law ; and we propose to prove various acts in furtherance of
that common purpose and design. But we are told that wo can
not do it because, forsooth, this common purposo and design
was carried out by secret emissaries, and by secret ways and
means, and therefore that tho constitution and the Shofther
act, are alike inapplicable. Let us see how that will operate.
In the county of Alamanco two hundred or fivo hundred men,
or every mon in the county say that you shall not carry out a
certain act of the legislature, and in furtherance of that design
thoy go openly to tho jail, break into It and tako out apriaonor
stid liberate him, because thoy say tho net ahall not bo execu
ted. Now a continued purposo of this aort, It is admitted ia
insurrection. But If men meet In a secluded portion of tho
county, bring nround them hired assassins, adminiater to them
and tho other members, terrible oatha to subvert the law and
in furtherance of that design in the dend of night, when tho
purpose Ib known only to themselves, and to the all-seeing eye
of God they take from the jail a prisoner and hang him in the
court house yard, that, it is said, is not insurrection because it
is a secret proceeding. Great God 1 what is to become of us,
if there is no1 power to crush out these men who are thus
engaged in subverting the law. We say to them that this

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. » ;
is the state of society in these counties, that these, men are
banded together to subvert tlie laws, to intimidate, and to
murder. We say to them that these men have invaded the
grand jury box, that they have invaded and controlled the
petit juries, and that by reason thereof we can find no protec
tion to life and property. And yet the reply is made that it
cannot be remedied, that wo have no power to remedy it, that
society may be outraged, the laws eubverted and anarchy reign
supreme,- their hands are without remedy because these men
do their work in secret. The proposition need but be stated to
be condemned. They seek here in this investigation to shut
our mouths, to hide these facts from public view, and to throw
the mantle of silence over these outrages.
We have been cited nearly altogether to precedents from
the English courts. Now, I desire to show from the acts of the
British parliament that their definition of insurrection is
irrelevant, and has no force and I will cite acts covering
precieely .the same atate of thinga that we have here.
I Biippo8e, air, that the Englieh constitution guards as sacredly
civil liberty aa the constitution of the United States or the
constitution of North Carolina, indeed the very foundation
of that liberty which we now onjoy may be traced to the
magna carta of King John, the magna carta of Edward I, tho
potitlou of rights undor Charles I, tho habeas corpus aot of
Charles II, and tho bill of rights of William and Mary, thoso
are the groat safe-guards of civil liberty in the British consti
tution, and I propose to aliow what tho British parliament did,
having regard to the constitution under which they legislated.
After the legislative union between England and Ireland, I
need not say the united parliament exerciaed authority over
the latter county, and Irishmen had the same rights, as to per
sonal liberty under tho British constitution, as Englishmen
had. On account of various* measures of the British govern
ment secret societies were organized in Ireland to subvert the
law* and to carry out by secret means their purposes. Whilst
no man has a livelier sense of the wrongs inflicted on Ireland I

846 COURT at' imfeIohments!
have never seen the 'day nor the hour' wh6ti I 'could 'have
approved of ono of those secret associations, 'not even to secure
tho repeal of the act of union to which I have referred, for,
thank God, I am so constituted that nothing can induce me to '
apologize for crime, no matter upon what pretext it may bo
committed. Although I have been in sympathy with all proper
<lnoans te redress Irish grievances under English rule, that
does not prevent me from citing analagous cases from tho
history of that country. I havo searched the state library to
procure volumes of the British statutes, and being unable to
find them, I will be excused if I quote from my only accessible
books, which I think may be relied on for authentic facts.
I quote from page 1215 of Mooney's History of Ireland.
"Jn 1813 the provinces of Ireland were disturbed by mid-
" night associations, called cardas, who legislated in the dark-
" ness of midnight, under the obligation of secret baths.
" Their object was to lower rents and abolish tithes ; their
" means, threatening notices and carrying those notices into
" barborous execution, inflicting torture on the unhappy objects
" of their vengeance. This system of procedure only gave the
" government more power, and embarrassed ; Mr. O'Connell
" and the catholic board ; for the adverse press readily attribu-
" ted to him the fomentation of these lamentable outrages.
" Peel, who succeeded Wellesly as secretary for Ireland,
"introduced a series of coersive enactments, entitled insur
rection acts, " which enabled the lord lieutenant to proclaim
any district he " thought proper in a state of rebellion ; to
suspend the trial " by jury 1"
Now, Mr. Chief Justice, I assert, as an historical fact that
those acts were passed fo suppress the very same system ol
subversion of law which existed in Alamance and CasWell. I
assert further, as an historical fact, ' that the acts which were
passed to suppress these same societies were known by the
general name of the " insurrection " acts. It is very hard te
find any precise definition in the books of "insurrection," af
.east I have looked for it in vain ; but I cite you to the histor*

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 347'
ical parallel that the acta passed by tho British parliament for*
the suppression of the secret societies described in the extract,'
of a similar character to tho Kuklux societies, wero passed to'
suppress InBurroctlon, and wore known, and aro still known, ni
" tho InBurroctlon acte," and I submit that this ought to settle
tho definition of tho word. And, sir, thero is another aot of
tho British parliament with which somo hero present aro*
doubtlosa familiar, known ns tho " coercion bill " which was
passed In tho yoar 1883. Earl Gray in introducing that bill in
tho houso of lords made theso remarks.
I quote from Hansard's parliamentary debates, volume IB,
page 730.
" To give your lordships one singular instance of this, I will'
" mention the. case of an orphan girl, gainst whom a mandate
" of proscription was directed, and her master was ordered to
" dismisB her from his service, because her mother had given
" evidence against a person on a trial on account of tithes.
" Such orders are enforced by the penalty of death ; and cases
" of this kind are so numerous that, if all the documents were
" submitted to your lordships, they would cover the table, and
" could not be read in any reasonable time. The proscription
" of those who enforce the laws is one of the most dangerous,
r< the most alarming, the most fatal effects of these proceedings ;
" rendering the laws impotent, and the detection and punish-
'* ment of guilt impossible. The vengeance of these guilty men
H \s, of course, directed against prosecutors, witnesses, jurors,
"and 'all who were engaged in carrying into effect the pro-
" visions of the law. Such a state of things renders the adminis
" tration of the law impossible ; for neither witnesses nor jurors
" will do their duty. I have statements, my lords, of measures
" of violence exercised against persons under these circum
'*¦ stances, which would occupy much of your lordships' time,
'were I to read them; I will, therefore, confine myself to ond
*or two instances out of a great number which display th»
•intimidation employed to prevent jurors and witnesses from-
doing thoir ,duty. I hold in my hand, as one specimen^,

848 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
" letter from the chief constable of police, dated Cashel, no
" longer ago than January 29th, which was forwarded for the
" information of tho lord lieutenant. This letter contains the
" information that at eight o'clock in the evening, five armed
" men had attacked a man by the name of Patrick Lalor, who was
" nearly seventy years of age, ordering him to give up some
" ground which he had taken two years ago. They took him
" out and shot him, bo that he survived only half an hour. The
" constable had repaired to the spot, and all the appearances of
" guilt appertained to a man by the name of Madden, who had
" formerly occupied the ground. The son of Lalor was an eye
" witness, and though his manner betrayed knowledge of the
" transaction, he would not disclose the names of the perpetrators.
" Here was an instance of an atrocious murder for holding land
" contrary to the will of the Whitefeet, and of a system of terror
" which prevented a son from giving evidence against the mur-
" derers of his own father, lest he himself should experience a
" similar fate. My lords, it is not necessary for me to advert
" to the attack on the police at Carrickshough, for your lordships
"know that, on that case, the jury would not find them
" guilty, which was a striking proof of the impossibility of car-
" rying the law into execution.
" At Kilkenny, also, at the assizes, the jury on a trial did not
" agree, and they were dismissed. This was at a period of
"considerable excitement, and they all agreed that nothing
" should be known of their opinions ; but within little more
" than half an hour after they had been dismissed, a placard
" appeared bearing the names of those jurymen who were for
" the acquittal inscribed in black, and the names of those who
" were for finding the parties guilty inscribed in red ; as if
" they were for blood ; and the placard was headed — Blood 1
", Blood 1 Blood 1"
, I insist, Mr. Chiei Justice, that the parallels are exact. It
is true that Earl Gray said, they, were not directing legislation
against secret societies. He said :
."It is not a secret society; because it is not bound

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 349
" together by secret oaths ; it does not hold secret meetings ; the
*' individuals who direct it are acquainted with thp laws, but
" keeping themselves within the limits of the laws, while they
" are engaged in this dangerous conspiracy to accomplish ulterior
" objects." The ulterior object referred to was a repeal of the union
between England and Ireland, but this principal society to
which Earl Grey refers, acted without force, except occasional
outrage and intimidation, which he details, and subverted the
law as he alleges by secret proceedings. What act did the
British parliament acting under the British constitution, pass
to meet that state of things. I read from. the same history on
page 1365.
"The reformed parliament, met on the 19th of .February,
" 1833, and Earl Grey, in the earliest opportunity, moved for
" the introduction of the " coercion bill." That bill compre-
" hended the following oppressive clauses :
" The lord lieutenant may suppress, by order, the meeting of
" any assembly deemed by him dangerous to the public safety,
"and may suppress any adjourned or continued meeting of the
" same; every meeting so proclaimed shall be deemed unlawful,
" and the members of it punishable for a misdemeanor.
" Empowers two justices to enter by force, any house, where a
" meeting may be supposed to bo assembled, enables the lord
"lieutenant to declare, by proclamation, any county in a state
" of disturbance, and to require the application of this law —
"orders the inhabitants in such district to remain in their
" houses between sunsot and sunrise. No meeting to be per-
"mitted in such district, under the pretense of petitioning
"parliament for the redress of grievances, without the con-
" sent fir6t obtained of the lord lieutenant. The lord lieutenant
" may appoint any commissioned officers of the line to try
" offences under this act — five to be a court — three to be a ma-
"jority, and to have all the power of the judges of the land, to
" imprison, punish, transport, or hang 1 They are to be assisted
" by a law sergeant for advice aa judge advocate. Enablea the
24

850 COURT OF IMPEACHMENT*,
"police, on being refused admission at any hour of tho nfght,
" to break open tho doors, prevents appeals from tho decisions
" of those courta-mnrtial, or redress for outrages committed hy
" tho crown officers in prosocutlon of the law — habeas corpttt*
" net suspended — offenders not bailable, &o. &o.
That the quotations I havo made (for I could not got tho
English statutes) aro correct, I refer to the wholo debate upon the
bill, which la contulned lu this volumo (Hansard's Parliament
ary Debates.) It was ono of tho abloHt debates that over took
placo In tho British parliament, and it verifies the recitals of
the act as I havo read them. I havo quoted thus largely from
those authorities, to show you and the court, that Although
tho liberty of tho British citizen Is protected by nil tho safe
guards that tho British constitution throws around him, yot
when those secret societies, and societies without anus or upris
ings existed, the British parllaniont suspended tho writ of
habeas corpus and proclaimed martial law. And moreover the
acts passed to put down these said societies are all known in
the parliamentary history and judicial history of Great Britain m
"insurrection acts." I regard this as an authority of the very
highest character to show that iho 6tate of things' which we
propose to prove was declared by the British parliament to
be an " insurrection."
But another point to which I call attention is, that Earl
Grey in his speech in the houso of lords put the coercion bill on
this ground also, that it was their duty to prevent a state of
legislative union between England and Ireland by illegal means.
things which might ultimately result in the subversion of the
Ho expressly declared that it was the duty of the legislature to
pass this act as a preventive measure. Willi ub I insist that a
Bociety existed the purpose Of which was to prevent the opera
tion of the laws ot North Carolina. Self-preservation is a princi
ple inherent in every government, and it was the duty ot the chief
executive officer of the state to put down Buch a society — if he
had failed to make the attempt, he would have violated the
solemn sanction of his oath.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 351
The constitution of the United States gives power to con
gress to provide for calling out the militia to execute the laws,
Biippresa insurrection, and repel invasion.
Tho constitution of the United Statea vests the power in
congress in the first instance, the constitution of North Carolina
vests the -power in the governor. The act of congresa of 1795,
providce, " whonovor it may bo necessary in the judgment of tho
" president," tfce. Tho act of our general assembly, known as
the " Shoff'ner act," provides, " the governor is hereby author
ized aud empowered whenever in his judgment the civil
" authorities in any county are unable to protect its citizens
"in the enjoyment of life and property to declare such county
" to bo in a state of insurrection and to call into active servico
" the militia of the state to such an extent as may become
" necessaiy to suppress such insurrection." I now desire to
call attention to the introductory speech of Mr. Sparrow to
be found on page 120 of the journal of proceedings of this
court. He there quotes the case of Martin vs. Mott, reported
in 12 Wheaton, page 14, and I may as well read the quotation :
" Whenever a statute gives a discretionary power to any
" person, to be exercised by him Upon his own opinion of cer-
" tain facts, it i6 a sound rule of construction that the statute
" constitutes him the 6ole and exclusive judge of the existence
" of those facts. And in the present case, we are all of opin-
" ion that such is the true construction of the act of 1795. It
" is no answer that such a power may be abused, for there is
" no power which is not susceptible of abuse. The remedy for
" this, as well as for all other official misconduct, if it should
" occur, is to be found in the constitution itself."
The honorable manager adds, "meaning impeachment."
But, 6ir, that is not what the court say, it is the comment ot
tho learned gentleman to point the meaning of tho court, as
he would point the application of words in a declaration for
slander by inuendo." It would be very strange indeed, if the
court should declare that the statute constitutes the president
the solo, the exclusive judgo of the facts and yet he may be

852 OOURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
impeached if he exercises that judgment ; this {is what the
honorable manager would make the court mean, but I insist
that such is not the proper construction. . i
I will call your attention to the clause of the opinion follow
ing that quoted by the manager.
" In a free government, the danger must be remote, 6ince in
" addition to the high qualities which the executive must be
" presumed to possess, of public virtue, and honest devotion to
"the public interests, the frequency of elections, and the watch
fulness of the representatives of the nation, carry with them
" all the checks which can be useful to guard against usurpation
" or wanton tyranny."
I quote this as an authority, that when an act confers upon
an executive officer a discretionary power, he cannot bo im
peached or tried for exercising that discretion, no matter how
ho abuses it. I stand upon tho law, and I insist that no other
construction#can be placed upon the act. There is no intima
tion even, that, for the abuse of this power, the president may
bo impeached, but there is an express declaration of the su
preme court of the United States, that whenever a statute gives
discretionary power to any person to be exercised by him upon
tho occurrence of certain facts, it is a sound rule of construction
that tho statute constitutes him tho solo and oxcluslve judgo of
tho fact. Can words be stronger tf Wo submit to this honora
ble court upon tho authority of this decision, that undor tho
" Shoffuor act" tho governor is mado the judgo of tho fact, and
of the necessity of action under the act, and that his action can
not bo called in question by any other department of tho govern
ment. The managers in their fifth article quote the decision of the
chief justice of this state aa their authority against this reapon
dent. I ask them if they are prepared to ignore that decision
at their pleasure ? They stand upon it, they quote it, and if
there be any meaning in words that decision sustains the very
authority I have quoted. Mr. Badger used this language :
" The governor shall be commander-in-chief, and have power

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 853
" to call out the militia to execute the law, suppress riots or
"insurrections and to repel invasions" — art. XII, sec. 8, con.
The statute, 1869-70, chap. XXVII, Bee. 1, enacts : " Tho
" governor is hereby authorized and empowered, whenever in
" his judgment the civil authorities in any coimty are unablo
" to protect its citizens in the enjoyment of life and property,
" to declare, such county to be in a state of insurrection, and to
" call into active service the militia of tho state, to such an ex-
" tent as may become necessary to suppress the insurrection :"
and he insisted :
" 1. This clause of the constitution and the statute empowers
" the governor to declare a county to be in a state of insurroc-
" tion whenever, in his judgment, the civil authorities are
" unable to protect its citizens in the enjoyment of life and
" property. The governor has bo declared in regard to the
"county of Alamance, and the judiciary cannot call his action
" in question or review it, as the matter is confided aolely to tho
"judgment of the governor."
Then hia honor the chief justico says':
" I aocodo to the first proposition ; full faith and credit aro
" duo to the governor In this matter, because ho is tho compo
nent authority, acting In pursuance of tho constitution and
" tho law. The power, from its nature, must bo exorcised in
"tho oxocutlvo, aB in enso of invasion or opon insurrection.
" Tho extent of tho power is alono tho subject of judicial
"determination." I Insist that tho very decision upon whioh the gontlomon
roly sustains tho dooislon which I havo road from 12 Whoaton,
and that this court cannot convict Govornor Holden aocordlng
to law, if It respects the decisions of the courts.
And there Is another most important particular in which this
ovidenco is admissible and that is on tho question ot intention.
This respondent canhot be convioted unless he was actuated by
a corrupt motive. The very first artiole presented by the man
agers speaks of the respondent " intending to stir up civil
" war, and subvert personal and,' public liberty, and the consti-

354 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
" tution and laws of said state, and of the United States, and
"contriving and intending to humiliate and degrade the said
" state and the people thereof." It is not neceaBary for me to
read every portion of the articles which charge a corrupt intent;
it runs through the whole of them, and when wo propose to
exculpate ourselves and to give evidence of the facta and cir
cumstances which governed the intention of the respondent,
they refuse to permit us, and say we shall not exculpate our
selves, and shall give no ovidenco of such facts and circumstan
ces na may be Biipposed to govern tho intention of the res
pondent, but we ehall be silenced. I will not dwell on this
Biibjoct because it will be taken up by my associates.
But now let us inquire for a moment tho point at issue.
For a series of months past, the partizan press of this state, and
stump orators of tho state, have been charging Governor
Holden with all sorts of wicked acts — with corruption in office,
with the violation of his oath of office, with tho violation of the
constitution of the state and of the United States. He repelled
those attacks and he said that the constitution and the law
gave him the power to do as he did, and in doing as he did he
was following out the solemn sanction of his oath of office. He
proclaimed to the state and to the United States, that in tho
counties of Alamance and Caswell there existed secret societies
banded together for the common purpose and with the common
design of subverting the government. He claimed as his
justification, that these secret societies acted in accordance with
that common design and committed their outrages on society,
whipping, drowning and murdering to such an extent that there
was no protection for life or property. Did the house of represent
atives not know, when they impeached him what his defence was?
They preferred their articles of impeachment to test the truth
of the facts on which Gov. Holden proclaimed he had acted.
It was for "tills that they brought him before this tribunal
and called public attention to this faot ; and now when in the
presence of his fellow-citizens of tho state, and of the United
States, he avers hie readiness to prove all that he has said, the

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 355
honorable managers shelter themselves behind a technicality,
aud seek to deprive him of the protection of that defence which
they have pronounced to be false, and which they have cited
him to maintain.
The honor of Gov. Holden is at stake, but ao is the honor of
the impeaching body — ho meets tho challenge of that body,
nnd hero, on the forum of tlieir own seeking, he asks to be al
lowed to prove the averments which ho has made in his de
fence. Protesting the legality of his acts, and appealing to
that God who searcheth all hearts for the rectitude of his in
tentions, he proposes to show the existence of societies organ
ized to subvert tlie constitution and the laws, and in further
ance of such thoir common design, persisting in a course of
outrage and crime, disgraceful to humanity, unparalleled in
the history of North Carolina, demanding the measures ho
adopted for their suppression, and' for which ho now stands im
peached. But here before this forum to which hehas been call
ed, an objection is raised which, if sustained, excludes tho very
defence it was known he would make, and screens from exposure
tho organized bands of midnight murderers and assassins,
whose evil deeds have disturbed the peace of the state, nnd
whose ains, if God is just, will follow them like curses to the
grave. Is it thus that he is to be silenced, and that they are to
be screened ? " Oh shame where is thy blush !"
Exclude this evidence, and be your decision what it will, the
moral victory will be with William W. Holden — he. will go
forth from this chamber, acquitted in tlie public mind, while
his prosecutors will atand condemned.
Mr. BRAGG. Mr. Chief Justice and aenators, it seems to
me that this discussion, especially on tlie part of our friends on
the other side, has assumed a very great latitude, and a great
many matters are invoked and brought into it and which are
calculated, properly considered, to have but little influence
upon the decision of this question. The highly eloquent and
impassioned gentleman who has just addressed this body [Mr.
ConiglaadJ has ottered, ae it seems to tne, some very strange

350 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
doctrines— doctrines not bearing directly upon the question
beforo the court and as to which I hop© I shall be excused for
saying a few words.
I had 6een it before stated in the defence as put in in the an
swer of the respondent, that he claimed a disoretionary power
was given him by this act of January, 1870, and that he was not
amenable to this court or any other court or to any body what
ever. In his answer, page 25, he says :
" Further answering this respondent says that the constitu-
" tion of North Carolina and the laws then in force, vested in the
"governor thereof, a discretionary power to declare a county
" to be in a state of insurrection whenever in his judgment the
" civil authorities thereof were unable to protect its citizens in
"the enjoyment of life and property, that full faith and credit
" are to be given to tbe action of this respondent as governor
" of North Carolina in declariug, as aforesaid, the counties of
" Alamance and Caswell in a state of insurrection, and he sub-
" mits and insists that his said action cannot be questioned by
" any other department of the government."
I hear that doctrine reiterated here to-day with a still further
assertion that the governor, at his discretion, may do anything
as to a county or the people of a county, and that he is not even
responsible by impeachment for his acts. If such a monstrous
doctrine as that is to prevail, wo may as well say farewell to
civil liberty, for by it you inaugurate a despot in place of a con
stitutional government, and make his will the law instead of
the constitution and tho laws of the land. Sir, need I elabo
rate that question ? I know that in a court of justice where a
discretionary power is given to a public officer and he exercises
that discretion, a court cannot call in question that
exercise of authority. Such was the fact in tlie case of
Martin vs. Mott, where the president of the United States
called out the mihtia. A militiaman having disobeyed
the orders his property was seized by judgment of a court
martial and he brought his action to get it back. Tho
court held they could not go behind the discretion veated

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 857
in the president of the United States, to call out tho
militia. They said, however, that if there was any abuse of his
power, he was amenable as anybody else was amenable to tho
people who might turn him out of his office, — amenable by
impeachment uuder the constitution, for an abuse of power.
And, 6ir, if the accused in this case is not amenable for an
abuse of power, if he can throw around him the mantle of this
Shoffner act, as it is called, to save him from the consequenees,
I desire to know if he is not a despot, uncontrolled by any law
or constitution, or anything except his own personal will.
And what, 6ir, if such be the fact, becomes of our act in rela
tion to impeachable offenses, which provides that " Every offi-
" cer of the state shall be liable to impeachment for corruption
" or misconduct in his official capacity." Yet, sir, it is assumed
here, and now, that the legislature havo undertaken to confer
upon the governor discretionary power. And that neither
your honor, sitting as a judge, nor this court, can hold him
amenable for any misconduct in his official capacity ; in other
words, that his discretion is the law, and that a court of im
peachment cannot sit upon his acts, because the legislature have
undertaken to give him all this power — a power they had not
themselves, and which they had no right to give by the con
stitution. The governor's powers are defined by the constitu
tion, and if the legislature can give him this discretionary power,
he is like the king of England, and " can do no wrong," and
thero is.no way of reaching hiin. I have only to cite such a
doctrine as that to show its absurdity.
Again my anient friend on the other side has appealed to
this very worst feature in tho legislation of England, that has
become a byword and reproach to tho civilized world in re
spect to Ireland. I might Bay to him, as a native born Irish
man, " et tu Brute!" I know that all that legislation to which
ho referred to sustain the action of our legislature, and to show
that what transpired in the county of Alamance, was insurrec
tion, receives his unqualified condemnation ; but it Ib invoked
here for the purpose of showing that, the legislature of this

358 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
state, by the act of January, 1870, had given the governor the
same power which was given in Ireland to suppress the secret
societies in that distracted country. What waa the character
of that legislation ? My friend has attempted to run a parallel
between the state of things there, and the stato of things in the
county of Alamance, and while he has not exactly justified
what was done there, he has virtually left such an impreaaion,
or left the subject so that the inference may be drawn that
what waa dono in Ireland waa right, and what has been done
here is right also. Sir, I have not had time to examine
tho authority, if it be an authority, which ho has introduced, it
being a history of Ireland of that day, but I beg leave to read
a littlo more in relation to tho character of the legislation there.
He has stated what it was, but let us boo how it was carried
out, and ascertain if we can, if the parallel can not be still fur
ther extended. I read from page 1217 of the same work
[Mooney's History of Ireland.]
"During the long period of gloom and suffering, which
" extended over the years of Peel's secretaryship in Ireland, tho
"business of spies, informers, and police flourished. Any
" villian could get himself on tho pay of Dublin CaBtle, by
"going into a district where oppressive landlords resided, and
" whero tho Buffering peoplo were easily excited to revolt against
" the laws. Peel took occasion to represent Ireland in eo
" disturbed a state, that a strong police was required ; and he
" readily got leave to place six policemen, with full military
" equipments, in every parish in Ireland. This new mode of
i government was previously unknown in either England or
" Ireland. It consists of a half spy, halt military body, without
" possessing, however, one particle of military honor or chival-
" ry, a force modeled after the gens (T armes of France, and
"called by tho people after the man who introduced it, —
" Peelers. " This iniquitous organization, with a full staff of spies,
"informers, expectants, place-hunters, Orange magistrates,
" Orange judges, Orange sheriffs, Orange juries, Orange attor-

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. nOLDEN. 359
" ney generals, — saurin, for instance — kept Ireland for twenty
" years in a state which no description can picture. It is not
"necessary to fill theso pages with recitals of the petty ^tyranny
" practiced on the people of Ireland by the ascendency party, who
" held the corporate and government offices through Ireland.
" From this party nothing but insults was experienced by the
" Catholics. Thegovernment availed itself of tho divisions which
" naturally grew from these animosities, to enslave and barbarize
" tho people. Peel, who had an inveterate hatred of every-
" thing Irish and Catholic, introduced, as a permanent system
" of government, tho most despotic laws which the history of
" the past or the example of tho present nations of Europe
" offered as a model. Tho curfew law, introduced into England
" by William the Conqueror, which rendered it criminal for a
"man to bo out of his houso after sunset, was introduced into
" Ireland by Peel. It was tacked to tho insurrection act,
" which conferred on the lord lieutenant of Ireland the power,
" on receiving a request from sworn magistrates, representing
" their district in a state of "disturbance," to i6suo hi6 com-
M mands, directing all persons in the county or barony to remain
"within their houses after sunset, and not to come out before
" sunrise, under penaltief of being tranxjwrted beyond the seas
"for seven years / empowering any two of these magistrates to
" try, convict, and punish, under its provisions, without appeal.
" Here was the establishment of the most galling and.ber-
"fected system of tyranny that perhaps ever oppressed •any
" nation. For three and twenty years of O'Connell's public
"life, Ireland was subjected to this barbarizing tyranny.
" Twonty-ono of the thirty-two counties of Ireland were, for
"these twenty-three years, brought within the rule of this
" species of government. The trial by jury was only a
" mockery," and tho laws a " snare.'* In truth, the law was a
"scourge, its officers corrupt, the judges partial, tlie juries
" packed, and the government unprincipled and despotic Peel
"was aecretaryof state in- Ireland* and Castelreagh secretary
" of state in England.','

860 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Such was the state of things and has been in Ireland, under
this legislation which my friend invoked here in order to prove
that insurrection existed in North Carolina.
My friend admits that the British parliament ia omnipotent. It
can paea any laws. It is not reatrained by any written' consti
tution na our legislative bodies are and under that power they
enacted those oppressive laws; and yet that leglalatlon ia,
Invoked hero to aliow that what tho British parliament had
enacted ngalnst every 'principle of liberty as to Ireland our
legislature had a right to enact hero, and our govornor na our
sovereign had a right to carry it ont.
Now, Mr. Chief Justice, all this it seems to me is aeide from
the question immediately before the court. I ask pardon for
having gone into it and I should certainly not have done so, if
it had not have been for the impassioned appeal made by the
counsel on the other side. The question now before this body
as I understand it is this :
The managers hero aver that at the time thia county of Ala
manco waa declared in a atate of inaurroction there was in fact
no insurrection. Tho respondent through his counsol avers
that there waa an Insurrection and that is tho question wo aro
trying. It Ib partly a question of law and partly a question ot
fact but we aro now discussing tho legal aspect of the question.
What Ib an insurrection under tho constitution of tho state of
North Carolina as it was understood and intended by tho
framors of that instrument ? I undertake to Bay horo that our
organic law defines and limits the powors of the logialature as
well as those of the governor and every other department of
the government. Nobody will controvert that. Wo are not
living undor a state government with unlimited powers like the
parliament of England, for is admitted by the learned counsel
on the other aide,— using the phrase of lawyers — that parliament
ia omnipotent and can do any thing, as is sometimes said, except
make a man a woman or a Woman a man.
Parliament is not confined or restrained by any written laws
and constitution. Certain great principles and acta are eome-

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. nOLDEN. 861
times refered to as parts of the British constitution, but there
is no written constitution, nothing defining or limiting the pow
er of parliament. Our state government on the contrary ia
one of definite and limited powers. Each department of the
government has certain powers conferred upon it and the pow
ers not conferred continue to rest with the people. Why do I
say that ? I say it because it is expressly provided in the con
stitution itself. If you will turn to section 37 article I — that
part of the instrument termed the bill of rights — you will find
these words :
" This enumeration of rights shall not be construed to impair
" or deny others retained by the people. And all power not
" here delegated remains with the people."
• Now, sir, I undertake to say further that neither the govern
ment nor tho legislature, by any acts or acts defining insurrec
tion or any thing else, can change the effect of the constitution,
can add to it or take any thing from it: In connection with
that matter, I desire to call the attention of the body to certain
other sections of tho constitution itself. Section 21 provides
that*" the privilege of the writ of 'habeas corpus shall " not be sus
pended." Will any one pretend that tho legislature can
suspend that or give tbe governor the power to suspend it ?
Any attempt of tho kind would bo a mere nullity — nothing
moro and nothing loss. The govornor claims that he] had a
right to suspend it, but I apprehond that thia body will not
sustain him in that claim, notwithstanding the discretionary
power which ia act up for him, under the law of 1870.
Again art. 1, soction 24, of the constitution roada ae follows :
" A woll regulated militia being necessary tothejsecurity of
" a free state, the right of thejpeoplo to keep|and bear arms shall
" not be infringed ; end, asjstanding armies in time of peace are
" dangerous to liberty, they ought not to bejkept up, and the
" military should be kept under strict subordination to and gov
erned by the civil power." " ' •
Can the legislature do away with that provision 'of the consti
tution by any legislation of theirs, and if they cannot do it can

862 [COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
they Authorize the governor to do it in fact or virtually 1 I
think it will hardly be so contended. >
Again section 85 of the samo article uses this language : ;
" All courts sliall be open, and evory person for an Injury
" done him in his lands, goods, person or reputation, shall havo
" remedy by due course of law, and right and justice admlnia-
" tered without sale, denial or delay."
Sir, can the legislature undertake to aet aaide that proviaion
of the conetitution, or can they authorize the governor to do it ?
I think not — clearly not.
Now let ua see what power the govornor has under tho con
stitution iu respect to this matter of calling out the militia in
in case of insurrection. By article 12, section 3, the governor
is authorized " to call out the militia to execute the law, sup-
" press riots or insurrection and to repel invasion," and by an
other section of the constitution he is made commander-in-
chief of the militia.
I concede that in the first instance, if insurrection exist, the
governor is clothed with the discretion to call out the militia
and has to be the judge of that. He may call out the militia
to suppress insurrection, and ordinarily a court of justice can
not call in question that discretion. But if ho calls out tho
militia when no insurrection exists or if ho abuse the power
given him by the constitution in the exercise of the authority,
which is admitted to be possessed by him, he is amenable be
fore this body as a court of impeachment. He cannot protect
himself by saying that this excess of power or abuse of power
was a matter of discretion which no other department of the
government has a right te call into question, for that would
place him above the law, above the government itself of which
he was the chief executive officer. So it seems to me therefore
Mr. Chief Justice, that we come back to the question of what
is an insurrection as understood in the conatitution.
Thore is a power given to the governor to suppress insur
rection. What inaurrection \ The insurrection named and
referred to in that article of the conatitution which I havo

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 868
iinmod. Gentlemen on tho other side undortako to vary
that. It must bo conceded, that besldoa thia exceptional leg
islation by tho parliament of Great Britain, which has
nothing to do with tho matter here now, that insurrection, in
tho meaning of tho constitution, meant a rising up against tho
enforcement of the law, and all the precedents which havo
been road, with forms of indictments, &c, go to show that tho
word in the constitution means a rising up and resistance to tho
law and lawful authority. The act of congress which has been
read, clothing the president with certain powers in relation to
calling out the military pursuant to tho clause in the constitu
tion to suppress insurrection, requires that he issue his procla
mation, and for what purpose ? Warning the insurrectionist to
disperse, showing clearly what was meant, that thero waa a
body of mon assembled in arms or in force in open resistance
to tho laws of tho land. It is true that some of the gentlemen
on the other side have feebly — and I say it without any disre
spect — undertaken to show some other kind of insurrection,
gut they have not succeeded, I submit, in showing it either
upon reason or authority. Sport is attempted to be made of
the definition as to what constitutes insurrection, which has
been read here. Upon such a subject Wester's dictionary is
authority. It certainly is authority which is made use of in
the supreme court of this state and in the supreme court of
the United States, when it is sought to ascertain the meaning
of words, even when used in statutes, in order to construe'
them. But it is said that the legislature itself has defined what is
insurrection and that that is binding and conclusive here —
that the legislature having placed an interpretation trpon the
word by declaring that a certain state of things shall con
stitute insurrection, then ipso facto by that legislation, acts
become insurrections which were not insurrections before under
the constitution Of the state. I deny any such doctrine as that.
I say that the legislature have no power to add a jot or a tittle
to the constitution ; that they have no power to declare sets

864 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
"insurrection- which as understood in the constitution itself are
not insurrection ; And that they have no right to confer power
upon' the governor to make that insurrection whioh was not
insurrection under the constitution by any legislation of theirs.
And, sir, . I go further and say that this legislature has not
defined'or undertaken to define what was insurrection. Have
they stated of what it should consist in this act which has been
referred to ? There is nothing of that kind said. This is the
language they have used." • •
" That tho governor is hereby authorized and empowered,
" whenever in hie judgment tlie civil authorities in any county
" are unable to protect its citizens in tlie enjoyment of life and
"property, to .declare such county to be in. a state of insur-
" rection, and • 'to • call into active Bervice the militia of the
"state to such, an extent as may become necossary to sup-
" press bucIi, 'insurrection."
What insurrection? Where is. the definition :of it?
Whore aro we told what the insurrection is ? .We are
told here that the legislature undortook to confer upon
the governor a power whenever in his judgment, life and prop
erty were not safe, to doclare a county in insurrection and that
under that language whatever the govornor thinks as to the
want of safety to life and property is to. bo insrtrrectionj or' not
as ho may think: — in other words they have undertaken to give
to the governor, if that be the construction of the act, a power
which they did not havo themselves. Of course not having
that power, any attempt to confer it on the govornor is a nulity.
But lot us see what would bo tho effect, if that wore the rule?
A good deal was said yestorday in relation to the construction of
this act. It was said that it was not to bo supposed the legislature
intended to violate the constitution. Lot us see what would be
the efieot of that act, if construed as tho gentlemen on the other
side contend. Is there any authority in the constitution any where
to the. legislature to declare a whole, county in a state of insurrec
tion ? Eyery man, woman and child in the county ? Yet it is said
that this is the effect of this Shoffher bill. - Where is the power

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 365
to be found ? I humbly submit that no 6uch authority is to be
found in our organic law. Can an act of the legislature, if it
had said so in so many words, set aside the different provisions
of the constitution which I have read, for that is really the
effect of it, if the construction claimed is to be admitted ? If the
legislature cannot in. terrors terms the constitution, no lawyer
will pretend tbat they have authority to confer the discretion
upon the governor to do it, least of all have they the right to
clothe the governor with power to declare a county in insur
rection, and thereby put all the citizens of that county at the
mercy of one man when he thinks, or chooses to say that he
thinks " the civil authorities are unable to protect its citizens in
" the enjoyment of life and property." It is a monstrous pow
er. I admit that they might empower the governor to call
into active service the militia of the state to such an extent as
may be necessary to suppress insurrection, by providing ways
and means for doing so ; but when they undertake to give him
a discretion under which he claims- thus to set aside tho
constitution nnd the law. I say that the claim on the
governor's part is in excess of his powers under the con
stitution, and that the act with that interpretation is unconstitu
tional and void. Thoy cannot empower tho governor to
suspend the writ of habeas corpus nor raise a standing
force or army (for this is forbidden by tho constitution of tho
United States.) Nor can thoy instead of keeping the military
in subordination to tho civil power, allow him or undertake
to clothe him with authority to mako the civil power subject
to the military power ; nor to clothe the civil courts which
by the constitution are to be kept open for the redress of public
and private wrongs and to substitute therefor military courts
and commissions to try and execute citizens of tho state, as has
been claimed by the accused they had done.
Sir, it has been insisted that by the action of the legislature
and the governor's proclamation all civil law for the time was at an
end in thia county, and the action ot the British Parliament
has been invoked to BhoW not only that the' legislature had a
25

866 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
right to do these things but that they had been rightly, dono,
and that under the act of 1870 the , governor was not amenablo
to Any body for his acts 'in this rospoct.
But what is the meaning of the aot of 1870? I submit that
it bears no such interpretation as is claimed here, but only that
tho govornor by that act was authorized, when an insurrection
existed in a county, to docluro that it existed there, and not to
proclaim the whole county in a stato of insurrection. The legis
lature had no Biich powor. Ho could declare that an insurrec
tion existed in a county, and there ia no doubt that he had
that right under the constitution ; but he M'aa reponaible if
he should mako such a proclamation improperly and cor
ruptly, when in fact no such insurrection exiBted. Ho would
be responsible notwithstanding the discretion waa given him in
the matter, for thia act does not and cannot add a cubit to the
length of his power ; and so at last, Mr. Chiof Justice, tho
question comes back a8 to what ia meant by insurrection under
tho constitution. This law that is relied upon here cannot make
a new offense of insurrection under that instrument. The word
insurrection is well known and defined and was adopted by
our fathers in the earliest of our constitutions and in the con
stitution of the United States, and it has been adopted in the
constitution ufcder which we now live, and we can have no defi
nition by a legislative body to change the effect of the organic
law. I care not how the legislature may have defined it, ad
mitting that they undertake to make something insurrection
which was not insurrection before. I care not what the British
parliament has done, for as the gentleman admits they can do
as they please. When we come to the state of North Carolina
wa have a written constitution and by that constitution certain
powers aro delegated to the legislature, and the legislature is
restricted to those powers thus given. The word " insurrection "
having a meaning under the constitution any act of the legisla
ture referring to insurrection must accept the constitutional
signification of the word. So here, this Shoff'ner act must be
construed with reference to the constitution. If it can be har-

TRIAL OF ^WILLIAM. W.. HOLDEN. 867
monizod with the constitution thon the rule is that such a con
struction of the law must be adopted.  ,-,.:.
It is not necessary for me to discuss the question which
was" raised by my learned associate [Mr. Graham] at the out
set, whether treason waa or was not embraced in insurrection.,
Tliis question doea not turn upon that. The gentleman on
the other side may or may not be right in saying that insurrec
tion is not always treason. Treason certainly embraces insur
rection, but treason in England would not, because there are other
acts constituting treason there which do not amount to treason in
this country. The levying of war would embrace insurrection.
Insurrection is well defined to be a rising of the people in
resistance to the law. It is not the existence of secret
associations or riots. It may well be that such persons
have been guilty of riot. The killing of Outlaw, which has
been spoken of, may have been guilty of a riot or even murder,
but it was no insurrection. A parcel of men get together,
determine to do an unlawful act, and a man is hung. That is
a riot, and those engaged in it may be tried for a capital felony ;
but if they do not hang him they would have been indictable
for a riot. Men may be indicted for conspiracy to do
unlawful acts, but their conspiracy does not amount to
insurrection ; and if the governor is to be permitted to
put the whole county in a state of insurrection with power
to arrest whom he will, and imprison whom he will, and try
whom he will by military commission, we shall have that state
of things in North Carolina which has existed in Ireland and
which has been bo well portrayed in the work from which the
learned gentleman read. That has been attempted to be
inaugurated here. Men were arrested, the civil law was
silenced, and a military court was ordered, and it is insisted, on
the part of the respondent, that he had the discretion to do all
these things. We say to the gentlemen, when they offer to
make thia proof and tell ua that they have a great deal more
behind, that they have begun at the wrong end of their case.
Xhey say it is a mere question of the order of the proceeding,

868 , /COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS. .
and that a court has the right to receive this proof when they
tell us that they expect to connect these secret societies with
overt Acts thereafter to be proved and that there should be no
objections to their proceeding now to prove the existence' of
these societies. We do not believe that they can show an overt
act of insurrection and hence wo desire that this trial
Bhall proceed in its proper order according to the precedent
quoted in the case of Bolman and Swartwont where it was
ruled by the highest judicial authority in the land that they
should begin by first proving the overt act. But they want to
commence where they should leave off, and not now take up
the time of this body by going into matters which are wholly
immaterial at present.
The gentleman who last addressed the court, stated in his
peroration that unless the respondent is allowed to give this
proof, ho will go out of this court, in the opinion of mankind,
an innocent man. That is to bo seen. I hope that no such re
marks as that will weigh a feather before thia court. Let the
court do what they consider to bo right in the premisea and
nothing more. I trust I am ono of the last men in the world
to deny to an accused evory fair opportunity of making his
defeneo, but I am not willing to conccdo any moro in view of
tho claim they make, than what they havo a right to under tho
law. It Ib said that the governor had the right to believe that this act
of January, 1870, known as the Shofther act, was constitutional
and that he acted under it in good faith as a constitutional
act, and that you ought not now to hold him responsible, if
ho has been mistaken in tho meaning of the law or its
proper interpretation under the constitution; That is a matter
to be ahownin another way than by going into[the particu
lar facta which were called for by the question propounded
by the counsel to the witness. We have offered evidence
aa wo humbly aubmit, to make out a case prima facie
that there was no insurrection in the county of Alamance in
the correct understanding of tho word at tho time the procla*

TRIAL OF! WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 869
mation was issued. The courts were in session and there was
no uprising of the people. Everything was going oh in its usual
order except here and there an outrage was perpetrated. As
to any honest impression and belief of the accused that he had
that power, that is a matter to be inquired into hereafter and in a
different way. The proof that there existed these secret organ
izations might weigh something to ascertain what the motive was ;
but it ia not so much that we object to as it is to proving in
limine the existence of these societies as they stated they deaire
to follow it up with proof of other matters to show not insur
rection, but offenses of a different kind. Whether this body
will acquit the respondent because he acted from honest
motives, and which the counsel said was the turning point in the
case, it is not for me now to say. It is enough to say there aro
other questions— other matters charged and many of them, and let
this question now pending be decided as it will, it will not affect
the matters which are involved in those charges. And so,
upon the whole, Mr. Chief Justice and senators, we submit
that, the the question asked by the respondent's counsel is
inadmissible. Wo havo averred that there was no insurrection
and havo introduced prima facie ovidenco of that fact. Thoy
havo avorrod that thoro was an insurrection and that tho
roBpondont did nothing but what ho was authorized to do
under tho law ; and tho order of proof requires, before he provoa
any other facts, that he must show that there was an insur
rection within the meaning of the conatitution, and until he
does make that proof, the question ia inadmissible.
Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chief Justice and senatore, the magni
tude of the question that is now presented for the consideration
of this body, must be my apology for availing myself of the
kind privilege extended to counsel to discuss the question with
out limit as regards time. I shall endeavor to return the com
pliment by condenaingmy remarks and making them pertinent
to the point at issue.
It will be recollected that the objection which we are now con
sidering was made on the part Of the counsel for the managers

' "870 COURT OF mPEAOHMENTS*.
to a question which was put as' to the existence of secret sbcie-
ties of an illegal character in the cbunty of Alamanco, and that
my associate stated that he expected to prove a'serjes of outrA-
gos In that county within the meaning of the first clauses of the
Shoffnor act. We are met by a denial of our right to produco
evidenoe as to tho existenco of this wide-spread organization,
and wo are mot with a furthor and stronger objection that
we are not to bo allowed to show any one of tho facts
alleged iii tho answer and upon which tho respondent bases
his defense. We are told by tho gentleman on the other side
that, according to tho definition of insurrection to be found in
the law books and dictionaries, this was not a case in which
the legislature had a right to confer upon the governor the
authority which was exercised. Now let us look at this one
moment and see how these gentlemen, if I may be allowed to
use the expression, adhere in the bark while they adhere to
the letter of the law. The constitution of the state of North
Carolina says that the governor shall have power to call out
the militia for three objects, — to suppress insurrection, to sup
press riots and to repel invasions. The gentlemen tell us that
insurrection never exists until there is a physical uprising in
opposition to the execution of the law, and therefore the gov
ernor had no right nor had the legislature the right to confer
upon the governor the power to call out the militia in
advance of the crime consummated making insurrection.
The gentlemen therefore hold, that if there is insurrection in
embryo, that is if men are organized with arms in their
handa and with all the arrangemente for this uprising, you havo
not the means of suppressing or repressing the movement until
the uprising actually takes place. What is an invasion ? Here
is the definition of that: " The entry of a country by the
•' public enemy making war." An insurrection is a " rebellion
" by citizens of the country against ita government." Whatia
a riot ? The gentleman has defined that to bo the meeting of
men "together constituting an illegal combination and
then proceeding ao far as to execute their purpose. When

TRIAL OF WILtlAM W. HOLDEN. 871
a consipiracy exists— -an unlawful assemblage, and no Bteps
are taken to consummate tlieir purpose, that is a rout, but
when the purpose ia fully accomplished it is a riot and: not
before. Tlie argument of the learned counsel is that the gov
ernor has no right to suppress a tumultous assemblage, that
is going to prosecute an unlawful design— that ho has no right
or power to repress tho agonclos— to provont tho execution of
that which, when consummated, makes tho offonco a riot, so
that, if tho military forcoa wore to arrest this Illegal body, by
reason of tho want of a consummation of Its purpose, the
aiTOBt would be a violation of. tho constitution, because there was
no riot, and hence the constitution did not authorize tho military
power to be used. Suppose that a body of armed men are
upon the frontier of tho state organized and ready to make a de
scent, on the county of Alamance or some other county that is
not an invasion until they tread upon the soil of North Caroli
na. Yet, according to the gentleman's argument the governor's
hands aro tied and he dare not summon the military or call on
•a single man, but must Mrait until this organization of forces
has actually invaded North Carolina and then, and not till then,
can ho call out tho military, within tho provisions of our funda
mental law. So they say in reference to the matter under con
sideration, that he must wait until the acts have been fully con
summated and accomplished, and then he can break up these
organizations, and arrest the persons engaged in them, but he
is powerless to call out the militia to break them up in their
inception — in their embryo ; or to use a homely expression, you
may kill the chicken when it is hatched, but you cannot destroy
the egg from which it is to be hatched." In our opinion this
is not the meaning of the constitution. We believe that it was
intended for a more beneficent and larger purpose. It was
intended not only to arm the executive of this atate with the
means of punishing thoso who have committed crime, but it
was also intended to prevent the execution of the purpose of
creating an insurrection or of making a riot , and hence was

372 court of mpiAcarMKNTS. -.
preventive in its nature rather than punitory when the offence
was committed. •• .,  -t .¦< i >.
JDoes the constitution authorize its officer to arrest and pun
ish men after they haye committed crime, and yet does not
allow them to anticipate the fact by arresting the man who
proposes to commit the crime and thus prevent its execution t
That is the argument upon which they assume to hold the re
spondent liable upon this charge.
In 1795 an act was passed by congress to carry out a similar
provision in the constitution of the United States, to enable the act
president to call out the militia to repel invasion, and that
expressly provided that he may not only repel it when invasion
takes place, but may anticipate it and prevent it. Yet no ques
tion was ever raised, that under the power to repel invasion which
was conferred by congress upon the president, he had not the
power to anticipate and prevent that invasion which might be re
pelled after it had taken place. Here then we meet the gentle
man in tho beginning and tell him that wo havo a right to show
any faot or circumstance tending to prove tho existence of an or-.
ganlzation the illegal purposea of which, in their proaecution,
would in all probability roault in riot or insurrection and which
this act of 1870, and the constitution together were intended to
give to the governor tho power to repress. Tho Btrict defini
tion of an offence and the proof required to sustain it, in the
case of a person on trial, cannot be applied to an officer
making efforts to prevent the perpetration of the act which, if
committed, would constitute the offence without rendering vain
and illusory all those constitutional and legal provisions inten
ded for the repression of violence and wrong, and for the pro
tection of liberty and life.
But aside from that let us see how this matter stands in another
point of view. The existence of these secret organizations led
to the enactment of a law by the General Assembly making it
a misdemeanor for any persons to go about armed and dis
guised for the purpose of terrifying or frightening the people
of the state, and making it a trespass committed by persons

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 873
thus disguised, a felony to be punished as such. The existence
then of such organizations is forbidden by law. > i • >
Later we find the enactment, known as tho Shofrher act,
which declares that the "governor is hereby authorized and
"empowered whenever in his judgment the civil authorities
" in any county are unable to protect its citizena in the enjoy-
" ment of life and property, to declare auch county to be in a
" state of insurrection and to call out into active service the
" militia of the state to such an extent as may become necessary
" to suppress such insurrection, and in such case the governor
" is further authorized to call upon the president for such assis-
" tance, if any, as in his judgment may be necessary to enforco
"the law."
The learned counsel who last addressed the court says — and
I really think he will scarcely ask the conviction of the respon
dent upon any such ground — that the general asembly haB not
in that act declared that those circumstances upon which tho
county might bo declared in insurrection constitute themselves an
insurrection, but on tho contrary that the act has, by tho use of that
word, fallen back on tho constitution itself for an interpretation
aud heretofore the general schenio and purpose of the act woro
not to enlarge or modify tho provisions to bo found in tho con
stitution. Now as reasouable-miudod mon, senators aoting as
judges, aro disposed, I am Biiro, to give this act its full and fair
interpretation, let us examine and see what is its real intend
ment and meaning.
This aot provides this :
" The governor is hereby authorized and empowered,
" whenever in his judgment the civil authorities in any county
" are unable to protect the citizens in the enjoyment of life
" and property, to declare such county to be in a atate of insur-
" rection, and to call into active service the militia of the state
" to such an extent as may become necessary to suppress such
" insurrection." *,-. *
What are the facts upon which he is to issue his proclama
tion? What are the]things which must exist according to. his

874 *court- of Impeachments.
judgment tor warrant thoexrercise of this power conferred upon
him ? All that is required isthat, whenever in 'such judgment
the civil authorities in any county are unable to protect citizens
in the enjoyment of life and propety, Whenever the citizens of
a county are unsafe either in their life or property, the act says
he may issue this proclamation to declare the county in a
state of insurrection. Has he not, aupposing that the ground
existed upon which that judgment was bnsed, literally exercised
the very authority which this act undertakes to confer upon
him? And will tho gentleman say, when he waa only required
to determine upon the question of the safety of life and
property that he must be answerable to this high court of
impeachment because there did not exist the facts nece6-
essary to constitute an insurrection according to the best
definition of it, although they are not in the statute, and al
though they are not made the ground upon which the procla
mation was to be issued ? If the governor believed that life and
propt rty were insecure and had reasonable grounds for that judg
ment, he is protected fully under that statute for issuing that
proclamation, according to our view of it, whether in point of
law the legislature had a right to enact it or not. It is at
least, a legislative delegation of that power as expressed
in this statute. This senate and the house of representatives —
the parties to this impeachment — the one preferring the
charge and the other trying it — these two bodies constituted
this general assembly, and they have in the most solemn man
ner called upon the governor in such a contingency as this to
call out the militia and use the military power of the atate. Ia
he to be arraigned and punished for obedience to the law ?
Although he is not in terms required, yet that statute, accor
ding to its literal interpretation, is mandatory upon the governor,
and had he ventured, with full and ample evidence that life and
property were unsafe in that county, to have refused to execute
the powers conferred upon him he might have been arraigned
before this tribunal for not protecting the lives of citizens of
this Btate ' - <¦

TRIAL OF ' WTLLTXM W. -HOLDEN. • 375
' On the other side,' it is said that this act violates the constitution
Cf'thO state of North Carolina. < Who is to judge of that? Is this
tribunal to pronounce it void? Will this senate, 'Bitting as
a COurt, doit? Perhaps it has ''such right ; and' may now
bo declare, although the respondent had not thellght and benefit
Of ita' judgment upon the constitutionality of the" law
When he was carrying ont its provisions, and aiming to
Bectiro ita objecta in the county of Alamance. 'Is tho
governor of tho state to be punished because he carried
into effect and exercised tho power which thia whole general
assembly' claimed the right to exercise, and put in the
statute under which he acted ? I am aware it was urged
in the trial of Andrew Johnson (much further than is
urged in this,) that it was the duty of the president of the
United States to carry into exercise an unconstitutional law,
and he was impeached, and it was insisted by the managers
there that he could not protect himself by showing that this
very statute for violating which he was impeached, was, itself,
an infraction of the constitution of the United States; Let me
read from the speech of the managers in that case, to 6how
how far the doctrine was carried from the claim which is here
made. Mr. Butler said :
"We claim that the question of the constitutionality of any
" law of congress is, upon this trial, 'a totally irrelevant one.
" The constitution substitutes this reconsideration and pas-
"sage as an equivalent to the president's signature. < After
" that, he and a]l other officers must execute the law, whether
"in fact constitutional or not. i '
" For the president to refuse to execute a law duly passed,
"because he thought it unconstitutional, after he had vetoed it
"for that reason, would, in effect, be for him to execute his
" veto, and leave the law unexecuted. '
"It may be aaid that he may do this at his ! peril; ; True;
«" but that peril ia, to be impeached for violating his oath of
"office, aa is now being done." i " >'"¦ i^'"<" ¦¦'¦>¦¦ ••'
It was claimed in that case (the other extreme of the propo-

376 'HCOUBT OF IMPEACHMENTS. '
eifion maintained here) that it was the duty of the president
of the United States to; execute a law paesed by congress
clothed with the forms of an enactment although in fact lie
might believe it to be totally repugnant to and unauthorized
by the constitution of the United States, while the managers
of this prosecution^ adopting the opposite view, undertake to
impeach the governor of this state for what? For executing
a law which they allege violates the constitution. They hold
and maintain the opposite theory in the case of the governor
from what the learned managers maintained on the trial of the
president of the United States.
But I take it that it is not material to this inquiry what
may' be the final adjudication as to the unconstitution
ality of this act. The guilt or innoconce of the respon
dent cannot be made to depend upon tho uncertain and
unascertained judgment of this or the highest court of
tho state upon the question of the constitutional power
claimed to bo oxorclsod by the loglalature of North Caro
lina. Who can know with unorrlng certainty what aro
tho limitations and powors conferred in tho constitutions of tho
United States? What judgo that sits upon tho bench does not
often oxorclso powers which aro not conferred and refuses to
recognize rights which are guaranteed under it, though in tho
exercise of an honest judgment as to what that conatitution ia ?
And if a judgo cannot be impeached because he expounds tho
law wrongly, why ahall the governor or another officer of the
country charged with tho execution of a law of the Btate that
ia not warranted by the conatitution, bo liable to thia aevere
punishment for error of judgment ascertained by tho decision
of some tribunal long after the act for which he is tried ?
Would it be just and fair for a public officer to be held
responsible upon such a rule as that? Would it be safe
to hold a public officer to the exercise of any discretionary
power if an error in judgment was to be followed up by
his impeachment and degradation ? In my judgment the
question is whether tho governor honestly exercised the

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W» HOLDEN. 87T
discretion conferred upon him by the statute, if he did
there ib an end of this prosecution so far as that charge is con
cerned. Let me not be misunderstood. The result does hot
follow that the learned counsel [Mr. Bragg] attempted to
deduce from this proposition that the • governor • would be
possessed of unlimited powers and those powers without any
restraint if the doctrine for which we contend is correct
and sound. That principle is that where the general assem*
bly conferred upon any one of its officers a power to be
exercised at his discretion upon a certain state of facts, if
that discretion be exercised im, good faith he is not answer
able before this or any other tribunal. If under the pretence
of exercising that discretion he abuses it and assumes
powers which aro not, and were never intended to be con
ferred, like all other acts of malfeasance in office he may be
held accountable for his act ; but if he honestly exercised his
judgment, if in fact in calling out the militia he did honeatly
believe theso facts to exist upon which he was authorized to
call out the militia then, as we insist, there is an end of this
charge as far as he is concerned ; otherwise a man may bo pun
ished for the exorcise of a diacretion not sought, but on the
contrary forced upon him by the legislation of the country.
The enquiry is not whether that judgment was right or
wrong, whether the state of facta did or did not exist. upon
which the senate would have authorized the calling out of this
military force ; that is not the question here ? A discretion was
imposed upon the governor and it was left to his judgment and
to the judgment of nobody else, and when that judgment was
properly invoked, when he honestly endeavored to decide the
issue and did decide it according to his own convictions
of duty, upon the facts then before him, I do say and say'
it on the soundest principles of law and common right
that he cannot be impeached for the error which ho may have
committed aa to the existence of the fact upon which his judg
ment was based. Suppose there had been a hundred witnesses
who had come and testified to him of facts, the truth of which

would have warranted tho calling i out of thit militia, and sup
pose, uj>ou an tinquliy tho lonate ascertains; that a largo pro
per tion, pi, thoso statements woro unfounded,' would the senate,
by reason of the false information upon which he had exer
cised that discretion and had honestly acted, say that he was
to bo criminally chargod with malfeasance in office and have him
punished and degraded for that exercise of discretion ? I re
peat, and it is tho point ot my argumont, that if the senate
believe that Governor Iloldon in the oxorciso of his judgment
upon tho facts and information thon boforo him, camo to
tho conclusion that that stato of things did exist upon which ho
ho was authorised 'to onll out tho mllltla, it is a full and ample
dofonco upon this trial.
Let mo call tho attention of this body to somo of tho difficul
ties and I may say tho groat Injustice which would arise if tho
dootrlno maintained hero to-day Ib carried out and applied to
this case. A caso has been before the supreme court of tho United
States whloh was referred to by the counsol for tho managers.
It inducod mo to look at tho writings of that great commenta
tor of the constitution of the United States to see how far tho
exercise of discretion on the part of the president of tho
United States was a full protection to him. Judge Storey at
section 1206 of his commendtariea on the constitution says :
"At a very recent period, the question came before the
" supreme court of the Uuited Ssates for a judicial decision ;
" and it was then unanimously determined, that the authority
" to decide, whether the exigency has arisen, belongs exclusively
" to the president, and that his decision is conclusive upon all
" other persons. Tho court said that this construction necessa-
" rily resulted from the nature of the power itself, and from the
" manifest objects contemplated by the act of congress. The
" power itself is to be exercised upon Budden emergencies, upon
" great occasions of state, and under circumstances which may
" bo vital to tho existence of the union. A prompt and
" unhccltating obedience te ordor* is indispensable to tho com-
" ploto Attainment of the objoot. Tho sorvico is a military eor-

TRIAL OB WILLIAM W. HOLDffiN. 379
vice, and tho command of' a f military nature ; and (in such
caaes every delay and every obstacle- (to an efficient
and immediate compliance would necessarily be to. jeopard
the. public interests. While subordinate officers ' or sol
diers are pausing to consider whether, they ought to obey
or are scrupulously weighing the facts upon which the com
mander-in-chief exerciaea the right to demand their services,
the hostile enterprise may bo accomplished without the
means of resistance. While subordinate officers and soldiers
are pausing to consider whether they ought to obey, or are
scrupulously weighing the facts upon which the commander-
in-chief exercises the right to demand their services, the
hostile enterprize may be accomplished, without tho means
of resistance. If the power of regulating the militia, and
of commanding its services in times of insurrection and
invasion are, as it has been emphatically said, they are,
natural incidents to the duties of superintending the com
mon defence, and of watching over the internal peace of
the confederacy, theso powers must be so construed, as to
the modos of their exercise, as not to defeat the great end
in viow. If a superior officer has the right to contest the
order. of tho president, upon his own doubts, as to tho
exigency having arisen, it must equally be the right of every
inferior officer and soldier, and any act done by . any
person in furtherance of such order would be subject to
responsibility in a civil suit, in which his defence must
finally rest upon his ability to establish the facts by
competent proofs. Besides, in many instances the
evidence, upon which the president might decide, that thero
was imminent danger of invasion might be of a nature not
constituting atrict technical proof; or the disclosure of tho
ovidonco might reveal important state secrets, which tho pub
lic Interest and public safety, might imperiously demand to bo
kept in concealment I Tho aot of 1705 was framed upon this
reasoning, Tho president is by it necessarily constituted, hi
the first instance, the judgo of tho existence of the, exigency,

380 '' 4WDKT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
"and is bound to act according to his belief of the facta. If he
" does eo Act, And decides to call out the militia, his order* for
" this purpose are m strict conformity to the law } and it would
" seem to follow; as a necessary consequence, that every act
" done by a subordinate officer in obedience to such orders is
" equally justifiable. The law contemplates, that under such
" circumstances orders shall be given to carry the power into
" effect ; and it cannot be, that it is a correct inference, that
" any other person has a right to disobey them. No provison
" is made for an appeal trom, or review of the president's opinion.
"And whenever a statute gives a discretionary power to any per-
" son to be exercised by him upon his own opinion of certain
•' facts, the general rule of the construction is, that he is thereby
" constituted the sole and exclusive judge of the existence of
" these facts. "
It will be seen, Mr. Chief Justice and senators, that the
reasons given for the non-responsibility of the executive officer
of tho United States for acts within the discretion conferred
upon him by statute, aro that the grounds upon which he acts
are not strictly capable of proof before a judicial tribunal. Con
sidorations involving tho public good may not permit, and
often do not permit, them to be published to the world ; and to
hold him responsible for exercising his judgment by going into
an inquiry to determine whether he believed he ought to have
thus acted, is to violate the whole scope and purpoae of the law
and to Bubject him to an iniquitous judgment. The only
inquiry is, has he been guilty of misconduct in office — has he
wilfully violated his duty. If he has, he is amenable to this
impeachment. But if this discretion was honestly exercised
and if the senate believe that was his judgment and that he had
reasonable grounds for that judgment, the defence is complete
so. far as that branch of the controversy is concerned. He
cannot be held and must not be held responsible and especially
in this proceeding because ho has erroneously, according to
your opinion, exercised a discretion conferred upon him by the
statute; His powers under our constitution are precisely the

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 881
powers conferred by the congress of the United States upon
the president of the United States under the federal conatitu
tion, and they were conferred upon him under the constitution
of North Carolina, and are regulated and restrained in a
measure by the act to which I have called the attention of the
court. In this connection, I beg further to refer to a case reported
in 11 Johnson, New York Reports, page 120, in which Judge
Spencer U8es thia language : j
"The case of Harmon vs. Tappenden and others (1 East
" 555,) and Drewry vs. Colton, in a note to that case, clearly
" show that this action is not maintainable, without stating
" and proving malice express or implied on the part of the
" officers. In the case in the text, Laurence, judge, said :
" 'There is no instance of an notion of this sort maintained for
" an act arising merely from error of judgment ;' and he
" cited Mr. Justice Wilson's opinion iu Drewry vs. Coulton
" with approbation. In that case the suit was for refusing
"the plaintiff's vote. Justice Wilson considered it as an
" aotion for misbehavior by a publio officor in the disoharge
" of his duty, and that tho act must be malicious and wilful
"to render it a misbehavior: and he held that no aotion
" would lie for a mistake in law. In speaking of the case of
" Ashby vs. White, he considered it as having been deter-
'• mined by the house of lords on that ground, from the reso-
" lutions entered into by them. The whole of Judge Wilson's
" reasoning is clear, perspicuous and irresistable ; and is fully
"confirmed in Harman vs. Tappanden. It would, in our
" opinion, be opposed to all the principles of law, justice and
" sound policy, to hold that officers, called upon to exercise
" there deliberate judgments, are answerable for a mistake in-
" law, either civilly or criminally, when their motives are pure,
" and untainted with fraud or malice.
The honorable managers themselves have understood this to
be the true construction of our constitution in relation to im
peaohment for they have not neglected in every one of their
26

382 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
charges to allege not merely the violation of the constitution of
North Carolina and the laws of the atate, but a wilful and cor
rupt violation of those laws. All through the impeaching
articles they have imputed to the respondent, the motives which
in their judgment, and rightfully in their judgment, were neces
sary to constitute the impeachable offense charged against him.
And now striking out all thoso it is seriously contended that
because the learned gentleman [Mr. Bragg] is able to make an
argument to this body, that the act is in violation of tho
constitution of the state and bocanso he may have to your satisfac
tion established the fact, he is at liberty to ask the conviction of
the respondent because he shared the sentiment of the gen
eral assembly that passed that act and carried, into execution
their positive injunctions to him. They have made it his duty
to protect the life and property by the strong ann of military
power, and whenever the civil authorities in his judgment were
incompetent to that end they have said to him that he must
declare that county in a state of insurrection. We say that he
has literally exercised the power conferred upon him in the act
and no more. For the exercise of the power conferred upon
him by that act he is not accountable whether in the judgment
q>f this body that act is or is not an infraction of the constitu
tion of the state of North Carolina.
Again, sir, my colleague [Mr. Conigland,] illustrated our
position, and I beg a moment to call the same matter again to
the attention of the senate. There has just been passed by the
general assembly an act providing for the calling of a conven
tion of the people of North Carolina, and it is required of the
governor to issue a proclamation with the view of carrying its
provisions into effect. According to the views of gentlemen
on the other side, if the governor should issue his proclamation
nnd endeavor to carry that law into effect, and it Bhould here
after bo held, and if iny friend Bhall be able to arguo and ahow
that tho constitutional powor to pass that law does not exist in.
a mere majority of tho members of either houso, the governor
would bo liable to impeachmont boforo this body for issuing his

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 383
proclamation and giving thereby force and effect to a measure
which another Benate may hereafter consider as a violation of
the constitution of the state ; that is, he could be impeached for
carrying into effect that unconstitutional law. If tho motive is
to be lost sight of, and tho honesty and bona fides of his conduct
are to be overlooked, your governor is just as responsible to
tho senate for carrying out that act, if it should hereafter be de
termined to bo unconstitutional, as Governor Holden is to bo
punished now for carrying this act into effect because it is un
constitutional. But there is another view of this caso to which I call the
attention of senators. The admission of this evidence can work
no harm to the prosecution. Whether its effects shall be to
exculpate him upon the final argument is a question which will
be open, still, for discussion. But exclude it and in what con
dition do you leave this case ? Suppose a minority of more
than one-third shall deem the evidence admissible and proper,
and believe that the senate ought to have all the facts proposed
to be given in evidence before them, that minority may deter
mine the issue of this prosecution, two-thirds of this body being
essential to conviction; and is it prudent and safe to rule
out, upon this preliminary matter, evidence which a minority,
more than one-third, most honestly believe should have been
heard and if the facts alleged wero fully established, should
acquit the defendant of the charge ? These views are not new,
they were presented with very great force, and I think very
correctly, on the trial of Andrew Johnson.
Mr. Curtis in behalf of tho respondent, 6aid :
" The honorable manager's argument may be a sound ono ;
" the Benate may ultimately come te that conclusion after they
" havo heard thia cause ; that is of discussion into which I do
" not enter ; but before tho senate can como to tho considora-
" tion of thoso questions they muat pass over this allegation ;
" thoy must either say as the hOnorablo manager says, that it Ib
"wholly immaterial what opinion tho president formed or un-
u der what advice or oiroumstanoes he formed it, or else it must

384 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
" be admitted by senators that it is material, and the evidence
" must be considered. » ,
" Now, how is it possible at this stage of the enquiry to deter-
"mine which of these courses is to be taken by the honorable
" senate ? If the senate should finally come to tlie conclusion
" that is wholly immaterial, this evidence will do no harm On
" tho other hand, if the senate should finally come to the con-
" elusion that it is material, what the intention of the president
" waa in doing theao acta, that thoy aro to look to soo whether
" there waa or not a wilful violation of tho conatitution, thon
" thoy will have excluded the ovidenco upon which they could
" have determined that quoation, if it should thus prove to be
" material. "I respectfully submit, therefore, that whether the argument
" of tho honorablo manager is sound or unsound, whether it will
" finally prove in tho judgment of tho senate that this evidence
" is Immaterial or not, this Is not tho time to exclude it upon
" tho ground that an examination of the merits hereafter and a
" decision upon thoao merits will allow that it is immaterial.
" When that is shown tho ovidenco can bo laid aside. If the
u othor conclusion should bo arrived at by any ono sonator, or
" by the body gonorally, thon thoy will bo in want of his ovi-
" denoo which wo now offer."
So groat was tho difficulty of rejecting evidence that might
become material and pertinent on tho final hearing that Senator
Sumner of that body proposed to admit all kinds of evidence
except such as was decidedly immaterial or trivial. The pro
position did not prevail it is true, but this resolution was
offered by Senator Sumner because of the embarrassment and
difficulty which he saw might arise in consequence of the rejec
tion of a large body of evidence upon which the conviction or
acquittal of the accused might ultimately depend.
Again, all this evidonco is material upon tho question of tho
intent upon wlilcJh theso acts wore dono. It is tho intent that
constitutes a orima for which impeachment lies — not errors of
judgment but witful violations of duty. These are acts of official

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. §85
misconduct — wilful and corrupt misconduct of a public officer,
and they are the acts for which impeachment lies. The motive
and intent is material to be inquired into. The senate has already
adjudged that these habeas corpus proceedings, returnable before
Judge Brooks, were admissible upon the question of the intent
with which the governor acted throughout the6e transactions.
This court has by its vote and by its decision declared that it
was a material inquiry as to the motive and purpose by which
the accused was actuated in doing what he has done. We
objected to this proof as irrelevant. But it was insisted upon
as competent by the honorable gentlemen associated with the
managers upon the ground of its tendency to show the intent
with which the otherjicts charged were done, and the chief
justico with the assent of the Benate, making it the judgment
of the whole court, declared that those proceedings were com
petent upon tho question of the intent with which th© governor
acted. Again, If tho gentlemen aro correct in tho position thoy
now tako, thia cause has boon prolonged very far and unneces
sarily, for the answer admits nearly every fact which has been
put In evidence during the course of tho trial. The answor
sots up tho very'defonces which are now off'ered to be proved.
If they are immaterial, why did not the honorable managers
demand j udgment without any further trial ? When wo admit al
most all if not all the allegations that are contained in the articles,
why did they not demand judgment at once ? For if we are not
to put in our justification for tho acts which they charge as
criminal, it was useless to take up the time of the court by
making an inquiry into unimportant and trivial matters which,
true or false, cannot avail the respondent on his trial. The
respondent has set out in his answer the nature of the acts
which he expected to give in evidence ; he now proposes to
make good that part of the answer, and we have gone to trial
npon it. Why shall he not have the benefit by proving before
this body the grounds upon which he exercised this power, for
which he is now arraignedt If the Benate ahall believe, acting

880 COURT OF IMPHAOIIMMNT*
as impartial And honest jurors and judges, that undor the cir
cumstances ho was warranted in coming to the conclusion which
ho did, and that the contingency had arisen on which it was
his duty to develop tho military strength of tho Stato to break
up these organizations, then this senato will bo reluctant, I am
sure, to condemn him when, senators boo that undor tho clrcuin-
Btanoos ho was warranted In his actH, though they may now
think tho state of things then existing was not such as ho then
supposed .
Mr. Chief Justice, wo are before a court, not as manager
Butler said, a senate, without a precedent except its own,
without law except the laws which it made itself, rather indi
rectly sanctioned by my honorable friend on the other side, we
are here in North Carolina before a court of justice, and noth
ing will be administered here but the justice of the state against
any and all offenders.
Ponding the remarks of Mr. Smith, Senator Flomming
moved that tho court take a recess for five minutes.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE put the question on the motion of
Senator Flomming, and it was decided in the affirmative.
On the court re-assembling, Mr. Smith resumed his remarks.
He said :
Mr. Chief Justice, when the Senate took the recesa I
was about calling attention to what I regard as an unsound
view of the attributes and powers that belong to this tribunal.
Mr. Manager Butler uses this languago in the opening address
upon the trial of Andrew Johnson :
" A constitutional. tribunal solely, you are bound by no law,
" either statute or common, which may limit your constitu-
" tional prerogative. You Consult no precedent save those
" of tho law and custom of parliamentary bodies. You are a
" law into yourselves, bound only, by the natural principles of
" equity and justice, and that sahispopuU suprema est lex.
Mr. BADGER. Mr. Chief Justice, tho argument which my
associate is now addressing to the senate as a court of impeach
ment is ono which is very important. It must be apparent

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 887
that thoro is scarcoly a quorum of senators present. Tho ques
tion now being discussed is a vital question and it does seem
to me that if the time is so far advanced in tho day that tho
senators cannot be present, the time has como for the court to
adjourn. I throw this out as a suggestion in the hope that
some senator will move to adjourn the session for the day. I
repeat that if the time has arrived when the senate of North
Carolina sitting as a court of impeachment, is unwilling to hear
what the counsel for the respondent have to say, it does seem
to me that the time has arrived for the court to adjourn. I
have not the power to make the motion myself. If senators
should see fit to leave the chamber for their dinners or for any
other purpose when counsel are proceeding with their argu
ment, I think the counsel themselves ought to be permitted to
go home until the timo when the senators, who are to decide
the question, shall come back to hear the conclusion of the
argument. Senator EDWARDS. Mr. Chief Justice, I have reason
to believe that it would be agreeable to the managers as well as
the counsel for the respondent to adjourn. I do not think the
lecture comes very gracefully from the counsel for the respon
dent, but putting that aside, I move that the court now 'adjourn
until seven o'clock.
Senator ROBBINS, of Rowan, moved as a substitute that
the court adjourn for the day.
The CHIEF JUSTICE put the question on the motion of
Senator Robbins, of Rowan, and it was decided in the affirmative.
So the court adjourned.

TRIAL OF WIUJAM W. HOLDEN. 880
SZJJVBMTH BAY.
Senate Chamber, Feb. 8th, 1871.
The COURT met at 11 o'clock, pursuant to adjournment.
Honorable Richmond M. Pearson, chief justice of the supremo
court, in the chair.
Proceedings were opened by proclamation made in due form
by the doorkeeper.
The CLERK called the roll of senators, and the following
gentlemen were found to be present :
Messrs. Adams, Albright, Battle, Beasley, Bellamy, Brog
den, Brown, Cook, Council, Cowles, Crowell, Currie, Dargan,
Edwards, Eppes, Flemming, Flythe, Gilmer, Graham, of Ala
mance, Graham, of Orange, Hawkins, Hyman, Jones, King,
Latham, Ledbettor, Lehman, Linney, Love, Mauney, McClam
my, McCotter, Merrimon, Moore, Murphy, Norment, Olds,
Price, Robbins, of Davidson, Robbins, of Rowan, Skinner,
Speed, Troy, Waddell, Warren, Whiteside and Worth — 45.
Senator TROY moved that the reading of the journal of
yesterday be dispensed with.
The CHIEF JUSTICE put the question on tlie motion of
senator Troy, and it was decided in the affirmative.
Mr. MERRIMON. Mr. Chief Justice, I desiro to call atten
tion te what may be a misprint in the evidence of Mr. Cock©
which is to be found on page 280. As printed Colonel Cocke
is made to say that he removed to Asheville in Ootober, 1869 ;,
it should be 1865.
Senator WARREN. Mr. Chief Justice I would like to bo-
indulged for a moment before the discussion is resumed. I do
not wish to interfere at all with the line of argument which ia
to be followed on either side, but I would like to hear a diacua-
sion on this point, if the respective counsel think it material,
whether any evidence of intent is admissible on this trial, and
if so, whether the evidence offered tenda to show the intent. I

390 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
do not allude to evidence referred to by the counsel for the
respondent aa to what 'they- propose to' prove hereafter, but
only to the particular question now before the court.
Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chief Justice and Senators, I had nearly
concluded what I had to say yesterday when tho court adjourned
and I would have trespassed en its time this morning by very
brief remarks but for the suggestion which has been made by
ono of the senators in relation to a point which has perhaps not
been adverted to in this discussion, and I will ask the indul
gence of the court for a very short time while I say something
upon it.
But before proceeding to that, I desire, as I am to, be re
plied to by the learned counsel for the managers, [Mr. Gra
ham,] to state that he maj7, understand the precise ground
which is taken on the part of the respondent in relation to
the admissibility of this evidence offered, bearing on the
question of the rightful issue of the proclamation of insurrec
tion as to the county of Alamance. The enquiry is as to the
relevancy of the evidence offered to show the condition of
things which existed. The statute authorizes the proclama
tion to be made by the governor, and we have offered the
evidence to show a state of facts communicated to the gover
nor as existing in that county, upon which, by the express
terms of tho statute, he was authorized to issue the procla
mation ; and, most undoubtedly, if all evidence in relation
to tho enquiry whether life and property were safe in the
county of Alamance is to be rejected, then of course the de
fence will not be permitted to show the facts contemplated
by tho statute upon which the governor was authorized to
declare a county in insurrection. We say further, that if we
do satisfy the court that his act was within the reasonable
exercise of his discretion (a discretion not colorable merely as
in the case supposed, by the learned counsel who preoeded me,
[Mr. Bragg,] but exercised bona fide and truly, as authorized
by the statute) upon the oaso then presented, and a judgment
formed upon a fair consideration of the evidence, it is oon^

. TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 891
elusive and protective in this and every other trial, and that
the contrary doctrine that men are to be impeached and pun-
ishod for errors of judgment, for mistakes of opiuion, finds no
countenance in any system of criminal jurisprudence known
to civilized nations ; and that the principle contended for
by which the governor would be subject to punishment,
would expel from the bench, by impeachment, every
judge who should deliver an erroneous decision, and would
drive from office every executive officer who, in an honest
endeavor to discharge his duty, might commit mistakes or fall
into errors of judgment.
All crime consists in the intent. There can be no crime
without a guilty intent. Sometimes that intent is conclu
sively established by the act, upon the broad principle that
a man must be supposed to contemplate that whichis the
natural and obvious result of his act — the intent to do that
which he did do. But there is another class of offences, and
this we submit is one of them, in which the intent is sep
arate from the act, and is an essential element to be ascer
tained in order to constitute guilt ; and the exercise of official
power by an executive or judicial officer, to be the sub
ject of punishment, must have been wilfully and corruptly and
intentionally wrong, otherwise no crime has been committed.
No judgo can be depof ed from his plaeo for an error of judg
ment, although that error may result in a disregard of the require
ments of tho constitution. No officer of any description can be
punished who honestly aims to discharge all his duty under
tho constitution and tho lawa which are supremo over him.
The act of passing counterfeit money illustrate this idea ; the
act of false swearing, furnishes another instance which illus
trates the same principle. The moro act of passing counterfeit
money is not a orimo ; if bo, no one would be free from guilt
for all of us unquestionably have rcceivod and paid it out. False
statements on oath aro not punished merely as such. There
must be a eorrupt intent and a wilful false swearing to consti
tute perj ury. There is no guilt, to bo punished by a criminal

892 COURT OP IMPEACHMENTS.
prosecution in the cases I have referred to, unless there is a
criminal purpose and intent accompanying the act. In the
case pending here, is an exercise of power, as we insist
the evidence will show, if admitted, fully warranted by the
language of the statute. If, upon exercising that power,
there was an honest purpose on the part of the governor
to accomplish the object which the legislature had in
view in making the law, we maintain he has committed
no crime, although the statute under which he acted, may
be in violation of the rights of individuals Beoured under
the constitution and lawa of North Carolina. ThiB was the
view taken by the counsel for President Johnson, when tho
question of his violation of tho tenure of office act was under
consideration. Tho United States Benate, I think most unjuatly,
refused to allow tho accused to show that ho took tho opinion
ot tho legal advisers of tho president nnd among thorn Secre
tary Stanton himself, then a member of the cabinet, whoso
advice waste tho effect that, tho act infringed the constitutional
prerogative of the executive office ; and tho testimony offered
by him to show that there was no criminal purposo on his part
to violate the constitution of the United States, but that ho
desired honestly and faithfully to obey Its commands and to
preserve unimpaired the attributes and prerogative of the offico
entrusted to him for the time being as its incumbent, was most
unjustly I think rejected. I refer to the portion of the speech
of one of his counsel to be found on page 169 of the second
volume of the reported proceedings of the impeachment trial,
remarking however, that in the speech are contained various
quotations in support of the view taken by the counsel.
I read an extract from the 6peech of Mr. Nelson.
" " Every crime must have, necessarily, two constituent
" " parts, namely, an act forbidden by law and intention."
And that is as applicable, I take it, to a high misdemeanor
as it is to a high crime.
• :, " "The act is innocent or guilty, jnst as there was or was
* " not an intention to commit a crime ; for example, a man

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 893
" " embarks on board a ship at New York for the purpose of
!' " going to New Orleans ; if he went with an intention to1
" " perform a lawful act he is perfectly innocent ; but if his
" " intention was to levy war against the United States, he i6
" " guilty of an overt act of treason."
" Mr. Bishop, in his work on criminal law, section 252, says :
" " Intent is not always inferable from the act done." " I
" " maintain that, there being no unlawful or improper inten-
" " tion, there can be no crime or misdemeanor, and although
" " I did not read this yesterday, I substantially cited it ; but
" " having it here, I ask your indulgence to repeat it again in
" " the language of the book itBelf. I refer to Wharton's
" " Criminal Law, page 733, and ftoscoe's Criminal Evidence,
" " page 804, te sustain this proposition."
" " An indlctmont against an officer of justico for mlsbe-
u " havloitr in office, niust charge that tho act was dono with
" " corrupt, partial, malicious, or improper motives, and above
" " all, with a knowledge that it was wrong." "
"In Wharton, page 269, and 2 Russell, 782, tliis principle is
" stated ;
" " As to aots of an official nature, everything ia preaumed to
" " to be rightfully dono until the contrary appears." "
" Again, Mr. BiBhop, in his criminal law, section 80, says :
" " A case of overwhelming necessity (aa to intent) or honeat
""mistake of fact will be excepted out of a general statute.""
I read also the opinion pronounced by one of the judges of
that court, who will not be charged with any partiality at least
towards the president of the United States, Senator Sumner,
of Massachusetts. Mr. Sumner 6aid :
" From the form ot procedure, I pass to the rules of evir-
" dence / and here again the senate must avoid all technicalities!
"and not allow any artificial rule to shut out the truth. It
" would allow no such thing on the expulsion of a senator.
" How can it allow any such thing on the expulsion of a preat-
" dent ? On this aceoun 1 1 voted to admit all the «ritileace that
" was offered during the trial, behoving, in thftffcsfc place, tha*

894 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
" it ought to be heard and considered ; and in the second placo,
"that, even if it were shut out from thoae proceedings, it could
" not be shut out from the public or bo shut out from history,
" both of which must bo the ultimate judges."
Senator Fowler in pronouncing his opinion uses this lan
guage: " The simple act is not in law necessarily criminal ; it must
" be accompanied with a criminal purposo. Actus non facit
" ream, 'nisi meus sit rea. Lord Kenyon says : ' It ia a prin-
" ' pie of natural justico and of our law that the intent and the
" ' act must both concur to constitute the crime. The intent
" itself is not punishable ; indeed not the subject of human law.
" It must accompany in some manner an act. Cogitationis
" paenvm nemo patitua. 'The intent must also be proved as
" alleged.' " The proof both of fact and intent must establish the unlaw-
. " ful act, and also the criminal intent, as charged in the articles
"exhibited." Senator GRAHAM, of Orange. Without desiring to inter
rupt the counsel, Mr. Chief Justice, I should like to hear dis
cussion on this point, whether, to show the intent with which
the respondent committed tho alleged act, we can admit evi
dence of what occurred before the passago of the act of January,
1870, known as the Shoffner bill, or whether we are not confined
to such matters has occurred after that bill became a law.
Mr. SMITH. I will answer for myself to that point before
I conclude. I next read the opinion of senator Ilondricks, then as now,
a senator of the United States, and one of the judges in that
case and a man of very high chrracter and position :
" I cannot concur in the opinion that has been expressed,
" that if a technical violation of the law has been established,
" the senate has no discretion, but must convict. I think the
" senate may judge whether In the case a high crime or mis-
" demeanor has been established, and whether in the namo of

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 895
" the people the prosecution ought to be made and sustained."
Senator Grimes expresses himself thus : >
" I coino now to tho question of intent : admitting that tho
" president had no power under the law to issue the order to
" remove Mr. Stanton and appoint General Thomas secretaiy
" for the department of war ad interim,) did he issue those orders
" with a manifest intent to violate the laws and ' the constitu-
" tion of the United States,' as charged in the articles, or did
" he issue them, as he says he did, with a view to have the
" constitutionality of the tenure-of-office act judicially decided ?"
Senator Doolittle who was also one of the judges, uses this
language in giving his views :
" This opinion of the attorney general, if given and acted
" upon in good faith by the president, is a protection against
" any charge of high crime or high misdemeanor. The attor-
" ney general is chosen because he is learned in the law, to
" advise a president who may not be a lawyer at all. He is
" confirmed by the senate as a judge is confirmed, for high
" character and legal learning."
In that case, one of the charges against President Johnson
was, that he had violated a law of the land. His defence was,
that he had taken the advice of his counsel and his cabinet, and
their opinion was, that the law infringed the constitution of
the United States — the highest law — and infringed it in a man
ner which stripped the executive office of one of its essential
attributes, that his purpose in the act of removal of his secre
tary, was to bring tho case before the courts that the constitu
tionality of the law might be decided, and, meanwhile, not te
surrender any of the just prerogatives of office entrusted to
him to maintain and defend, under the solemnities of an oath
for the time being as president of tho United States. I am
sustained In this view of the case further, by the fact that the
honorable managers have not, in tho common form of an indict
ment, contented thomselves with leaving out the allegation of
illegal and improper purposes whioh they charge existed in
the mind of the aooused, and for which they now arraign him

$96 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS. i
before the bar of this court. I will read a portion of one of
the articles, for I believe the same language runs through all of
¦ them, so far as they relate to this part of the case. The article
chargea the corrupt and illegal intent in the following words l
" That William W. Holden, governor of said stato, un-
•" mindful of the high duties of his office, the obligation of hie
•*' solemn oath of office, and the constitution and laws of said
" state, and intending to stir up oivil war, and subvert per-
" sonal and publio liberty, and the constitution and laws of
" said Btate and of the United States, and oontriving and in-
41 tending to humiliate and degrade the said state and the
"' people thereof, and especially the people of the oounty of
•' Alamanoe, and to provoke the peoplo to wrath and violence,
41 did, under color of his said offloo, on the seventh day of
«' Maroh, in tho year of our Lord ono thousand eight hundred
?4 and seventy, in aaid state, of his own false, corrupt and
M wiokod mind and purpose, proclaim and declare that the
" oounty of Alamance, in said state, was in insurrection," &o,
Why is this corrupt intent imputed unless the honorable
managers believe the establishment of it by proof was an es
sential element of the orime whioh the artioles set out? The
fact that they have put them there carries with it, to my
mind, convincing proof that they believed, as we insist to
day, that the essential ingredient of the crime— an ingredi
ent to be found to exist as a fact necessary to the conviction
and deposition of the accused party from office— is something
more than the mere issuing of a proclamation ; and accord.
ingly, they allege and they must prove that it was issued
with the purposes and for the objects charged and set out
in this portion of the article. And will senators upou
their oaths, when they pass upon the accusation that the
governor is guilty, after they have shut our mouths and not
permitted us to repel the imputation of intents, find that
intent to exist outside of the act of issuing the procla
mation and refuse the accused the opportunity of showing hiu
real intent and the absence of that purpose which the article

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 897
charges ? They have made the charge and its truth is now to
be ascertained before the senate. Proof must be competent by
way of repelling as it is by way of establishing the truth of
that part of the allegation ; and I repeat as I said a little while
ago it would be an unheard of proceeding and a dangerous
precedent for the future to hold that a public officer honestly
bent upon the discharge of his official duties should be deposed
from office for an error in judgment.
Sir, when this unfortunate civil war, which lasted for four
dreary years was coming on, tho President of the United
Statea resisted tho execution of tho writ of habeas corpus
in the caso of Merry man and directed tho military officers
not to obey tho writ Issued by tho chief justice of tho
United States. No one dreamed of Impeaching tho President
ot tho United States for that timely act, though wholly unwar
ranted bylaw, to preserve the government Intact and tho union
of states unbroken, or for tho many othor acts put forth of
extraordinary power while ou tho ovo of civil war, though auch
power was not conferred or authorized by tl o constitution ; and
tho country now accords him credit for his wiso precaution
and because of his patriotic intention of preserving the union.
And yet tho same reason which would depose, without refer
ence to the purposo or intent tho executive of this state from his
position, would, had President Lincoln lived and continued in
office, have boon sufficient to oxpel him, by an impeachment
from the presidency of tho United States. His defence would
have been that the great emergency called for tho exercise of
extraordinary powers and that these powers were put forth not
with the view of violating the laws of the land or constitution
but to preserve the government ; that there was no intent or
purpose to break down the constitution or laws of the country
But to preserve both by this extraordinary exerciae of execu
tive power. I do not mean to say ¦ any such exigency existed.
in North Carolina as existed in the United States at large,
when these illegal arrests were made by order of the president.
But that principle by which the highest officer of the United
27

898 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
States would then have been justified against an impeach
ment, when he declared and tho attending circumstances
show that he had not willfully and corruptly exercised
an undelegated power, is invoked as a defence for the governor
of the state, when we insist and offer to prove tlie honesty and
sincerity of his Conduct, in using a power intended to be con
ferred upon him by the act of 1870. And that we hold he can be
no more arraigned and convicted for the offence in this form of
proceeding at least, than could the executive of the United
States have been for the use of those extraordinary and uncon
stitutional powers which he put forth on that occasion. It is
veiy true, sir, as the learned gentleman [Mr. Bragg] said, these
great constitutional principles, by which every man is guaran
teed in the protection of lite and property, and our statute laws
are intended for the government of our people in times of
peace. But when great exigencies have arisen such as those
which we have witnessed for some years passed, there has been
brought into exercise in more instances than this, a higher
power which the executive of a country and state possesses for
the protection of the great fundamental rights of the people —
personal security and liberty.
But, sir, I desire to say a few words in relation to another
point. I stated yesterday, that while these gentlemen might be
correct in the definitions they have given of insurrection, or
riot, or treason, still they fall far short of a correct understanding
of the comprehensive scope and purpose of this constitutional
provision. It is tree, of a man on trial for an offence, but
whenever some great crime is premeditated and the means hto
furnished to an officer to put down and prevent tliat which, if
accomplished, would become a great public calamity, the power
to suppress tho wrong, as we my, necessarily carries with It tho
right to repress It in Its Inoiplonoy, to nip ft In tho bud, and
provont as well as break up and overcome an actual lawless
roilstanco to authority. Tho constitutions of North Carolina
and tho United States are remarkably similar in respect to the
provision for calling out the militia few certain objects. In the ono

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 899
instanco the power is invested in tho govornor of this stato and
in tho other it is invosted in tho congress of the United States.
It will be observed that power is conferred upon congress and
delegated to tho president by an act of congress "to repel
invasion and suppress insurrection, and if tho legal definitions
of theso offences is to control in tho question which we are
now considering, then tho act of 1795 which undertakes to
confer upon the president tho power of repelling invasion, in
one of its most important features was a clear violation of tho
constitution of tho United States. That act provides :
" Whenever the United States shall be invaded, or be in
" imminent danger of invasion from any foreign nation or Indian
" tribe, it shall be lawful for the president of the United States
"to call forth such number of the militia of the state or states
" most convenient to the place of danger, or scene of action, as
"he may judgo necessary to repel such invasion, and to issue
" his order for that purpose to such officer or officers of the
"militia as ho shall think proper."
The. constitution uses no such language — " being in im
minent danger" ; it only authorizes the president to repel inva
sion. That statute in conferring further power went beyond
the language of the constitution ; yet looking at the end to be
accomplished, it arms him with the power of calling out troops
to upset a threatened and impending, as well as an actual invasion
of our soil ; and, sir, the supreme court of the United States
held that act to be constitutional in the case of Martin against
Mott, reported in 12 Wheaton, page 19. Mr. Chief Justico
Story in delivering tho opinion of tho court uses the. following
language :
" It has not been denied here, that the act of 1795 Is within
" tho constitutional authority of congress, or, that congress may
" not lawfully provide for cases of Imminent danger ot invasion,
" as well as for cases whore an Invasion has actually taken
" place. In our opinion there Is no ground for a doubt on this
" point, evoii if it. had beoii relied on, for the power to provido
tl for, repelling invasions includes the power to provide against

400 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
" the attempt and danger of invasion, as the necessary and
" proper means to effectuate that object. One of the best
" means to repel invasion is to provide the requisite force for
" action before the invader himself has reached the soil."
Carrying out then the principle by which it is held that a
statute authorizing the military to be called out to repel
a threatened iuvasion, was warranted by the provision
of the constitution authorizing the president to call out
the militia to repel invasion, we say here that the right
to call out troops to suppress insurrection involves the right
to repress and prevent insurrection which could bo put
down, such was the intention of the act of tho legislature, and
if it actually broke out. But if this wero not so, surely
tho act under which this authority is exercised gives to
the executive tho right, under his judgment to bo exercised
upon such facts as might bo laid boforo him — honestly exercised
I admit — to place in Alamance county tho militia, and
preliminary thereto to pronounce tho county to bo in a Btate
of insurrection.
One of tho honorable senators has presented a question
which I will answer upon the spur of the moment. He asked,
if I understood him rightly, whether this inquiry should not
be restricted to tho state of things existing after the enactment
of the Shoffner bill. I think, Mr. Chief Justico, that the act
shows that the legislature then believed an evil to exist of the
kind which these provisions were intended to remedy ; that
there were being committed in the state of North Carolina some
where, these offences which are there denounced as criminal
and for tho suppression of which punishment is provided.
Assuming this to be so, it seems to me that the enactment of
that law is legitimate and proper to be considered for the pur
pose of showing what the state of things was when the governor
made up his mind on the 7th day of March to issue his proclama
tion ; and it would be extraordinary, sir, if those outrages existed
previously and ilp to the time of that enactment and the gov
ernor followed it up soon after by issuing this proclamation,

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 401
we are to be restricted to the little interval of a few days
or a few weeks, within which to show' what offences
had been committed to justify the exercise of the power
which that act conferred. It seems to us that his judg
ment ought to have taken in the whole range of offenses with
the view of arriving at a conclusion whether, at the timo
when tho proclamation was issued, there existed that state of
things which rendered life and property insecure, inasmuch
as the proclamation is preliminary to tho measures adopted
with the intent to afford protection te life and property by tho use
of the means which that act authorized him, in such an event,
to adopt.
There is one single technical view in this case to which I
ask tho attention of tho court. Tho learned counsel for the
managers [Mr. Graham,] took tho ground that this question was
asked prematurely and that tho cxistanco of illegal organi
zations must not bo shown until after somo overt acts of the
illegal organizations havo been proved. I will answer him by
saying that tho order of proof is always within tho fair discre
tion of tho court, and I cannot seo why wo should bo compelled
to begin at tho last act of tho drama rather than go to the source
and traco out its results. If all this ovidenco together c6nsti-
tutes a state of things material for tho court to know, I cannot
seo why it should make any essential difference whero we begin,
whether with the overt act and traco back from that to the
source, or begin at the source and then come down to the overt
act. But the answer is complete when I say that we are ask
ing his witness a question on cross-examination, and for aught
we know, wo can prove nothing by him as to the acts of these
illegal organizations. To rule the evidence out at this stage of
the case would deprive us of it altogether. The witness on
the stand is produced and examined by the prosecution and we
have a right to extract from him any evidence material to our
defence as set forth in the answer.
I have said more than I intended upon the important ques
tion which haa been under consideration. We regard this as

402 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
a very material question to be passed upon by the court. • Re
ject the evidence, and you may, by a majority vote deny to
the minority of your body, greater than one-third, an op
portunity to hear and consider evidence which that minority
may deem material to a just decision when the last act is reach -
¦ ed in the trial of tho cause. I submit whether senators have
not a right to hear this evidence, and whether it would bo
proper to prejudge the question of the guilt or innocence of tho
accused upon a preliminary point involving the rejection of
a particular species of evidence. And I commend to the court
that suggestion made in the progress of Andrew Johnson's
trial, and which I read yesterday, to let this evidence come be
fore the court. If it bo no defence, it will not avail the re
spondent. If in law it does not protect him from the judg
ment of the court, then its admission will not accomplish the
result for which it is offered ; but if it is rejected — if it is not al
lowed to be heard — many senators believing it ought to be heard,
(as was the case on the trial of Andrew Johnson, the larger num
ber beyond the third voting steadily to admit this evidence and
finally voting to acquit, perhaps considering the evidence rejected
in even a stronger light than it would have been presented if had
been admitted before them), an acquital may result here. Why
should it bo ruled out ? Tho senate is a court made up of judges
and jurors passing upon questions of law and questions of fact,
and why should they deny to themselves tho knowledge of any
facts which may turn out, after a full and thorough argument of
tho causo on tho merits on its final hearing to bo material and
essential to arrive at a just conclusion as to the guilt or in
nocence of the accused ? You aro a high court of justico — ono
of tho highest known to tho laws of our state — and a court
from whoso judgment no appeal can bo taken. Your decision
is final and irreversible. Tho judgments of the supremo
oourt of this state may bo revised in certain casos before tho
higher judicature of tho United States ; but tho action of tho
senate of North Carolina Bitting as a court of impeachmont, on
u question involving tho official Integrity of tho highest execu-

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 403
five officer of tho state, is final and irrovorsiblo ; and surely when
so much depends upon a correct decision of a question of tliis
magnitude we cannot do less than ask this body to accord the- re
spondent the privilege of bringing to its consideration that evi
dence which in fact was before his own mind and upon which he
did act and which is material upon the question of the intent with
which he issued that proclamation for tho issue of which it is
now proposed to depose him from his office as tlie chief execu
tive of the state and degrade him in tho estimation of his fellow
citizens. Senator TROY. Mr. Chief Justice, I observe in the lobby
the Honorable Samuel F. Cary, of Ohio. I move that he be
invited to take 'a seat within the bar of this chamber.
The CHIEF JUSTICE put the question on the motion of
Senator Troy and it is was decided in the affirmative.
The CHIEF JUSTICE appointed as a committee to wait
upon Mr. Cary, Senators Troy, Worth and Fleming, who
retired and conducted Mr. Cary to a seat by the side of the
presiding officer.
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. Chief Justice and senators, I shall
endeavor to meet the argument which has been advanced, in a
. . I
spirit of candor, and discuss the questions that have been
raised so as to make them in my view intelligible to this
court. I stated to you the other day that I thought, as this was
an imputation upon the people of the county that an insur
rection prevailed, it was necessary to show some overt act of
insurrection, before any testimony could be introduced in relation
to tho accompanying circumstances. I think so now. I do not
propose to elaborate the idea, but I beg leave to call your attention
to the subject of insurrection and treason and to read a brief pas-
sago from a decision of Chief Justico Marshall on that subject
in tho caso of Bolman and Swartwout. It is a subject, sir,
calculated at all times, to bring into play tho evil passions of
men. In the division of a country into parties or factions,
whenever an imputation is made that a man ia not aa faithful
to the government as he should be, there will ajways be found

404 COURT OF IMPEAOHMENTB.
those of the opposite party who are ready to believe it at once.
It ia therefore necessary, for a court passing upon questions of
this kind to disabuse its mind of all impressions derived from
other sources, and to act upon the law and the evidence that is
presented before them, in making a decision. On that subject
I beg leave to call the attention of the court to a few remarks
of that great jurist whom I have just mentioned and invoke
his authority to sustain a position, which I think is impreg
nable, and that is, that there can be no insurrection against a
government without an overt act. I read from page 80, 2
Curtis' Supremo Court Cases.
" As there is no crime which can more excite and agitate tho
" passions of men than treason, no charge demands more from
" tho tribunal before which it ib made a deliberate and tempo-
" rate inquiry, whether this inquiry be directed to tho fact or
" to tho law, nono can bo more Bolomn, nono more important
" to tho citizen or to tho government : nono can moro affect
" tho safety of both.
" To prevent tho impossibility of theso calamitiea Which result
" from tho extension of treason to offences of minor importance,
" that great fundamental law which defines and limits tho vari-
" oub departments of our government has given a rule on tho
"subject both to tho legislature and tho courta of America,
"which neither can bo permitted to transcend,
" Treason against tho United States shall consist only In
"levying war against them, or In adhering to their enemies,
" giving them aid and comfort."
"To constitute that specific crime for which the prisoners
" now boforo tho court havo been committed, war must be actu
ally levied against the United States. However flagitious
" may be the crime of conspiring to subvert by force the gov-
" ernment of our country, such conspiracy is not treason.
So that, in order to justify a proclamation like this, there must
have been treason, and in order to constitute treason, there
must have been an open act of resistance.
But, sir, there are various other points of view, in which this

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 405
evidence is not admissible. The issue between these parties is,
that the respondent made a proclamation with a view to stir
up civil war and to create strife and that he followed it up by
an illegal military force and that he imprisoned a large number
of the citizens of this state without warrant of law. He admits
that ho issued this proclamation and that he imprisoned theso
men, but he Bays he is justified or excused for the act. Sir, I
contend that the evidence off'ered here is not pertinent either to
show justification or excuse, any more than under an indictment
for murder, it would be proper for the accused to show that ho
killed a bad man. The crime imputed is, that he violated the
constitution and laws of the state, and that he did it in
tentionally and for a corrupt purpose, and that it is no excuso
to show that the men whom he imprisoned were persons who
did not deserve well of tho country. Every man, even criminal
in this country is under the protection of tho law, and no officer
is justified in denying him any privilego which is accorded to
any other citizen. Thia protection Is provided upon tho sup
position that theso chnrges may bo false as well as truo, and
that thero may be Sidneys and Russells accused of treason as
well as real traitors to their country ; that thero may bo mar
tyrs and patriots sacrificed to suit tho behests of unjust and
illegal rulers who deserve a bettor fate. I shall endeavor to
meet tho issue fairly, and to show that, if the state of things
alleged by propounding the question be true, he was not justifi
ed in the illegal course he adopted.
The declaration of lights prefixed to the constitution of
North Carolina, is intended for the security of the liberty of
the citizen. It is intended not so much to Becurean individual
person from oppression by another as to prevent tho rulers of
the people from oppressing the people. Provisions abound
on that subject — are found in many sections. They were
read by my associate [Mr. Bragg] on yesterday, and I
will not trouble the court by reciting them again. But
there ia, in my opinion, in the whole range of our
learning, eave the precepts of the decalogue and the max-

¦ 406 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
ims and parables of the New Testament, nothing which
contains more sublime morality and more useful information
than the axioms of liberty and justice announced in this
declaration. They are in effect the legal sanction of the golden
rule. Thoy in substance proclaim that no man shall do to
another except what he would that other should do him ; and
that, if any man invosted with authority violates theso great
principles of ethics, he shall make atonement by loss of office,
as well as be liable to further punishment according to law.
To secure those great rights what has been done 'i The gov
ernment has been divided into threo departments, tho legisla
tive, the executive nnd the judicial; and what is charged against
this respondent is, that he has usurped tho judicial power;
that he has not left the officers of the law to perform their
duty, but has undertaken himself to decide that they are not
executing their office, and has assumed their whole powers in
two counties to himself. Now who constituted him a conserva
tor of the peace ? Who made him a judge ? Who authorized
him to arrest and imprison, and to refuse obedience to habeas
corpus, and to try by a military court, and punish by its sen
tence, the freemen of this country ? This matter of dealing
with criminals, whether of high or low degree, is a judicial
function which cannot bo performed by any but judicial
officers. It belongs to the judges and tho magistrates of tho
state and does not pertain to the executive at all. The king
of England himself cannot issue a warrant to arrest a citizen.
In 2 Hale's Pleas of the Crown, page 37, it is said :
" Where a man is taken per mandatvm domini regis, this is
" not intended of the personal command of the king, for regu-
" larly the king cannot in person arrest or imprison, but it
" must be done by some order, writ or precept or process of
" some of his courts."
So we havo that ancient authority that the warrant of the king
will not justify an arrest for treason. And although the king
cannot bo impeached, for " the king can do no wrong," yet
the man who makes the arrest is a trespasser and ia liable to bo

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 407
dealt with upon indictmont, and ia amenable in a civil action
for assault and battery. Ia tho governor of North Carolina
superior to tho king of Groat Britain ? Is ho authorized upon
his warrant in tho form of a military ordor te direct a citizen
to bo arrested ? Wo provido in tho constitution that no man
fllmll bo arrested oven upon a general warrant. Tho precept
must apocify tho individual and it is issuod only upon tho affi
davit of a responsible prosecutor. A magistrate's warrant or a
warrant ot a judge is tho authority to mako arrests in North
Carolina, and though thero aro a few instances in which a private
individual is permitted to arrest, in cases where a felony has been
actually committed, they constitute exceptions not necessary
to bo noticed, in tho argument in this case. And thero is an
exception in the case of tho actual levying of war against tho
states and of dangerous riots. In these emergencies tho
military may mako an-csts, and deliver over tho prisoners to
tho civil authority, as soon as order is restored, nnd tho civil
tribunals havo control. But the general law of the land no
more gives the governor tho right to issue an order of arrest
for an individual, than it gives it to a chimney-sweep. The
constitution forbids that any man shall be arrested or desized
of his liberties and imprisoned except by duo process of law,
issued by a judicial magistrate and by nobody else. This
legislature cannot, by joint resolution, authorize the arrest of
anyone, save only for a contempt or breach of privilege, and
the man who shall undertake to execute such a process, would
be liable to be treated us an offender, who had no excuse at all.
Nor can tho legislature and tho governor combined authorize
any such thing. It is a judicial function entrusted to that
department of the government ; and any attempt on tho part
ot the oxocutivo to oxoroiBO buoIi a power is sheer usurpation.
And whon there has been resistance to the execution of pro
cess in the hands of a lawful officer, which it is not pretended
1ms taken place here, it does not rest with the governor to
bring in military aid, exceot in the last extremity. No,
sir, the judicial department of this government is not

408 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
dependent upon the executive for the performance of its-
duties. It directs the sheriff at his peril to execute
the process, and make the arrest ; and he is in comi
mand of the physical force of his county to enable him
to perform that duty. The governor is not to come in until
there arises a greater emergency. If there was any object
which the people of this country in the formation of our free
institutions guarded with especial jealousy and care, it was the
prevention of interference by military officers in civil affairs.
The posse 'comitatus — the power of the countiy — the loyal
citizens of every locality are the men upon whom the judiciary
is to depend for the execution of its lawful commands. If
these are tried and found inefficient, then the military may bo
called in for aid, and not till then ; and when tho military
ia thus called out, do thoy go as soldiers ? Thoy go as citizens, I
wish I had hero tho life of Lord Mansfield containing hmspoooh
in parliament Immediately after tho great riot of London In
1780, in which his houso and library wero destroyed, and
his porson threatened, though not injured. Ho justifios tho
calling out of tho military on that occasion. Tho fpirit of
freedom was as high in England thon, as it over has boon in
America. Complaint was made in parliament that tho mil
itary should havo been used to suppress the riot. Lord Mans
field, in a most impressive speech, declared that their interposi
tion was justified by the imminent peril of the crisis. He said
the military had been " called in — and very wisely called in —
not as soldiers but as citizens," using theso very words, and
with the emphasis with which I havo prononnoed them.
Thus ho affirmod the doctrine I now assort, that tho military
when called in aro to bo put undor tho command of tho sheriff' or
city polico ; and their officers, though retaining thoir authority
over the men, took their orders from thoso evil functionaries.
The idea that the commander-in-chief of the militia sitting in his
office of state at the seat of government is to command the troops,
and not only to make arrests but to keep men imprisoned beyond
the reach of the law, is a device and invention of \ this respon-

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 409
dent alone. There is no semblance of authority for it in the law
of England or of this country. During the administrations of
Mr. Fillmore and Mr. Pierce, military aid waa called for in
order to enable the United States marshals to execute the law
in reference to the rendition of fugitive slaves. You may
examine the history of those events and you will not find a
case in which the military officer did not place himself under the
marshal as an auxilliary in the performance of duty. They did
not assume to act as an independent power. This is a subject
in which the American people are tender and justly so. I
do not regret that this discussion has arisen, because upon its
determination rests the question, by what tenure the people of
this country hold their liberties : whetlier there is authority
which has a right to arrest, imprison and try for crimes except
the regular judicial officers of the country ? If men go into the
regular military service and make themselves soldiers, they vol
untarily subject themselves to a different code. But even by the
Articles of War in this country as well as by the Mutiny Act of
Great Britain, no man is put under the orders of the military
unless he has enlisted as a soldier and put on the livery of the
army So far is this carried in England that what is called
the Mutiny Act, the law for the government of the army, is never
allowed to continue in operation for more than twelve months
at a time ; and the soldier of Great Britain, whether he be at
home or in the most distant parts of the globe, knowB that the
law under which he has surrendered his rights as a citizen,
can exist only one year, unless re-enacted. And for what
reason is this law annually passed like the appropriation bill
providing moneys for the support of government? It is on
the ground that the king, if he undertakes to do unlawful
acts to subvert the liberties of the people, shall not have a
standing army to accomplish it. The articles of war in
this country are made permanent ; but you find that no person
is liable to be arrested by a military force, except hv times of
great public emergency, when the forcO Opposed prevents the
service of civil process; and in that' case he must be delivered

410 COURT OF IMPEACHMENT.
over to the civil authority as soon as tho exigency will allow,
provided he be not a soldier, and be a citizen of tho United
States, and the courts of justice are opon for the trial of crimi
nals. The case of Major Andre could not have been tried by
a military court, if he had been a citizen of the Unitod States
and not a soldier. His crime would have boon treason, triablo
by a civil court. Articles of War provide that whero citizens
are found lurking about camps as spies they shall be arrested ;
if thoy are citizens of tho United States they can only be pun
ished, after convicticn on indictment, for treason. We say
that the spirit of the constitution and its positive directions have
been violated in this instance, and have been violated persist
ently and contumaciously ; that there has been an usurpation
on the part of the governor of this state, of powers belonging to
judicial magistracy : to himself issue orders of arrest : himself
to determine upon the question of the commitment : himself
to determine that the offenses shall not be heard before the judi
ciary. The people of this country view these proceedings with
astonishment and horror, that a state of things should prevail,
when there was no authority to enforce the laws except at the
will of tlie governor ; when a military force acting under his
orders made arrests of tho people by scores, without affidavit
imputing crime, without any adjudication to determine whether
there was probable cause, and even after the determination of
these questions by himself, by force and with a strong hand, he
would not permit thorn to bo carried before the judicial officer
to be dealt with as required by the laws of the land ; but held
his prisonera to be brought before a court which he himself had
set up, and by which, ho proposod to have them convicted
and capitally punished.
, I say, Mr. Chief Justice and senators, that hero is a case of
, dear usurpation. The only instance in which tlie military can
be allowed to be used in making arrests is when they are sum-
, raonod by civil officers charged with a warrant, (I do not stop
te notice a fovv exceptional cases— they have no application to
this argumpnt,) and then they are to, come to the assistance of tho

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 411
eivil officer, find are under his command just as much as a citizen
summoned from his store or his farm, to aot in the posse comi
tatus. If the king's warrant does not justify an arrest in Eng
land, the governor's order cannot justify it here. They can
only justify an arrest on the order of the governor where men
are combined in arniB and there is no . ability in the civil
authority at the time to execute process. These are the only
cases in which the governor can have any pretence to arrest by
virtue of military authority ; for when the courts of justice are
open there is in judgment ot law a state of peace. In making
this statement I don't speak without authority. No arrest can
be justified by the order of the governor, except when bodies
of men are in resistance to lawful arrests, and there is no civil
force that can execute process.
The only cases in which the governor can pretend to arrest
by virtue of military authority is, where there is a state of war.
" For if the courts of justice are open, there is, in judgment of
law, a state of peace." There is for this great principle the
highest authority, Hale's Pleas of the Crown, page 347. In the
Earl of Lancaster's case, it was ruled first " that in time of
" peace no man could be put to death for treason, or other
offense without being put to answer ; and second" that regularly
" when the king's courts are open it is a time of peace." And
I say that the only instance in which either the king in Eng
land, or the executive in thia state ia authorized to make
arrests, is in time of actual war, and the citizen arrested
must be in a state of insurrection.
Well, what is that state of insurrection and war? There is a
test upon this subject stamped with the approval of Lord Oliief
Justice Hale, two hundred years ago, and that of the supreme
courtof the United States within the last five years ; and the
doctrine laid down is, that which will bear to be repeated again,
nanlely r "when the courts of justice are open there is, in non-
templation of law, a state of peace." I have repeated it thus often
beeauseJI wish it to be grounded inthle minds ot thO judges of
this court that,* whon tho king'atoottTt* are open in England and

412 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
when the courts of justice are open in the TJnited^States, it is in
judgement of law, a time of peace. And the governor has no
more right to arrest in auch case, than any private citizen of the
state : that is no right at all. A most remarkable instance
occurred in England which is referred to in the report of ex parte
Milligan in the supreme court of the United States. The Earl of
Lancaster had mado war against one of the princes of the house
of York as early as the time of Edward III. He had an army of
forty thousand men, but he was defeated and captured on the
field of battle and was immediately tried by a military court
and executed, and his estates wero forfeited, of course, on the
ground that he was a traitor. But, within eight years
afterwards, whon the public mind became moro calm, tho
parliament of England mot (and moro vigilant and jealous
guardians of tho rights of the subject, never assem
bled any whero, and the attainder was reversed— thoy
could not restore the life of the dead Earl. But his es
tates wero restored to his family. And why? Because tho
courta ot juetice were open at the time of his trial, and he was
entitled to be tried for treason. And here, if there bo any
nervous people affected by the argument of the gentleman
[Mr. CJonigland,] who addressed the court yesterday, that this
body will be held to approve acts of incendiarism and disloy
alty, if it rejects this evidence ; I refer to the case of the
Earl of Lancaster. It was a case where eloquent declama
tion might insist that he was a traitor to the govern
ment, and that he ought to be put to death in the most
summary and expeditious manner. But not bo, says the
law. Its framers knew that these charges are aa often
false as they are true ; and whether true or false, when a citizen
is captured in- arms against {he government, it is his birth
right to be tried by a jury of his country : just as if a murder
is committed in the presence of a judge ; that judge would have
no right to crd:? the > assassin to executiqn. He would be
entitled ta 6 jpy trial and to have his. guilt (determined pre
cisely ica if the judge were elsewhere when the crime was com-

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN., 413
mitted, bo that when a man is arraigned for an abuse of a
political power, as in case of any other crime, the question is
presented, what will the evidence offered avail him ? Sup
pose there were men in the country who are suspected of
being unfaithful to the government, what is the course to
be pursued for their apprehension ? To apply to a justice
of the peace for a warrant, because these imputations may
be false aa they may be true. You must find, in the first
place, aome ono who will swear to a state of facta that prove
hla acts within tho catalogue of crime ; ond having done
that, procure a warrant and cause him to be arrested. And If
his friends combine in such a force, that the posse comitatus
cannot arrest him, thon tho governor may interfere with tho
militia — and nothing olso but the militia — by bringing it te tho
aid of the civil authorities and effecting tho arrest. If auch com-
bination8 existed in tho county ot Alamanco it was not tho func
tion of the governor to capture them. The judicial authority,
was the department for this service, and the governor had no
excuse for superceding it, and assuming the office himself — by
declaring the judicial power incompetent or ineffective — that ia
the plea by which tyrants at all times have endeavored to jus
tify tlieir usurpations of power.
But the case of Milligan is now the great authority in con
demnation of the respondent on this head. Milligan was a
citizen of the state of Indiana, and during the war he, with
others, conspired to liberate the confederate prisoners who
were confined in that State and to havo the State of
Indiana invaded by confederate troops. The military
are not backward in assuming authority even when civil laws
are in force and the military authorities arrested him, consider
ing him a subject not to bo dealt with by the ordinary courte.
It was determined to send him before a military commiBBion to
atone for hia crime. He was carried before a military commis
sion and condemned to death. Then the circuit court of the
United Statea in Indiana was invoked to relieve him. ". Here wa8
another opportunity forfervent and impassioned eloquence, like
28

41*4 oouirr of nrrfixcnMBNT*
that we hoard from the learned gentleman who Opened this dfs"-
cussion on the other side, to appeal to the passions, to rouse tho
indignation of the public against the accused, and frighten tho
with the apprehension that if they dealt out justice to him ac
cording to law, they should be liable to the imputation of favor-
ring a traitor, who deserved to be summarily executed. The
question in that case was rai&od on a writ of habeas corpus
and carried to the Supreme Court of the United States^
where it waa argued with an ability, on the part of the bar and.
the bench, which does honor to the legal profession in America.,
The case occupies one hundred and fifty pages of Wallace's Pur
ports ; and, sis, the principles of civil liberty secured to the citi»
ssens of. this country are laid down by Mr. Justice Davis, who
delivered, the opinion, of the court in a manner which will pro
tect the people from usurpations of this kind for a long time to
come. That decision had bcjen made public before this respond
ent undertook his military, expedition, and he ought to have
known, and could have,' known if he had been disposed to
respect the constitution^that he had no reasonable pretext for
the atrocious oppression, and injustice he was alwmt to inflict on
all the good citizens of the state in, tho counties of Alamance
and Caswell. I shall detain the count to. read some passages
from that decision, and first from. tho head notes:
" Military commissions organizediduring the late civil war, in
" a state not invaded and not. engaged in. rebellion, in which
" the federal courts were open, and in tho- proper and unob-
" structed oxercise of their judicial functions, lmd.no jurisdiction
" to try, convict or sentence for any criminal offence, a citizen
" who waa neither, a resident of a rebellious Btate, nor a prisoner
" of war, nor a person, in tho militory or naval* sorvioe. And
" congress could not invojt them with any such power.
" Tho guaranty of trial by jury contained in the constitution;
" was intended for a state of war as well as a state of peace y
" and is equally binding upon rulers and poople, at all tlmoe
" and under all olrcumotcncea.!'
That is a guarantee oiiiVAodcnniU'enuti'ial by military courts*

TRTAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 41'&\
but it will be seen at a glance, that it is equally a guarantee
against military arrest in time of peace. For the ri'gntr to
trial by jury in one article of the constitution as amended by
Mr. Madison's ten amendments is no more strongry secured
than is the exemption from arrest, except by due-process of
law secured by another. Both of these> are but copied from
the constitution of North Carolina, adopted1 in 1776 and con
tinue to this day.
But this extract from tho head-note, B beg to be engraven.
on the memories of senators.
"Neither the president, nor' congress, nor the judiciary, can
" disturb any of the safeguards of eivil liberty incorporated
"into tho constitution, except so far as the right is given to.
u suspendm certain crses the privilege of the writ of habeas*
u corpus. Yes, sir; under this great govern ment of ours, extending over
an empire from the Atlantic to the Pacific, the president, and
congress andthe judiciary all put together, cannot authorize a citi
zen who ia not a soldier to be arrested by military means or tried
by a military court in time of peace. They cannot authorize
a man to be> deprived of his liberty except upon tho warrant of
a judge or- magistrate. If thoy attempt to authorize it, any«
body exorcising the power, thus Bought to be conferred, ia liable
at his peril to atone for it in damages, and by indictment. Hero
is another principle :
" A citizen not connected with tho military service and res!-
" dent in a stato whore tho courta are open and in the proper
y exercise of jurisdiction cannot, when the privilege of the writ'
" of habeas corpus is suspended, be tried, convicted, or sentenced
M otherwise than by the ordinary courts of> law."
The decision is too long to be read now, but I commend the
whole to the attention of senators who desire to inform them
selves with reference to this question of personal liberty nnd to
tho younger mombors of tho profession' who wish to soo tho
law of liberty as it oxlsts in tho Ynited States laid down in
tho most unmlstablo mawwiu 1 will road extracts from tho.

416 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
decisipn to show the extent to which the supreme court of the
United States have proclaimed the liberties of the citizen, on
page 121. :
" Time has proven the discernment of our ancestors ; lor even
" these provisions, expressed in such plain English words, that
" it would seem that the ingenuity of man could not evade them
" are now after the lapse of more than seventy years, sought to
" be avoided. These great and good men foresaw that troublous
" times would arise, when rulers and people would become res-
" tive under restraint, and seek by sharp and decisive measures
" to accomplish, ends deemed just and proper! and that the prin-
" ciples of constitutional liberty would be in peril, unless estab-
" fished by irrepealable law. Tho history of the world had taught
" them that what wa8 done in tho past might be attempted in
" the future. The constitution of the United Statos'is a law
" for rulers and people, equally in war and in peace, and covers
" with tho shield of its protection all classes of mon, at all
" times, and under all circumstances. No doctrine, involving
" more pernicious consequences, was over invented by the wit
" of man than that any of its provisions can bo suspended during
" any of the great exigencies of government. Such a doctrine
"leads directly to anarchy or despotism, but the theory of
" necessity on which it is based is false ; for the government,
" within the constitution haB all the powers granted to it, which
" are necessary to preserve its existence ; as has been happily
" proved by the result of tho great effort to throw off its j ust
" authority. " Have any of the rights guaranted by the constitution been
" violated in the case of Milligan ? And if so, what are they ?
"Every trial involves the exercise of judicial power; and
"from what source did the military commission that tried him
" derive their authority ; certainly no part of the judicial power
" of the country was conferred on them ; because the coustitu-
" tion expressly vests it ' in one supreme court and such in
ferior courts as, the congress may from time to time ordain
" and establish,' and it is not pretended that the commission

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 417
*' was a court ordained and established by congress. They can-
"not justify on the mandate of the president; because he is
" controlled by law, and has his appropriate sphere of duty,
"which is to execute, not to make the laws; and there is no
"unwritten criminal code to which resort can be had as a
" source of jurisdiction."
" But it is said that the jurisdiction is complete under the
" ' laws and usages of war.'
" It can serve no useful purpose to enquire what those laws
" and usages are, whence they originated, where found, and on
" whom they operate ; they can never bo applied to citizens in
" States which have upheld the authority of the government,
" and when tho courts aro opon and their process unobtructed.
" Thia court has judicial knowledge that in Indiana the federal
" authority was always unopposed, and its couits always open
" to hoar criminal accusations and redress grievances ; and no
" usago of war could sanction a military trial there for any
" offbneo whatever of a citizen in civil lifo, in nowise connected
" with tho military service.
" Congress could grant no such power ; and to the honor
" of our national legislature be it said, it has never been pro*
" vokod by the state of the country oven to attempt its exercise,
" ono of the plainest constitutional provisions was, therefore,
" infringed when Miligan waa tried by a court not ordained and
" eatablished by congress, and not composed of judges appointed
" during good behavior."
Again on page 124 :
" It is claimed that martial law covers with its broad mantle
" the proceedings of the military commission. The proposition
" is thiB : that in a time of war the commander of an armed force
" (if, in his opinion, the exigencies of the country demand it,
" and of which he is to judge), has the power, within the lines
" of his military district, to suspend all civil rights and their
" remedies and subject citizens ai well as soldiers to the rule of
«M* witt; and in tbe exercise Of his lawful authority canifot bo
--¦ " ¦ '" : :'¦>>; ' ' j >;¦' ',,'J. .;, .-

•416 KWOST OF , IMP^C^fcEBfTS* .
" restrained, except by his superior officeror the President of the
H United States.
" If this position is sound to the extent claimed, then when
" war exists, foreign or domestic, and the country is sub-divided
" into military departments for mere convenience, tlie com-
" mander of one of them can, if he chooses, within his limits,
( "on the plea of necessity, with the approval of the executive,
" substitute military force for the execution of tho laws, and
"punish all persons, as he thinks right and proper, without
" fixed or certain rules.
" The statement of this proposition shows its importance ;
"for, if true, republican government is a failure, and there is
"•an end of liberty regulated by law. Martial law, established
" on Biich a basis, destroys every guarantee of the constitution,
"and effectually renders the 'military independent of, and
" superior to the civil power ' — the attempt to do which by the
" king of Great Britain was deemed by our fathers such an
" offence, that they assigned it to the world as one of the causes
" which impelled them to declare their independence. Civil
"liberty and this kind of martial law cannot endure together;
" the antagonism is irreconcilable ; and, in the conflict, one or
" the other must perish.
" This nation, as experience has proved, cannot always re-
" main at peace, and has no right to expect that it will always
" have wise and human© rulers, sincerely attached to the
" principles of the constitution, wicked men, ambitious of
" power ; with hatred of liberty and contempt of law, may fill
" tho place once occupied by Washington and Lincoln ; and
" if this right is conceded, and tho calamities of war again
" befall us, th© dangers to human liberty aro frightful to con-
" template. If our fathers had failed to provide for just suoh
" a contingency, thoy would havo been false to the trust re-
" posed in them. Thoy know— the history of the world told
" them— the nation they wero founding, be its existence short
" or long, would be involved in war ; how often or how long
" continued, human foresight could not tell ; and that uniim-

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 419
*'ited power, wherever'lodgedfatsuch a 'time was especia^y
"hazardous to freemen. For this, and other equally mighty
"reasons, they secured the inheritance they had fought to
"maintain, "by incorporating in a written constitution, the safe
'" guards which time had proved were essential to its preserva-
" tion. Not one of theso safeguards 'can the president or con-
'" gross, or the judiciary disturb, except the one concerning'the
" writ of habeas corpus.
" It is essential to the safety *df every government that, in a
"great crisis, like the -ono 'we have just passed through, there
" should be a power somewhere of suspending the writ of
" habeas corpus."
I next read from page 125,
" Martial law cannot arise from a threatened invasion. The
•".necessity must 4ie actual and present; the invasion real, -such
" as effectually closes the courts, and deposes the civil admlnis-
"" tration. " It is difficult to see how the safety of the country required
"martial l>rw in Indiana. If any of her citizens were plotting
" treason, the power of arrest could secure them, until the gov
ernment was prepared for trial, when the courts Vere open
" and ready to try them. It was as easy -to 'protect witnesses
*" before a civil as a military tribunal."
And I beg Senators to remark that if ther© was >any -such
state of insurrection or .conspiracy or plot, as te alleged, in
offering this evidence, it was as easy to have di
rected a civil court te try tho offenders as. a military
oourt. And it was as easy to tnako arrests through th©
civil officers as by tho so called Stat© troops, latterly called
tho mllltla ; and a great deal cheaper— yes sir, if an extra forco
was required (as it was not) tho posse wmitafais, would have
Iboen much more economicrtl *n tho first place, and would have
¦answered every purposo. Even if it had boon nocesaary to make
arrest* of large numbers, «r to give protection to tlie sessions of
courts, whioh is wholly fabulous, a civil posse could have
supplied tho force as readily as the militia; and would

420 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS. .
have claimed no participation in the deliberations and1
judgment of the court. But that does not seem to have
been the objeot. If the purpose was to enforce the laws, there
was no difficulty in procuring a state's warrant, having the
parties against whom probable guilt could be shown by cred*
ible evidence, and at least bind to the peace and good behavior
by proper articles — or send them to prison. That did not suit
the executive views — nothing else but the military arrests
and a military court suited him. The ocean must be tossed
into a tempest "to waft a feather or to drown a fly " The
great law of force must be brought into action and citizens
must be arrested without warrants and without a faot being
sworn to, to justify their being taken into custody. I again
read from the opinion of Judge Davis :
" It follows, from what has boon aaid on this subject, that
" there are occasions when martial rule can be properly applied.
" If, in foreign invasion or civil war, the courts are actually
" olosed, and it is impossible to administer criminal justice ac-
" cording to law, then, on the theatre of active military opera-
" tions, where war really prevails, there is a necessity to furnish
" a substitute for the civil authority, thus overthrown, to pre
serve the safety of the army and society ; and as no power i»
" left but the military, it is allowed to govern by martial rule ,
" until the laws can have their free course. As necessity «re-
" ates the rule, bo it limits its duration ; for if this government is
" continued after the courts are reinstated, it is a gross usur*
" pation of power. Martial rule can never exist where th*
" courts are open, and in the proper and unobstructed exercise!
" of their jurisdiction."
I pass now over to page 128 :
" We are not without precedents in English and American
"history illustrating our views of this question ; but it is hardly,
" necessary to make particular reference to them.
" From the first year of the reign of Edward III., when th© •
" parliament of England reversed the attainder of the Earl of
" Lanoaster, because he, cpu]d have been tried by the courta of,

TRIAL OF, WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 421
" the realm, and declared, ' that in time of peace no man ought
" to be adjudged to death for treaeon or any other offence with"
" out being arraigned and held to answer ; and that regularly
"when the king's courts are open, it is a time of peace in judg^
"ment of law' down to the present day, martial law, as
" claimed in this case, lias been condemned by all respectable
"English jurists as contrary to the fundamental laws of tho
" land, and subversive of the liberty of the subject."
I say, sir, that the court of impeachment has no right to go
any further than to ascertain whether the courts of justico
were open, in order to determine whether these prisoners could
have been dealt with by any other than the civil power.
When it is established that tho courts of justice in this county
are open, there is no power conferred upon the military to
make any arrests at all upon the orders of a military officer —
and when called to assist the civil officer, they cannot right
fully deprive a citizen of his liberty, except as they may act
as a. posse comitatus, in which case the civil offiopr — a sheriff
for example — gives directions and is substituted for the com
mander-in-chief. I read further :
" During the present century, an instructive debate on this
" question occurred in parliament, occasioned by the trial and
" conviction by court-martial, at Demerara, of the Rev. John
" Smith, a missionary to the negroes, on the alleged ground of
" aiding and abetting a formidable rebellion in that calling."
He was arrested to bo -tried by a military court, and died in
prison. There was a case where the declamation of my learned friend
[Mr. Conigland] might have come in very handsomely, the case
of the missionary who had gone to that colony in the course
ot his work and was arraigned and tried for inciting negroes to
insurrection, and the military attempted to deal with him in
true military fashion. But when the information came home
to England the spirit of British freedom-was aroused. ;
" Those eminent statesmen, 'Lord Broughman and Sir James
" Mcintosh, participated in that debate^ and denounced the

'£23 OOSBT OF IMPEAClTMENm
"trial as illegal jbecarwe 'it did not appear that tlie courts of
41 lawin Demerara couldmot try offenses, and that "when the
" " laws can act, every-ofcher mode of punishing supposed crimes
'" "is itself an enormous crime." "
Yes-sir, when the judges, in their respective states, and the
magistrates, in their respective neighborhoods, are engaged in
Jthe preservation of the peace, and dispensing juatice, no matter
'how black alnan'a crime may be, or how much blacker informera
may attempt to-make it, the effort to punish him otherwise than
• according to the civil law of the land, is an "enormous crime."
That is the language of Sir James Mcintosh and ot Lord
Brougham, and it is adopted in the opinion of the supreme
court of the United States, by Mr. Justice Davis-
Then tho opinion goes on to say, " that so sensitive were our
li revolutionary fathers on this subject, sal though Boston was
" almost in a state of Beige when Gen. Gage issued his procla-
" mation of martial law, they spoke .of k as an attempt to super-
" cede the course of tho common law, and instead of theso to
" set up martial law ; and tlie Virginia assembly ako denounced
" a similar measure on the part ¦of Gov. Dnnmoro as an assumed
" power which tho king himsolf cannot exercise, because it
" annuls tho law of the land and introduces tho most execrable
" ot all systems, martial law."
I oould read other passages from this work, but I will not
detmin tho tcourtloffl ger with this uuthority. I commend it
to the attention of every oonator who is trying this cause.
I dorive from it this instruction, that if the courts of justice
bo open as they havo mhvavs been open in North Carolina,
except in 1805, when we wero in a transitional state, any
attempt to interfere by military force, either to try to arrest,
to punish men. or to keep them imprisoned and deprived of tho
remedies administered by civil magistrates is an enormous
crime" &ad usurpation.
But, eiv, the, greatest offense after all, imputable to thia
respondent is the contempt whioh he casts upon the entire
judiciul establishment of this Btate. He undertakes to de-

n-fnia OF WILLIAM w. bolden. 429
^ormine'tha't the judiciary is effete, that it does not answer the
purpose of putting down insurrection in one or two counties ;
that the conservitors of the peace are not doing their duty,
'and that ho must assume their neglected functions. Here is
a force of seventeen judges and twelve solicitors and an attor
ney general, whyhas not somo appeal jbeen made to them? I
will tell you why it is not. The informers who thronged the ex
ecutive department and told their tales of crimeand wouldnot
Tsweartothem. They would not make affidavits, and the judicial
¦courts could not be brought into play. The executive, in his new
character of a judge, it -seems, could be induced to take action
upon the unsworn information of an informer or aspy ; but there
is no legitimate ground or a prosecution — no regard is had to the
manly spirit of English law 'that no man shall be put in arrest
until somebody shall make oath that he has committed 6ome
offence. That is totally disregarded. Judicial procedure is
ignored ; but the executive takes up tho matter and acts upon
such evidence, as suits hiih; substitutes military orders for state
warrants, and proceeds to the arrest and imprisonment of
peaceable citizens, by fifties if not by hundreds. It is a sublime
spectacle in this country to seo a warrant of a dozen lines
signed by a magistrate, a mere justice of the peace, or a judgo
put into tho hands of tho sheriff or constable, who proceeds to'
the party against whom charges have boon made, perhaps tho
most wealthy, popular or influential character in his county,
and 6ay " I arrest you by virtue of this process," and
the man submits, as if it wero the force of an army
with banners. He is brought up before the magistrate
and is examined ; aud if a probable case of crime be establish
ed, he is committed for trial unless he gives bail, and if the
accusation is found to be false, he is discharged.
Sir, I say this was an attempt, on tho part of tho Executive,
to usurp the entiro judicial functions of North Carolina, and not
merely to provont the judges from exercising- thorn within its <
limits, but to make himself, both judge and executioner. ' What
has he, to, do with the administration of justico I • His office is

424 ,,„©0nBT0F ZMPHACHMUNTS, ,
created for a totally, different purpose, and his interference with
justice ia that, after conviction and sentence of an offender, he
may, upon satisfactory reasons, grant a pardon and'prevent the
sentence being carried into effect. But hero he takes up tho
role at the beginning instead of the end, and undertakes, with
out any lawful proof, to declare who shall be arrested, how long
imprisoned, by what kind of court he Bhall be tried, taking
care to appoint all its members himself, under no law and to
introduce now rules of proceeding and new modes of punish
ment, even to death. He treats all those holding judicial sta
tions as imbeciles or poltroons, or worse, men who will not do
their duty. But how can the j udiclary act until somebody comes
and makes an affidavit ? They cannot act at all, even In a caso
of real guilt, unless somebody can bo found who will prefer
charges upon oath. But tho respondent did not wait for that ;
he undertook to be judge and direct the whole proceeding from
arrest and commitment to judgment and execution. After all
the respondent's allegation in his answer about infidelity to tho
government, and a desire on tho part of those who did not
vote for him to overthrow it, or thwart its policy, the aver
ments may be false, as probably as they may bo true. To
have the truth ascertained, the charge is brought beforo a
judicial tribunal in the same way as a charge of murder, and
is to be tried in the same way.
Mr. Chief Justice and Senators, these are no new doctrines
with me. I am happy to find that my duty to the state in this
prosecution corresponds with the sentiments I uttered when
a different power prevailed in this state. In the convention
of North Carolina in 1861, in the zeal to maintain the struggle
then going on, to prevent any disaffection toward the Confed
erate States, or the harboring - of sentiments favorable to
the United States government, it was proposed to subject
every citizen to a test oath, which was to be taken before a
public officer under1 penalty of expulsion from the country.
It originated in a - zeal to maintain the cause, but, being in
my view unconstitutional and unjust, I took occasion to ad-

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 425
dress the convention on the subject; I beg leave to read a
few remarks then made not as authority, certainly, but as a
statement of the argument perhaps more clear than I can
make it in these extempore observations. I am happy to find
the doctrine I then maintained, supported by the opinion of
Mr. Chief Justice Davis, already quoted and delivered in Bub-
sequent years :
" But, Mr. President, the enormity of the proposition re-
11 mains yet to bo told. It violates every safeguard of oersonal
" freedom embodied in our bill of rights, most of which have
" been conseorated in the history of English liberty from the
" timo of magna charta itself. The northern government be-
" came a despotism by usurpation. Pass this ordinance upon
" the old plea of tyrants, tho necessity of the times, and the
" southern one, within the bordors of North Carolina, will
" have become a dospotism by legislation, whereas, our people
" are resolved to be independent and free, not only in the end
" but in the means, They are resolved, not only to be free-
" men at the termination of the contest, but will not surren*
" dor their liberties during its progress. Nor will they be sat-
" isfied until the flimsy pretexts and excuses for the saorifioe
" of a sacred principle, that it can do no harm exoept to
" traitors. They intend that even traitors shall not be con-
" demned except in accordance with these great principles qf
"right and justice, which are of universal application, for
" they know full well that it is upon the persons of friendless
" or odious men that despotism, whether of a single tyrant or
"of a mob, first lays its hands; and that vigilanoe.is more
" necessary to the preservation of liberty in times of publio
" peril and revolution, than in peace.
That language-was concurred in by a majority of the con
vention in which passed the ordinance to separate .from the
fedeial government, and, I am pleased to observe that, Mr.
Justice Davis, in the argument in tho case of Milligin, among
other instances of the, government niaintajning these, rights
of the citizen, refers, to the, ftot thafc in ..#* gqu&er^Statea

426 •'¦¦¦• T30BBT' or TMPEaonMENT.
during the rebellion, the' writ of habeas corpus waa auspendbd
but for a short timo, and that tho constitutional privileges of
the citizen were im noway abridged. And, sir, I consider, Jn
the language of Mr.. Black, in his argument in the case oi
Millignn, that times of" war and excitement are the times to
double the guards aoiound the constitution. Sir, in times of
excitement and party rage, and party malevolence, the hope
of ascendancy and tne preservation of power may induce men
to forget, as- thoy did in this case, induce this respondent to
forget his- inauguration oath, to sustain the constitution — to
maintain the haheas corpus and protect men from illegal ar
rests, and he himself to be guilty of these illegal arrests.
We had also a case in the legislature in 1862. A preacher of
the gospel in the county of Orange was arrested' by one of those
persons called detectives on a sabbath day just as he had con
cluded the services in his church, and was carried ©ff to
Eichrriond. It became known to us here and I myself intro
duced a resolution requesting the Governor to correspond with
the Secretary of war, and demand that Mr. Graves, the person
departed^ should be returned to his home. His arrest and
deportation by a military order without trial or intimation to
the state government was considered violative of the rights and
dignity of the statej as well as a blow at the liberty of tlie citizen.
The secretary of war politely surrendered the prisoner, and was
brought back, examined before a competent commissioner and
bound over to answer to a charge of treason at Bichmond.
That was the spirit of the North Carolina legislature flagrante
bello. Though it was in the midst of a tremendous struggle
our people would not allow a hair on the head of a private citi
zen to be rudely touched, except by warrant of few; and when
we brought the matter to the attention of the government at
Richmond, thoy gracefully made the amend, and seat the accused
party here to be dealt with by the civil authorities. '
It is not denied here that thecivil courts in Alamadce-wete open;
The saasta knows it as> a public fcct, independency e? £he proof
which has been oScredt. ¦ A'v»$y$then>.theprete..t thaotkO people

TRKL OF WILLIAM W. HOEDEN.. 427'
. were 'in- a state of war, for if this fact were true, it follows in
judgment of law, the courts being open, that there was a' state
of peace. This court is not at liberty to disregard tliev adjudi
cation that when the courts are open there is, ih' judgment of
law, a state of peace. This being eo, the executive-had 'no right to
interfere by military force with the people of Alamance arid
Caswell. It wasanobtrusirn on hispartintotheprovinoe off he
judiciary, undertaking to perform functions with whicli they
alone are entrusted.
Thus, then, stands this matter upon the constitutional rights,
duties and restrictions upon the executive department' of the
government of the state
I shall now endeavor to show that tbe act of 1870 furnishes no
justification or excuse to the governor, and confers no military
power that he did not possess under tho constitution. Faf-
firm that that act, and the proclamation made by virtue of it,
did not deprive the people of any of their rights as citizens..
It is a highly penal statute, according to Iho most Ifenient
construction, and therefore is to be strictly construed. Its
language is, that the governor is empowered, whenever, in
his judgment, tho civil authorities in any county are unable
to protect its citizens in the enjoyment of life and property,
to declare such county in a state of insurrection, and to' call
into service the militia, &c. ; and by the second section; the
judge iia directed to remove the trial of indictments to- any
countythe solicitor may designate. Now what is the author
ity of the governor, and how did his action in this case effect
the people. He had authority to proclaim the county to be
in a state of insurrection ; but does the statute go on to enact
that tbe inhabitants of the county shall thereafter be heldto
be insurgents?' Nol It does no such thing. I insist that
without some positive direction that they shall thenceforward
be treated as guilty insurgents, no such penal consequence
can follow by construction. - ; ¦ <» -N-.<r. •<* ¦ >-
The . proclamation was a sharp rebuke, a public denuncia
tion ; and, being, levelled* at «u whole people innocent andi

428 COtTRT OF, IMPEACHMENTS.
guilty, black and white, of either sex, old and young, the
victims of alleged oppression, and their persecutors, putting
all in the same condemnation, as a publio admonition, it did
great injustice to the peaceful and orderly part of the com
munity, merely when operating to that extent. The procla
mation therefore was similar to a papal bull, a severe reproof
denounced on the people, but did not effect their rights of per-
eon or property — and ordinary charity to the Legislature re-
requires that iterp rotation . To contend that they designed to
place the whole peoplo in the state of convicted insurgents,
so that his military might arrest, imprison and maltreat them
at pleasure, is to suppose that they designed to tread the con
stitution underfoot and authorize the cruelty of barbarians,
and this by reason of an insurrection it might be not existing
in fact,but proclaimed on paper by tho governor. He is author
ized to call out the militia to suppress " such insurrection."
When we inquire what insurrection ? the answer is that, which
he has declared (and thua made) by Lis proclamation. When a
statute is capable of two constructions, the one highly penal
and the other not, or the one constitutional and the other not,
it is proper to adopt that which is merciful and conatitutional.
Tho humano spirit of our law has carried this doctrine to great
extent in favor of tho Ufo, liberty and porsonsal rights of tho
citizen. On indictments for theft or trading with slaves in
former times, the distinctions, though legal and just, wero
calculated to excite a smile. Whore a statute had declared it
a crime to buy of a slave any " sheep, &c." a case occurred in
which this was charged against the defendant; but on tho
proof it appeared that the animal had been butchered, and
the carcass dressed for food, had been bought of the slave,
and the defendant was acquitted, and properly, upon the
ground , that a citizen has a right to do any act not en
acted into a crime,, and to buy mutton of a slave had
not been denounced as a crime. And can the people of a
county, some 15,000 in number, be. all placed boyond the pro
tection .of the grett safe guards of personal liberty because the

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 429
legislature has authorized the governor to declare their county
in a state of insurrection without more saying ? Do the people
hold their rights in classes and by counties ? And are they to
be indicted and punished in like manner? Did any member
of this learned court ever hear of the indictment of a county,
in which all the inhabitants were arraigned, convicted and
sentenced, because some crime had been perpetrated in their
county. It seems to me, that it would have been about as
sensible to have empowered the governor to declare the county
in a state of murder, arson, burglary or larceny as in a btate of
insurrection, which is only one other 6pecies of crime. The
legislature has not said what shall be tho effect of such a procla
mation, no more than parliamentary law has provided what
shall be tho effect upon members if disorder is kept up after
the mace is, by or of the presiding officer, taken from his
side and carried down among them. In cases of great
disorder, says tho parliamentary law, when the speaker
has called to order generally, then proceeded to call members
to order by tlieir names, his next final step is to order the
maee to be carried 'among them and waived to and fro. But
the oldest of parliamentarians have never been able to explain,
what is to bo done, if the body does not cease its confusion
then he respondent would meet the tumult by calling out the
military ; parliament would consider that remedy worse than
the disease. The proclamation then was only authorized as
public reproof and warning ; it was not allowed to the governor
to authorize the despotic power of entering a county and
taking military possession, seizing the peaceable inhabitants at
his pleasure, without any evidence of guilt, known among
civilized men, degrading men in the presence of their families, a
circle in which eveiy man is an object of respect and reverence
tearing away husbands from their wives, eons from the side of
their mothers and sisters, with a studied concealment of the
charges against them, and leaving the worst doom to be ima
gined, as impending over. them*. It ia reapectful to the
legislature to presumo ,- that they intended,* J&y this obscure
29

480 COURT OF ntPBAOHMflNTt.
statute, no such consequences as theso, But if they did
intend them, the penalties are so cruel, so savage, so
obviously in conflict with almost every provision of the
declaration of rights, that a fool could not err in seeing that they
are utterly unconstitutional and void ; and that the war which
ia admitted to have been made on them, ia an attempt to seize
a mere frutum fulmen, a power to lecture and to combine and
convert it into a thunderbolt of war. Men are not responsible
for crimes by counties, but each individual stands before our
law as ho will stand before his final Judge, each according to
the deeds he has himself done ; and it is a most astounding
novelty in this age and country, that men aro to be made
criminals by vicinity to the place of crime ; that because my
neighbor, perhaps my best friend, has been the victim of assas
sination, I am to be denounced, and held out to the world as a
suspected person, and even cast into prison without process or
examination, and delivered over to the tender mercies of a
military commission. The constitution was made and fought-
for by our fatheis to prevent just such ronsequences as these.
Study the history of our English and American liberty, and
you will discover that all the careful and sublime provisions ol
tho declaration of rights " were not to protect citizens eo much
as to protect the peoplo ngnluat oppression by their rulers. It
Is war against imprisonment, by orders of the king, the privy
counsellor, tho cabinet minister or other public officers, that the
acts of habeas corpus woro designed to guard by imposing
penalties on judges, by reason of which, neither party feeling,
bribery, timidity, or -other motive should induce them, to
refrain from Issuing the writ. No provision of the constitu
tion can perntit the governor, by tho breath of his nostrils or
by the stroke of liis pen to place those people ex lex — outside of
the protection of the constitution and authorize a military
tribunal to deal with them as if dealing with Indian savages-
on tho frontiers. See the result of the contrary construction.
It places the whole power of the State in the hands of the gov
ernor. Upon . learning that the house; of roprciantatives is

TRIAL OF WILLIAM wl HOLDEN. 431
about to impeach him, before the articlea have been presented to
the Senate, he declares the county of Wake in a state of insur
rection ; and on the next morning a la mode Louis Napoleon,
his army of state troops under Kirk, seizes all the members of
the general assembly and commits them to prison ; and if the
supreme court should not happen to be in accord with the
author of the proclamation, he seizes them also ; and tho judges
of the superior courts happening to have come up to the seat of
government, he incarcerates them under the same set of guards.
Would not this be an interesting spectacle? the legislative
and judicial officers all in jail, and no one outside to issue
writs of habeas corpus or other process for tlieir relief? But
the governor, with the prison keys in his pocket, is lord of the
ascendant. The power to sot over the peoplo this French or
Turkish despotism is a natural corollary from tho construction
of the statute in question, for which the respondent contends.
An interpretation of a statute which leads to such results can
not be allowed upon any theory whatever ; and if there be any
other by which it may operate in consonance with the consti
tution this should be adopted.
The governor had power, under the constitution, to call out
the militia to suppress riots and insurrections and repel inva
sion. The repetition of this authority, bo far as regards in
surrection, contains no new grant of power but the question
of that as ordained by tho constitution. And the govornor
will look in vain te that for any permission to treat any part
of the peoplo as thoso of Alamanco and Caswell have been
treated ; and their troatmont could not havo boon worso if they
had boon Comanche Indiana. It was sheer usurpation whon
it was attempted to treat theso people by an oxecutivo order,
as If all were guilty of insurrection without ever having per
mitted to them the common rights of exemption from illegal
arrest, examination before a magistrate and trial by jury. It
was seizing the persons of men by military order who are
accused of nothing except what ia Cognizable by the civil courta,
and that not charged on'affidavit. ' Thte% the' conduct of the

432 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS. . ,
chief , executive officer of the state. He first denounces the
whole people of, two counties as guilty of insurrection when,
the charge was untrue, and then goes on to inflict on them
imprisonment and other violence, and to prepare a military
court to try and put them to death, in which procedure ho was
only brought to a pause by tho writs of Judge Brooks.
If ho can treat tho people of Alamanco and Caswell in that
way, ho can treat tho officers of tho government in all its
departments, oxcept his own, in like mannor — try thoir nerves
as ho did thoso of these aggrieved people, by confinement,
threatening and hanging, and let them out one or moro at a
tlmo as they may confess or Invent ovidenco, to bo used and
published to affect a ponding oloctlon — or tako the Uvea of
those obnoxious to him, for any cause, personal or political.
The socuritiea of person, life and liberty can bo taken away by
no implication. If the legislature designed that habeas corpus
should be suspended, that citizens may be arrested without
warrant, denied the privilege of the writ ot habeas corpus,
kept in prison at the will of the governor, refused jury trial
and tried by a military commission, and put to death, or other
wise punished by its sentence, let them say so in no doubtful
terms. But if they did so intend, their enactment was entitled
to no obedience or respect. It is not allowed to the legislature
to take away from the citizen his interest in that declaration of
rights, reaching back to magna charta, improved by the peti
tion of right and the bill of rights of 1G88, reaffirmed and
enlarged in the American constitution; and that he should be
permitted to annul these, and roll back the tide of time ei»ht
hundred years, relegate this generation to the vassalage of king
John is a proposition too absurd to require refutation, whether
it be claimed under the constitution or under the statute.
Neither case offered either justification or excuse, for the.
outrages which have been practised — the law of liberty as
written in the declaration of rights ia a law in large print;
every one can read it. The statute- is also clear on one point
tp-wlt ; that thero should bo a trial in tho civil courta apd that!

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. nOLDEN. 433
the solicitor ought to remove tho. cases to any other county.
But tho governor intended that thoy should go whore tho
solicitor had any jurisdiction over tho subject. IIo novor
intended thero should bo any judicial proceedings "St* that
tho party arrested idiould have the right tc appeal to a
court of justico. And yot it Is contended, simply bocauso
of a man's vicinity, by reason of his living in a neighbor
hood whero a crhno has boon committed, to mako him a crim
inal ; and bocauso ono or nioro in a population of somo 10,000
bouIb, that being about tho number in this county, has boon
guilty of erimos, to visit upon him penal cotisormoncos, to sub
ject him to bo worriod by tho military, if ho bo not shot upon
tho sentonco of a drum head court martial.
Tho executive seems to havo proceeded upon tho idea that
tho military could forrot out oft'endors when tho civil authori
ties could not. Whore did ho learn any such doctrine as that
men with drums and muskets and glittering bayonets and uni
forms and tho paraphernalia of war were more likely to find
out offenders and bring them to justice than men in civil life
summoned by civil officers and acquainted with tho country
and its inhabitants? Did you ever hear of tho military being
employed for any such service aforetime ? Did you over hear of
the doctrine that after the judicial officers of the government had
failed to discover the authors of crime done in secret, there lay be
hind them the executive which could go out on the hunt of oft'en
dors? It is utterly repugnant to our eystem. If you cannot find out
the real offenders in the mode appointed by law, you cannot
punish mon upon suspicion that they are offenders. The idea
seems to have been that the judicial power had become utterly
inefficient, and that tho governor, by means of the [military,
had a talismanic power through prisons and instruments of
corporal pain, to extort evidence from whomsoever be sus
pected, to invade any family circle, a scene where every man
should be, and usually is, an object of homage and affection,
and capture and bear off its head or its membersj 'to be confined
fri a military camp> and there subjected "to wiy torments that

484 court of mpEACHMEirrs,
his mercenary keepers may invent, to eompel confessions of
the guilt of himself or of others. It is the old doctrine of the
application of tho rack existing at the time of the star chamber,
known*to despotisms but utterly unknown to the common law
any where. This was the ostensible purpose, p utting on its
best phrase, for which the military was called out. I say, sir,
that if the fact will show that a combination existed in the county
Alamance for the purpose of resisting the law or for the pur
pose of promoting objects hostile to the government, it would
not justify an application of the rack, to torture men into con
fessions ; whothor. that bo, in tho form of an arrest, sud
denly, and without any provlous notice, hurrying him from
his family, leaving them perhaps unprovidod with the neces
saries of life, undor a military guard, or kooplng him im
prisoned, in dofianco of law, beyond tho reach of tho writ of
habeas orpus, or threatening him with a military court that
will mako short work of him, as soon as it can bo convened.
I say that upon the question of intent, there is no evidence
wanted further than you have it in the violent exercise of
authority in seizing men, depriving thorn of thoir liberty
and treating them as theso have been treated. Such
conduct is so outrageous and so wrongful, that no explanation of
intent, can justify or mitigate it — whether it bo claimed
under the constitutional powers of the executive, or under
the authority of tho act of tho General Assembly.
The respondent proposes to show by this evidence, that his con
duct was a blunder — that ho thought the legislature had author
ized it. Talleyrand has said, "there are blunders which are worse
than crimes." Those of the respondent, if they have any claim to
that designation, are of this character. If Kirk and his men
should come into this chamber and fire on the assemblage and
kill some of its members, would he be allowed to Bay in extenua
tion of his offence, that he thought he had a right, to do it in
defence of the governor of the state, because he thought the
governor was improperly impeached ? That would be a greater
atrocity, but it would be no greater violation of the bill of .

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 435
rights than what he admits by his answer that he has done, by
shooting down a person in open day. In such a case as thie,
w here the offence is of so flagrant a nature, where the parties
could have been proceeded against in spite of any interference,
before the judicial department of the government, the question
of intent is one incapable of being rebutted. The liberties of
the citizens are as much under the protection of the law as
their lives, and any act that wantonly deprives a person of his
liberties is as much an offence, though not as enonnous as if
he were put to death without any judicial inquiry. I say, sir,
that the intent of this respondent is a matter proven by the
enormity of the crime so clearly that, if it- were shown by
evidence that there was such a combination in Alamance and
Caswell, as is alleged, it would afford no justification for treat
ing tho inhabitants of a county in the manner he practised.
This proclamation was issued on the 7th day of March. What
then ? The sun rises and sets ; the affairs of the country pro
ceed in Alamance as they had done before. They contract and
are contracted with ; they marry and are given in marriage ;
all the functions of society are in full operation. The courts of
justice and the magistrates courts are held, and everything goes
on in accordance with the usual relations and a peaceful condi
tion of society. Ono assassination, perhaps two, had
taken place in secret, it is true; but similar crimes occur
in other communities, and nobody thinks of proclaim
ing a whole county in a state of insurrection as a con-
quenee. Thus things remained, down until June, when
Kirk was sent for. Three months passed from the killing
of Outlaw, (which was a terrible assassination; no good
man, I feel assured, thinks otherwise of it,) when the power of
the executive Ib put in motion for the puipose of accomplishing
his ultimate purpose. A proclamation had been issued. What
then ? Were the peoplo treated as inhabitants of a hostile
country, with lines kept up and nobody allowed te go in or
out? Was it an offence to trade with these enemies of the
state by the people of any other part of the state! Not at all.

*
436 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
United States troops were there within a few days after
Outlaw was killed and they remained there until after Kirk
departed. But they don't answer the purpose of the executive.
You cannot by means of them hang, or torture, or impriaon,
or drag the heads of families from their homes and frighten
them into admissions against themselves, and to make alloga*
tions against othors. The gallant armies of this country have
boon taught a different lesson. Tho real soldiers of this country
and much more tho officers who command them, know that
is no way to keep tho peace of the country to themselves
bocomo breakers of the peaco. They know that they havo
no authority, even in case of actual or approhendod resis
tance to law except to follow the officers of civil justice in the
execution of a process, put into his hands. If a riot occurs and
thero is difficulty in suppressing it and an insurrection arises,
they may deal with it when they see it. But sir, this did not
answer the purpose. This brigand of Tennessee and his army
were the kind of force the executive wanted. They are to go
and lay hold of people and inflict upon them tortures and
threaten them with death. He intended to pursue a savage
war by designating men and taking them just as he chose, and
putting them in prison, detaining them and maltreating them
at his pleasure. I say that if the facts which he alleges are
true, and could be proven, they would be irrelevant, and would
furnish no justification, no excuse, because the courts of justice
being open there was a state of peace ; if there was a state of
peace there was an embargo on the executive not to interfere
with the Hberties of the citizen, with this great privilege of
habeas corpus, and exemption from arrest except in a legal
manner. I repeat what has been already said, that all these
are not so much intended to protect men against men from
being foully dealt with by each other, as to protect them against
those in whose hands power is vested. If gentlemen will look
into Blackstone, they will find it laid down that the great writ
of habeas corpus was not so much devized to protect the
subject against the king, the cabinet ministers and the privy

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 437
councils tfcc, aa that it waa to protect them against persons
vested with power. If yon look at tho ' acts of suspension of
tho writs of habeas corpus in England which have taken place
from timo to time, you will find that it does not mean to turn
loose tho military upon the people like a wolf among the flocks
of the shepherd. But they declare that if persons be arrested
on tho warrant of a cabinet minister, a privy counsellor lor
perhaps othor officers, tho privilege of the writ of habeas corpus
Bhall not be allowed in such cases for a given time.
The governor ot North Carolina had not, nor could have,
any such suspension ot tho writ or grant of power to mako
arbitrary arrests. If thero was such a combination, ho had four
months to trace it out, after issuing the proclamation, before
he sent his troops. But that was not tho drama that was
to be enacted. This last tragic act was in contemplation at
the time when the proclamation was first written. No other
agency was to be allowed but state troops. No United States
troops, though quartered at the court house during all these
months, no posse comitatus, no judges, no justice of the
peace, but the Kirk military most go two or three weeks
before the election is to be held ; and then tlie people are to
be treated as if they were condemned felons, having no rights
to be protected from inhumanity. Even a felon, if he is at
large, may be arrested, but there is no power to maltreat
him except to inflict the sentences of the law. The evi
dence offered may gratify the prurient curiosity ; but it throws
no light upon the question of the guilt or innocence of the
respondent. If the provocation existed then as now, deal with
it as the law directs. If any body thinks proper to institute
proceedings as to the question of the man's guilt or innocence
of committing a crime, it is his province to do so ; but to pro
claim a county in insurrection, and then seize citizens and put
them in prison without authority of law, in my opinion there
can be no pretence at justification or excuse to bring, forward
such proof as is now sought to be introduced.
The learned counsel who last addressed yOu [Mr. Smith]

488 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
aays that the evidence ought to be admitted anyhow, bocause
the respondent offers it, and that Mr. Sumner in the trial of
President Johnson moved to admit all evidence, It is a suf
ficient reply to that suggestion to state that Mr. Sumner was
not sustained in his views, and that his proposition was laid
on the table immediately by a great majority of the Sonate.
I think that my friend wholly forgets his argument on last
Saturday on the admission of the evidence we offered in re
gard to the declarations of Kirk on the hotel register. Ho
then thought that we should be governed by the rules of law
on the admissibility of the testimony. Now he says that
great liberality should be shown on this subject and that the
rules of evidence laid down by the courts ought not to be sus
tained here. We say, sir, that if evidence is not relevant to the
issue between these parties, it ought not to be received. He
says that Mr. Johnson, although the majority of the senate was
opposed to him, was allowed to introduce evidence showing that
ho had exercised a certain power with the view to bring tho
question of his right to do so before tho supreme court. But,
sir, Mr. Johnson was acting in the line of his duty. He was
exercising the executive power of the government of the
United States. The president of the United States had had tho
power to remove at his pleasure any of his subordinate officers.
Congress thought proper to say to him that he should not do
it except under certain circumstances. The aots of President
Johnson wore thoso which appertained purely to the execu
tive office. What this respondent was doing was usurping
tho office of tho judiciary. Ho went outside of his duty in the
exorcise of the executive functions and undertook to supply
the plaoe of tho judiciary whero he thought thoy were not as
active as they should be.
The counsel says that this case is like that ot President
Lincoln refusing to respond to the habeas corpus in the case of
Merryman, issued by Chief Justice Taney. There is no par
allel between the two cases. In that case there was public war
between the two sections of the country. And within the

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 439
6phere of his powers, Mr. Lincoln declined to allow the civil
process to be served. But here there was no war and no pre
tence of war. There were acts ot secret crime liable to be
dealt with if you could find out the peipetrators, just as any
other crime was to be dealt with. Sir, this is not the first
instance that a crime has been perpetrated and the offenders
have eluded pursuit, and even evidence has failed to be produced
against them. Look at the case which occurred in the most
populous city in our great country. A man was put to death
in the night time in his own house, and from that day to this
nobody has been able to state who did it. There was a case
where Governor Hoffman, of New York, might have with
equal propriety declared the city of New York in a state
ol insurrection, and have ordered troops to the city and arrest
citizens until somebody should disclose something about tho
peipetrators of that crime. But Gov. Hoffman properly chose
to leave that matter to the judiciary. He knew that he was
forbidden to interfere in any manner by the military power
except there was an insurrection against public authority, and
then only when it was found that & posse had not the power to
arrest men who wero charged with crime. Thero are other cases
all over tho civilized world where crimes havo been committed
in secret and tho perpetrators have eluded detection and have
escaped punishment. But this idea of proclaiming all tho citi
zens of a county outlaws by an executive declaration and arrest
ing cltlzons and denying thorn tho ordinary privileges of a fol on
who is soon in the commission of an act, was left to be suggested
by tho governor of this state.
The learned counsol speaks of theso acts of the executive as
an orror of j udgment. This was a case bo plain and palpable and
so entirely outside of executive duty and power, that there could
bo no mistaking the fact that the military could not interfere
for the purpose of ferreting out criminals wliich the civil authori
ty had not ferreted out or had not been able to ferret out, for
no application was ever made for a warrant against anybody
before any judge or magistrate, and much less was the.applica-

440 ""COURT bFTMPEACHMENTS.
tion refused. The wrongs and outrages which were perpetrated
in the oounty of Alamanco, illustrates tho stato of society which
always follows upon revolutions. It is but acting over again,
excopt upon a moro violent scnlo, tho sconos which woro
perpetrated in England, In tho times of Charles II and James
II. Tho royal authority wna subverted by Oromwoll and tho
King put to death. Later thoro wna a restoration of tho dynasty
of tho Stuarts and Charles II was mado king. Thon thoro aroso
a system of osplonogo, and informers wont about preferring
accusations against mon and thoy wero arrested by tho scoro
and tried and convicted. But in thoso prosecutions the forms
of law wero conformed to, and mon wont before courts of
justice with perjuries, and upon such testimony convictions
were had and men were punished capitally. As Mr. Fox
eays it was " an ago of good laws and bad government," for
still the forms of tho law were observed. Hundreds of mon
were charged with being enemies to tho Protestant succession,
who did not belong to the reigning party of tho king and
Titus Oate8' and Bedloes and other informers whose infamy is
shown up in all the histories of England came forward and pre
ferred charges of " meal tub plots " and " rye house plots "
and other incendiary proceedings designed to take away tho
attachment of the people for the government; and, sir, it is a
blot upon the history of England which I have no doubt every
Englishman would desire to have effaced. Such persons
thronged the executive chamber here and with a credulous ear
this respondent took their stories as if thoy wero sworn evidence.
In England they wont through tho forms of judicial proceed
ings by tho issue of processes directed to tho proper officors to
execute, bnt our governor aont tho military into the county to
commit those outrages against tho liberties of the citizen.
It is said Mr. Chief Justice that this is an important question.
It is of not bo much importance with reference to this trial as
it is with reference to the tenure by which the people of this
country hold tlieir liberties. If 6uch conduct as that of this
respondentia to pass Without a proper visitation of punishment,

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 441,
then the liberties of this country are held by a very different
tenure from what has been supposed. It is not to be regretted
that this discussion has arisen, that thia subject has been brought
to the minds of the senators that that thoy may turn their atten
tion to it in ordor to let it bo known to the people of this state
whether thoro aro no guards for thoir liberties such as will pre
vent conduct liko this. If there is not, they will soon take
measures to endeavor te obtain them.
There has nover beon in this state such an outrage on tho rights
of tho people, and really tho plea of insanity would bo a much
hotter ono to bo interposed by the executive than tho one which
he has attempted to set up. I respectfully submit that this
court will not receive the evidence, because it is not pertinent
to the issue in this trial and that it will not be deterred from
its duty by the idea that clamor may be raised that it will
have been guilty of injustice in not allowing him to prove the
facts which he offers.
Senator GRAHAM, of Orange. I suppose it will be agree
able to the presiding officer and to the court to take a recess
for five minutes.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. If it would be agreeable to sena
tors the presiding officer would prefer an adjournment at this
time before delivering his decision, that he may look over some
notes he has made, with the view of preparing a brief state
ment of his reasons. He supposes, also, that it will afford an
opportunity to senators to reflect upon the question before being
called upon to vote. .{,
Senator DAEGAN moved that the court adjourn. ,
Senator JONES. Mr. Chief Justice, I hope the senator
will withdraw his motion for a moment. I think there is a
misapprehension in reference to which side has the right to
the concluding argument. I am told by the counsel , for the
respondent that they claim the right to reply to the argument ,
of the counsel who has just concluded his remarks, and, I am
also informed that the counsel for the prqsecutipnalso claim tho
right. , I think tbAttbe.d^ussjon ^be^gB^failuyjjftj

442 " ''court of tmf^eacihm&ntb;
that matter settled now, and I hope it will be done before the
court adjourns.
Senator GILMER. Mr. Chief Juatice, I cordially join in
tlie wish that the matter may be determined at the present
time. I regard the question as purely one of law. Great lati
tude has been given in the argument and I hope if there is to
be any more discussion it will be concluded to-day.
Mr. BOYDEN. This question, Mr. Chief. Justico, arose on
the trial of the president of the United States. The rules
adopted for the government of this court gives the counsel for
the prosecution the right to make the concluding argument on
the final argument of the case, but we have no rule, as I under
stand it, touching this question which has been now raised.
On the trial of President Johnson, the counsel who made the
motion had the right invariably to close the argument upon it.
That has been the rule invariably in the courts of North Car
olina during forty-seven years that I have practised at the bar.
I have never known the contrary. I know that it has been
alleged on this trial that this court ia " a law unto itself," and
can make just such rnlea aa it pleases ; but I have the utmost
confidence that senators will not act upon auch a principle a&
that, but will give to the reepondont the same righta that are
accorded in all civil courta.
Mr. manager SPARROW. It aeema to mo, with all
due deference, that the rule aa etated by the counsol for the re
apondent, would operate different y from the way he claima. I
do not understand that any motion has been made — certainly
none by the othor side. What are the facts? The managers
have a witness upon the stand and on cross-examination, tho
counsel for the respondent asks him a question to which
the counsel for the managers object. There is no
motion at all, unless the objection interposed on behalf of the
managers be regarded as amotion. Hence we claim to have
the reply. ' ' • ' ' '
' Mr. BOYDEN. Mr.' Chief Justice, the honorable manager
is entirely "-xni&a&eh I think. We proposed to put a certain

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 443
question to the witness for him to answer, and the affirma
tive is with us. We offer ; they object. It seems to me there
cannot be a clearer principle of law.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer iB of the
opinion that the counsel for the respondent have the right to
reply. It is well settled that whoever makes an affirmative
proposition has the right to the conclusion in the argument.
The only difference made by the Manager is as to whether the '
question which is objected to iB equivalent to the motion.
The presiding officer is of the opinion that it is to be regarded
as such, and that tho respondent's counsel are entitled to the
reply. Senator DARGAN withdrew his motion to adjourn.
Senator GRAHAM, of Orange, moved that the session this
day be extended to half-past three to enable the argument upon
the question pending, to be concluded.
A sufficient number seconding the motion, the Chief Justice
put the question on the motion of Senator Graham, of Orange,
and it was decided in the affirmative.
Senator NORMENT movod that the court adjourn.
A sufficient numbor seconding the motion, the Chief Justico
put the question on tho motion of Senator Norment, and it was
decided in tho negative.
Those who voted in the affirmative are : Messrs. Bollamy,
Brogden, Cook, Council, Currio, Dargan, Eppes, Flemming,
Ilawkina, Hyman, McOotter, Moore, Norment, Olda. Yeaa, 14.
Those who voted in the negative are: Messrs. Albright,
Brown, Edwards, Gilmer, Graham of Alamance, Graham of
Orange, Jones, Latham, Ledbetter, Linney, Mauney, McClam
my, Merrimon, Murphy, Robbins of Davidson, Robbins of
Rowan, Skinner, Troy, Waddell, Warren, Whiteside, Worth.
Nays, 22. ¦ v
Mr. BOYDEN. I listened with great pleasure to the elo
quent argument of the gentleman who last addressed the court,
(Mr. Graham,) upon those important principles racoigporated
in our bill of rights for the protection pf life, liberty and prop-

444 COUBT.OF IMPEACHMENT. ,
erty of its citizens. It waa a very, eloquent argument and no
doubt much time has been devoted 'to its preparation, but, Mr.
Chief Justice, the only fault in that great and eloquent argu
ment was, that it is aside of the question before the senate ;
and I will take this occasion to say that I think it was not fair
for tho gentleman to argue tliis point before the senate, as if
upon a final argument of tho cause. I think it was unfair to
attempt to argue this time as if the whole testimony was in and
endeavor, as I thought, to enable the senators to mako up thoir
minds upon the guilt or innocence of the respondent. That is
not the question at all. Nor whether my client, the respon
dent, is guilty or not. He states what has been done, goes
through all that testimony of the aggravating circumstances,
and then says there is nothing in reply, and there ia nothing
that can bo offered in reply. He starts out with the proposi
tion stated at the opening of this argument, that no evidence
can be given in this case untU an open insurrection is estab
lished and lie cites high authority, if it were at all applicable to
this case, the opinion ot Chief Justice Marshall, but, Mr.
Chief Justice and senators, that is talking about the law when
a person is on trial for the crime of treason, and has no appli
cation whatever to the case now before the court. So that
however the law may be when the person is on trial for the
crime of treason, certainly the gentleman ought to know it has
no application here.
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. Chief Justice, the gentleman is a
little mistaken, it was on an application for bail in the 'case of
Balman and Swartwout. It was not on Burr's trial.
Mr. BOYDEN. That does not alterthe qu estion at all. It
is where an individual is before the court charged with treason,
whether before he is bound over, or whether he is before the
jury, makes no manner of difference, as it seems to me, that
every lawyer can weU understand. So that the suggestion can
have no influence upon the argument I am making. In thia
charge against my, client they admit as it will be seen thct under ,
the coptitntion of North Carolina the governor of, the state

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 445
"has power to call out theT militia to execute the law, to sup-
"press riots or insurrection and to repel invasion."
Now, Mr. Chief Justice and senators, the whole argument of
the gentleman wont to show — if I con comprehend it— that
thoro waa no such power in North Carolina and that tho militia
could only Ikj called out lit old of the civil authorities. That is
the manner In which I understand tho argument. I contend
that that 1« not the law. Sir, all ho said in iuVor of tho writ of
habeas corpus, that great and Important right of the citizen, I
concur with him fully, concur with him as te its importance,
but that writ never runs to a section of tho country declared in
insurrection, and taken charge of by military power. That is
the position which he laid down and I shall attempt to establish
it by high authority aud by the authority read by the gen
tleman in the case of ex parte Milligan.
In the first place I beg permission to read from Bishop's
Commentaries on Criminal Law, commencing in the first book,
chapter 4th, section 54, and concluding with section 08. I will
begin with section 54, book I, chapter 4 :
" If the reader will turn to the constitution, he will there
"See that the power conferred on the judges is "Judicial."
" It is not all the power of tho government, but only tho "ju-
" dicial power." Says the constitution : "The judicial power
'• of the United States shall bo vested in one supreme court,
" and in such inferior courts as the congress may from time
" to time ordain and establish." "
41 Now, here is no power of martial law, because martial law
u is not a thing pertaining to "judicial power." The United
" States courts cannot establish martial law, on the one hand ;
" nor, on tho other hand, can they overthrow or interfere with
"it in any way, if lawfully established by any Other depart-
" merit of the government. Their "power," either for or
" against, does not extend to this matter.
" There are certain principles laid down in the constitution
" to guide the "judioial power." In some1 of tho clauses ex-
Sprees words mention the "judicial" as the power to bo
ao

44C COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS, ,
" graded ; and, in others, the form of the language is such as
" merely to point to this power alone. Of the latter, lot tho
" fourth and fifth articles of the amendment serve as samples.
" They are read consecutively, as follows : " The right of the
" people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and ef-
" fects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not
" be violated, and no warrants shall issue but upon probable
" cause, supported by oath or affirmation and particularly de-
" scribing the place to be searched, and the persons or things
" to be seized. No person shall be held to answer tor a capital
" or otherwise infamous crime, unless on presentment or in-
" dictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land
" or naval forces, or ia the militia, when in actual service in
" time of war or public danger ; nor shall any person bo sub-
" ject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life
" or limb ; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a
'• witness against himself, nor bo deprived of life, liberty or
" property, without due process of law ; nor shall private
" property be taken for public use without just compensation."
"Perhaps the last clause is properly construed, as it is by the
" courts, to be a limitation upon the legislative as well as the
"judicial power; and indued the wholo restrains the legisla-
" tine from passing any act which shall command the courts
"to violate, in their proceedings, the provision? thus laid
"down. But these provisions have nothing to do with tho
" martial power of war, or with tho law which this power
" executes ; and that this is bo, the form of tho expression just
" as conclusively shows as if the precise words of limitation
" wero used.
" It is obvious that if no man could, by the war-arm of, tho
" government, be put to death, or be deprived of his liberty,
" until first he had been indicted by a grand jury and found
" guilty by a petit jury, we should make as a nation but a poor
"headway in martial affairs; and in fact, the restriction would
" bo tantamount to a prohibition of all war. Then, if by;looking
" into other parts of the constitution, wo find war to be a thing

TRIAL OF WILLIAM1 Wi ' HOLDEN. 447 *
"provided for iri it/we are to draw' the general conclusion, that
"the particular provisions of the constitution which do' Dot
" point expressly or^ by clear intendment to thia matter Of war
"are meant to be regulations for the civil branches of the' go v-
" crnment in matters pertaining to peace, and that they have
"no reference to war or to martial law. ¦ '
" We have already seen, that by the constitution y congress is
" to make rules and articles of war, and the president is to be
" commander-in-chief of the army and navy, so the Congress
" has power " to declare war," " to raise and support armies,"
" " to provide and maintain a navy," " to provide for calling
"forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress
"insurrections, and repel invasions," and, among other things,
" " to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for
" carrying into execution the foregoing powere." " Congress
" has made the needfnll laws, in pursuance of this latter clause,
" and they apply both to the suppression of insurrection at
" home, and to the repelling of invasions from abroad, and it
"iB not always imperative, to justify an exercise of war power,
"?tBw3' there should be a declaration of war by congress ?
" The president, having this power put into his hands, takes
" the oath to " preserve, protect and defend the constitution of
"the United States." In another clause, he is enjoined to
" " take care that Dlie laws be faithfully executed." It iB obvious
"that the word "laws," in thia connection, does not have
" any restrictive meaning ; it is plural in its form, and, if it
" were singular, it would not be restrictive'; it applies, not
" alone, perhaps not primarily, to the laws administered by
"the "judicial power," the judges, to whom they are expressly
" committed, being ordinarily competent to execute these laws ;
" but it applies,' in an especial manner to the law martial, |vhich
" js executed b^'the military forces whereof he is the cOmman-
" der-ih-chief. If by reason of insurrection' or rebellion at
"home, or invasion* frOm abroad, there cbmes a disturbance
M which the civil power cannot or will not suppress, he iabotmd

449 . COURT OF EUPEACHMENTSv . lV1
"to callinto action tins power pf war, carrying with it the law,
"martial* . .1 •-.[...¦ r.. ,,,,, .... ... ;, ..¦¦ --y,. ¦ .. -
" In circumstances like these, and in all other circumstances,
" the president, if he wants advice concerning his duty, orcon-
" eerning tlie meaning of the constitution, or on act of congress,
" or concerning anything else, ia to apply not to the judges,
"but to the proper cabinet officer." " He may require," says
the constitution, " tho opinion, in writing, of the principal
u officer in each of tho executive departments, upon any subject
" relating to the duties of their respective offices. It is not,
" therefore, for the judgea to advise him of tho time or the
"necessity for calling out tho military forco of tho country to
" execute the law of war, or law-martial ; but, aB ho ia to act,
" and to 1)0 responsible in this matter, the duty of judging do-
" volves upon him ; nnd, if ho wishes advice, ho is to take it,
" not from them, but from his cabinet officers. And, this
"being so, it Is Impossible for the courts to limit him as to tho
" apnco over which, within tho country, tho martial law of tho
" army and navy shall operate.
" Let not the proposition of tho last sentence be misundor-
«' stood : tho president may do wrong, may commit a violation
"of law, by extending the sphere of martial law too widely, or
"by causing tho weight of thirt law to fall too heavily; but,
"under our constitution, it Ib not for th$ judicial power
"tooxerclao tho restraint. If tho judgea should attempt it,
" they could not execute their decree without calling upon tho
" military power ; but thie power Ib, by the constitution and tho
"lawa, controlled, in these circumstances, — that Jb, when it is
" used for purposes of war, — by the president, and he cannot
" command the power to operate against himself. When, in a
" time of peace, a judge calls for a militaiy force to act as a
"posse to carry out somo decree he has made, or to protect the.
"officers .of, his tribunal, flie case ib entirely different: there*
" the president is pot asked to employ thomilitary forcp against -
"himself ..,„ ,. ,-.,,, p .„., • ¦ , ., ,. ... , . ii; „;, ,,,,,., ..
" These views — which are intended to be but an outline of

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 449
"the matter — would be found practically 'ifoperfect'were we not
" to consider a clause of the constiintion which is 6ometimes
" quoted in the connection; it is: 'the privilege of the writ
" of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in case
" of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.'
" Now the principal use of a habeas corpus Writ, and ita great
" value, is, that, by it, when a man is imprisoned, ho may have
" tho lawfulness of his imprisonment looked into at once, with-
" out awaiting tho other slower processes of the law. It is a
"writ which can be used only where the judicial power has
"jurisdiction. If a party is held by military arrest, under tho
"law martial, that is, aB a prisoner of war, — the judicial tribu-
" mils, even, it seems to tho writer, by the common law ns
" brought to this country from England, would have no juris-
" diction to proceed in the case b}r habeas corpus, much less has
" the 'judicial power' any such authority under our constitu
tion, wherein the different functions of the government are
" intrusted to separate departments with accurately enumerated
"powers, acting independently of one another.
"The writ of habeas corpus, therefore, is a judicial process;
" it is an arm of " the judicialpower." And the judicial power
" cannot bo controlled by the president ; it is controlled only
" by congress, and in the way of legislation. In pursuance of
" the plain intimation coutained.in the clause of the constitution
" quoted, congress, by legislation, has authorized tire courts to
" make U60 of this writ as one of their processes. And it is not
" easy to see how the president, who has no legislative power
*' within himself alone, can suspend an act of congress; for this
" is as much a legislative function as was that which brought it
" into being. Nor, as we have seen, is this necessary, Or in any
" degree desirable in any case where martial power "oi war is
" called into action. The suspension, contemplated by the con
stitution, may be useful in some circrimstancea 6r localities
" where the full martial power ' ia not called out,' and Where
** congreas authorizes arrests in tho way of civil proceedings,
"yet when it niay not be prtident to hard !i 'publto examination

4flO flPUST OF , !Ml»K>0eM«N'M, :
" of .the), matter, on an application for the discharge of a prisoner,
" until the caBe comcson regularly for trial. But the bare siig-
"gestion that, to; suspend the writ of habeas coipus, even by an
" act of congress, will justify an arrest which would not other-
" wise belawful, ia a monstroaity in jurisprudence ; and in morals,
"it is of the ethics of the thief, who holds himself justifiable if
" ho can but escape the pursuing constable.
" Thus we have traced, with somo care, tho thread of judicial
" argument through the various constitutional provisions upon
" which the question of martial law under our government
" depends. It was not deemed necessary to cite, in the notes,
" all the crude utterances which have fallen from judges and
" from legislators on this subject. This is one of thoso questions
" of constitutional law which the author expects to unfold moro
" fully, in another connection, hereafter.
" It may bo hero said, however, that, though the constitu-
" tional provisions relating to this subject, are, when fully ex-
" amincd, plain enough, it is very difficult to tell tho truth upon
" it without subjecting one's self to being misunderstood. Thia
'• matter line been bandied about in politics,' and each reader is
" seeking to know whothor the author belongs to this party or
" to that, and he Ib ready to approvo or disapprove, according
"as ho likes or dislikes tho answer to this question. Yet, in
"the prcsont case, the author belongs neither to this or to that
" party ; but ho is ono of thoso few persons who hold truth to
" bo Buporior to party, and who seeks it alone, without asking
" or caring whother it ploasos one party or another.
, " The reader, therefore, may suppress his surprise at finding,
" that the foregoing views are not the views of any political
"party; being, instead, the views of the constitution of
"the land. If «he is told that they accord to the presi-
" dent great power in time of rebellion or other war, the
" author's answer is, that he did not make the constitution. If
" he is told, that, assuming these views to be correct, the gov-
" ernment of this country is not the weak thing which he has
"often heard it represented to be, but is, on the other hand,

TRIAfc OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 451
" one of the strongest governments in the world, his reply is,
" that not he, but the Higher wisdom which inspired our fore-
" fathers when they framed our national constitution, ordained
t " this matter. If it is still objected that not even the queen of
" England has such power of martial law, as according to the
" foregoing views has the president of the United States, the
" answer to this objection is, tliat it it may be 60, or may not,
" but, whatever bo the power of the English queen, she derives
" it from tho English constitution, while our president derives
" his irom the American. It has, indeed, been assumed in this
" chapter, that the common law of England is the common law
" of this country ; but where our constitution is distinct, as it
" is on this matter, it, and not the common law must prevail ;
"moreover we shall see, in the proper place, that according to
" the highest judicial authority in this country, — an authority
" which wo are all bound to respect, though the doctrine as laid
"down doubtless requires some limitation, — there is no com-
"mon law of the United States in distinction from the several
" states." " But it should allay our apprehensions to know, that the pow-
" or of tho president, In rcspurt to martial law, w of no higher
" character than in judicial matters, is exorcised by our courts of
"law throughout tho country. If the president, may procood
" wrongfully, so may a judge. If hu may commit an error, so
" may the highest judges of tho land. Jt' a judge may bo im
peached, so equally may bo tho president. If tho judge is
" bound to proceed, in civil affairs, according to judicial la v, bo
" is tho prosidout, in martial affairs, bound to proceed according
," to the law martial. If it is in tho power of the -president to
" ruin a man by violating the law-martial ; so also it is in the
"power of the judge to do the same thing by violating the
"judicial law. If, from an inferior judge, there lies an appeal
" to a superior ; bo also doe8 thero from, an order of an inferior
" military officer to the president. , If t)iere are instances in
"which an .inferior, military .officer may do a wrong which
¦ ;" cannot find practical redress ; so likewise there are, in whicl

452 ¦/ COURT . OF .IMPEACHMENTS. .
" an inferior judge may do a wrong whicli cannot be redressed
" by application above. In short, the difference between mar-
"tlal law and the law of civil tribunals is, that the one is
" adapted to suppress what the other cannot, in a time of re-
" hellion or other war; whilo tlie other ia adapted to a condi-
" tion of pure peace. Aud let ub not eonqilain when we find
" our conatitution to havo embodied a wisdom suited to all tho
" emergencies of a nation."
And as further authority ou this point I quote from tho
opinion of Chief Justice Chnso in em parte Milligan.
"There are under tho constitution thrco kinds of military
"jurisdiction, one to bo exorcised both in peace and war,
" another to be exercised in time of foreign war without tho
"boundaries of the United States, or in timo of rebellion and
" civil waa within states or districts occupied by rebels treated
" as belligerents ; and a third to be exercised in time of inva-
" sion or insurrection within tho limits of the United States or
" during rebellion within tbe limits of states maintaining
" adhesion to the national government, when the public danger
"requires its exercise. The first of these may be called jnris-
" diction under military law, and is found in the acts of con-
" gress prescribing rules and articles of war, or otherwise pn>-
" viding for the government of the national forces ; the second
" may be distinguished as military government, superseding,
" as far as may be deemed expedient, the local law, and exer-
" cised by the military commander under the direction of tho
" president, with the express or implied sanction of congress ;
" while the third maybe denominated martial law proper, and
" ia called into action by congress, or temporarily, when the
" action of congress cannot be invited, and in the case of justify-
" ing or excusing peril, by the president, in times of insurrec-
" tion or invasion, or of civil or foreign war, within districts or
" localities where ordinary law no . longer adequately secures
" public safety and private rights. . , , ,
" We think that the power of congress, in such times and in
" such localities, to authorize trials for crimes against the secu-

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 453
" rity and 6afoty of the national forces, may lie derived from its
" constitutional authority to raise and support armieB and to
" declare war, if not from its constitutional authority to provide
" for governing tho national forces.
"Wo havo no apprehension that this power, under our
" American system of government, In which all official authori-
"ty Is derived from tho people, und exorcised under direct
" responsibility to the people, la moro likely to bo abused than
" tho power to regulate commerce, or tho powor to borrow
" money." 4th Wallace, page 141, Boyden 1.
Thoro, Mr. Chiof Justice, it is laid down expressly that there
are three kinds of military law ; there is that for governing tho
militia in ordinary times of peace. I need not recur to that nor
to the next one but thero is this other military law called bb
such as any part of the civil law, by which tho president not
without the power of congress, has the right to proceed to put
down invasion or insurrection by calling out the militia. I
mean the strict legal right. But, sir, it requires no act of North
Carolina, no act of the legislature to authorize the governor to
do the same thing, which congress can authorize the president
to do. But in our case it seems that the governor wm unwil
ling to act without the authority of the people, as expressed
through their legislature, and therefore he refused to act, no
matter how great the difficulty in such an emergency as this
unless the people ot North Carolina through their representa
tives in their legislature would authorize him to do so. Then
what is the question now before this honorable court ? It is
not what constitutes treason. . That is not the question. It is
the question here purely as to motive, for it is laid down in
the law books as every lawyer knows. I have a- citation
from Roscoe, where he says : " every crime must have two
constituent parts, namely an act forbidden by law and an in
tention." >
Senator EDWARDS moved that the session be extended
indefinitely in order to allow the argument Of the counsel to be
completed.

454 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
A infficient number seconding the motion, t> . in :
- i The CHIEF JUSTICE put the question on the motion of
Senator Edwards, and it was decided in the affirmative.
Mr. BOYDEN. Mr. Chief Justice aud senators, the ques
tion which we propounded is upon the question of motive ; I
trust every 6enator will understand that it is upon the question
of motive, the motive which induced the governor to issue
tbia proclamtion ; that is what we are upon. It is not a ques
tion which has been argued heretofore and at such great length
by the counsel for the prosecution, whether there was an insur
rection or not. That is not the question, the only question is
touching the motive of the governor. What do we Bay upon
that ? Why, sir, in the first place we have to reply that none
of our evidence is before this high court yet. We have not
come to the time when we could offer it, and yet the case is
argued on the other side as if upon the final argument. I have
furnished me the annual cyclopaedia of 1861, to a passage
from which I beg leave to call tbe attention of the court:
" A writ of habeas corpus was also issued by Judge Garri
" son of Brooklyn, N. Y., and served upon the officer in charge
" of the prisoners at Fort Lafayette, commanding that one ot
" them should bo brought before him, but without any success.
" The declarations of tho government coincide with tin.
" evidence of these facts.
"On tho 5 th ot July, Attorney General Bates prepared an
" opinion,, at tho request of tho president, on tho suspension of
" tho privilege of the writ ot habeas corpus. Ho coinmencet
" his opinion with theso words :
" Sir, you havo required my opinion in writing upon the fol-
<s lowing questions :
. . " 1. In the present time of a great and dangerous insurrec-
'.' tion, has the president the discretionary power to .cause to be
" arrested and held in custody persons known to have criminal
J.' intercourse with the, insurgents, or persons against whom
"there is ¦ probable i cause for suspicion of , such , criminal
" complicity.

TRIAL OP, WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 455
" 2. In auch oases of arrest, ia the president justified inrefu«ing
" to obey a writ of habeas corpus issued by, acourt or a judge,
" requiring him or his agent to. produce the body of, the pris
oner, and show the cause of his caption and detention, to be
" adjudged and disposed of by such court or judge ? , ¦
" Both questions were answered in the affirmative ,by the
"attorney general. The basis of his argument, is i in these
" words: " To make my answer to these questions at once consistent
" and plain, I find it convenient to advert to the great principle
" of government as recognized and acted upon in moBt, if not
" all the countries of Europe, and to mark the difference
" between that principle and the great principle which lies at
"the bottom of our national government. ~
"Unity of power is the great principle recognized in Eu-
" rope ; bnt a plan of " checks and balances," forming separate
" departments of government, and giving to each department
" separate and limited powers, has been adopted here. These
"departments are co-ordinate and co-equal; that is,, neither
" being sovereign, each is independent in its sphere, and. not
"subordinate to the others, either of them or both of. them
" together. If one of the three is allowed to determine tho
" extent of its own powers, and that of the other two, that one
"can in fact control the whole government, and.. hap become
" sovereign. The samo identical question may come up legit
imately before each one of the three departments, and bo
"determined in threo different. ways, and each decision stand
"irrevocable, binding upon the parties <o each case, for tho
"simple reason that the departments are co-ordinate,, and
" there is no ordained legal superior with power to revise and
" reverse tlieir decision. To say that the department of our
"government are co-ordinate, is to say that ,fhe judgment of
"one of them is not binding upon ,the othor, two„ias, to the
" arguments and principles involved in the jndgementtf ; Tins
"independence, of tho,, department being, .preyed^ and (the
"executive being the act jvft-opo; bound by loathl!to.porforni

450 '¦' ODtJHT Or IMPKAWtMKNTi. ' i;
?•certain' duties he must bo, therefore, of necessity,1 tho solo
"judge, both of the exigency which require* him to act,' and of
"tho manner which it is most prudent for him to employ tho
" powers intrusted to him, to onnblo him to discharge his tonatl-
" tutlounl and legal duty. Such Is tho outline of tho prollml-
" narics upon which thin (rpliilon rests."
Mr. OUUW JUSTICE that authority shows exactly what
your honor docldod In tho habeas corpus cases In North Caro
lina, and this Is decided by Judgo Bond In tho habeas corpus
case of Burgen.
The governor In this case is to act upon his judgment of the
circumstances, and If ho acta fairly anil honeatly upon what ho
believes to be tho truo atate of tho case, he is to be justified 'here
before this tribunal whatever may be tho justification of the
governor in any matter which may call up these questions here
after between the governor and the individual. I say then,
thero can be no question, as I understand the law, that if the
governor has acted honestly and bona fide in this matter, he
must go acquitted.
Well sir, what is tho testimony offered 'i What do we say?
We allege that when wo come to offer our testimony wo shall
bo able to prove that in the county of Alamanco the lives and
property of the citizens wero entirely insecure, and although
the courts were open thero, as has been proved, and although
outrage after outrage, murder after murder, scourging after
scourging, mutilation after mutilation, whippings innumerable,
at any rate, to the amount of eighty cases which Ave expect to
show. Eighty cases* in the comity of Alamance and yet al
though they say the courts were open, and although these out
rages were public and notorious, scarcely a citizen in the county
of Alamance but what knew it; yet when the courts met no
presentments' wero made, no indictinenta were found ; not a
human being engaged in theso assassinations was brought be
fore the courts. • ' < ' ¦' '"
iI ask this learned court and every man who hoars, me if that
docs not show that tho ami of civil power was completely par-

TttlALOS; WILLIAM W. 1IOLDEN. 45T
allied aud that no matter what offences wero committed upon
tho lives or property of tho citizens of Alamance, no man could
bo brought to justice, and wo expect to show to this high court
why thoy could not. Wo allege that theso very officers In that
county, tho sheriff', tho constables, grand juries and tho juries
that wero summoned by him belonged to his vilo organization,
and that It was perfectly Idle and futile to attempt tho prosecu
tion of any man there. No bill could bo found. No atten
tion whatever was paid to theso horrible deeds.
Now what wo contend ia this, that if what I allege is true,
and more can bo shown to be true, I will ask senators if with
tho Shoffner act before my client he had not a right to suppose
that he was permitted to issue this proclamation. But, sir,
that it was a high duty and instead of being impeached for per
forming that duty, if he had let the thing go on, and murder
and assassination and mutilation and ecourgings were running
riot and the respondent to take no notice of these offences and
not exercise his power ; why he had every right to suppose that
that would bo an impeachable offence, and that for that he
might be impeached and deprived of his office.
I say then, Mr. Chief Justice and senators, it does Beem to mo
that if any question is clear, it is clear that we have a right to
this testimony. The gentleman says no, Ave have no right to
this testimony and Ave have no right to prove any part of these
facts which I haA'e stated. Why} Because, says the counsel
for the managers, there was no open rebellion, no resistance to
peace officers of tho country. No sir, and there could be no resist-.
ance. They say they never called for assistance. No, sir, they
never did. They were in these vile organizations. They looked .
on complaisantly if they did not engage in them themselves,,,
They ifiBued no warrants, they took no steps, It is said, though,.
why have yon not gone out of the county, why have you not ap
plied to some judicfal magistrate or,.judge.. We shall be able to ,
answer that, if we are permitted, to oflfar our testimony ;, such, wast,
the power (Of, this organization, in(, tb$ oounty ,,of .Almance, that
any maniwho made, complaint, did. lit; fit jthevperil. of hfy $0..

458 ' ¦•''¦ ac*' of £*fckcfeMfa?.' ' -' r
How canU'Pttryear 'ih^MeTjatfiatf d;id*o%n^i;•, What do' we expect
to1 show Von iff that case t "''Why, fcft'iy that; thia poor'- half wftted
colored' mansaW Outlato Imng in thfe tewn'of Graharh,'and
he was simple enough to mention that fact. Then what1?' '
This organization- heard that he had said he had 'seen it and
knew sOveral otthe men, arid then his house is entered in the.
night tirrioi ' he taken from his wife and children, dragged bfi
at a distance, a large rock tied to his foot, and plunged in the
doep water and drowned. I say we expect to show' 'all that if
we are permitted to, and we expect to show there tfasno hope
of redress from the civil authorities, and1 any attempt to keek
redress resulted in the Bconrgmg or in the death of 'anyone
who attempted to inform against this organization in that coun
ty, consisting, as we expect to show, of more than half, if not
more than two thirds of the legal white votei'B of the county of
Alamance. Now the governor had seen that this had gone on from day to
day, from month to month. It la true he had the power to
call out tho mllltla, but hoAV did he net? With great prudence.
lie issued his proclamation ; ho calls upon cltlzons to aid him
that ho might not have to resort to oxtroino measures; Ho
calls upon tho citizens of Alamanco to hold public meetings
and to use this kind of Infiuonco to stop this iniquitous course
Ho calls 'upon his political adversaries, and emploros them to
rldo over tho country and mako spoechoa to relieve him of tho
diro neceaslty of being compelled to declaro the county of
Alamance to be in a atate of insurrection. He waitB and waits
and Aval ts. These iniquities cease not, this vile organization
progresses day after day until at last— arid that speaks language
which no nian can misunderstand, every senator must know
that it was unsafe for any body to make complaint 'there. '
They had a senator, Shoffner, in the 1 SturO of North
Carolina and he introduce t bill to wliic haV.e alluded,
for thti purpose of heading , Lnd putting u J to theso out
rages of these organization^1 tiM what do wtf bxpect to'prbve
touching that !' We Shall establish beyond ali controversy,1 no

TRIAL, OK AVILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 450
doubt about that, that one of these organizations in their camps
decreed the death of Senator Shoffner. Thoy decided that he
must.be executed, and, sir, we shall show that a parcel of this
band of assassins fifteen or twenty in number started to execute
this vile deed of darkness; and how waB it prevented, as we
expect to bIioav ? We expect to show that one man who, Was
a member of this very organization, happened to be a per
sonal friend of Shoffner, he was informed of the decree against
his life, and being his friend, we expect to show he prevailed
upon him to leave the county of Alamance and go to Greens
boro' on the day or rather the night before he was to be exe
cuted, and we expect to show the interference of another man
belonging to this same organization ; that he heard it, and he
started on the direction that they are to come and he meets
the men armed and moving forward to execute Shoffner ; they
aro informed that ho Avas not at home, that he was not in the
county, and thoy retire.
Now, Mr. Chief Justico and senators, is it not Idle, is It not
farcical that gentlemen should got up hero and say that bocauso
tho courts were open, because they hold courts thoro which took
no notice whatever of those transactions, thoy indicted no man,
they punished no man, they imprisoned no man, every man's
life if ho became at oil obnoxious to this vile organization, his
lifo was in peril. If ho had been scourged, If he named it he
was put to death or scourged agaiu. I say then can any '
senator declaro, can any, senator vote that all this testimony
tending to show the motive of the governor is to be excluded,
because theso vile deeds were done in secret in the dead hour
of the night, and with persona disguised so that no man could
tell them even in the day time. I trust senators all understand
this question. It is offered merely as to motive. . *
Now, sir, if the respondent's motive is good, if the county of
Alamance was in the condition, as we expect to show tlie court
it was, and that the respondent expected to stop it by this pro
cess, then he must go acquitted. !«., >...,,. ..,.• n / - '•., v ,"»¦,
, But .what, do the gentlemen say here now in' the last . argu-

400 COURT OF IMl'KACHMKXTS.
ment! Why they say that ho intended to try these men by
court martial and execute them. Have wo got to that point f
Is that tho question which wo aro arguing ? No, sir, whon this
testimony is closed, whon avo havo laid before this high court
tho testimony wo allege, and whon thoy show that ho arrested
A, B, C and I), who are mon of good character, mon who had
no connection with this matter, thou anothor question will
urlso. But wo have not como to that yot. Tho counsol who
last addrosBod you lins nrguod this question ns if the ovidenco
were nil In, and contends that there Is no justification for tho
governor whatever. I shall contend for tho principle that when
a county or a particular neighborhood Avith eircuniBcribed
boundaries is declared to be in a state of insurrection, a writ of
habeas corpus does not run there. The chiof justice had no
right to issue a Avrit to such sections. Instead of his stopping
short of his duty in refusing to issue writs of habeas corpus he
issued these Avrits of habeas eoipus Avhen he had no right to
issue them. Sir, Avhat Avas declared ? That the countv of
Alamance was in a state of insurrection, and martial law con
trolled the county. In Avhose name does this Avrit ran ? In
the name of the state. Who is commander in-chief of the
state ? The governor. Ho had declared the county to be in a
state of insurrection and had put it under military power, and
then they ask the chief justice ns they have done, to issue his
writ of habeas coipvs, to go and endeavor to overcome the
military force which had possession of the county of Alamanco.
That proposition is utterly absurd. Sir, I understood the pro
position Avas made before the court when the argument Avas
going on in the habeas corpus cases, thot although the governor
was commander-in-chief of the military, all the able bodied men
Avithin certain ages were under the command of the governor.
The chief justice, it was insisted could issue a writ of habeas cor
pus to the old men and the women and children to execute it.
It would make a nice parade against a military force — women
going with writs of a civil court with children in their aims to
overcome a military force. It would bring on a glorious state

TBIAL OP WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 401
of things. But that is what your honor was asked to do.
No man has a hlghor regard for all thoso principles of the con
stltutlon nnd for the writ of habeas corpus than myself, but I
say thoy nro to bo exercised in times of war and that Ib tho
most Important tlmo In which thoy nro over called In requisition.
I huvo always held fhl«, nnd I hold It to-dny, that notwithstand
ing I hold that doctrine, I hold tho other doctrine, that that
applies to nil places whero tho civil power has the authority,
and that thie writ runs into all counties whore the civil authori
ty has control, but it runs into no county — it runs into no
locality whero tho country has been declared in insurrection
and is in possession of tho military. They execute" and control
and govern that county while that proclamation exists. Sir,
hero wo have tho authority of the legislature tor this proceed
ing. Why, what took place during the rebellion. Did not
president Lincoln, before the suspension of tho Avrit, havo tho
legislature of Maryland seized? Were not numerous indi
viduals seized before tho writ of habeas corpus Avas suspended ?
For what did he doit? does any maudoibi? Yes, I enter
tain no question but that many here doubt it, doubt that he
did it from any pure motive to protect the life and the liberties
of tho country. I doubt not there arc those Avho entertain the
6ame opinion of the president of the United States for exe
cuting these high authorities which congress had not authorized,
that now entertain the opinion against tho respondent, that it
was out of the Avorst of motives that he did those acts after the
legislature had authorized him and as I say commanded him to
doit. Will any senator contend that in the month of April, 1869,
while General Sherman had military possession of a large por
tion of North Carolina, and held in his military custody a pri
vate citizen of North Carolina, that any judge of the courts of
the United States had a right to issue the civil Avrit of habeas
corpus, and direct a civil officer to take this private oitizen out
of the military custody of General Sherman? . I think no law
yer will hazard such an opinion. And in this case would the
81

462 court or ntrxAouMUNrs.
great principles of liberty incorporated in the amendments to
the constitution of the United States be violated ? If not,
why ? Because the country was under military control. Just
so was AlamaUce in legal contemplation after the proclamation
of the governor declaring tho county of Alamance in a state
of insurrection, and all persons in that county wero in legal
contemplation insurgents, however innocent and unoffending
their conduct. I am now speaking ot tho strict Uav of tho
case ; and for this decision I refer to Mrs. Alexander's cotton
case in Wallace's Supreme Court Reports, vol. 4, page 404-
and the authorities therein cited by the chief justice.
So that in all these cases, the motive is the very turning
point of tho cose.
Tho gentleman who last addressed tho court thinks this
matter of no sort of consequence and he supposes a very ex
treme case. Those suppositions can always be made and they
have the effect to startle timid minds. IIoav was it here, waa
thero any ground for declaring this county of Waho in a state
of insurrection ? It avhb not so declared. lie might havo de
clared it if theso facts had existed that would authorize it
as they did in Alamanco but if ho had declared it, Hir, then thin
question of motive avo come up as to thoso hero, but if it were
shown that he did It with tho view to seize the members of tho
legislature nnd the court and prevent his impeachment, then
this high court, Avould impeach him because ho would havo
abused his power, Avould have dono this out of bad motives
and those motives Avould havo boon shown and ho Avould havo
been convicted. But suppose another case ; suppose a large
majority of tho members of tho house and a large majority of
the Senators and all the judges were interested, and it was
understood they were on the eve of the rising of an insur,
rection to overthrew the established authorities of the state
and this had come to his knowledge. Then he would have
a right to take 6teps to prevent it. Putting extreme cases can
have no weight before this high court. It would be a case
where he would be undoubtedly guilty if he did as was sup-

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. DOLDEN. 463
posed by the learned counsel when there was no ground for his
acts ; but surely if he did that and he alleged by way of de
fense that all these authorities had entered into a conspiracy to
overthrow the present government and that ho was able to
prove it, then tho evidence would he heard and if the fact Avas
established by it that would justify him even in the extreme
case stated.
It was said by the learned counsel in one of his arguments
that if Gov. Hloden was justified in issuing this proclamation on
account of the disturbed condition of affairs in Alamance, then
Gov. Hoffman would have been justified in declaring the city of
New York in insurrection on account of tho the murder of
Nathans. I am surprised that such a proposition should bo
stated. It is stated upon tho assumed ground that aU we can 6ay
is that certain individuals woro murdered in Alamanco county,
that certain others woro scourgod and certain others mutilated.
Thoy leavo out tho main point in the caso. Thoy Bay not one
word about tho proposition which ' avo havo stated and which
wo expected to prove, to-wlt : that the White Brotherhood had
banded together and taken tho most solemn oaths that thoy
would resist all amendments to tho constitution of tho United
States and all uiioudinontH to tho constitution of North Carolina
since the war, save that of tho emancipation of slaves, that thoy
would havo nothing to do with tho colored peoplo nnd would do
all they could to doprivo thorn of their rights nt all hazards.
Thut is what avo allogo and what avo expect to prove. Thon as
to tho "Constitutional Union Guard " avo oxpect, if avo aro per
mitted to do so, to prove that its members had also taken tho
moat solemn oaths to guard the constitution of tho United
States as it existed before any of the recent amendments, save
that of the emancipation of the slaves, and that they had sworn
to resist all the amendments to the constitution of North Caro
lina save that which gave the slaves their freedom. Expecting
as wo do to prove these facts, will this high court in the dis
charge of its judicial functions say, that we are not permitted
to show a combination of more than one half of the white

464 court of impeachments.
voters of Almannce to resist and overthrow these high provi
sions of the constitution and that this was aimed at a particular
class of citizens, cither tho colored race or those individuals
Avho havo operated on their sido of political questions and
havo attempted to aid in carrying out the recent provisions of
tho constitution of tho State ?
That, sir, Ib Avhat avo allege. They say that we begin at tho
Avrong ond and henco Avhat avo offer cannot be admitted.
Noav, Mr. Chief Justice, I ask ovory knvyer who is a member
of tho Bciiato if it Avas over heard of in North Carolina when
ever a man was on his defense and tho stato called witnesses to
provo his guilt, the defendant Avas ever stopped from calling
out from that Avitness any testimony Avhich ho thought Avould
tend to exculpate him ? Was it ever said that before you can
ask that question you must introduce your testimony and provo
a certain point which is necessary in tho case, but you cannot
ask your adversary's witness what ho knew ; such a proposition
Avould 6hock the common sense of every lawyer in North Caro
lina. I venture to say that no lawyer Avill get up here and say
that such a thing ever occurred in his practice. We say that
Ave think that Ave can establish some part of our defense by this
witness called on behalf of the managers. The gentle
man says no — it is beginning at the wrong end ; and, 6ir,
what is the usual course in the courts of North Carolina,
when the defendant introduces his own testimony ? I have
had some experience in that matter, and I see many gentle
men in this court who have had a large experience also,
and I appeal to them to know Avhat is the practice? Sir, if
tho counsel for the defendant, or tho counsel for tho prosecu
tion, wish to call out a fact which a particular witness knows,
and it is necessary that a certain other fact Bhall be established
before the ono they desire to prove can bo mado available, the
invariable course is when the gentlemen making the proposi
tion assure the court that these other facta Aiill be proven, to
admit the testimony offered, Avith the understanding that it is
to bo ruled out unless the condition is fulfilled of proving the

"TRIAL OF AVILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 465
fact necesaary to make the ono ovidence. Tho court says, wo
relying on tho statement of counsel that ho avUI be ablo to
provo tho other matters, pormit him to begin his caso as ho
thinks proper. Moro especially when thoy begin in tho chro
nological ordor as avo propose here ; first, tho organization of
those secret illegal political societies, and truco them doAvn from
their organization to thoir powerful influence in upsetting tho
wholo civil authority of the country. The course is always that
unless counsel establish this othor testimony required tho fact
first proven, which otherwise Avould bo irrelevant, shall bo with
drawn -from the proofs.
But Avhat is the condition if Avhen avo get the Avitness on tho
etand aud suppose he is a very unwilling witness, and avo havo
just got at the point in which ho can tell a material fact and
counsel objoct, and ho retires to consider upon the fact until wo
ehall call him in our behalf, and he comes prepared? Would
the court submit to such a thing as that ? No sir, when a Avit-
ness is on the stand for the prosecution, the defendant is at lib
erty to call out every fact which he thinks will havo any ten
dency to prove his case, and I think there is no lawyer in this
high court who can state a solitary case wherein defending his
client he Avas stopped from calling out any fact that his ad\rer-
sary's witness knew, and certainly if other facts were not proven
the one he sought Avould be of no avail. Such a thing lias never
occurred in my practice.
I say that therefore, according to all the rales of law, it does
not make the slightest difference whether this Shoffner act
was constitutional or unconstitutional, this testimony is com
petent. I have had some intimation that some senators desire the
question to be argued whether thero is any distinction between
treason and insurrection because our constitution provides what
ahall constitute treason, and that if insurrection jind treason in
all cases are perfectly synonymous terms, then this Shoffner
act woidd be unconstitutional because tho constitution defines
treason; and of course, the terms being equivalent, defines insur-

'400 COCBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
rection. Permit me to say in reeponse to the inquiry that it
waa admitted by one of the learned counsel (Mr. Merrimon)
who addressed this court, that there was a distinction between
treason and insurrection and to show that, various authorities
wore cited.
My loamod associate, I believe, stated the law that waa paased
in New York during the administration of that great statesman
Silas Wright, whose authority would be regarded as veiy high
Avherever courts of law are held. That was an act ATery similar
to this one, which has been animadverted upon by the learned
counsel, and it provided that where these disturbances existed
in the county, the governor might declare the county in insur
rection, «fcc. This act was passed in the year 1840, and it was
expressly denominated an insurrection act. Under that act
Silas Wright, then governor of the state of New York, and one
of tho distinguished lawyers, declared the county of Delaware
in a state of insurrection, and the conditions there were not to
be compared Avith those in tho county of Alamanco in thia
Btate. To bo sure thoy Avore somewhat difficult, but thoy had
not gono that length thoy had in Alamanco comity ; it entirely
paralizod the civil poAver, but in Alamanco there has boon no
protection for tho lives or property of tho colored race, or oven
of the Avhite race who maintained the position of insisting upon
an enforcement of tho reconstruction acts or amendments of
tho constitution of the United Statea and of tho atate of North
Carolina, aAvardlng to tho colored people political righta. I
any, then, wo do not have to go to England to find out what Is
insurrection, wo need only go to tho groat stato of Now York
for a procedont which will fully justify tho courao taken by tho
executivo of the stato of North Carolina. I do not wish to
prolong this argument. I havo evdeavored as far as in my
poAvor to confine the argumont to the question before thia
court, as to the admissibility of the testimony offered, and it
does seem to me that if any legal proposition can be established,
my associates who previously addressed this learned body have
fully established it, and I think there ia nothing stated in tho

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 40 7
eloquent speech of the counsel for the managers which lias
answered the proposition which they laid down.
Mr. BRAGG. Mr. Chief Justice, I do not rise to enter into
a discussion of the question which has been pending, for that I
consider closed. But, at the request of the managers, I desire
to bring before the presiding officer of this body a matter which
they consider of moment in settling the course of business here,
as to how far, under the law Avhich applies to trials of this kind,
the chief justice can go in announcing tho decision that he may
make. As this is the first time that point has been debated,
we think it is proper to bring the matter fully before the body.
It Avas intimated that the chief justice was about to prepare
an opinion to deliver upon the question which has been under
discussion. It is contended on tho part of the managers that
the presiding officer can only announce his opinion for or
against any proposition to submit evidence here, and that after
that decision is made, it must be submitted to by the body or
they can, on the call of one-fifth of the members present, have a
decision by a vote of the Senate — not exactly in the form in
Avhich the presiding officer has put the question heretofore, of
sustaining the decision of tho chair, but as the decision of tho
court. I understand that to be the force of the laAV. I believe
that on the trial of President Johnson before the senate of the
United States, the chief justice, in no one instance deliATered an
opinion on any matter brought before the senato sitting ns tho
court of impeachment, but in overy instance whero ho did de-
cilo it was simply a statemant of his decision. In some in
stances ho preferred to leave the matter to the judgment of tho
body. Sub-division 4 of section 5 of the act concerning proceedings
of impeachment prescribes as one of the powers of the presiding
officer " to decide in the first instance without a division, all
« questions of evidence and incidental questions— but the same
" shall, on demand of onorfifth of the members presont bo
" decided by tho yeas and nays."
The corresponding rule of the sonate of the United States

46S COUET OF IMPEACHMENTS.
on the trial of President Johnson was rule 7, and as it was
finally perfected, it read as follows :
" The presiding officer of the senate shall direct all necessary
" preparations in the senate chamber, and the presiding officer
" of the trial shall direct all the forms of proceeding while the
" senato are sitting for the purposo of trying an impeachment,
'* and all forms during the trial not otherwise especially provi-
" ded for. And the presiding officer of the trial may rale all
" questions of evidence and incidental questions, which ruling
" shall stand as tho judgment of tho senato unless some mem-
" ber of the sonate shall ask that a formal voto be taken there
in; in which case it shall be submitted to the senate for
" decision, or ho may, at his option, in the first instance Biib-
"mit any such question to a vote of the members of the
" Senate." So that it Avill bo seen that tho rule here is evidently framed
upon tho one adopted by tho United States senate in that trial.
We havo no particular objoction to opinions being delivered,
but wo submit that the presiding officer hero ns a matter of law is
only to decide tho questions as they como up before him and
that, os presiding officer, he cannot submit any argument on
cither side pro or con. on any proposition. He is the organ of
tho body, simply to announce in the first instance the decision
upon the admissibility or inadmissibility of evidence proposed
to be introduced, and then, if one-fifth of the members desire
it, the question may be put to the body for it to render the de
cision of the court. There were a great number of instances
in Avhich the chief justice rendered decisions on tho trial of
Johnson, but in no one case did he giAfe an opinion in support
of his decision.
At the request of the managers, I have brought the matter
to the consideration of the presiding officer. I think it is
proper that some course should be determined upon now.
Mr. McCORKLE. Mr. Chief Justice, it strikes the counsel
for the respondent that the duty of the presiding officer is a
plain one, and that no rule can be adopted in this court which

TKIAL OF AVILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 469
is in contravention of the law under which we are now proceed
ing. The law is imperative, and any rule such as is suggested
by the learned counsel, which will conflict with the act regula
ting impeachments, avUI be a nullity. As to intimations which
the gentleman has heard, that the chief justice intends to givo
an opinion, 6tatingthe reasons for the decision he has arrived at,
I cannot understand whero tho intimation could have come
from. Mr. BRAGG. It was intimated by tho chief justico him
self in an incidental remark he made during the course of to
day's proceedings.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The statement of the presiding
officer was, that he had made some notes with a view of ex*
pressing reasons in a brief Avay for his decision.
Mr. McCORKLE. We say, Mr. Chief Justice, it would bo
proper that such a course should be adopted. The gentleman
Bays there is no precedent for it in the proceedings on the trial
of President Johnson. On that trial, Avhen the question was
decided as to who should have tho concluding argument, tho
chief justice who presided over tho senate assigned tho reasons
why tho managers should havo the last address and it was
because they held tho affirmativo of tho issue. I submit that
it Avould be an act of manifest injustice to the presiding officer
himself if ho is to be restricted to a mere declaration of Avhat
his opinion is Avithout being allowed the privilcgo of assigning
reasons therefor, and I can seo no reason why tho presiding
officer should not assign reasons as has been dono by tho
counsel on either side. What kind of a position would it
place the presiding officer in, if he wero not allowed to stato
the reasons which led him to his conclusion on an important
question raised in the course of tho trial. Thero is no restric
tion in this regard in the practice of legislative bodies, and this
being eo, what good reason can there be given why it should
not apply te the presiding officer of this body. In addition to
that, I suggest that this body is a court constitutionally recog
nized ; and was it ever heard of in the supreme or superior

470 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
court or any other court, where a man of learning was pre
siding that he was not permitted in rendering an opinion to file
his reasons therefor ? It is contrary to the whole course of
judicial proceedings and it would be at variance with the estab
lished usages. Therefore, we think that unless some good reason
bo shoAvn therefor, the presiding officer should bo allowed te
atate tho reasons for tho decision to which he shall arrive.
Mr. BRAGG. That would be very true, Mr. Chief Justice,
if the presiding officer Avoro a member of the court ; but nothing
can bo clearer than that ho is not one of the court and can give
no vote touching the matters at issue before the court. He
cannot give any opinion whatever upon any one of the articles
Avhen they come to bo passed upon, for the law prescribes how
that matter Bhall be proceeded with, that tho clerk shall read
over tho articles and each senator shall announce his decision,
guilty or not guilty. Therefore, there is no analogy in tho
illustration presented by the gentleman of proceedings in courts
of law. With all due respect to the presiding officer, I think
he is put in his position merely as the organ of this b:dy to
preside over it with cortain limited and defined poAvers, and
beyond them he cannot go.
Tho gentleman states that in ono instance, Chief Justico
Chase presiding over tho senate ou tho trial of Johnson, did
intimate an opinion that tho managors should have the closing
argument because they had tho affirmative. That Avas nothing
more than stating tho usual practice, and may very Avell havo
been an incidental remark, because it was a rule so universally
recognized. Senator MOORE offered tho folloAving order :
Ordered, That the chief justice be requested to give his
reasons for the conclusion to which ho may arrive in regard to
the admissibility of the question asked the witness by the coun
sel for the respondent.
Senator GILMER. I doubt not, Mr. Chief Justice, in view
of the importance of the matter which has been discussed, it
will be a great relief to you and probably remove some em-

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 471
baiTassment, if this question be decided as I hope it may be
by the senate. The laAV prescribes —
Senator MOORE. I rise to a question of order. The point
I make is, that debate is not admissible.
Senator GILMER. I move, Mr. Chief Justice, that the
senate be allowed to debate the question noAV under considera
tion. !
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE put tho question on the motion (of
Senator Gilmer, and it Avas decided in the affirmative.
Senator GILMER. I have but a word to say, Mr. Chief
Justice. I Avas about to say that the law referred to by the dis
tinguished counsel for the respondent OA'idently prescribes two
modes ef deciding questions ot evidence — incidental questions ;
one is by the presiding officer, in the first instance, Avithout
division, and then on the demand of one-fifth of the senators
present it may be decided by the yeas and nays. I desire to
move a substitute for the order proposed by the senator from
Craven (Mr. Moore) that this question which has beer so Jong
discussed bo decided by the yeas and nays.
Senator WARREN. Mr. Chief Justice, I do not proposo
to discuss tho question of law that has been raised bore as to
tho right of tho chief justico togivo his reasons for tho decision
ho may make, but to call tho attention of tho court and the
distinguished counsel for the managers, to the trial of Johnson.
On pago 093 of tho first volume, Avhere Chief Justico Chase
did givo his reasons for his decision on tho admissibility of the
evidence offered in relation to the cabinet council and tho
president's purpose to make a caso for the supremo court,\for
holding that the testimony offered was admissible. As to an
other matter suggested, I desiro to say a word. The chief
justice has hitherto put tho question, where, after the statement
of his decision, when the decision of the senate has been
called for, as if it were an appeal from the decision of
the chair. I submit this is not correct. Under our rules
there is no such thing as an appeal from the decision
of the chair at all. The rules provide that upon tho de-

,472 COURT OF IMPBauiijiiic« lb.
mand of one-fifth of the members present, the question
ahall be decided by tho court. It is not in the nature of
an appeal at all. So that tho question that is to be put to tho
oourt is, " avUI tho court ndmit tho question put by tho counsel
for tho respondent to tho Avltnoss ?" I find in tho proceedings
of Johnson that that usage Avns Invariably followed by tho
Chiof Justico of tho United States. On page 008 I find this :
"The CHIEF JUSTICE. Sonators you who aro of tho
" opinion that tho proposod ovidenco is admissible will, as your
" names are called answer yoa, thoso of tho contrary opinion
no." I-Biibmit that that is tho propor form of submitting tho
proper question to tho Benate.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer will stato
that he was lod into putting the question as an appeal from the
decision of the chair, in the first instance, because that tho
form was adopted by some senator Avho requested that the
question then pending might be determined by the court.
Senator GILMER. I have prepared an order, I Avill sub
stitute for that offered by the Senator from Craven (Mr. Moore.)
If his order is to be considered I desire to have mine off'ered as
a substitute. Senator MOORE. I Avithdraw the order that I off'ered.
Mr. GRAHAM. M.iy I bs allowed to make one suggestion,
that it may be considered by the presiding officer and by the
learned counsel for the respondent. As I understand it, when
ever this senate sits as a court of impeachment, the rules as
provided by law are the same whether the party on trial is the
governor or any other officer. The chief justice is not hero to
preside bocauso he is a lawyer, but he is brought hero to pre
side because the ordinary presiding officer of tho senate,
tho lieutenant governor, might be supposed to havo some
interest which Avould give him a bias in making decisions ;
and, whether the chief justice or the lieutenautgovernor pre
sides, tho same rules obtain. It may very Avell bo that tho
lieutenant-governor may not le a lawyer, and yet he would
preside ordinarily on a trial of impeachment. His business

TltlAL OF AVILLIAM AV. HOLDEN. 478
would bo simply to administer tho rales of tho court no ndopt-
ed for its goA'ornmont, on tho trial, and his action upon thoso
rules would bo similar to thoso of tho presiding officer of tho
senate acting as a branch of tho legislature, ovor which ho pro-
sides, putting tho quostions, and announcing tho results ; and,
any furthor agency on his part would not bo oxpectod. Tho
statementB of arguments to sustain a decision would havo this
effect : thore Avould be no opportunity to reply on the part of
any ono. Wo submit that the counsol having said all thoy can
say, the matter should bo docidod by the court Avithout any
further debate or argument.
Senator DARGAN. I move, Mr. Chief Justice, that the
court adjourn.
Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE. Before putting the question the
presiding officer would like to stato that he is much relieved
by the fact that this discussion has taken place.
The act provides that the presiding officer shall " decide in
" the first instance, without a division, all questions of evidence
" and incidental questions, but the same shall, on demand of
" one-fifth of the members present, bo decided by the yeas and
" nays." The presiding officer had supposed that in deciding a ques
tion of evidence, it would bo expected he would briefly state,
as he has done in one or two instances already, the view he took
of it. He had no thought of giving an elaborate opinion dis
cussing the ground of the decision which he shall render. He
would bo very glad to hear what is tho sense of the senate on
that subject. If there is a desire that the presiding officer
shall state the grounds of his decision, he will give them the
benefit of such a statement. If, however, the senate say they
simply wish the presiding officer to deoide the question,
although he would be departing from the precedents set by
tho Chiof Justice of tho United States, who gave some short
reasons for the view taken by him without pretending to elab
orate it until the rules were amended by aaying "it ahall bo at

474 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
" his option to have a vote taken without-giving any opinion at
"all." Thero is a seeming inconsistency between sections 5 and 6,
paragraph 4, of the impeachment act. The former is confined
to questions of evidence and incidental questions, which the
presiding officer is to decide in the first instance. The latter
provides that the chief justice shall not vote on any question
during the trial, and shall pronounce decision only as the organ
of the senate Avith its assent. These two sections can only be
reconciled by confining section 0 to questions involved in tho
final vote on the articles of impeachment, in regard to which it
is clear the presiding officer has no right to vote, and is " to pro-
" nounco decision only as tho organ of tho senate with its
" assent." Tho CHIEF JUSTICE put tho question on tho motion of
Senator Dargan to adjourn, and it Avas decided in tho affirmative.
So tho court adjourned.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 475

TWELFTH DAY.
Senate Chamber, Feb. Oth, 1S71.
The COURT met at eleA-en o'clock, A. M., pursuant to
adjournment, Hon. R, M. Pearson, chief justice of the supremo
court, in the chair.
The proceedings were opened by proclamation made in duo
form by the doorkeeper.
The CLERK called the roll of senators, and the following
gentlemen wore found to be present :
Messrs. Adams, Allen, Battle, Beaslcy, Bellamy, Brogden,
Brown, Cook, Council, CoavIos, Crowell, Dargan, Edwards,
Eppes, Flemming, Flythe, Gilmer, Graham, of Orange, Gra
ham, of Alamance, Hawkins, Hyman, Jones, King, Latham, Led-
bettcr, Lehman, Linnoy, Love, Maunoy, McCottor, Merrimon,
Moore, Morohoad, Murphy, Olds, Robbinson, of Davidson, Skin
ner, Spoed, Troy, Waddoll, Warren, Whiteside, Worth — i3.
Senator GRAHAM, of Orange, ino\'od that the reading of
tho journal of tho proceedings, yesterday, bo dispensed with.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE put the quostion on tho motion of
Senator Graham, and it was decided in tho affirmative.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. Tho presiding officer before an
nouncing his decision upon tho question of evidonco, will call
attention to somo of the points made by the learned counsel on
both sides. To the end that the members of the court may see
clearly the dividing line between questions which are to be
disposed of, by the final vote on the articles of impeachment,
aud can only be sustained against the accused by the concur
rence of two-thirds of the members of the court — and questions
of evidence, which are to be disposed of as the trial goes
on, by the decision of the presiding officer, subject to a majority
vote of the members of the court. An erroneous decision of a
question of evidence, might on the one hand cripple the prose
cution, or on the other, cut off the defence ; thus, in effect, result

470 COURT Or IMl'EAOIIMKNTS.
Ill a conviction by a majority vote ; for this reason the Impeach
ment aot throws into tho icalo tho weight of tho decision of tho
pronldlng officer. What amounts to Insurrootlon ? Can Insur
rection bo oommlttod by creating terror among tho pooplo,
through tho dlsguluod movements of a soorot organization, or
must thoro bo opon display of foroo ? What is tho legal offeot,
of doclarlng a county In a state of insurrection ? Whether tho
executive ia liable to impeachmont, for executing an unconstt-
tutlonal act ? and whether the executive be not liable to im-
poachment, for executing an act which is conatitutional, ahoidd
he falsoly, corruptly, and wickedly proclaim the state of things
set out in the statute to exist, when in truth and in fact, such
a state of things did not exist ? are mattera Avhich may come
up for decision on tho final Arote, in the decision of which the
presiding officer takes no part. The discussion of these ques
tions, however, in this stage of the proceedings, Avas pertinent*
by Avay of inducement to the question of evidence, and has no
doubt made an impression upon the minds of the members
of the court, which will be available on tho final action,
Whether the accused should be allowed to prove that the
state of things set out in the statute " for the protection of
life and property" did in fact exist in the county of Alamance ?
is a question of evidence.
The presiding officer is of the opinion that the evidence is
admissible on the ground that it tends, if true, to bring the
case of the respondent within the provisions of the act — and
also on the ground, that whether the act be constitutional or
unconstitutional, and whether the facts shoAv an insurrection or
a riot, the evidence tends to disprove the allegation of false
hood, corruption and wickedness in the discharge of his official
-duty. The reepondent is entitled to put the members of the
court in possession of all relevant matter, bo that the articles of
impeachment may be disposed of by a final decision upon the
merits. Upon this view, the question as to the order of intro
ducing tho evidence, does notarise because the evidence is ^not
offered to provo treason or insurrection, but to show that the

TWAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 477
state of things sot out in tho statute, did in fact, exist in tho
county of Alamanco.
On tho trial of tho habeas corpus ea»of», to which reference
hns boon mado In tho argument, ovldonoo offered by tho
prisoners, to show that In part thoro wne no Insurrection In tho
county of Alamanco, Avns rulod out by tho chiof justico on tho
ground that tho judiciary had no power to rovlso the action of
tho executive
Tho object of constituting a court of impeachmont ia to pro-
vido a tribunal Avith power to look Into tho conduct of all of tho
principal officere of tho state, to pass on tho fact whether they
acted bona fide or mala fide. That is, in one case, whether tho
gOArernor acted honestly, according to his coiwictions of duty,
or Avhether he acted comiptly for 6omo wicked purpose, out
side of the discharge of his duty.
It folloAVS, that the evidence offered is both relevant and
material, and ought to be heard according to Avell settled rales
of evidence. The rules have been established by the wisdom
of ages, for the purpose of securing a fair trial, an eternal princi
ple of justice ; rales so established aro binding upon every
judicial tribunal in the land, Avhether in a civil or a criminal
proceeding — from tho lowest to the highest: — a justice of tho
peace up to the court for the trial of impeachments.
WILLIAM J. MURRAY, a witness called on behalf of
the managers.
Cross-examination resumed.
By Mb. Boyden.
Q. The question that was propounded to you at the time
this dicussion arose Avas this : do you know of any secret polit
ical organization in the county of Alamance known as the " Ku
Klux Klan," the " White Brotherhood," the " Constitutional
Union Guard," and the " Invisible Empire " ? A. I do not.
Q. I asked you some questions as to what day you were in
Graham thatAveek. You have had time to reflect upon the
82

478 • COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
matter and you can perhaps answer it more distinctly now i
A. Do you mean previous to the hanging ?
Q. I understood yon to say that you had regular appoint
ments in the town of Graham for Thursdays and Saturdays, and
that you as deputy or you brother as principal sheriff', attended
those days. Can you tell us with certainty on which day you
were thero ? A. I cannot any more than it is my impression I
was there on Thursday.
Q. You cannot give any more information than you gave
when you Avere asked before ? A. I cannot.
Q. I understood you to say that early on Sunday you got the
information that Outlaw was hung ? A. Yes' air, it waa eight
o'clock — I suppose about that time.
Q. I ask you whether yon Avent that mora ing to Graham or
at any other time that Aveek ? A. I did not go that morning.
Q. IIoav did it happen, as you Avoro deputy sheriff of the
county nnd did the main business, that when you had been in
formed of such 'a crime as that you did not go to Graham and
Inquire Into that matter and endeavor to apprehend the felons?
A. The «hii'ltf wont himself. We were both living at tho
samo place. He Avent, and I thought ono ivas sumclont.
Q. You thought ono wm ample ( A. Yen, hIi*.
Q. You tell tho court that one avo* ample for all such pur
poses i A. I thought the rfioritf avm the main ono to go,
Q, You thought that it needed no one but tho sheriff to ap
prehend these mon ? A. I thought thoro avoi-o other deputies
over there and that he could get them if he needed assistance.
Q. That Avas the reason you diet not go % A. That waa one
of the reasons. I had company at my house and that was
another reason I did not go.
Q. Was there any other ? A. None that I remember now.
Q. What is your full christian name? A. William Jameav'
Q. Do you live at a place called Andrews ? A. No, sir.
Q. I understand you to state to this court that you are not a
member of any one of these secret organization ? A. I am not.
Q. And never have been ? A. And oiever have been.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 479
Q. I understand you distinctly to say you know of no such
organization in the county of Alamance? A. Not to my
knowledge. Q. It has been alleged here that the superior courts were
regularly held during the year 1870. I ask you if there was
any grand jury impanelled in that court in the fall term of
1870 ? A. No, sir.
Q. Do you knoAV the reason ? A. The jury summoned Avaa
challenged by the solicitor.
Q. Why ? A. For some irregularity about the drawing
of it. •
Q. Do you know who mado this irregularity ? A. That was
done by the commissioners of the county.
Q. You do not know whether any one of thcin belonged to
theso organizations ? A. I do not.
Q. Who wae at your houso on Saturday night or at tho house
of the sheriff whero you and ho lived ? A. There was nobody
at my house. There avhb a gentleman and lady on their return
from Tennossoo, camo thoro early that morning from tho train,
Thoy wore at my houso when the im)nnengor camo thoro.
Q. Woro you at your brother's that Saturday night? A.
No, sir.
Q. You saAv him on Sunday morning? A. Yes, sir,
Q. Whero did you soe him? A. I saAV him at tho office. or
store that we have thore.
Q. Who else did you Bee thoro that Saturday night — tell us
the names of all the persons that you saw on Saturday night,
and at what time of the night you saw them and all you saAv
on Sunday morning ? A. I do not remember who I Baw on
Saturday night.
Q. As near as you can. You must recollect some of them ?
A. I do not remember who I saw — any particular one on Satur
day night. I do not remember any person at all now.
Q. You tell thia court then that you have no recollection of
seeing any person at your house or your brother's on Saturday
night, except the persons that belonged there ? A. I do not

480 court or impeachments.
think I did. I don't remember ot seeing anybody but some of
tho family that lived on the hill. I do not think I saw any of
thorn after dark when I quit business.
Q. It was boforo dark ? A. I do not remember who was
about the store in the day time,
Q. You cannot remember any body ? A. I have no distinot
recollection. Q. Now come to Sunday morning ? A. I do not remember
anybody but the gentleman that I epoak of, from Tennessee— -
Mr. Leith. He came to my house and I made some arrange
ments for him to go home. After I made that I do not remem
ber that I saw anybody but the messenger that came over — Mr.
AndreAvs. Q. How soon after he left did you see anybody and who was
it? A. I do not remember Iioav 60011 it was. It Avas Sunday
and I stayed in my house that day. I do not remember of any
body coming in after Mr. Leith left.
Q. You do not remember anybody coming in and you do
not recollect of going out and seeing anybody ? A. I do not
remember just now of any person particularly that I saw.
Q. I will ask you another question. Have any persons
wearing what is knoAvn as the " Ku Klux Klan' disguise ever
been at your houso ? A. I saw a party one night, but I don't
know Avhether they called themselves " Ku Klux." They were
disguised. Q. When Avas that ? A. I do not remember when it was.
Q. [By the Chief Justice.] Was it before or after Outlaw
was hung ? A. It was before.
Q. How long before % A. Several months I think. I can
not speak postively as to the time, but my impression is it was
several months before ho Avas hunsr.
Q. How many were there ? A. think there Avas twelve or
thirteen. (
\'fQ. What sort of disguises' did they have on \ A. ' They had
on white gowns or something. '

,' .>/

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 481
Q. IIoW about tho head and face ? A. Thoir faces woro hid
Bo that I could not boo any of thoir faces.
Q. Did they have any thing like horns ? A. I think thero
Wore probably somo fow had horns or something sticking out
Q. What woro they engngod in Avhon you saAv them? A.
They wore Btandlng at my door.
Q. Were they on horseback or on foot? A. They Were on
foot. Q. Did they talk to you ? A. They said something to me
--asked me some feAv questions.
Q. Do you tell this court that you did not recognize the
voice of one of them ? A. I did not.
Q. Which way did they go from your house when they left ?
A. They went down the hill towards the factory — out that way,
I do not Ioioav where they went.
Q. They went towards whose factory ? A. It belonged to
Murray Brothers— W- J. & A. Murray.
Q. They went doAvn towards your factory ? A. Yes.
Q. Do you know whether they went to the factory ? A.
I do know. I never saw them after they got outside of the
gate of the yard.
Q. They were inside of the yard ? A. Yes, air.
Q. Where waa your brother then — was he high eheriff at
that time ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Where was he then ? A. He Avas at home I suppose. —
He was not at my house.
Q. How far from your house ? A. About two hundred yards.
Q. Do you know whether they went to his house ? A. I
do not.
Q. Do you tell this court you never saw any men disguiaed
except that one time ? A. Never but that one time.
Q. You think that was several months boforo Outlaw was
hung? A. I think so— I cannot be positive about it. My
impression is it was some time before.
Q. What did they come to your house for ?— do you know]?*— -
A. I do not know.

482 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. They did not give you any information of what they came
for ? A. No, air ; none that I learned.
Q. They juat came in, wanted nothing and went off? A.
Thoy Baked for aome water ;— that ia all they asked for.
Re-direct examination
By Mn. Ghaham.
Q. In regard to tho fall term of tho court in 1870 5 when
did tho judgo got thoro ? A. IIo got thoro Tuesday.
Q. Ho did not eonio on Monday; and whon ho wont into
court, you say, tho solicitor challenged tho array of jurors?—
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Upon tho ground that thoro had boon an informality In
tho drawing of tho jury? A. That Is what I understand.
Q. Was It in this, that In tho law requiring jurors to bo
drawn from tho tax-payers of tho year they had been diwn In
this Instance from tax-payers of the your with tho exception of
ono toAvnshlp and that In that township tho county commis
sioners did not attend te It and thoy took tho old list of tho
previous year and put that in ? A, That Is Avhat I understood
Avas tho objection.
Oj. Tho judge hold that ho could not constitute a grand jury
by reason of that ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was tho contrary vIoav urgod upon him and did tho
court adjourn over to givo him timo to consider ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Tho court adjourned till Wednesday? A. Yes, sir.
Q. The matter was then decided by him, at the instance of
the solicitor, that he could not have a lawful grand jury and on
that accoimt the court was adjourned — at least, he went on to
make orders and nothing else? A. He did all the business
that could be done without a jury.
Q. Was tho judge Tourgee and the solicitor Mr. • Bulla ? —
1 Q. I will ask you whether tho relatione betweeri the white
and tho black population at that or any time were friendly as a
general thing ? A. I think aa a general thing1 the relations
bctAvecn the two races were good. : '¦ >• '

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 483
Q. Were or were not the black people employed by
the Avhites either in the way of laborers under the direc
tion of white men or as renters all over the country ? —
A. Yes, 6ir, they were employed in different ways, some for
standing wages, some employed for a part of the crop, and some
rented land and Avorked it on tlieir own hook.
Q. Was there, as a general thing, any unsafety to black or
white men on account of their political opinions, as far as you
haA'e any knoAvledge ? A.I have no knowledge of anything of
the sort, if there Avas anything.
Q. In relation to your not going to Graham on the day that
you heard of tho death of Outlaw, had you any motive in not
going to OA'ado any duty that belonged to you as an officer of
tho county? A. None at all. I thought it Avas tho duty of the
coroner. I think it may have been the duty of the sheriff to let
the coroner know, It ho had not found out, to havo an inquest
over hiin. I thought tho sheriff was sufficient to attend to that
businosH. Mr. BOYDEN. I would like to ask tho witness another
question. Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. You can do bo by consent of tho
counsol. Mr. GRAHAM. I lijwe no objection.
By Mr. Boyden.
Q. You say that these disguised men came to your house.
As that Avas after the laAv Avas passed making such things in
dictable, Avhy did'nt you arrest them, you being deputy sheriff?
A. I think it Avas before I knew anything of that law that
they were at my house.
Q. You say it Avas two or three months before the death of
Outlaw ? A. It might have been longer than that. I do not
know exactly the time they, were there, n ti y
,The ,CHLEFi JUSTICE. . ; . What day was it that Outlaw, was
hung? ,l! . * -¦ .- 1 ¦ >-» • ;| :..;;".) r i'.'.'i.,- -I ,y... ¦'¦• .:.;¦'•' •• '•--¦
Mr.jGRAHAM.M I understand Ui to, have been the 2f5th of
February, 1870.

484 COUBT 07 IMpJUCttMKNTl.
1 Mr, SMITH. Tho not making it a felony to go disguised'
and mnskod wa» pnsiod April IS, 1800.
JkhnjoGanta witness vailed on behalf qf th Managm
being duly sworn testified as follows, >
By Mr. Giuham.
Q. Aro you a oltlzon of Alamanoo ? A, Yos, sir,
Q. And you havo lived thoro all your llfo ? A, Yoi, sir,
Q, Iinvo you boon a public officer either of Orange or Ala
manoo? A. Of both.
Q. How long since yoii first occupied a public position ? A.
I suppose I havo boon somewhat in public llfo for forty years
or moro.
Q. Do you know the people of tho county pretty exten
sively? A. I used to think there was scarcely a grown man
in Alamance or Orange but what I knew. My business was
that of constable, sheriff or chairman of the county court.
Q. How long were you chairman of the county court ? A.
I do not recollect, but pretty much ever since 1842, most of
tho time.
Q. Up to when ? A. Up to two or throo years ago.
Q. Whon tho govomment was ohangod. A. I was even
appointed a magistrate thon ; for tho purposo of going into
that position, I was appointed by Governor Iloldon when ho
Avas provisional govornor, and I accepted tho office.
Q. You hold it until the constitution was changed ? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. Have ycu been a county commissioner since? A. I was
elected but I did not go in. There was a gentleman who was
ready to take the office, and I did not get it.
Q. You were considered to be under disabilities? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. With the acquaintance you have with the people of the
county, I desire to ask you to state to the court whothor, as a
general thing, there is any unssfoty to the porcons of tho black
people or white' people in tho county on account of their
political opinions? A. My opinion is, that thoy wero not

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 48ft
unsafe ns to any political matters. It is truo thoro was somo
lawlessness going on at times wo know nothing about, but my
impression is that thoro was no man nood apprehend danger
from any political matter that wns up, ns I undorstand it.
That la a more opinion howovor.
Q. What township of the county do you live in? A. In
number 5 — Faucett's township.
Q. Are you acquainted through that part of the county as
Avell as the county generally ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Stato whether or not the colored people were generally
engaged in business associations with the white people ? A.*
Yes, sir.
Q. To the extent of being employed cither as laborers, work
ing for wages, or for a share of the crops, or as renters of land ?
A. That Avas their business generally. For a large portion, I
give the blacks great credit for tlieir manner of conducting
themselves in my neighborhood of late years. For a time after
the surrender, there Avas some stealing going on, but there iB
very little of it hoav.
Q. About the time this unfortunate man Outlaw was mur
dered was there anything like hostility between the whites and
the blacks on account of politics ? A. It Avas all peace and
quiet in my neighborhood.
Q. What ia your age ? A. I am aixty-eight, or will be in a
few daya.
Q. Were you arreeted by these Kirk men ? A. I suppose
it was the Kirk men. They looked like soldiera — had on tlie
garb of soldiers. Some of them wore white and some black-—
there waa one black man.
Q. The blacks were wearing the soldier's garb? A. Yes,
sir. Q. Recruited in the county, or did they come from Tonnes-
see ? A. I understood from the black* about me that this was
a black man raised by a man of the name of Crawford. He
aaid he knew mo very well ; bat there are many black men I

480 COURT OF, IMPEACHMENTS. ,
do not know. It was very well imderstood that he was raised
there in the neighborhood.
. Q. He was a soldier and soldiering it about with those other
men? A. Yes, sir.
k Q. Where did they come upon you ? A. They met me
betAveen High Falls Factory and my houso, which are a little
over a quarter of a mile apart.
Q. Narrate what took place ? A. Shall I state tho condition
I Avas In at tho timo ?
Q. Yes. A. I was unfortunate in tho spring or early pnrt
Of the summer, in being overturned in a Avagon and getting
caught under ii. I knoAV nothing for somo half hour.
Q. You woro very much disabled ? A. I was apparently
killed ; I supposo I breathed, but aftoi'Avards I came to. I
Avas in bod for about two Avooks, but I Avas not ablo to e\'en
to turn myself for part of tho time in bed Avithout aid from iny
family. I got out of bod, and after a few weeks Avas ablo to
Avalk about tho houso. But I got tired staying about tho house,
being used to tnko a good deal of exercise, nnd I concluded I
Avould Avalk down to tho factory nnd did bo. I remained thero
awhile and then concluded I would go back homo. Whilo I
Avas sitting on tho piazza at tho store at High Falls, these sol-
soldiers passed along Avith a nigger with them. Thoy
stopped — they did not know mo, I suppose. I do not
know they Avere — but I supposo thero A.ero Avhat Avere
called Kirk's men. Thero Avas frequent passing along
there to Caswell — a good many going and coming. I asked
them if they were going to Caswell. Ono of, them said,
" That is what we think of doing." I supposed from Avhat took
place they Avent to my house for me and then they had come
that A\ray and were on the Avay to Yanceyville. My family
told me they had been there. As I went home and gqt; about
two hundred yards from the' factory, marching on slowly up
the hill I met • these men, and one of them in front said,;
"Halt!" .. I did so. ... It did not take me long as I could not
much more than move anyhow. I stopped. Said he, "What

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 487
is your name?" I said, "My name is Gant." He said, "That
is the very one." They relied upon the nigger mostly as he
belonged around there. He said to the nigger, " Are you cer
tain?" He said, "Yes, I know Mr. Gant, I have worked for
him — I know he is the man." I said, " Yes, I am the man,
but what'is it that you want — let us know something about it ?"
The corporal — they called him corporal — said, " You have got
to come to cairp with us," I said, " I am in a very poor fix to
"go to camp; I am just making my way home to bed." He
said, " You will haA'e to come with us to camp." I said, " I
" don't feel able to go, but if you say I must go, I shall not
" offer any resistance — of course I must try." He said, " Do
you Avant to ride?" I said "It is ride or tote, one or the
" other — I can't Avalk." Then he detailed two or three men to
accompany mo to my house and they followed me. I Avent
into tho room to put on a coat and they dodged around peep
ing in tho AviudoAvs. I got ready. I Avas so situated that I
had nothing but a young horse, all tho other horses and mules
Avoro out of the Avay. llo Avas got up. I Avas in a poor condi
tion to rido on horseback. I was badly diseased and this was a
young horse, not fit for mo to ride on. But I managed
to get on and thon Ave Avent on until we got within
half a milo of tho camp. I said, "Men, you all being
strangers here, is it possible that you go out and arrest
strangers in tho country Avithout a list of those you are to
arrest ?" Ono said, " I think I havo got a, list with mo," and
run his hand into his pocket and pulled out a little strip of
paper about ns long ns your finger. Ho did not pretend to try
to read it, but ho handed it to a smaller soldier, and he looked
nt it and began, " Y— 'A— u"— and thero he stuck. I said,
" that is a bad start for Gant ; you had better let me look if yon
cannot make it out." Ho' handed it to me and it was written
in large, legible letters, "Job Faucett," ' I said,!"meny is this
themanyou are after? / He saidy ¦"• Yes, that is the name."
I said, "Men, I know-Mr. Faacett, he lives up the creek,. five
or si* miles* He is a young man of twenty-three or twentg-

488 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
four years old." He then went round cursing the nigger for
awhile for getting him into a scrape, and then he said, " Old
gentleman, I reckon you can go back home." I said " I reckon
the old gentleman won't do anything of the kind. I am not
of that sort. When I undertake to do a thing I do it, and I
am going to camp to see how this matter is." I went. I know
borne of tho officors and when I got near the camp and thoy
«aAv who it Avas, I think there was more cursing than I have
heard for a good while — cursing tho nigger and cursing tho
Avhito ones and all, as they said, for "taking the most respectable
man in the county"— though I did not claim it at all. Tho
officers discharged me and I came back.
Q. At the camp, did you see an}' soldiers ? A. Yes, sir. I
stayed there a few minutes.
Q. What sort of discipline seemed to prevail among them ?
Mr. BOYDEN. I do not think that is evidence.
Mr. GRAHAM. We charge that they Avere men utterly
Avithout character and were lawless.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The question is competent.
Q. What sort of discipline, if any, was there ? A. Just
about as much as you would expect among a parcel of vagabonds.
Q. Was there anything like discipline or order ? A. When
I talked with them they were the most ignorant and stupid
creatures I ever talked with, either white or black men — tho
soldiers. The officers seemed to be pretty ehrewd men. The
officers treated me with respect.
Q. They did not offer you any indignity when you went to
camp and found you to bo the Avrong man ? A. No, sir.
Q. Yon have been acquainted with courts of justice, and I
will ask if they Avere such a force as would be selected to keep
the peace as police ?
Mr. BOYDEN. I do not think the question is competent.
Mr. GRAHAM. We withdraw it.
Q. [By the Chief Justice.] They were all in uniform ?
A. Yes, sir, black and white.
#Q. In your long experience in that county did you ever kno.w

TEIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 489
of any resistance to an officer of the law at any time ? A. No,
sir, not in many years. I have been resisted myself in some
instances as long as thirty or forty years ago, te some small
extent. I have made some inquiry as to that matter both from
sheriffs, deputies, constables and officers, how they were acting
and whether —
Q. We do not care for their declarations ? A. I have heard
of nono and seen none.
Q. I Avant to know Avhether there was any to your knowledge,
any resistance to the authority of tho law in the county of
Alamance for several years before these troops came ? A. No,
sir, not at all. I believo I could now, old as I am, go and
oxecute a process.
Q. Without summoning anybody to your aid ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Arrest anybody? A. YeB, sir, I think bo.
Q. Wero the courts of your county regularly held? A.
They were all the time.
Q. At the usual times ? A. A portion of the business was
not done at the last term of the court. There was no jury.
Q. The judge and solicitor managed that? A. Yes, sir,
there was some mishap about that.
Q. After argument they refused to hold court ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was there the usual state of peace and quietness in the
country prior to this killing of Outlaw, and up to this time for
several years ? A. Yes, sir, as much 60 as I have ever seen at
any age of my life. People are as disposed to abide by the
laws of the country and yield obedience to the authorities as at
any time.
Q. These men dignified you, you say, as being " the most
respectable man in the comity." In view of that, , I ask you
whether there has ever been at any time any resistance either
to the laws of congress or tho policy of oongress r on the part,
of any portion of the population so far as you know, or, of , the
laws of the state? A. Not ¦within mv knowledge,; ,1 dfin't
think there has.

490 v COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. You have paid your taxes regularly to the federal gov
ernment and to the revenue officers ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And your state taxes ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Has there been any resistance to the collection of the
revenue ? A. None in the Avorld that I have heard of.
Q. Has there been any attempt by violence to control the
votes of either white or black politicians ? A. Not that I ever
heard of.
Cross-Examination.
By Mk. Boyden.
Q. You have been asked whether you have heard of any
resistance to the lawful authorities ?
Mr. GRAHAM. I asked him if he knew of any.
Mr. BOYDEN. He has been telling what ho has heard in
his answer time and time again.
Mr. GRAHAM. The questions I asked him were if he
knew of any efforts to control votes, or if he knew of any
violence to anybody, if he knew of any resistance to the law.
I confined my questions to Avhat he kneAV.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. I so understood the counsel, but
the Avitness took the privilege of stating further.
Mr. BOYDEN. Without objection.
Mr. GRAHAM. I called the attention of the witness once
or twice to the fact that I Avas asking for his knowledge, and if
the gentleman did not make any objection that is not our fault.
Mr. BOYDEN. We have no objection to statements com
ing in of hearsay if we have the right to put in the same testi
mony. The CHIEF JUSTICE. I do not think that the fact that
the Avitness did not properly respond to tho questions wi'l
admit of the introduction of hearsay evidence.
Mr. BOYDEN. Then I take it for granted that it is all out.
Mr. GRAHAM. If you had any objection it should have
been made at the time.
By Mr. Boyden. :

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 491
Q. I have no suspicion that you belonged to any of these
secret organizations? A. I never did.
Q. I aaid I had no suspicion that you ever did. But I ask
you in the first place, if you did have any knowledge of such
organizations '? A. Only from hearsay; none of my own
knowledge. Q. You have no personal knowledge of them ? A. I have
not. Q. Have you ever seen men disguised, going about ? A. I
never have at any time.
Q. How far do you live from Graham ? A. It ia about four
miles. Q. You say you live in Job Faucett's neighborhood ? A. I
live in the township.
Q. How far from Faucett's? A. About four miles from
Chester Faucett's.
Q. Does he hold any position ? A. Do you mean Chester
Faucett ?
Q. Yes. A. No, sir, his mind is entirely done. He has no
mind. Q. How about Job Faucett? A. He is a youngster just
groAvn up, and he is tiying to make some bread and meat to
live on.
Q. He is in no position ? A. None that I know of.
Q. Did you see Outl.aw's body after he was hung. A. I
I did not.
Q. Yon did not go up after yon had heard of it. A. No,
sir, I did not go.
Q. How long before Avere you in Graham ? A. I declare I
don't know. Sometimes I may go to Graham almost every
week, and sometimes it Avould bo two or three weeks. I have
no particular business that calls me there.
Q. When you were apprehended, aB you have mentioned,
there was one colored man who pointed you out? A J He said
he knew me. '¦ >¦' :
Q. You were carried over to the camp? A. Yes, sir.

409 court or impeachments.
Q. Tho officers treated you with respect ? A. Yes, sir, the
ofiieeri did not mistreat mo.
Q. They said that you had beon arrested without any au
thority? A. Well tho officers cursed the soldiers a good deal
about arresting me.
Q. Upon what ground ? A. They alleged that they did not
arrest and bring in the man they had gone for, and that they
had brought in the " most respectable man in the county."
Q. In other words they had no authority to arrest you ? A.
That was the understanding.
Q. As soon as they got you there you were discharged ? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. And the officers cursed the men for bringing you there ?
A. Yes, sir.
William Holmes, a witness called on behalf of the Mana
gers, being duly sworn testified as follows :
By Mr. Graham.
Q. Where do you reside ? A. About two miles south of
Graham. Q. What is the township called ? A. Number 7, Albright's
townships. Q. What is your age ? A. I am upwards of seventy.
Q. Have you been a long time connected with any public
employment in your county ? A. A good many years.
Q. What offices have you held ? A. I was constable and
deputy sheriff for some fifteen or twenty years, and after that
acted as magistrate for several years.
Q. When did you cease to be sheriff? A. I think I acted a
little Avhile after the surrender. I was appointed after the sur-
surrender and acted for a year or two, then resigned.
Q. You had beon a magistrate many years before that ? A.
Yos, sir.
Q. What aro tlie relations between the black and the white
pooplo in tho township in which you llvo ? A. They appear
to got on very well in that township. They appear to be
friendly. We employ them and they get along very well, >

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 403
Q. What nro tho relations ai to friendliness or otherwise
botwoeu tho black and white people generally in the olrole of
your acquaintance, and what Avas it before this affair of the
hanging of Outlaw ? A. I think very friendly, thoy got on—
that Is, thoy employ them.
Q. Is there any Instance whero a colored man of good char
acter has failed to get employment if ho applied for it, to a
white man, to your knoAvledge. A. Not in my knoAvledge.
Q. In some instances they are employed as laborers under
the direction of the owner, are they ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And in other cases they rent land ? A. Yes, sir, and.
carry on little farms.
Q. As a general thing, so far as your knowledge extends, is
there any danger in point of safety to the colored people in
that county ? A. Not to my knowledge, there is not.
Q. I mean at the time of the occurrance of Outlaw's hanging
or any time before, was there any Avant of safety to the black
people from the whites ? A. Not to my knoAvledge.
Q. For the last five years since the surrender of the southern
army has there been a single instance of resistance to the) au
thority of the law, either of the United States or the state, to
your knowledge. A. Not to iny knowledge.
Q. Were the taxes collected by the state and the United
States authorities in yoiu* county as far aa your knowledge
extends ?
Mr. BOYDEN. You will speak from your own knowledge.
A. I think they wero.
Q. You paid your own ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you any your noighbora and friends paid theirs or not.
Mr. BOYDEN. You must apeak of tho individual that
you aaw pay.
Mr. GRAHAM. The counsel can bring the details out on
cross-examination if ho desires.
Q You say the taxes were paid in your presence in somo
instances te tho federal tax gatherer and also to the sheriff of
the county, and it there was any resistance by forco to the pay-
88

494 COURT OF IMPEAOnMENTS'.
ment, it never came to your knowledge ? A. I know nothing
of it, if there A>'as ever any resistance.
Q. Do you know of any attempts by force to control the
votes of colorod people or Avhite people there ? A. I don't.
Q. Or to scare thoin or intimidate them? A. I do not.
Q. You do not knoAV of a Birtgle instance ? A. Not one.
Q. You generally go to elections I A. I generally go to the?
elections. Q. And vote? A. Yes, sir.
Q. No Biich occurrence has taken place in the county to
your knowledge ? A. Not to my knowledge.
Cross-examination.
By Mr. Boyden.
Q. Do you knoAV of any secret political organizations in the'
county of Alamanco, either under tho name of tho " Ku Klux
Klan," the "White Brotherhood," tho " Constitutional Union
Guard," or tho " Invisible Empire "? A. I do not.
Q. Did you over see any person bIiico the surrender disguis
ed? A. I did not.
Q. You have never seen any of those persons cither riding
or Aval king Avith their faces nnd bodied concealed? A. I have
not seen any.
Q. What toivrship did you say yon lived in ? A. AMbright's-
toAvnship, Number 7.
Q. Did you seo the body of Outlaw ? A. I did not,
Q. You did not go up after you heard he was murdered ?
A. I did not hear of it, I think, until after he Avas buried, I am
not certain as to that. I heard it shortly after that — I reckon
not before Monday.
Q. You think you heard it aa Boon as Monday ? A. I think
I did. Q. You live about how far from Graham ? A. About seA'en
miles. Q. Yon did not go up? A. I went up a few days after
that — sometime that week.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 405
Q. To which political party did you belong? A. I belong
to the conservative party.
Q. You Bay that you have no personal knoAvledge of any
attempt to prevent colored men or white republicans from
A'oting ? A. I havo not.
Q. Have you seen persons that had been scourged or muti
lated? A. I saw some.
Q. Tell us who they were ? A. There was a colored man
camo to my house. lie said some black men went out 
Q. I do not ask A\'hat ho said. Did you see any marks on
his body ? A. llo shoAvcd mo ono I think on his arm.
Q. Did you see his back ? A. I do not think I did.
Q. Won't you try and recollect ? A. He said —
Q. They will not allow you to tell Avhat ho said at tho time.
I ask you Avhat you saw, if you did not bco his back aud if it,
was not terribly scourged ? A. I do not think I did. I do not
think he shoAvcd mo his back.
Q. Stato Avhether his clothes Avere bloody — his shirt 3 A. I
don't knoAV as thoy Avorc.
Q. I Avant your best recollection about it? A. I don't think
his clothes Avero bloody, it aviis somo days after.
Q. Stato Avho avus along with this man ? A. Ilia name waa
Henderson Coble.
Q. Is he a colored man or a white man ? A. Ho is a colored
man. Q. Tell us who was along with him? A. I do not think thero
Avas any body Avith him.
Q. I thought you said there Avas a number of persons ? A,
I said he stated that he had been whipped by —
Q. Thero Avas no body along with him ? A. Not with him
when he came to my house.
Q. Before he left did any body come? A. No, Bir, not any
body that I know of.
Q. What members of your family saw him beside yourself?
A. I don't know as to that. He was not in the house. He
just come to the yard. He appeared to be in a hurry !

490 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. Whon was tliis ? A. It has beon nearly a year ago.
Q. Can you toll what month it was ? A. In February, I
think, or the first of March.
Q. February or March ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Have you seen any other person who had been acourged.
A. I saAv ono Avho said —
Q. I ask you Avhat you saw? A. I saw nothing.
Q. You only saAv this man ? A. That is all.
Q. You said yon saw a cut on the arm of this man ? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. What sort of a cut was it? A. Ho said —
Q. I am not asking you Avhat he said. A. It was a bruise.
Q. Describe it as avoII as you can ? A. It looked like it had
been dono with a stick.
Q. What sort of a stick, a club or a small stick? A. It
looked something liko a club. He said it Avas a club.
Q. Did you see the body of William Puryear that Avas
found ? A. I did not.
Q. How far Avas that from yon? A. Somo four miles I reckon.
Q. Did you hear it was found directly after? A. I heard
of it a day or so after I supposo.
Q. You did not go to seo anything about it ? A. It was on
the other side of the rivor from mo.
Re-Direct Examination.
By Mk. Graham.
Henderson Coble is a black man of pretty good character?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. He got out a states' warrant to have the man taken up
who beat him ?
Mr. BOYDEN. We object.
Q. Did he have soino men arreated for it ? A. Yea, air,
tho mon were arrested from what he said that morning —
Mr. BOYDEN. We object to tho answer.
Q. Do you know the fact that men woro ai forwards arrested
and brought to the court to be tried ? A. They were.
Q. Where aro they now ? A. A part of them are in the

TttlAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 407
penitentiary, thoso that did not got away boforo they could be
arrested. Q. Wero they white mon or colored mon ? A. They wore
colored men. ',
Re-Cross Examination.
By Mn. Boyden :
Q. Do you speak of your own knowledge — Avere you at the
trial ? A. My knowledge from what he told me-—
Mr. BOYDEN. You have no right to tell what he said.
When you speak ot your OAvn knowledge you have no right to
state what anybody else told you.
By Mn. Graham.
Q. Do you know that the men he charged were tried and
are noAV in the penitentiary ? A. I am told so.
Mr. BOYDEN. We object.
Q. You have been in the ponitentiary to see I
Mr. BOYDEN. Wo object to the whole of this testimony.
It is evidently founded upon hearsay.
Mr. GRAHAM. We offer to prove it in this way, and if it
becomes necessary we Avill send for the records.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. If the counsel can agree upon both
sides to alloAV such matters then it will be admitted.
Mr. BOYDEN. I have no objection, but they cannot do it
and then exclude us from the same privilege.
- Mr. GRAHAM. You had better produce the penitentiary
records. Q. This was Henderson Coblo who was whipped ? A. Yes,
sir, and some two or threee others at the same time, I sup
pose. Mr. BOYDEN. We object to this heresay testimony.
Q. Tavo or three others in the same category. They wero
pretty respectable colored men who Buffered? A. Yea, sir.
Q. I do not recollect whether the question has been asked.
Was there peace and quietness in your neighborhood in tho early
part ot 1870 ? A. As far as I know it was all peace and qui
etness.

498 COURT OF IMPEA0HMENT8.
JEREMIAH HOLT, a witness called on behalf of the Man
agers, being duly sworn testified as follows :
By Mr. Graham : ,
Q. Where do you livo ? A. In Alamance county *
- Q. What part of the county — what township? A. Graham,
about tAvo miles and a half south-Avest of Graham.
Q. What is your age? A. I am going on peventy-fivo
years, since last June.
Q. State what is the relation botweeu the black and white
pooplo in your neighborhood and oounty as far as you knoAV ?
A. Do you mean at this time?
Q. Any timo back Avithin two yours, and particularly about
January, 1870? Q. About that time they AVoro quite peaoe-
ublo nnd friendly as far a» £ knoAV ; in my neighborhood, I am
certain of it.
Q. Tho blaolc pooplo wore omployod by tho AvhittiN and hud
buNincHS transaetioni with thoin ? A. Yes, mv, a good, many
of them.
Q. Woo there over a black por«on=a ronpoctablo man of
that complexion— refused employment, to your knowledge,
on account of political considerations or the Avay ho voted?
A. Not that I knoAV of.
Q. In business transactions Avas there any denial of credit
to thorn or of confidence in any avuv to your knowledge, whero
thoy were supposed to be rcspectablo men Avith poAver to mako
their contracts good? A. I do not understand the whole of
your question. I am a little deaf.
Q. I Avant to know if in business transactions Avith the
Avhite men in your county, terms less favorable than would
be alloAved white men Avere exacted from them? A. None
that I have heard of.
• Q. In the acts of good neighborhood in cases of sickness
and distress Avas there any denial to them of charities and
friendly acts ? I think there was.
Q. You do not understand me. I mean Avas there any re
fusal in cases of sickness or distress to a black person when ho

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 499
asked a favor of a neighbor, or on account of political consid
erations. A. None that I knoAV of, except that it was a phy-
6ician Avho refused to go and eee some negroes unless he could
have some assurance of getting paid for it.
Q. It was not because they would not vote his ticket or any
thing of that sort ? A. No, not that I heard.
Q. You say, as a general thing, the relations between the'
white and black people are friendly? A. Yes, sir, in my
neighborhood. Q. Do you know of any resistance to the law there, either
to the United States laAvs in the collection of whisky taxes in
your part of tho county or any othor taxes under Btate laws ?
A. None at nil that I over know of.
Q. You havo been in tho habit of carrying on a distillery
nnd making splrltB \ A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you pay ta.\on to tho ptiblki nflleoi' ? A. Yes, dr.
IJ, Do you know of any puiMun ruf'iwlng tho payment of hlfl
taxes in tho county? A. I do not.
Oj, Are tho black people generally employed by tho Avhltes
thoro as Avorkers on tho farms for a Bharo of tho crops or for
wages and aw renters of land? A. There is a good many em
ployed in botliAvays, some oa hirelings, somo as croppers—
Avorking for a part of the crop, I mean.
Q. Do you knoAV of any man being refused employment- —
being refused to be contracted Avith there by reason of the Avay
he voted ? A. I think I heard one man say that not a nigger —
Q. It is not proper to state Avhat you have learned from hear
say. I wish to knoAV if you saAv any transaction of the kind
yourself — any refusal to give employment on account of politi
cal motives? A. I do not know it. I only know that the man
worked there and he left ; I have no way of telling why he did
leave only by asking.
Q. In relation to the general condition of tho neighborhood
and county, as far as you know, was it peaceable as a general
thing or otherwise ? A. It was quite peaceable, I think.
Q. Do you know of any resistance to the officers of the law

000 OOURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
in your oounty within the last tliree or four yean ? A. I do
not. Q. Nothing of tho sort ? A. I never hoard any or saw any.
Mr. BOYDEN. You must not toll what you heard.
Q. Do you know of any instance of resistance to a law of
the United States or to a state law ? A. No, sir.
Q. Are you in the habit of going out to public places a good
deal ? A. Not much.
Q. Are you in the habit of going to Graham frequently ? A.
I don't go there very often.
Q. Do you go to court ? A. I always go to court.
Q. If there was any instance of resistance to the law either
ot the United States or the state, it never came to your knowl
edge ? A. It never did.
Q. The dork's offlco was always open when you went there
for probate business, the proving of wills and granting ot letters
of administration ? A. It has always been open ever since I
knew what a court Avas.
Q. In relation to the county commissioners — they have tlieir
regular sessions for county business as usual? A. Yes, sir.
Q. [By Mr. Boyden]. Do you speak of your oAvn knowl
edge ? A. That is what I say, I saw them transacting busi
ness. Q. You saw them in the actual exorcise of power perform
ing their duties ? A. Yes, sir.
Cross-Examination.
By Mn. Boyden.
Q. I understood you to say that you do know of one instance
where a man was refused employment on account of political
opinions and was made to leave ?
Mr. GRAHAM. No, ho did not say that ; I objeot to any
evidence, unless the witness has a knowledge of the tiling.
Mr. BOYDEN. I think it is very clear that if the man was
driven oft', and the witness heard him say so, it is evidence as
part of the res gestce.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. fiOl
Mr. GRAHAM. I submit that unless tho wltnoss was pre
sent at the time ot tho transaction, it is not evidence.
Q. What was the answer you gave to tho question ? You)
woro asked If you knew of any body being turned off on account
of his political opinions. I do not recollect what you said %
A. I said I knew of one from hearsay.
Q. Only from hearsay ? A. Thoy say I must not state that,
Q. You only know from hearsay ? A. That is all.
Q. I understood you to say that you kneAV of one man leaA'-
ing another's employment — you kneAV that fact ? A. Yes, Biiv
Q. Were you not present when he left? A. No sir.
Q. What you heard said was not when the man left? A.
No. sir, it was afterAvards.
Q. Do you Iciioav of a colored man of the name of Caswell
Holt? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Where does he live. A. He liA'edon my land.
Q. Do you-knoAv any thing about his having been whipped ?
A. He lives about n quarter of a mile from my house, and the
morning after he AvaB Avhipped, he sent for me to come there
and I Avent up.
Q. What did you see ? Did you see his body ? A. I did.
Q. What avus its condition ? A. It Avas pretty badly whipped.
Q. Did you seo any body else Avho had been Avhipped ? A.
Not to my knowledge.
Q. Did you see the back of any one Avho had been Avhipped 7
A. No, sir, I saAv no other back.
Q. Do you know any thing about Joseph Harvey? A. No
sir. Q. When Avas this you saw CasAvell Holt: — how long ago 7
A. It was in the spring, about twelve months ago I think.
Q. There have been tAvo. superior courts in the county?—
A. There have been two courts called but tho last oourt, they
did not do anything scarcely.
Q. Do you know of any person being indicted on account
of whipping Caswell Holt? .A CasweU Holt had a state'*
warrant out.

£02 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. You do not ansAver my question.' I have no objection
to that answer hoAvover. Do you knoAV of anybody being in
dicted or punished for the offence ? A. I don't hardly know
Jioav to ansAver that. There was some men tried for it.
Q. In the superior court? A. I understood so— I was—
Q. You avUI only speak from your oavh knoAvledge? A. I
did not attond tho trial.
Q. Do you Ichoav of any secret organization in the county
of Alamanco under tho name of " Ku-Klux-Klau," "The White
Brotherhood," "Tho Constitutional Union Guard" and "The
Invisible Empire," or any other name ? A. No sir, and I
never saw any ono that I had any suspicion bolonged to any
Biich. Q. Did you nover soe any persons going about disguised?
A. I never did.
Q. Did you CA'er see any body at your oavh house dis
guised? A. No nir.
Q. You nover siiav anybody Availing Avhat is called tho
Ku-Klux disguise? A. No, sir, if I did I did not Ichoav it.
Q. You Avould havo known if you had soon thorn diwguised?
A. I am very near flighted, and if I aviih standing at iny door
and fifty men should go along the lane, which is fifty yards
off", I could boo something moving, but Avhether black or
Avhito I could not tell.
Q. You have no personal knowledge of tho laws being re
sisted in any shape? A. I have not.
Re-Direct Examination
By Mr. Graham.
Q. This man CasAvell Holt — Avas ho a politician and un
derstood to be an influential man? A. He belonged to the
league, he said.
Q. What Avas his general character as an honest man ? —
A. Vtry bnd.
Mr. BOYDEN. We object to that, Mr. Chief Justice. What
has that to do with the matter. Is it insisted that they have
a right to punish a man because his character is bad?

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 603
Mr. GRAHAM. Not at all ; but it is insisted, and such are
the allegations in the answer, that these acts of violence were
committed from political motives, and it is competent to 6how
Avhat is the character of the man for honesty or dishonesty, in
order to show that these acts of violence proceed from no politi
cal motives, but Avoro directed at tho individual because of some
moral defect in himself; that they wero inflicted as a punish
ment for his offences. In other words, avo proposo to show
that thoro was no political significance in theso whippings of
colored men.
Mr. SMITH. If this testimony bo admissible, Mr. Chief
Justice, whero is it to end ? Are aa'o to go into tho character
of a man avIio has been injured in every instance Avhere a law
less act has been perpetrated ? I agree Avith my associate that
tho character of tho party is totally immaterial. An outrage
irt as great a violation of the law, Avhether the party bo ono of
the moKt desperate and wicked of men in tho country or 0110 of
tho bcHt men. There may boa difference in tho moral charac
ter of tho net, but tho legal quality is tho same. Tho answer
alleged IuavIohhiiohh by aocret nnHociatioiiR, and that the procla
mation of tlio governor Avas put forth for the purpose of pre
venting thotto actri of violonce. It scouih to mo that it is totally
irrelevant Avhat tho character of the man injured.
Mr. MEItHIMON. Mr. Chief Justico, 'the point, it septus
to mo, is thia : The respondent sets up by way of defense the
oxistenco of these secret organizations, of which they complain
and allege that they are political organizations; that their object
Avas to subvert the reconstruction acts of congress and the gov
ernment of the state inauguaratcd in pursuance of thoso acts;
and they allcgo that ono of the means to bo used was to whip
and scourge and kill tho colored people of tho state because
they wero enfranchised by means of this reconstruction policy ;
and they desire that this court shall infer when one ot those men is
shown to havo beon Avhipped that it Avas because of his political no
tions, and bocauso ho was enfranchised, and not because of any
crime or alleged crime charged upon him. Then, sir, if that bo

004 count or impeachments.
truo, I insist that whenever they show that ono of this ohms of
people Avas injured for the purposo of raising tho presumption that
it Avas the result of political considerations, it is competent for
ns to destroy that inference, and that it Is not only fair, but is
perfectly legitimate in view of tho issue before this court. Wo
insist that all tho strict technical rules that apply to a formal
indictment, cannot apply here, for this very plain reason that,
articles of impeachment are not drawn Avith the technical
nicety that pertains to an ordinary bill of indictmeut. Tho
articles are draAvn more loosely, in this general way, on pur
pose to let in evidence of this very character, in order that tho
Avhole case may be made to appear to the court. I repeat, tho
object of the respondent is to let the court diuw the inference
that, whenever a colored man was Avhipped, whether from tes
timony introduced by the managers or the defence, that
he was Avhipped because of his political notions, and be
cause he has a right to entertain those political notions
and exercise his political privilege in pursuance of the recon
struction policy. We have a right, Ave insist, to repel that
inference by showing that the man Avas one avIio had perpetra
ted crimes, and that the Avhipping or outrage — Ave admit it Avas
lawless, — was imposed upon him because of that, and not be
cause of his political opinions.
Mr. BOYDEN. I think the gentleman has misconceived
tho purport of the respondent's ansAver.
Mr. MERRIMON. The gentleman mado tho statement tho
other day in his speech.
Mr. BOYDEN. I am talking about the answer. In tho
way of opening, it is usual to present a cobg in several views.
But, Mr. Chief Justice, avo insist that It makes no difference.
If theso organisations undertook to take tho laws Into thoir
own hands instead of resorting to tho courtB, nnd decreed tho
punishments and carried them Into effect, it makes no mannor
of difference whether tho motive was political or otherwise,
it was just as much tho duty of tho govornor to put down riots
or this illegal way of punishment 0j cltUens for protended

TRIAL OF AVILMAM W. IIOLDEN. 005
crimes, as if the motive were a political one. He is to prevent
mon from taking tho law into their own hands and carrying
out their iniquitous puiposes. It is wholly immaterial, so far
as the goveni.or is concerned, what was the reason for chastising
theso men. If this man was a republican and a colored man,
and they chastised him really on that account, they would nat
urally pretend that the purpose was because he had committed
some crime for the purpose of concealing their real object. Is
it to be contended that a court will admit testimony to show
that a man against whom an outrage was perpetrated was a bad
man, and that hence there was an excuse for an outrage upon
his rights. The act does not provide that the governor shall
issue his proclamation when the crime is against this party or
.the other party, but that he may issue his proclamation and put
the people under military law when such a state of things exists
that life and property are not safe and offences go unpunished
by the civil law.
Mr. BRAGG. Mr. Chief Justice, a good deal of what has
been stated is correct. But, sir, these other matters have been
brought into tho defence also. We admit there may be insurrec
tion without these political questions being mingled in the insur
rection. We do not pretend to say that tho whipping of a bad
man is Hot against tho law. No body has a right to whip a
man, bad or good. Let us see, sir, what the accused has said
hero in his defence. His answer at page 13, reads as folloAvs ;
'• Within a few days after the ratification of the said act, a
"a body of armed men, to tho number of fifty or more, mem-
" bors of tho aforesaid organizations, disguised by masks and
" othor means, intending to awo members of the republican
" party throughout tho stato, by putting to death cortaln re«
"publican cltlxoiu of Alamanco county, did, on tho night of tho
««20th of Fobniaiy, 1870, on tor tho town of Graham, the shlro
" town of tho said county of Alamanco, with tho purposo
"and intent of putting to doath evory adult republican male
"resident of tho said town of Graham, and did, with such pur*
•« poso and Intent, visit the hdusos of all such reiidents, and did

506 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
" drag from his bed and put to death by hanging, in the square
" of 6aid town, one Wyatt Outlaw, an old colored man, whoso
v " only offence Avas that he belonged to the republican party."
And, sir, all through this defence, there is an endeavor to
give a political turn to this whole matter, to show that these
whippings and Bcourgings Avero done for political reasons — for
the double reason, I may say, according to the defence, of intimi
dating one class of the community — ono political party, and of
overturning tho laAvs of the state and of the United States con
ferring upon colored men the privileges ot citizens, Avhich they
had not enjoyed heretofore. So that it becomes highly mate
rial to the inquiry, Avhen it is alleged that a man was scourged
for those particular reasons, to show what his character was and
what he had been scourged for — for instance, stealing. It is
suggested by my learned associate that, though it is against tho
law, theso and othor breakers of the laAV are not unfrequently
lynched in different communities ; but it does not follow that
it was done for the reason alleged hero. I read from pa^o 7
of the answer :
" The members Avere united by oaths which ignored or repu-
" diated the ordinary oaths or obligations resting upon all other
" citizens to respect the laws and uphold the government ; these
"oaths inculcated hatred by the Avhite race against the eol-
" ored race ; the members of the klan, as above stated, AA'ero
"hostile to the principles on Avhichthe government of the stato
" had been reconstructed, and in many respects, hostile to tho
" government of the United States."
Hence I thiuk, in view of the allegations in the answer tho
testimony is admissible.
Mr. CONIGLAND. There is no question in the books
better settled, than the cases in which evidence as to charac
ter may be introduced. The character of a witness may be
put in evidence, in order to affect his credibility. Were the
parties who did this whipping convicted thereof before a
court of Justice, evidence aa to the character of the party on
whom the offence was committed would be heard by the court

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEX. 50T
in mitigation of the punishment. But in the present instance
the evidence proposed to be introduced raises a question
wholly foreigu to the issue before the court. It is indeed
said, that the purpose is to show that these offences' Avere not
instigated by political motives and thus it is proposed to meet
the allegations in the ansAver, but the ansAver proceeds on the-
ground of an organized society to subvert the laws, and if avo
prove that the offences complained of Avero committed in
furtherance of that design, it cannot affect the cause no mat
ter Avhat may have been the character of the victims : outrage,
political or othenvise, ve insist justified the respondent's ac
tion. The effect of the question, if allowed, will be to raise
collateral issues, Avbolly at variance with the main issue, and
te occupy the timo of tho court in hearing evidence as to the
character of tho parties Avho may have been maltreated. In
case we can prove that one hundred persons Avere illegally
punished, Ave might, if this question is alloAved, summon two
hundred Avitnesses — two as to the character of each person,
for, if they are alloAved to prove the bad character of the parT
ties, we must bo allowed to sustain their character.
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. Chief Justice, I have no purposo to
prolong this discussion. It is the right of the party offering
testimony to conclude the argument. The whole case on the
part of the respondent is that these violations were committed
from political motives and Avere inflicted upon men because of
their political opinions. We offer evidence to show that the
man who suffered may have brought the infliction upon him
self by other means than on account of his otiensiveness be
cause of his political opinions.
Mr. SMITH. I desire to call attention to another part of
the answer, on page 7 :
" These combinations were at first purely political in their
" character, and many good citizens were induced to join them.
" But gradually, under the leadership of ambitious ajid dis-
" contented politicians, and under the pretext that society
"needed to be regulated by some authority outside or. above

£08 coTjirr of impeachments.
'Haw, their oharaoter was changed, and those seorotklans began
,l to commit murder, to rob, whip, scourge, mutilate unoffending
" citizens." Mr. GRAHAM. It does not matter. That allegation does
not materially change the aspect of the question. It still speaks
of the acts being done under the lead of ambitious politicians.
I suppose that " ambitious politicians " may havo an aversion
to crime as wellas a desire to triumph in their party connec
tions ; and we offer this evidence in order to show there were
other motives than political motives which operated in relation
to tho whipping of this man. I submit it is competent evi
dence on that point. Lynch law is occasionally administered
in all statea of society. There was a negro put to death in the
presence of a judge in Salisbury ten years ago, and another
one put to death in the presence of a judge in Cleveland
county some twenty years ago — not on account of political con
siderations, but because they had been acquitted of crimes with
which they were charged. Though the jury found them not
guilty, mob violence interposed and inflicted punishment. It
-will also be recollected that in the city of San Francisco, in
California, a number of years since, several men were sum
marily executed on account of stuffing ballot boxes at an elec
tion. All these tilings could take place without any sort of
insurrection or any political motive and without any design
against the government. If it can be implied that there Avas
reasonable ground for belief that other motives besides politi
cal moti\'es actuated the parties who did this illegal act, it is
proper to show it in order to enlighten the court in regard
to it.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer decides that
the evidence is admissible. Although the act is just as lawless
Avhen perpetrated on one man as another, yet the articles of
Impeachment and tho answer present the matter in two aspectB.
One is that tho county had become lawless, and that the othor this
JaAvlewness waa induced by reason of political elements Intro-

THIAL OP WILLIAM W. II0LDKN. 500
duced into the organization. In that point of view tho evi
dence is relevant !
JEREMIAH HOLT. [Examination resumed,]
By Mk. Graham.
Q. What was the general character of this man Caswell Holt
as to- honesty or dishonesty ? A. Not good.
Q. In what respect was it not good ? A. He was considered
a roguish man — Avould steal.
Q. You have been asked Avhether you ever knew anybody
to be punished for Avhipping him. Do you knoAV of his having
some persons arrested and examined before a justice of the
peace ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Before Mr. Hardy ? A. Peter Hardy.
Q. What is the politics of Mr. Hardy ? A. Radical, I think.
Q. [By Mr. Boyden.] Were you present at the examination
or are you talking of Avhat you heard ? A. Yes, sir, I Avas a
Avitness in th© case.
Q. You were before Mr. Hardy at the hearing, AA'hat did
Mr. Hardy do Avith the case ? A. He examined the witness.
Mi'. SMITH. If there was any judicial proceeding, the
evidence of what transpired is the written memorial made at
the time.
Mr. GRAHAM. I submit that Avhat took place on the
trial in the presence of the Avitness is competent evidence.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer is of the
opinion it is competent for you to sIioav that the witness proved
an alibi.
Mr. GRAHAM. [I expect to sIioav that the magistrate
whom the witness has denominated a " radical " discharged
tho man charged.
The WITNESS. Yes, sir, they were all discharged.
Q. The magistrate heard the evidence. A. Yes, sir. Mr.
Badham was tlie laAvyer.
Q. He appeared for Caswell Holt ? A. Yes, sir.
84

51Q .COURT 07 IMPEACHMENTS,
s Q. And Mr. Hardy the justice of the peace, after hearing
all the evidonce dismissed the warrant? A, Yes, sir/ v
Re-Cross-Examination. By Mr. Boyden. •" <
Q. Did Caswell Holt swear he knew the men who had
whipped him i A. He said he knew one.
Q. On tho trial ? A. Before the trial.
Q. He had him before the magistrate ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did they prove an alibi on the othor side ? A. Yes, sir,
he was proved as clear as anybody.
Q. Did they prove that they were in some other place whon
it was done \ A. He proved that he was away.
Q. That is what I mean ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. He called witnesses to prove that he was at home and
could not haA'e done it ? A. Yob, sir.
Q. Do you know Avhether this negro was afterwards shot —
after this investigation ? A. He Avas.
Mr. GRAHAM. That la going iuto now matter i
Mr. BOYDEN. It la ounoetod with this.
Mr. GRAHAM. Wo havo gono through with tho whipping,
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. You might havo callod that out on
thooroj-i-oxamlnatloii. Wm aro now ci'OBS-jxaminlng tho wit
ness In reply.
M. BOYDEN. Yes, sir, in reply to this question about his
being Avhipped because ho AA'as guilty of stealing. They pre
tend that ho was a man of bad character, and to meet that view
of the case and to meet the allegation hi tho articles, we now
off'er to prove that they did establish an alibi by which the
accused party wa9 acquitted ; and we now understand that be
cause Caswell Holt made that complaint he was afterward shot.
Mr. GRAHAM. The allegation on the other side was that
this man had been whipped and cruelly treated, and we ex
amined the witnosB upon nothing elso except that. This mat-
tor whioh is sought to bo introduced is new matter.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. I think it is irregular to introduce
tho proof after the cross-examination has been closed.

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 811
GEORGE PATTERSON, a witness called on behalf bf
the Managers, being duly sworn, testifies as follow*:
By Mb. Graham,
Q. Where do you live? A. Alamance county, Patterson
township, number 1.
Q. What business do you follow ? A. I am a farmer.
Q. What is your age ? A. Fifty-eight.
Q. Are you well acquainted with your neighborhood ? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. Were you a representative in the legislature in former
years ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. State to the court what, in your township in the year
1870, January and February and tho following months, was
the state of feeling between the white and black people as to
their being friendly or unfriendly? A. I think they were
friendly. Q. There was the usual business transactions between them,
forming contracts ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were the blacks employed principally in fanning ? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. Some by contract on wages, some on shares of cropB,
some renting lands ? A. Yes, sir.
Mr. BOYDEN. You will speak of your own knowledge.
Mr. GRAHAM. I am seeking to confine the witness to
that. Q. Do you know what Avas the general arrangement in the
country among your neighbors and friendB as to transactions
of the business between the white and black people?
Mr. BOYDEN. That iB improper. It cannot be supposed
that the witness knew any such general transactions betAveen
man and man, or that he had personal knowledge of them.
Mr. GRAHAM. I don't desire to ask any evidenco that
will be considered in the slightest degree improper, as I want
to show that, so far as thia witness goes, business transactions
took place and contracts were made between the whites and
blacks. This defence is placed on the ground that there Avas

512 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
maltreatment of the blacks as a race, and a disposition to pros
cribe and do them injustice because of their exercising the
right of suffrage in a vvay which did not suit their employers.
I Avant to show there was no oppression, that they made con
tracts as other people made them, and there was a general
peaceful state of society,
Mr. BOYDEN. As the question has been circumscribed in
tjio statement of the counsel, wo can have no objection. They
can prove that in any case whero the witness saAv the contract
mado or hoard it made, but tho question that was first asked
Avas much more extensive than tho one now suggested.
Mr. GRAHAM. I have asked time and time again the
other witnesses the same question in substance without objec
tion. It is a general fact capable of being proved as any other
general fact, the state of society between these people.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. You have a right to provo by
general reputation the condition of things as betAveen the
Avhitos and blacks.
Q. Stato Avhether, as u general thing through your county,
tho business relations botweon tho Avhite and black peoplo
Avere thoso Avhich belonged to the conditions in which they
Avoro respectively, the ono being able to give and the other
AA'an ting labor? A. Thoy Avere generally employed I think
— those who wanted employment.
Q. Thoso Avho Avanted employment could get it as laborers,
either for Avages or for a share of the crop, or could rent land
upon reasonable terms, Avhere they Avere men who Avere ca
pable of fulfilling their contracts ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was that general throughout the country as fur as you
know? A. It Avas as far as I knoAV.
Q. You have an extensive acquaintance in the country out
side of your township? A. Yea, sir.
Q. Wero you a magistrate of tho county ? A. Yes, sir, for
many years.
Q. As a justice of tho peaco and member of th© house of

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 518
ropresentativos, you were in the habit of being' iri public
places very frequently ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. If there Avas anything took place in your neighborhood,
you generally attonded these public assemblies ? A;' Yds, sir.
Q. Are you often at the Court house ? A. Not very often,
at Graham, except at the time of courts. ..¦>'•
Q. How far do you live from Graham ? A. Fourteen miles.
Q. The southern part? A. The south-western part Of the
county. > .
Q. Waa there any hostility between the two races leading
to violence on account of political differences? A. I think
not. '
Q. Do you know of any attempt by force or violenoe to
control the black people in their votes? A. No, Sir, I don't
know of any. *
Q. Do you attend courts in the county pretty regularly ? A.
Yes, sir, < i
Q. Do you act as foreman of the grand jury? A. I have on
one occasion. J . ;
Q. When ? A. The June term, 1869, I believe.
Q. Did you pass upon all the business sent before? A. Yes,
sir. Q. The court was held as usual ? A. As usual.
Q. Was any attempt made to intimidate you or in any way
prevent you from the performance of your duty ? A. Nono
Avhatevcr. Q. Was there any resistance to the law in your part of tho
county or your neighborhood for the last several years. A.
No, sir. • ,,;<..'
Q. Were there magistrates in your township?. A. There
Avere at all times. ,
Q. Republican or conservative ? A. There was one on each
side. Q. Did'you'ever know anybody to apply for a state's wai rant
and support the application by a proper affidavit and no i get
it ? A. I never did. ! ' : <

614 COtTBT OF1 CtPEACIttfENra. '
Q. Did you ever know a constable iiavhsg a process, felling
to execute if he could find the man ? A. I never did* ¦¦¦¦¦
Q. Have yon ever known any resistance to the collection of
the United States revenues! A. No, sir. ' ii
Q. There were a good many distilleries in your county about
that time ? A. There* were some — not very many.
Q. Distillers, merchants and other people liable to pay Uni
ted States taxes — was there any resistance by them by force, to
pay any part of the taxes ? A. None to my knowledge.
Q. How was it in reference to state taxes ? A. It was about
as usual, so far as people were able to pay.
Q. Did anybody take up his gun to avoid it ! A. No, sir.
Cross-Examination. By Mb. Boyden :
Q. To which political party do you belong ? A. To the con«
servative. Q. Do you know to what party the last witness, Mr. Holt,
belongs? A. I believe I have heard him say
Q. Do you know it ? A. I havo never seen him vote in my
life. Q. Do you know what his opinions aro and to whioh party
he belongs ? A. I think he is conservative.
Q. You were asked about the general state of foiling be
tween the white and colored people in your county, what you
thought it was ? A. I have said it wm good.
Q. I ask you if it is not the general feeling and belief in
your county, that a great many outrages have been committed
on colored people within the last two or three years ?
Mr. GRAHAM. We object to that. It Ib an attempt to
prove particular transactions under the cover of a»general
question. Mr. BOYDEN. It is simply in reply. I asked him if ho
does not know if there have not been a large number of out
rages committed on the colored people, if that is not the general
opinion. ¦ *l- ! ' '
Mr. GRAHAM. This is an attempt to prove by general

TBlAfc Ofr WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. S15
reputation that there has fessn a great many injuries done to
the colored people and preclude any explanation oh the subject*
t think the question is clearly incompetent and that it would
lead to an investigation which would be tedious, and not perti-*
nent to the matter before the court .1
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer is of the
opinion that the tacts cannot be proved by general reputation.
Q. Do you know of any secret organization in the county of
Alamance under the names which you have heard repeated, or
any other names ! A. I do not know of any.
Q. Have you seen any persons disguised 1 A. Never in
my life. >
Q. Have you seen any persons who have been scourged ? A.
I never have.
Q. Did you seo the body of Outlaw after he was hung ? - A.
No, sir. '•
Q. Did you see the body of Puryear after he waa drowned ?
A. No, sir.
Q. You have kept clear of all these things f A. I did not
aee them. I did not know that Outlaw was hung until four or
five days afterwards. ,x
Q. You live fourteen miles from the court house ? A. Yes,
air, and further from where Puryear was found.
Q. You say you were foreman of the grand jury I A. In
June,1869, 1 think it was.
Q. At Avhich term ! A. The spring term.
Mr. BOYDEN. The act to prevent men from going masked
aud disguised was passed in April, 1869, and we wish to ask
the Avitness the question whether, before he was foreman of
the grand jury, he had not heard and did not believe the truth
of the numerous charges made of persons having been whipped,
scourged and mutilated by persons masked and disguised and,
knowing that, if he instituted any investigation into any one of
these offences. .,,,., , f
Mr. GRAHAM. Put the question in writing.

616 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.*
[The counsel for the respondent ' reduced : the question to
writing.] ',',.(¦ i - -" •'¦' •  «'!¦¦!  '. *¦*-¦*.•'-- •. ••¦
Q. You say you were foreman of the grand 'jury at the June
term, 1869.. Now I ask you if you had not heard of a number
of whippings of colored men in the county of Alamance,* which
statements you believed to be tme, and whether with this infor
mation and belief you made any investigations ? :..¦'• • <:
Mr. GRAHAM. I do not know, Mr. Chief Justice, how
far a grand juror's oath may not bind him to keep secret what
took place before the grand jury. I have no objection to the
question being answered unless that point should be interposed.
Mr. SMITH. It has been expressly decided in this 6tate
that a grand juror may be compelled to state what occurred in
a grand jury room before a court of justice.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer is of 'the
opinion that the question may be put on cross-examination. /
Mr. GRAHAM. You will read the question. I
Mr. BOYDEN. The first part of the question is whether
you had not heard of Avhippings before you become foreman of
this grand jury at the June term. The next part of the ques-
ion is whether you did not believe they had taken place. And
the third part of the question is whether you made investi
gation as a grand juror touching these whippings. , ; ¦ ¦ -
Mr. GRAHAM. I prefer the counsel to read his question.
Mr. BOYDEN. I will read it.
Q. You say you were the foreman of the grand jury at the
June term, 1869. Now I ask you if you had not heard of a
number of whippings of colored men in the county of Ala
mance, which statements you believed to be true, and whether,
with this information before you, you made any investigations
as to any of thoBe whippings ? A. There were some, but as to
the number I am unable to answer.
Q. Go on and give an answer to the balance of the question ?
A. There was one case investigated, and there waa not a true
bill found.

TBIAL OF WILLIAM, W, HOLDEN. 517
Q. Thero Was not moro ; than, ono j caso?- ,AVI Not to jay
knoAvledge. ¦: ij v'.'i ..,; , ¦. ,- -\ i l". ... ,.,.; .,.;/ ,(,,,,
. Q. You .had , heard of more than, one before,, that court ?
A. Yes, sir, I think I had- > i ., ¦¦,,!.. , , ,,.•
Q. Were you ever asked by auy man to joinasecret political
association, and if so by Avhom ? ;. ;,,,.,
Mr. GRAHAM- I object to the question as not, at all rele-
van t to this case. Statements betAveen this Avitness and anybody
eke are like any other hearsay matter. I object to any evidence
that takes place inter alios before the court as not competent.
Mr. BOYDEN. Our object is to establish the fact that
there was a secret political organization, and the question is
whether any person ever asked the witness to joinsuck a secret
political organization, and if so who it Avas.
Mr. GRAHAM. We understand that. It is about the
6ame thing as this : did anybody ever tell yon there was such
an association ? It clearly can not be answered. This question
is simply putting the same thing in a different form. > >
The CHIEF JUSTICE. I do not think the question is
proper. ,.
De-Direct Examination.
- Q. At this Juno term Avhen you acted as foreman of tho
grand jury, in June, 18G9, the solicited was Mr. Bulla? A.
Yes, sir. ,, > r t
Q. You investigated a case — whose caso was that?, ¦/A., A
man by tho nanio of Harvey. , >
, Q. Joo Harvey ? A. I think his name is Joe. ,, , ,
Q. Was Joo llarvoy a colorod man ? A. Yob, sir.
Q. Did tho solicitor sond you in a bill in that case? A.
Yes, sir. 
Q. What was dono with it ? A. It was found not a truo, bill
unanimously. , , , ... i •.»¦..,...¦ .
¦ iQ^Was there any pupose to intimidato tho grand jury in
that matter ? , A. No, sir. ,, .,_.,, ,, „,.. ,.,, , , f ,, .; ...y
Q. They considered the, bill ,npt sustained by proper evi
dence? A. Yes, sir. ,,,.!'<

1118 •''' OOOBT OF 4MPBJUmttENT8, I'"
Q. And returned not a true bill I- A. Yes, sir. > tn'.T .0
Q. Was there anything said in the grand jury in fegutd to
political considerations to affect their aotion? A. Not one
'word. There were men of both parties on'the grand jury.
Q. Not one word or allusion was made to political matters
In any of your business ? A. No, sir. ¦¦•¦ i > '
Q. And every man you say on tlie grand jury voted to ignore
the bill? A. Yes, sir.
Q. There were some colored men on tho jury that term t
A. I think not.. >
Q. But thoro were mon called republicans in polities who
voted aplust the bill? A. Yoi, sir.
Q. Wrs thoro any proposition by any grand juror to send
for a witness in relation to any ease which was refused \ A,
Nono. Q. Nono of thoso republican gentlemen made motions to
bring up anybody which were refused ? A, No, sir.
Q. Was tho business conducted as tho business is usually con
ducted in such bodies under the oath taken ? A. Yea, sir.
Q. What is the politics of the solicitor and judge ? A. They
are republicans — said to be.
Q. There was no bill except the ono in the case of Joo Har
vey that was rejected ? A. Not that I recollect ot now— I
don't think there Avas.
Q. What was the politics of the clerk of tlie superior court ?
A. He is a republican.
Q. And the majority of the county commissioners? A.
They are republicans now. • .
Q. How were they in January or February, 1870 ? A.. Tlie
first election they elected — those that qualified wero three con
servatives and two republicans. Not long afterwards one of
them retired and a republican was put in his place.; That
made three republicans and two conservatives. Then at the
last election the thing was changed and the newly elected offi
cers Avere sworn in and continued until the judge decided that
the old officers had a right to hold over. ....

TRIAL Of WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 519
Q. The only time there has been a majority of the board
that was not republican, was the short form the newly elected
ones were in and they remained in until tho judge decided the
old ones wero entitled to hold over ? A. Yes, sir, and tlie term
after election until one resigned.
Q. There was a question asked you a while ago about tho
drawing of the grand jury, and a statement that the1 judge re*
fused to hold tho oourt because he was not satisfied that the jury
hod beon properly constituted. Do you know what board it
Was that drew the jury ? A. I don't know anything about it,
only I hoard tho argument of court and counsel.
Mr. GRAHAM. Wo do not oaro about hearsay.
SAMUEL WHITE, a, witness called in lehalf qfths Man
ager, being duly sworn testified as follows .'
By Mb. Graham.
Q. State where you reside and what business you follow t
A. I live in Alamance county, Melville township, number 10,
and I am a farmer.
Q. State whether in the township in which you live and in
the county aa far as you know, in 1870, during the month of
March and before, what Avas the state of feeling between the
white and black people ? \. Very good, as far as I knoAV.
Q. Were they employed in the usual transactions of farming
and the like, by the whites ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. On contract and for a share of the crops? A. They
were employed either as tenants or hirelings. It is the prin
cipal labor that we have there to depend upon in our section of
the country. We employed bo far as I know, all who wanted
employment and they got the usual terms in the country.
Q. Do you know of any instance in which colored men were
refused to be employed or otherwise to be dealt with on ac
count of polities or the way they voted ? A. I do not.
Q. The general condition ot your neighborhood as to peace,
how was it in February and March, 1870? A. So far as I
know it was peace and quiet '

<fl|20 COUBT OF,. IMPEACHMENTS.
i, Q. That was tho general condition of things ? ; A.. .That was
tho usual condition in my, sootlon of tho country., : ,,i ., ,< >
, Q. Thoro wero some exceptions in Individual cases of vjo-
lonoo? A. Well,, yos, sir. , ,,.., ,,
Q. Do you knoAV of any attonipt by forco or violence to con
trol tho colored people in , tho way thoy should vote \ A. I
uoA'cr havo. . ,
Q. Do you know of their being refused favors and offices of
good neighborhood on account of politics A. I(do not.
Q. In tho ordinary eourso of society in eases of sickness and
of distress, Avhen they haAro applied to neighbors for afayorAvas
it over refused to thorn? A. I nover knoAV an instance whoro
they Avere refused Avhen over they applied for anything of that
sort, either to their employers or to the immediate neighbors.
Q. Something has been said about a man named Puryear
having been killed. Did you knoAV him ? A. Yos, sir.
, Q. What Avas his character as an honest or truthful or moral
mau in any way ? A. Bill Avas a negro of bad character. , ;,
Q. How did you happon to knoAV him ? A. Ho formerly
belonged to Mr. Puryear who is my ihther-in-laAV.
Q. Seymour Puryear ? A. Yes, sir. I have known this man
Bill over since I have been connected Avith the family.
Q. You have known him as a slave and also after the eman
cipation ? A. I have knoAvn him since his liberation, and I
knoAV him well before.
Q. What avus his reputation ns to tho maltreatment of his
Avife and children ?
Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chief Justico, wo think that this is oxtond-
ing tho rule a great deal further than your honor has stated.
Miy GRAHAM. Wo proposo to show this num's general
reputation in tho neighborhood, that ho was a cruel and brutal
man to his family and in various respects until ho became a
lunatic ; that he was for somotlino insuue arid confined in tho
poor houso, and Avas subsequently released; and that. the. cir
cumstances of his character make it quite aB probablo that ho
was taken off in an unlaAvtul cruel manner by the friends of his

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 821
wife and family as by anybody else.' My first question is whether l
his general reputation was not that' of an inhuman person to
wards his own family.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding offlceris of the' opin
ion the question cannot be answered. It would be carrying
the question of reputation too tar. ' ' ;
Q. You say you knew him. In what respect was his character
bad ? A. In almost every other respect, sir. He was a rogue,
a notorious liar and he was notoriously intemperate when he
could get anything to drink.
Q. Ho was a liar and a drunkard 2 A. That Avas his character.
Q. Had ho any prominence in politics that would havo
mndo him a victim of political opposition ? A, I should think
not. I don't think Bill was a man who meddled much in
political affairs. I novor heard of him having anything to do
with it or anything about it,
Q. Do you know Avhether he Avas insane and confined as an
insane man? A. I so understood. I never saw him in that
condition. I havo heard it frequently spoken of by his old
master and others.
Q. What time did Puryear's death occur? A. I can't say
precisely, but it Avas either late in the winter or early in the
spring. Q. Was it before or after the death of Outlaw ? A. Shortly
after that,Icnn't say precisely Iioav long.
Q. Wus ho seen after tho death of OutlaAV or was he missing
before? A. It Avas after tho death of Outlaw that he Avas
¦missing. MrUADGER. Soon by whom?
Mr. GRAHAM. By him or any body else?
By tho Chief Justice.
Q. Bid you seo him after Outlaw was hung ? A. I did not.
Q. Hoav shortly after Avas it that he was missing, a feAV
days or weeks? A.. I don't think it oould have been many
days, but as to the length of time I oannot say positively.
Q. You think it wos a few days after the death of Outlaw

523 COCBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
that his body was found ? A. That he waa missing. It was
some two or three months before his body was found.
By Mr. Graham [resuming.]
Q. He had been missing for some considerable length' of
time? A. Yes, sir, some time.
Q. Do you know of there being any resistance to law in
Melville tovraship, either to the United States or to the state
law? A. I do not, I have never heard of a single instance.
Q. There are magistrates and justices of the peace in your
township? A. Yes, sir, duly elected in 1860.
Q. And constables ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you ever know of any application being made to
any justice or magistrate for a state's warrant by anybody
and refused? A. I never did.
Cross Examination
By Mr. Boyden.
Q. Did you seo the body of Outlaw shortly after ho was
killed ? A. No, sir, he was found on Saturday and the inquest
was held that day and I never heard of it until the next, day.
Q. You nover saw the body after his death ? A. No, sir.
Q. How long after that was it before you heard this other
man was missing ? A. I thought it was Puryear you were
speaking of, as to Outlaw, I don't know. I live some distance
from Graham.
Q. But you know about Outlaw's death ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. How long after that did Puryear disappear ? A. I can't
say precisely, but it was not a great while.
Q. Three or four days ? A. I suppose it must have been
that long.
Q. Is that your judgment ? A. I have no certain recollec
tion as to the time.
Q. According to your best recollection as to the time, do you
think it was more or less than three or four days ? A. I can't
say anything positive as to the length of time.
Q. Did you Bee his body after he was found ? A. Do you
mean Puryear ?

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 523
Q. Yes? A. No, sir. ,
Q. Did he five in your neighborhood ? A. I suppose it ia
about four miles from where I live.
Q. You did not know anything about his death personally ?
A. Nothing about it personally.
Q. Do you know about any other person being whipped or
scourged or beaten ? A. Not of my own personal knowledge.
Q. Have you seen anybody who showed you marks of having
boon whipped ? A. I have not.
Q. You have no knowledge then by having seen them or
having soon the marks of whipping and scourging in your
oounty ? A. I havo not.
Q. Do you know anything about a secret organization
political or otherwise to sot things to rights in Alamanco
county ? A. I havo no personal knowlodge of any organisa
tion of that kind.
Q. You never saw them going about ? A. I never did.
Q. You never saw them going about disguised ? A. I never
saw any man disguised, and I never saw any man who I had
any reason to believe belonged to anything of that sort.
Q. Have you seen bodies of men going about at night ? A.
I have not. I never saw anything of the kind.
Q. You do not know anything about the causes or circum
stances attending the death of Puryear ? A. I do not.
Q. You say he belonged to your father-in-law ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. When lie was a slave ? A. Yes, sir, and h© was living
on his land before he Avas missing.
Q. Do you give the opinion of the community as to Pur
year, or do you give your OAvn opinion as to his character ? A.
I give both.
Q. Has he a general reputation among his acquaintances and
friends such as you gave him, or have you given your own inT
diAadual opinion of 1dm ? A. That is the opinion entertained
by all who knew anything about him.
Q. Is1 that his reputation among those of his own color ? A .

$24 COURT 09- IWPBACHMIMTS. >
So far as I know it was. I never heard them aay much about
him. ' • ¦ . ¦ ¦ > i - ¦ , v / ' •: * i .*,/
Q. You never heard them say anything about him ? A.
Not a great deal. I have heard them speak of his oharaoter,
and that is tlie character they gave him. ... <. /
Q. Have you heard enough of his own color speak of bim{to
give him a general character ? A. I 6hould think I have.
Q. How many did you ever hear speak ot him— I mean of
his OAvn color ? A. I can't say positively as to that.
Q. As many as two ? A. Yes, 6'ir. i
Q. How many do you suppose ? A. I could not say the
number. It may have been more or it may have been less.
Q. You Baid something about his mind having been disor
dered — that he was crazy ? A. Yes, sir, that was the general
report that he was crazy. I never eaAV him while he Avas in
that condition.
Q. But you stated that he was a crazy man. , ,
Mr. GRAHAM. He did not say that he was of his own
personal knowledge — he had neArer seen him in that condition.
Q. Was that his reputation ? A. Yes, eh.
Q. Do I understand you to say that his reputation being
that of a crazy man, he Avaa also reported to be a bad man and
a liar? Ib that the reputation which a crazy man has? A.
That Avas the reputation which he had before that. It was only
within the last two years that I heard of his being crazy.
Q. During the wholo tAvo years ? A. Not the wholo of dr,
but during that timo.
Oj. You don't havo reference to that time as to his having
born© that character— you speak of him before that? A.
Boforo that and at all times. , ,
Q. So he boro the character of a thief and a liar at tlie tlmo
ho was also understood to be crazy ?
Q. [By the Chief Justice.] What timo was ho crazy—
continually, or off and on ? A. I never saw him in that condi
tion, and I cannot speak of ray own knowledge as to what his

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. nOLDEN. 525,
condition was. I understood that a part of the time he was
confined in a jail at Graham.
Q. As a lunatic, on account of his craziness ? A. Yes, air ;
he was considered at that time in rather a dangerous condition,
He was abusive to his own family and dangerous. He was
violent, I understood.
Q. What political party do you co-operate with — vote with ?
A. I vote with what is called the conservative party — what is
known as that party now.
Re-Direct Examination.
By Mb. Graham.
Q. You are a brother of Stephen White, who was elected to
the legislature by the republicans ? A. Yes, 6ir, I am.
Mr. BOYDEN. We object to the question.
Q. In regard to Puryear, did he recover his senses before his
death — and if so did you see him at any time after he had re
covered ? A. I recollect 6eeing him at times at Mr. Puryear's
farm at work. He had him employed after he got well.
He had recovered sufficiently to go to work as a laborer on
the farm.
Q. Your father-in-law, who formerly owned him, employed
him to work for him ? A. He was living on his place and
employed on his plantation at the time. I understood at that
time he was making a very good hand on the farm.
WILLIAM J. MURRAY, a witness recalled on Vehalf of
th Managers, testifies as follows :
By Me. Gbaham.
Q. Did you know tliis man Puryear was confined as a lunatio
in jail of Alamance ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. What time ? A. Ho was in there a few days, it strikes
ine, in 1869.
Q. What was he in for t A. He seemed to be in a deranged
state. Q. Waa he committed on a peace warrant or was he simply
35

526 COTJBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
confined as a lunatic ? A. He was not committed on a war
rant at all, I think.
Q. What was done With him ? A. He remained a few days
and the commissioners sent him to tbe poorhouse, where he
could bo kept cheaper.
Q. He was sent there accordingly ? A. Yes, sir, the man
ager of the poorhouse took possession of him at the jail. I
gave him to the manager.
Q. Did he confine him ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And carried him to the poorhouse? A. lie started
with him.
Q. How long was he there to your knoAvledge ? A. I don't
remember, I don't think he was there a great while — how long
I don't remember exactly. ¦
Q. Some months ? A. I supposo tAvo months, it may have
been not quite bo much or it may have been a little longer.
Q. Were his actions that of a crazy man ? A. Yes, sir.
JEREMIAH HOLT, a witness on behalf of the Managers,
being re-called, testified as follows :
By Me. Gbaham.
Q. Did you know this black man Puryear ? A. I he\rer saw
him but once, that is to know him. He was then in' a dis
tracted condition.
Q. Under what circumstances ? A. Doctor Freeman was
well acquainted Avith him. We Avere standing in f lie street in
Graham and he had had some little trial and Doctor Freeman
had done him a favor. As he passed by us, there was a black
man leading him by a lino and he told him to stop' and he
raved out that there was Doctor Freeman, that he would always
respect him. Doctor and I were standing close together, and
the man chatted right smart awhile Avith him; when he waa
done they carried him to the poor house, at least tho man Bdid
he was going to take him there.
Q. Did he act like a crazy man? A. Yes, sir! Ho \v"as
liallooing and singing and dancing and cutting up shines.

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 527
¦ * '¦¦¦: ¦¦¦¦¦<> ',<¦!¦ 
Q. This black man was leading him off towards the poor
house and he discovered Doctor Freeman who was an acquain
tance of his, and he stopped and said he would always respect
him, and he capered around like a foolish or crazy person ? A.
Yes, sir. He doubled up his first and said " I will always, re
spect you."
Cross-Examination. By Mb. Boyden.
Q. What political party do you belong to ? A. I never
belonged to any society except a debating society ?
Q. I said what political party ? A. I always voted with, the
old whig party, and I expect to die there. [Laughter.]
Q. What Bide do you vote with now, the conservative or re
publican ? A. I vote the conservative ticket.
' WILLIAM GILLIAM, a witness called, on the behalf of the
Managers, being duly sworn, testified asfollrws :
By Mb. Gbaham. • < > ¦ » ¦
. Q. Where do you live ? A. In Alamance.
Q. What is your age ? A. 54 years last September. '
Q. What business do you follow ? A. Farming. '
Q. In what township do you live ? A. Morton. ¦
Q. Near the Caswell line? A. Yes, sir.
Q. State to the court what was the feeling in February and
March, 1870, between thevhite and blaek raGes in your neigh
borhood — was it friendly or unfriendly ? A. The feeling was
very good as far as I know.
Q. Was that the general reputation of the country?'! A.
Yes, sir, general as far as I know. I don't know any differ
ence except with reference to some that were low. doAvn.
Q. Any worthy colored man was treated with kindness; by
every body?: A. Treated with respects ; I >
Q. Did" they have business transactions in the way of mak
ing contracts for work ?, A. Yes, air, the freedmen I made
their own contracts, and the whites with them.
Q. Sometimes they got wages, sometimes they got a share

528 COUBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
of the orop and aometimea they rented land? A. Yea, air,
they did their own trading without any prohibition iti any
way. '' "' " '¦-'"' ,,: '"•" ''' '¦ ¦'"• 'i -id *i,i. !',m, ," n'
Q. So a man was a reliable man, was he contracted with
and trusted aa a white man would' be of the same standing ?
A. So far as I know, and I heard of no difference.! ' • ,» • '
Q. Were they in any way unsafe by reason of voting the
republican ticket? A. Not at all. ' »
Q. Did you know of any resistance to the officers of the
law in your county. A. Not at all. ...... • 1
Q. The taxes were gathered in your township and county
as they were anywhere else without any resistance? A.
Without any resistance at all. There was no interruption at
all in any respects — that is, about politics or voting. Some
times they would drink a little too much.
Q. Was any attempt made to resist the law in the collec
tion of taxes or any thing else ? A. No, sir. < I have been
connected with the township trustees for two years and I
have never heard any complaint in any respect. ¦
Q. You are one of the toAvnship trustees ? A. I am one of
the school committee, connected with the township trustees.
Q. Constantly in intercourse with the township trustees ?
A. Yes, sir. ,
Q. You say there was a general state of safety for .colored
men or republican white men as there was for others ? ' A.» I
saW no difibrenco. '.<;,'(
Q. Do you know ot any violence used to control the votes of
those colorod people, or thoso of anybody else ? A. No, sir, I
do not. ^ ¦ • • : r •
OrodS-Etoamination.1 ' ¦ , { T , , • s *,•¦:
By Mr. SMrm. ;• < \ , «i ,, t^ m.*
Q. D6 you know of any acts of violence committed '» on any
colored people, or any others, >in the county of Alamance-'?
A. Not of my own knowledge, only jrst from ¦hearttyv' i ¦', ¦
Q. Have you never seen any one whose^body pr^snted the
""•' '" "'- ." ''" "• •i '"•'¦""' '-"'.' '»•¦" .'•"(.* ': I," <,-. t:, ..l ;

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 629
..,¦¦ • <t ¦-.( ¦¦,' , i i' '. ¦ , '¦ , ¦.
marks of violence ? A. No, sir, I never did. There is a man
in our neighborhood who is said to have been whipped; J '"
Q. Did you hear his screams whilst he was in the process of
being whipped ? An I saw him a .month or two afterwards.
Q. Did yon notice any scars or marks of recent' whipping
about him? A. No, sir. - ^ i
Q. You nover made any examination? A. No, sir, nono
at all. ' < 11
Q. Do you know of any secret associations, whether called
by any names, in that county ? A. No, sir. •'/ \>
Q. Have you ever seen persons going about disguised V > A.
Never. i
Q. You have never seen crowds ; of persons going about at
night ? A. Not in disguise. I have seen persons comingfrom
a frolic, from a raising or a corn husking. ¦<>< i
- Q. Did you see the bodies- of Outlaw or Puryear after their
death ? A. No, sir, I did not know them before.. ¦ > ,..' .
Q. How far off from the place where they lived do you live ?
A. It is ten miles from my house to Graham and how far it was
to their place I do not know, it is still further I suppose.
Q. Have you any personal knowledge of any of tbese'organi-
aations? A. No, sir. .;,.'/•
Q. You have never had any connection with them yourself?
A. No, sir.- lis -¦ . <•¦,;' <;• •'¦'¦• '•' V
Q. What political party have you voted with I A, With the
democratic party all my life. i * r ¦ ¦ K
\ i .:! ¦ ... .. ¦•.,.., i. .' i
DAVID W. KERR, a witness called on behalf of the Mana
gers, bring duly sworn, testified as follows ? . 'J 1 \'
By Mr. Gbaham: ¦ m.>j "Y/"</; '-'
Q. Where do yon reside ? A. I reside In Holville township,
Now 10, 1 thlnki— Alemanoe oounty. ¦.•»». . ,•
; Q. What is your age ? -•?*. 57* - <' "¦. -'< ' , •
Q. What is y Our pursuit? A. A Smlasi*
1 Q. Stato to the court what wans tbe relations between the
black and white people in yonr township as far as yon know in

530 COTJBT OF IMPEA0HMENT8.
. > "¦'•.' ¦>. '¦ . jt :ir v '. f.T.n cr ',|i> r;
February and March, 1870 ? A. The feeling in generaj was a
kindly one,! f '.i.»|. r^vt I . ; • ¦>; ./. v.-o-i'V '¦ <' '.' ¦
Q. The usual oontracts Of business were made between them ?
A. Yevshri: ,.: -,.., «.! \--*\-u.w* - -¦ ••-,-' y.y\ M" .V.
Q. They were principally in the employment of formers?
A. Yea, sir, either as laborers hired by the month; dr'year or
day on shares. ' U
Q. Was there anything in the state of soolety there that made
it unsafe for them ? A. I think not. < J
Q. Neither, to life nor liberty? A. I think not.
Q. Were they unsafe in matters ol property—any likelihood
of their being deprived of their property? A. They were not
in my opinion.
Q. Do you know of their suffering any violence in the effort
to control their votes or because of their politics ? A. None, > in
my knowledge. < '. ,
Q. i Was there any resistance to the law in the county or the
township to your knowledge within tho last two years. A.
Nonei.if *• :., -it .;.i:' •¦•...•• ' u- <¦• /..!•
Q. Is your township suppled with magistrates? * A. Yes,
sir. -• i , ji t M ., • ' ,; ¦! ¦ i; < »-:
Q. What is the politics of your magistrates? A. In the.
toAvnehip where I live the magistrates and constables are repub
licans. ¦:>."* <': ,,,!',»::•,• •,,•'•,,•')
Q. Both magistrates and constables ? A. Yes, shyboth. -
Q. Do you know of any instance of a magistrate beingap-
pled to for a state's warrant for a black man, for any man, black
or white, who made the proper affidavit that he was refused ?
A. JDdondk v •¦• ' •• ' n ' •'' > ' I
Q. Did you know this man Puryear? A. Only by character;
Q. Do you know his general character? A.> I have- heard
it spoken of frequently Avithin the last year or two; ¦ < i ¦' - •/>
Q. While he was Uving did : you know whatj hie fcbaracfor
was ? A. Yes, sir, since his derangement avbs the first/ time I
ever heard of it — atiboifciiae he was deranged. f; <Y ' >
Q. What was his* reputation at the time arid what has been

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 531
his character since that time? A. I don't know that I heard
it spoken of at that time in that respect. I have heard it spo
ken of since.
Cross-Examination. By Mr. S,mith : v
Q. Have you known any acts of violence m that part of the
county towards the colored men? A. No, sir, not ihat'I
know of.
Q. Have you never seen fa person who has been whipped,
after he had been whipped ? A. I havo seen persons that were
reported to have been whipped.
Q. Have you seen them after they havo been whipped." A.
No, sir.
Q. Never examined them ? A. No, sir.
Q. Never saw any marks or scars or bruises about them ?
A. I have not.
Q. Did you see the bodies of these two men who were killed .?
A. No, sir.
Q. You never saw Puryear's body or Outlaw's body after'
tlieir death ? A. No, sir.
Q. Do you go much about that part of the country ? A.
'Not very much. I stay pretty closely at home.
Q. You spoke of hearing of things about there. Why ta it,
if you go about much, you have never seen any of these things ?
A. I don't understand what things you allude to.
Mr. GltAHAM. He says he does not go about much.
Q. I misunderstood you. You don't go about much ? A.
No, Bir. ,;
Q. You know very Uttle of. what is going on' about the
county except what you hear? A. Only what I hear.
Q. Do you know any thing about these secret Organizations ?
A. I do not. ./
' (J.' You have never' had any personal connection with them
yourself? A. No, sir. t
Q. Have you ever seen persons going about disguised ? A.

683 COffBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. Neither m the day or night ? A. No, air. .¦;¦''' ,
Q. Have you ever seen any of the disguises? A. No, sir.
Q. Do you go out at night at all, I mean in the sense of not
being at a distance ? A. I sometimes go to my neighbor's
house or some of my friends and remain until towards bed
time. Q. You don't go about except to your neighbors, to visit
thorn occasionally? A. Sometimes I maybe late in getting
home when I am out of my neighborhood.
Q. Have there been any outrages around in that neighbor
hood that you know of? A. None that I know of.
Q. In that immediate part of the country ? A. No, sir.'
Q. What portion of the county do you reside in? A. Direct
ly east of the town of Graham on the east side of Haw river.
Q. Is that the eastern part of the county ? A. It is east of
the central part — three miles.
Q. How far from Graham ? A. Three miles in a direct line
and four and a half miles by road. It is circuitous.
Q. You have to cross the river? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were you there at tlie time Outlaw was found hung ?
A. No, BIT.
Q. You did not go over ? A. No, sir.
Q. When did you first hear of it ? A. I cannot be positive
when I heard of it, whether the next day or not— -whether it
was Sunday evening or Monday, but I heard of it a day or two
afterwards. Q. You did not go over to see or inquire anything about it ?
A. No, sir.
Q. You remained at home ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. What party do you belong to ? A. The conservative
party. '
Q. You have always voted with them I A. Yea, sir, always.
Re-Direct Examination. ,,,.;,«
By Mr. Gbaham.
Q. I believe you hold a commission as justioe of the peace in
former years ? A. Yes, sir.

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. W0LDEN. 523
Q. How many years? A. I suppose five or six years.
Q. Have you also acted as a juror? A. Yesy sir.
Q. Were you also a candidate for the legislature, and in that
way also became extensively acquainted with the • country I
A. I was a candidate in 1869 for the senate in that diatriot.
JONATHAN NEWLIN, a witness called on behalf of
the Managers, being duly sworn, testifies as follows : , , f
By Mr. Gbaham. . , ,
Q. Where do you live ? A. In the county of Alamance>.
twelve miles south of Graham. ... . ,f
Q. On the Haw river ? A. Yes, sir. i. ...
Q. What is your business ? A. I am engaged in .manufac
turing cotton, selling. goods, milling, &c.
Q. And fanning ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. State what is tbe feeling in that part of the county be
tween the two races, the whites and blacks, and what was it in
1870 — the early part of the year? A. I think it was good.
Q. Were there the usual business relations between them of
employers and employer ? A. Yes, sir. ,,
Q. They were generally farmers, and sometimes mechanics ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. They got employment in these vocations from the white
people in that township ? A. Yes, sir. ,
Q. Do you know of any instance in which a man was refused
employment on account of his not voting as the white people
wanted him to? A. None. , i . <
Q. Do you know of any instance where favors wero denied
colored people when they were in distress or sickness?
A. None. , , ,,i
Q. Was or was not the black men as safe as white men in
the ordinary course of tilings ? A, Just as safe fa my opinion.
Q. Do you know of any attempt by force to control thorn in
their votes? A. None to my knowledge,. ,-. ,,,,, ),, ... ,,
Q. Do you know of any resistance to the law, either federal
or state ? — A. None sir.

634 COUBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.

:?•

Q. You are a tax-payer yourself to a considerable .extent,
being Ongaged in' manufactures to the federal' ^verjciment ^
taxes are collected, both federal and state, without resistance in
your township? A; Yes,' sir. ; ' ' •'"^ '^ '^'^ ^
Cross-Examinatiori.. '",
By Mr. Boyden.
Q. Have you knowledge of any secret political organization
inlhe county of Alamance? A. I have not.
Q. Do yon know of any outrages having been committed
upon' white persons or colored persons, within the last two or
three years ? A. I do not.
Q. Have you seen no person who has been whipped or
scourged or mutilated ? A. None to my knowledge.
Q. ' What I mean is, have you seen persons with marks or
bruises on their bodies subsequent to tlieir being whipped ? A.
I havo never seen any marks.
Q. Did Mr. Shoffner live near you ? A. He did not.
Q. He did not live in your township ? A. Ho lived just
twelve miles from me to the north-west.
Q. Do you know he has left the county ? A. I only knoAV
reports that he has left the county.
Q. Do you know what caused him to lea\-e the county. A.
I do not.
Mr. GRAHAM. The question propounded is Dot com
petent. Mr. BOYDEN. It will be competent if he knows it. '' '
Q." Have you seen any man in your county having what ia
called the kuklux disguise ? A. I never did.
Q. What political party do you act with now ? A. The
conservative. Q. You have been asked what is the state of feeling between.
the colored and white races within the last year. How Was it
the year before and the year before that ? A. It has always
been good in my neighborhood. ' j
Q. Every since the dose of the war ? A. Yes, sir.

TRIAL OF AVTLLIAM W. HOLDEN. 535
Q. You know of no one being refused labor or turned off
because he would not vote with the man who hired him ? A.
No, sir, I do noUvAc HT-X^UTaiHT
The hour of half past one having arrived, the court adjourned
to to-morrow at 11 o'clock.

68(1 COCBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.

Senate Chambeb, Fob. ^ptb^ ,1,87,}..
The COURT met at 11 o'clock, pursuant to adjournment.
Hon. Rt M. Pearson, chief justice of the supreme court, in the
chair. Proceedings were opened by proclamation made in due form
by the door-keeper.
The CLERK proceeded to call the roll of senators when tho
folloAving gentlemen were found to be present :
Messrp. Adams, Albright, Allen, Barnett, Battle, Bel.
lamy, Brogden,, Brown, Cook, Council, Cowles, Crowell,
Currie, Dargan, Eppes, Flemming, Gilmer, Graham, of Ala
mance, Graham, of Orange, Hawkins, Hyman, King, Latham,
Ledbetter, Lehman, Linney, Love, Mauney, McClammy, Mc-
Cotter, Merrimon, Morehead, Murphy, Norment, Olds, Price,
Robbins, of Davidson, Robbins, of Rowan, Skinner, Speed, Troy,
Waddoll, Warren, Whiteside, Worth-47.
Senator ROBBINS, of Davidson, moved that the reading of
the journal of' the proceedings of yesterday bo dispensed with.
The CHIEF JUSTICE put tho question on tho motion of
the senator from Davidson, and it was decided in the affirm
ative. RICHARD THOMPSON, a witness called on behalf of
th Managers being duly sworn, testified as follows :
By Mr. Graham.
Q. What is your name ? A. Richard Thompson.
Q. Whero is your homo? A. In Alamanco county.
Q. Do you know a man by the name of Henderson Coble
in that oounty ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Is lie any relation of yours ? A. Yos, sir, he is my uncle.
Q. Do yon know of Henderson being whipped ? A. Yes,
sir. ' .-
Q. Whore was it? A. At his home.

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 537
Q. Wlio whipped him ? A. Allen Paisley.
Q. Where is Allen Paisley? A He is in the penitentiary.
Q. Is Allen Paisley "a cdloredlman ?- -A) Yes, sir. >
Q. Tell hoAv he came to be whipped, how happened you to
be there? " ' "; ¦ ¦ ¦¦
Mr. BOYDEN. The witness has not stated <that 'he1 Was
there. ¦' >¦ f <' ."n •¦
Q. Were you there at tho time he was whipped ? A. Yes,
sir. •¦ ' .'¦)¦ "'• !
Q. How did you happen to be there and who was along1 be
sides Paisley and yourself? A. I was at work for Jim Foust.
Q. He is a black man? A. Yes, sir. I was sitting by the
fire at supper and was studying my spelling book, and after
awhile, in the night, Oscar Albright, Allen Paisley and Duke
Hatmaker came over and they said to me, " ThompBon I Want
you to go with me on a journey." I said, " Where ?" He said,
" I want you to go to Henderson Coble's." I said, "WhatfoH"
He said he was going to give him a whipping. I said,1 "I don't
want to go." '' '' 1" ¦ ¦ ' ' •
Mr. BOYDEN. I do not think this conversation1 is compe
tent: -¦¦ ¦' >' '¦¦' ,,--: i'
Mr. GRAHAM. We expect to show that these three men
came there and prevailed upon the witness to go With them on
an expedition to whip Coble, and anything that was said1 in ex
ecution of the design is competent. We expect further to prove
that Paisley had disguises prepared, long gowns and caps and
some paraphernalia of that kind, and went ori to execute their
purpose. " '*' "" '
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer thinks tbe
evidence is competent. ' " ¦'¦ ' '*'
Q. [By the Chiet Justice.] Begin again. -When they
came to your house and asked you to go with them what took
place ? A. Allen Paisley, Duke Hatmaker and Oscar Albright
came over to Jim Fousts and wont in. I was working at Jim's*
PaiBley saidv^ThoTOpson, I wantyou'to'go on a journey."-; I
said; " Whereto?" He said, " To Henderson Coble's.'' '¦¦ Isaid^

638 COtTBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
" What for?- . 'He said, he ' wanted to i give him a whipping.
I said, " I don't wtfni to go." He said, ** Yon must go." I said
" I wont go." Then Jim Foust drew a club and Paisley cocked
his gun and said, " If you don't, I will kill you right here." I
thought rather than be killed I would go. Then he put Al
bright and Jim Foust to guard me.
Q. To guard whom ? A. To guard me.
By Mr. Ghaham.
Q. Was it at Jim Foust'o? A. Yos, ho was guarding
mo. Thon he went down tc tho woods and got four caps.
Q. Paisley ? A. Yos, sir, ho brought thorn up there.
Mr. BOYDEN. Tho witness certainly did not go down with

Q. [By the Chief Justice.] He went down to the woods and
brought up what ? A. Some eaps.
Q. Pap&r, or what ? A. I don't know exactly what they
were ; they looked sort of white and blue. It was after night,
and I could not tell exactly.
Q. Did they cover their face and heads ? A. No, they came
right about hero, [indicating over the forehead,] and then they
had a face to gd on.
Q. A masked face ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. He had a cap or something that covered his head ? A.
Yea, sir.
Q. Could you know a man when yon saw him with one of
these eaps on and a mask, or did it hide his face ? A. It hid
his face, and you could not tell who it was.
,Q. How was Paisley dressed after he put on this cap and
mask ? A. Ho had on a sort of a white looking gown that
come down here. • It looked white-^-I Could not tell what it
Was., t .'¦, ••'•!; ; '
¦> Q. He had* on a white gown and his face' was covered ? A.
Yes, sir, it looked white. i ! ' ; ,. i
Q. Did you take it to be white J A. I thought it to be
white — I took it to be. ( ,.-.,}! '.',/'¦ | .
Q. You thought this gOAvn was a white one ? A. Yes, sir.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 689
Q. Did he have any gowns for the rest of you? A. The
other two men, Jim and Duke Hatmaker, one had an old
blanket and the other an old white petticoat, I think. ...
Q. That was Jim Foust and Duke Hatmaker. A. Yes, sir.
Q. One had a sort of gown, one a petticoat, and one a
blanket ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. How did they manago with you ? A. They made me
tako off my shirt and put it on the outside of my coat— thoy
made Albright and mo.
Q. You stripped down to tho buff and began to put your
clothes on wrong side out ? A. Yos, sir.
Q. They mado you do that ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Tho Avhole party consisted of Paisley, Duke Hatmaker,
Oscar Albright, Jim Foust and yourself ? A. Yes, sir,
Q. Thoy had but threo goAvns and they made you and Jim
Foust put on your shirts outside of your coats ? A. Yes, sir,
me and Oscar Albright put on our shirts that way.
Q. Did they have any cap for you ? A. No, sir, they did
not have but four caps and Paisley said. " What shall we do ?"'
" He said, '• Thompson has got a pair of saddle pockets, won't
they do," Jim did. Paisley said " Yes," and told him to bring
them out. Jim Avent in and brought the saddle pockets out
and gave them to Paisley, and Paisley went and . made a
cap. Duke and Jim guarded me while Paisley was gone to
make the cap. They made the cap and put it on Albright,
and then they went to an old field and stopped there, and he
said, " Now you have got to swear that you will never tell, and
" if anybody asks you, to say you don't know anything, about
" it," and that he would kill anybody that told, and that if he
did not do it, he had another company at Graham who would.
Q. He told you to never tell and swore you not to do it, and
if you did he would kill you, and if he did not somebody else
would? A. Yes, sir. .„• ...» ,,,. ,;j.j <i
Q. You started on after getting the dress, for Henry Coble'e ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Describe what took place at Henderson Coble's! A.

XtQ oocbt or impeachments.
When we went to Henderson's they knocked at the door and
made him come out of his house. They asked him if he be
longed to the league or had anything to do with the league.
Q. Who asked that? A. Paisley did. I don't know whether
he said he belonged to the league or not. I cannot say posi
tively, but he asked him about his going about and telling
stories about the county, and he said he was going to give him
a whipping for it. Then he commenced whipping him and he
made him get on his knees, and he whipped him right smart,
and he begged and commenced praying. After be got up, he
eaid, if you go a squirrel hunting don't keep your gun loaded
at night.
Q. If he went squirrel hunting he must shoot off his gun
and not keep it loaded at night ? A. Yes, sir. He told him
he would do it. Then he whipped him some more. Then he
eaid "Have you got any meat?" He 6aid "Yes." He said
" What sort ? " He said " I have got some middlings." He
said " Haven't you got some ham ? " He said " No." He told
him he might keep it then.
Q. Did he take off his clothes when he whipped him ? A.
No, sir, he was in his shirt-sleeves.
Q. He had nothing on but his shirt ? A. Yes, sir, that was
all. I forgot whether he asked him anything else or not.
Q. Was he whipped pretty severely? A. Right smart.
Then he went on from there to Uncle Tom Woods'.
Q. Let us get through there first. Did Paisley and the
rest of you go into the house ? A. No, sir, we never went into
the bonce.
Q. Did he have any conversation with Henderson's wife?
A. He had no wife •
Q. Was anybody in the house besides Henderson ! A. His
little boy as for as I know. If there was anybody else I don't
know. '
Q. Did you hear Paisley say anything about his being, a
« Ku Klux " at the time— did he ask Henderson if he had ever.

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 541
seen the " Ku Klux " before ? A. Ho did not ask Henderson
that. That was at uncle Tom Woods'.
Q. They went in you say, and made "Henderson come out,
asked him these questions and gave him a severe whipping ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Then they went to Tom Woods'. What took place then ?
A. We hallooed at the door and made him come out and 6aid,
"" Did you ever see Ku Kluxes " ? He says " No." He says,
these was " Ku Kluxes." He <sakl, " We have a hickery " — he
eaid, " tell your wife to get up and come out." .She come out
and he asked her if she had ever seen Ku Kluxes, and she said
*he had not, and he told her that these Avas Ku Kluxes. He
said, " Why haven't you got the free school [started ?" He
said " The folks had concluded not to put it up until fall, that
they wero not ready. He said, " No, you are tho cause of it,
" and if you don't start that school in three weeks avo will come
•"down and whip you;" and he eaid if they don't finish that
•church they intended to burn it up.
Q. Were the peoplo building a meeting house in tlie neigh
borhood at tlie time ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. The colored peoplo? A. Yes, sir. Ho told him he
iniiBt start a colored folks' bcIicoI and a white folks' school.
Q. Woods Baid the reason why they did not start the school
was because they were not quite ready, and Paisley Bald If
they did not commence It In throe weeks he would come down
and whip him, nnd if ho did not finish tho church ho would
bum it up? A. Yos, sir.
Q. Whero did they go thon ? A. To Monroe M. Frooland's.
Q. A colored man ? A. Yes, sir. They went and hallooed
and told him to come out. Undo Monroe Freeland, he got out
ot bed. They said "What aro you doing? " lie said that ho
was doing nothing only putting on his pants, and would lie
out. He came out and Paisley said " Didn't you and Hinton
¦"Roberts steal a bull sometime ago ?" He said no, he didn't
but that they wero accused of it.
Q. Is Hinton Roberts a black man ? A. No, sir, he is a
36

542 OOCBT OF IMPEACHMENTS. .
white mam He said they were accused of it bnt they/ did not
do it. Then Paisley said he was going to give him a whipping,
and turned in and commenced whipping him. He called on
all the fellows around to go in and give him five licks apiece, but
they wouldn't do it. He turned in and went to whipping him
himself. Q. Paisley ? A. Yes, sir. He whipped— I don't know how
much but he whipped him right smart. After he had whipped
him he asked where his son Mike was. He said he was up
stairs in bed. He mado Mike come doAvn. lie asked him
something about hip going to soe a girl In the neighborhood ;
that he would havo to hurry up and marry her or ho would
whip him. Thon he whipped Mike right smart. He said that
Mike had told stories on him.
Q. Did he do anything more that night? A. Yes, sir.
When we left uncle Tom Woods' avo wont down to his son-in-
laAv's. He and uncle Tom Woods' son-in-laiv had had some fall
ing out. Ills son-in-law was not in ; and he told his wife that
he was going to leave a hickory to whip him with.
Q. Nothing else done that night ? A. Then Ave went back
to the old field close to Jim Foust's, when We left and went into
the woods, and after we had pulled off the goAvns I do not
knoAV what he did with them, but we staid there and he told
Jim to go to the house and see if there was anybody there, he
Avas to AA'histle. We took the clothes off but Avhether he took
them in the woods or not I don't know.
Q. Did you see anything more of him that night? A.
No, Bir.
Q. Were you taken up about this ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. How was that done, by a constable or officer? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Who took you ? A. Uncle Henderson Coble and Monroe
Freeland 
Q. I mean who took you up and carried you before the
court? A. Mr. John Ray.
Q.. Is he a constable? A. Yes, sir.

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 543
Q. What justice of the peace were you carried before ? A.
Mrt Wylie Neese and Seymour Olds.
Q. They were justices of the peace? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were you examined and then put in the jail ? A. Yes,
sir. Q. And kept there until court ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And then you were sentenced by the judge to the peni
tentiary? A. Yes, sir.
Q. The men that wero with you that night were all colored
men ? A, Yes, sir.
Q. And the mon you whipped and whose houses you wont
to wore those of colored people ? A. Yos, sir.
Q. What timo was this, Dick i A. When this whipping
took place?
Q. Yes? A. It was in February, somewhere along thore ;
I don't know exactly what time it was.
Q. February ot last year ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. When were you taken up — how long afterwards ? A.
We were taken up — this was done on Friday night, and
they took us up on Saturday, before twelve o'clock.
Q. How did they happen to take you up— did Henderson
Coble have it done ? A. Yea, sir, he and Uncle Monroe Fre
land came there and had us taken up, as far as I know.
Q. When you Avere brought before the 'squires was Hender
son there ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. He was examined as a witness ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. After they had heard what he swore to about it they sent
you to jail ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. You whipped how many that night ? A. Three.
Q. Paisley did all the whipping himself? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Your party consisted of five ? A. Yes, sir,
Q. That is, there was Paisley, Hatmaker, Albright, Jim
Foust and yourself ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Are they all in the penitentiary now % A. No, Jim and
Duke run away.

544 COOBT OF rMPEACHMENTS.
Q. All that did riot get away are in ' the penitentiary / ' A.
Yes, sir.
Q. Did anybody attempt to prevent you from being arrested
by the constable ? A. No, not as I know of.
Q. Did any company gather to prevent the constable from
taking you before the magistrate or to jail afterwards ? A. No,
sir, not as I knoAV of.
Q. What is Paisley's calling — what is his business ? A. He
followed teaching school and preaching.
Q. Was he going to teach that free school in that neighbor
hood which he Avanted to have started so quickly ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. He is iioav in the penitentiary ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know Iioav those men A'oted — Paisley, Hatmaker
and the other men of the company ?
Mr. BOYDEN. Do you mean Avhether he saw them cast
their votes ? I insist that the Avitness should speak of his own
knowledge? A. I do not know how they A'oted. I heard
them saA', but did not see it myself.
Q. Did they belong to the league ? A. Paisley said he did.
Mr. BOYDEN. That is clearly inadmissible.
Q. I do not care about Avhat ho said. Did you ever see him
In a league meeting? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you over see him In the league, marching about in
their processions ? A. I BaAV him at a big dinner and marching
about there.
Q. What big dinner was that ? A. It Avas in Graham.
Q. You siiav them marching ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. What thoy called tho "Loyal League?" A. I forget
now what leaguo they called it.
Q. It Avas a league ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. All black peoplo, or some white? A. Some black and
some white. '
Q. Did they wear any sort of badges or marks of any kind?
A. I forget whether they did or not. I think some of them
had some ribbons tied in tlieir coats.

TBIALOF WILLIAM W- HOLDEN. 545
Q. Was Paisley at the dinner? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And he was marching with them ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did he wear a ribbon ? A. Yes, sir, he had on a ribbon.
Q. How was it with Jim Foust ? A. I don't know how it
is about him. I never saw him at one of these.
Q. Was Oscar Albright? A. Not as I know of.
Q. This other man, Hatmaker, was he there ? A. I never
saw him there.
Cross-Examination. By Mr. Boyden.
Q. What is your name ? A. Richard Thompson.
Q. How old are you 1 A. I think I am going on twenty.
Q. Where do you live ? A. I live in Alamance county.
Q. With whom do you live ? A. I used to live before I
was taken up Avith a man named William Thompson.
Q. With whom do you live now ? A. I am staying in the
penitentiary. Q. Before you went there with whom did you live? A.
With William Thompson.
Q. When did you go to the penitentiary. A. I went thero
in June last.
Q. You liA'ed Avith William Thompson at the time you went
out this night you have been a talking about ? A. Not at that
time, I was staying with Jim Foust.
Q. Jim Foust is a colored man ? A. Yos, sir.
Q. And Duko Hatmaker? A. Yos, sir.
Q. Thoy Avoro all colorod mon that went along .that night?
A. Yos, sir.
Q. Whon did you first toll this story you have been telling
hero to-day. A. I told the samo thing last year.
Q. Who was tho first person you told it to ? A. I think Mr.
MoAdam was the first man.
Q. How did you happen to tell him ? A. He had me to tell
it to him there at the time of the court / :
Q. You told him at the time yon were tried ? A. Yes, sir.

546 COUNT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. That was the first time yon told it? A. That is the
first time. I stated it all over to htm.
Q. Was he your oounsel — did you employ him as a laAvyer ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And you told him of it ? A. Yes, sir, I told him of it.
Q. Who did you next tell of it? A. I told the jailor some
part of it, and to Mr. Thompson when he came up there.
Q. Which party does Mr. Mo Adam belong to ? Is he a dem
ocrat or republican? A. I do not know which party he be*
longs to.
Q. Do you know whether Mr. Thompson belongs to $he
republican or the democratic party ? A. I do not know which
he belongs to.
Q. Have you ever sworn to this matter before? A. Yes,
sir. Q. Where were you sworn ? A I was sworn at Graham.
Q. Before whom were you sworn? A. I do not know who
the man was who swore me.
Q. Where were you when you made oath— at whose house
or whose room ? A. I was sworn in the court house.
Q. How happened you to swear there — were you made a
witness in that trial ? A. Yes, sir, they took us for state wit
nesses at the court.
Q. Were you in the penitentiary then, when you took your
oath? A. No, sir.
Q. Had you been in the penitentiary before you were sworn ?
A. No, sir.
Q. You say they made a state's witness of you? A. Yes,
sir, that is what they told me, they made a state's witness.
Q. Did you put your hand on the Bible and swear ? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. Then you told the whole story? A. Yes, sir, I told
what I knew about it. , • . ¦ ¦ . ¦ i • >
Q. Have you ever been sworn about it at any other time
before today, since that? • A< Yes, sir, I think they took us
for -witnesses at Mr. Neese's.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 547
Q. What did you swear to there-r-did you deny it before
him? A. We denied it before him. i
Q. You swore to a lie about it, then ? A. They took us— —
Q. You swore to a lie about it, did you ? A. No, sir ; they
had witnesses  , . *
Q; Answer my question-^-did you ewear to a lie then ? You
say you were sworn. Did you tell a lie about it ? A.I denied
it— I said I didn't
Q. Was not that a lie t
Mr. Manager SPARROW. The witness means to say that
they had an examination, not that he was sworn. •¦
Mr. BOYDEN. He means to say no such thing. He says
he was sworn oa the Bible.
By the Chief Justice.
Q. Did you put your hand on the Bible before Justice Neese f
A. Yes, sir, they had us put our hands on the Bible. . "
Q. Mr. Boyden asks you if you did not deny having been
along with this party, whether you told the truth. A. We
denied it.
By Mr. Bovden [resuming.]
Q. You all swore to a He ? A. I just  •
Q. Just answer it right out. You all swore to a lie ? A. I
do not know whether we ewore to a lie ; we told them we
didn't do it ?
Q. You do not know whether that was a lie or not ? A.
Yes, sir, we told him a story.
Q. I ask you if you were ever sworn at any time before to
day wheti you gave a statement about the matter, and when you
did aot tell a lie, but told how it was ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Where was that ? A. We told it at the court house.
Q. At what court house ? A. At Graham, /
Q. When 9 A. Last year. > <
. Q. What time I A. It was in June. - '
Q. Were you sworn' then? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Who swore yon? A. I don't know who it was swore
me.

548 OOCTTT or ntPBACHMENTSV '
Q. Diid you put your hand on the bible ? •' A. Yes, sfr, •'
Q. And you were sworn ? A. Yes, sir. ''
Q. WJiere were you in the court house? A. Up In th»
COUrthoUSe. .';.¦¦¦' ;.' .
Q. In the court room ? A. Yes, sir. ;
Q. What was going on — how happened you to be sworn
then — who was on trial ? A. Me and Adam Paisley and Oscar
Albright. Q. They swore you in your own cause did they ? A. Yes,
err, I reckon that is the way it was done.
Q. They made you tell all about it ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And you were convicted and sent to the penitentiary.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And that was in Alamance ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. That such a thing was done? A. Yes, sir-
Q. No mistake about that ? A. None at all.
Q. Don't misunderstand me. I don't want to get you in
any difficulty. ¦ You say you were on trial in the superior
court ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. You were indicted and tried for whipping that man %
A. Yes, sir. *
Q. And you say that when you were on trial you were called
up and made to put your hand on the Bible ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And you were sworn to tell the truth ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And you told it then to the jury and court that wero
trying you ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. No mistake about that ? A. Yos, sir, I told it there in
oourt. »
Q. And under oath ? A. Yes, sir. >
Q. Upon that they convicted you and sent you to the pen
itentiary? A. Yes, sir. .,.„,.(,
Q. Well, have you ever told it any other time*— have you
ever boon sworn in Raleigh about it before today— oh don't
look over there, look here and tell us. Have you evor been
sworn in ILalclgh before' to-day %• A. I never swore- in Raleigh
that I know ot

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W.' HOLDEN. 54&
Q. Did you ever tell this story since you have been in the
penitentiary ? A. Yes, sir, I have told some part of it since I
have been in the penitentiary. ' •• <•••¦*<
• Q. Who did you tell ? A. Mr. Thompson. ', '¦ • •
Q. Why did you tell Mr. Thompson ? A. I told it to him
directly after I got into the penitentiary. ¦ ' "
Q. How did you happen to tell him ? A. He called me rip
to the office and asked me something about it.
Q. That was after you had sworn to it in court at Alamance t
A. Yes, sir, that was after I had been convicted and put in the
penitentiary. Q. Have you ever told anybody else besides Mr. Thompson
since you have been in the penitentiary ? A. Yes, sir, I havo
told some men about it to-day. '
Q. Have*you not told them before to-day? A. Not as I"
know of.
Q. Let us go back to that night. What night was it that
you went on this expedition. A. I think it was on a Friday
night. Q. What time of the year ? A. In June. /
Q. What time in June? A. When we went out a whip
ping — that was about this time last year. I think it Was. ' I
did not understand your question.
Q. What sort of a night was it ? A. There was snow on tho
ground. Q. Was it a clear night or cloudy ? A. Tho moon was
shining. I think it was right clear. '
Q. Can you toll what day in February it wsb ? A. No, sir.
Q. You do not recollect the day ? A. No, sir;
Q. But it was a Friday night you say? A. Yes, sir, it was
a Friday night when I was taken up. > >
Q. I am not asking you when you wore taken up.' I n»k
yon what night it was you started out to whip these persons.
A. That was on Friday night. - ,,! i,i\ :;<,.; i,,
Q. You were not taken up that night t A. No, aii», we wero
taken upon Saturday. \r •'. . ! A

550 >«0UET OS IMPEACHMENTS, t
Q. Ypu. cannot tell whether it was in the middle of Feb
ruary or past the middle of February ? A. No, sir, I cannot
tell that for I don't know. ¦>¦ "*"<'<• <v "
Q. But you recollect there was snow on the ground? A.
Yes, sir. ; . ;. r/, <..»
Q. How deep waa the snow t A. A little light snow.
' Q. Where did they find yon that night ? A. At Jim Foust's.
Q. What were you doing there ? A, I was helping them
clear new ground.
Q. What time in the night did they oome there? A. I
don't know exaotly what time in the night. It was a while
after supper — right smart in the night after supper.
Q. Had you been to bed ? A. No, sir. '
Q. You had not been to bod ? A. No, sir. ' ¦
Q. Who was in the house when they came ? A. Me and
Jim and his wife. \ ;
Q. Jim who? A. Jim Foust. < ' •
Q. And his wife? A. Yes, sir. > '•'
Q. Did they come in all of them ? A. Yes, sir. •¦'¦ •
Q. Who camo in ? A. Allen Paisley, Oscar Albright and
Duke Hatmaker came in. ' ! ' .
Q. Did they take seats — did they sit down there and talk ?
A. No, sir, they did not sit down ; they just came in and stood
up. ,'
Q. What did they say when they came in ? A. They came
and went to talking to Jim a little bit. Then he said "Thomp-
" son, I want you to go Avith me on a journey to-night ?" I said
" Where to ?" He said, " I want you to go to Henderson
« Cobles." . '¦ v
Q. Henderson Coble was a relation of yours ? A. He was
an uncle. I said "What for ? " He said he was to whip' him.
Q. You 'did not have any occasion to go and whip your
uncle? A. No, sir; I didn't want to go. I told him I didn't
want to go. : < He said 1 should. Then Jim and Duke draWed
clubs on m&< '-^* w* '¦ ' *,!i •• "' ' • • . '<• • - ,,;.'¦ > > % ^.t t»-
Q. Jim who? A. Jim Foust and Duke Hatmaker.
Q. Drew clubs on you ? A. Yes, sir.

TKIAL OF WILLIAM W; HOLDEN. 551
Q. What sort of clubs ? A. -They had great big knots —
some kind of little clubs grubbed out of the ground, and had
roots on about as big as my first or a little bigger. I "t '
Q. They raised them ? A.JYes, sir; i i , h.
Q. And threatened to beat you ? A. Yes, sir. They said
they would kill mo— and Paisley cocked his gun-*-if I didn't
go. I thought ratlier than be killed it would be best for me
to go. . /
Q. And help to whip your undo ? A. Yes, sir, and I—
Q. What preparation did you make for starting? A. Then
Paisley put Jim and Duke there to guard me, and he goes
down to the woods and got some caps.
Q. They guarded you right there at the house ? A; Yes, sir.
Q. Were you in the house or ont of tho house? > Aj They
kept me in the house. - '
Q. Did they tako seats there in the house ? A. No, sir, they
stood at the door. The house didn't have but one door to it.
Q. How long was this man gone ? A. He was gone right
smart — I don't know exactly how long.
Q. An hour or two ? A. I don't think — I think he was gone
about a half hour, I reckon. '
Q. That is your notion about it. He came back / A. Yes,
sir, he came back. .! - • /
Q. And came in the house / A. Yes, 6ir. .<n
Q. What did he bring in / A. Four caps. •¦ />•¦• ,i'
Q. What sort of looking things were they? A* They
looked sort of white and sort of blue — that is tho way they
looked to me. -• • ., • < <<
Q. Which did they have the most of, white or blue? A. >I
did not notice particularly about that. I cannot tell which was
the most •'•¦ >> i ; <<
. Q. Describe what sort of things these caps were; and how
they looked ? . A. ' They looked mighty, bad, . . / < A ' . i
• Q. Tell us how they looked bad? What was there except
being a cap ? A. They had a little tassel on the top. m< > M<i':

652 . „ COCBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.:
Q. What, horns-rris that the way they were I . ,A.,,No, sir) I
cannot saythey looked like horns, it was a tassel. - » , a ¦», v
Q. How long? A. That long, [indicating about six inches],
Q. Did they stand up or did they fall- down,? .A; They
stood up. ; i m !•!/. ,\<
,Q. How many did they have ? A. Four of them, ., ,
Q. And they looked mighty bad ? A. Yes, sir., •¦•;¦¦'! . .
Q. Did they scare you any ? A. No, sir, I wasn't any Beared
about the cap.
Q. What did they do with these caps ? A. Then he told
Jim he didn't have a cap — they lacked one. He said, "Thomp
son has an old pair of saddle pockets, won't they do ?" t Pais
ley said " Yes," and told him to go and get it.
Q. Who. went and got the saddle pockets? A. JimfFoust.
Q. How long was he gone ? A. He was not gone more than
two or three minutes. 1 1 • >
Q. And he brought back the saddle pockets ? A. Yes, sir
he brought them to Allen Paisley and Paisley went and made
a cap, and Jim and Duke guarded when he made it. .
Q. What color was the saddle pockets? A. Red. .<,>
Q. What did they do with the saddle pocket cap ? A. He
put it on Albright. ; . < »
Q. What was done with the other caps ? A. They put the
caps on all of us. , >
Q. Did you put one on ? Ho put it on for me. /. >
Q. You wouldn't put it on? A. No, sir, I didn't want it
on but he made me.
Q. What else was put on ? A. He made us pull out'our
shirts and put on over our clothes. < ., ,
Q. Right before Foust's wife— she was there ? A. She was
there* ¦, ,<
Q. And ehe saAv it put ou ? A. Yes, sir.  j . n
Q. After you got your shirts on outside of your .coat, and
your caps and they got on their white gowns— first tell* us
who had tho ...twite, gowns? i A. Paisley had a long gown
of some kind that hung doAvn to about here [indicating],

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 658
Jim had a blanket, and Duke had something like apettiooat.
Q. How did he wear it? A. He put it on over his head
and it come down. !•„?¦!¦. iij t.i
Q. How low did it come down ? A. I think it come down
to about here [indicating.] -,.«; ...
Q. How did he keep it about his neck ? A. He fastened it
some how around there. .< ,\ ,,-,u <\
Q. When you got equipped what was then said? A. We
went up in the old field. >• ¦.,• ,i,
Q. Whose orders were you under? Who was captain? —
A. Paisley. . « ,, . , i;
Q. He ordered you to march up to the old field ? ¦ A. Yes,
sir. , ,.
Q. How far was the o]d field from there? A. I reokon
some two hundred yards from the house.
Q. When you got to the old field what was then done ? —
A. He said he waa going to make laws. ,< , i »
Q. What laAvs did he make? A. He told us that we must
never tell  : • : /
Q. The first law Avas that you were never to tell, no matter
what happened ? A. Yes, sir. : ... i" ¦»
Q. Tell us the next law? A. He said—— , >
Mr. GRAHAM . Will the counsel let the Avitness go on and
complete his answers without interrupting him before he gets
to the end of the sentence.
Mr. BOYDEN. I think I have a right to cross-examine
the witness in this way. < , ¦ f
Mr. GRAHAM. I think the witness is entitled to be ex
amined fairly and without the frequent interruptions to throw
hlin off his self-possession. n, , j. ,; .
Mr. BOYDEN. I am willing that the witness shall state
all the laws that wore made. > ' i • U/
"¦' Q. Go on. A. He said that if we evor-itold ho would
kill us. -  •¦< '¦¦"¦'•¦"
Q. You' have stated that before, What next? any thing

554 OOTOT OF 1MPEACHMBNTS.
more / A. He aaid if he did not get us there' was another
company over in Graham that would do it. \ ! ••
Q. Did he tell you who they were/ A. No, sir, he never
told us who they were.
Q. After this conversation what then / A. Then he went
down to Uncle Henderson's.
Q. How far was Henderson Coble's from there/ A. I
reckon it was a Uttle over half a mile.
Q. You went there did you / A. Yes, sir.
Q. When you got there what took place / A. He knocked
at the door and made him get up.
Q. Did you go in, any of you / A. No, sir.
Q. What was said when you knocked at the door / A. I
forget now exactly what was said, b.ut he knocked at the door
and called him ont.
Q. Who called him out / A. Paisley.
Q. What did he say he wanted / A. He said he was going
to give him a whipping /
Q. He told him that before he came out/ A. No, sir, after
he came out.
Q. What did he say before he came out; — why did he tell
him he wanted him to come out/ A. He told him to come
out there after he knocked at the door.
Q. He did not tell him what he wanted / A. Not until
after he had got out. Then he told him he was going to whip
him. Q. How long after he told him before he came out / A.
He never told him what he was going to do until after he
came out.
Q. You do not understand me. I ask you how long it was
after he told him to come out before he did come out / A. It
was not long. I don't reckon it was more than two minutes.
Q. Who opened the door? A. Uncle Henderson opened
the door.
Q, Yon did not open the door at all ? A. No^ sir* < v

TRIAL OF WILLIAM VT. HOLDEN. 655
Q. As soon as he stepped out what was done? I A. He com
menced whipping him. • ¦ • ..;••<',.?'.
Q. Did they catch hold of him ? A. I don't know whether
they took hold of him or not. ¦¦>¦ <v i .
Q. You don't recollect anybody taking hold of him, but you
recollect they whipped him? A. Yes, sir, I did not see them
take hold of him. I >
Q. Did they whip him very severely? A. Yes, sir, thoy
made him beg and pray mightily.
Q. Did ho take it without being held — didn't he offer to run
away, or did ho just stand and tako it? A. He got down on,
his knees. Ho didn't try to get away.
Q. He just stood and took it? A. Yes, sir. '¦ ,»
Q. Then he commenced to pray mightily ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. How many licks do you think you gave him ? A. I
don't know, I can't say. '
The CHIEF JUSTICE. You have no right to put the
question in that way.
Q. I do not mean you — how many were given him ? A. I
don't know how many there were.
Q. You didn't whip him at all / A. No, sir.
Q. Nobody but one man ? A. Nobody but Paisley.
Q. What after that/ A. After they whipped him once
they asked him if he didn't belong to the league.
Q. What did he say / A. I don't know whether he said
he belonged to it or not. I never understood what he said.
Q. You didn't hear his answer ? A. No, sir.
Q. Then did Paisley whip him again? A. Yes, sir, he
whipped him again, and asked him about his going about and
telling stories over the country.
Q. Did he tell what stories? A, He said he told some
stories about him. -v" '
Q. He didn't tell what they were? A. Not as I heard of,
he did not. '" ' '
Q. After you had been whipping ' him What 'did they do ?
A. After he whipped him for going over the country and tel-

556 OOTJET OF IMPEACHMENTS.
ling stories, he asked him if he had got any meat. He eaid
yes he had got some middlings. He said, " Have you got any
ham ?" He said " No," then he said " You can keep that then."
Q. Did he know who was whipping him — did he say he
knew you ? A. He said at the trial he knew us.
Q. I mean that night ? A. I never heard him say that he
knoAV us that night.
Q. He did not profess to know any of you that night ? A.
He did not say he did.
Q. What next? A. They made him go to bed.
Q. Did you go in the house all of you ? A. No sir, I didn't
go in the house — there didn't any of us. They told him that
he had to go to bed. I heard the bed rattling, and I allowed
lie had gone to bed.
Q. Then what ? A. Ho goes on to Uncle Tom Woods'.
Q. Who goes ? A. Paisley, and he takes us to Uncle Tom
Woods'. Q. How far is Tom Woods' from that place? A. I don't
knoAV exactly how far it was.
Q. State as near as you can. A. I reckon about a quarter
of a mile.
Q. What time in the night do you think it was when you
got to Tom Woods' ?* A. I don't know — I cannot tell what
time it was. I think it was pretty late in the night.
Q. What do you mean by pretty late, eleven or twelve
o'clock ? A. I think it was getting about bedtime.
Q. You think it was about getting towards bedtime ? A.
Yes, sir, I think so.
Q. Early bedtime or late ? A. Late— about eleven o'clock.
Q. How long did you stay at Tom Woods' ? A. I don't
know, we didn't stay very long.
Q. When you got there Avhat was done? A. He went to
the house and woke up Tom Woods and made him get up and
come to the door.
Q. How did you make him get up ? A. They just called
<J. What did they do ? A. They called him to come to the

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 557
door. He came to the door and stood at the door and looked
at me.
Q. He came and opened the door and looked at you ? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. What'then ? A. Then ho asked if he ever saw the " Ku
Kluxes." He said " No." He said these was « Ku Kluxes."
Q. Who said that? A. Paisley.
Q. lie said they Avere Ku Klux ? A. Yes, sir. He said he
never saw them before.
Q. He asked Avhere his Avife was? A. lie said she was in
bed. He told him to have her get up and see the Ku Kluxes.
Q. Did he go in ? A. No, sir, he didn't go in the housfe.
Q. He did not go and tell his Avife ? A. lie 6tood at 'the
door and told her.
Q. To come ont? A. Yes, sir, and when she came out tho
door he asked her did she ever sec the Ku Kluxes before.
Q. What did she say ? A. She said she had neA'er seen
them before.
Q. Then Avhat? A. Then he said these was Ku Kluxes.
Q. Then he wanted to know of Tom Woods why' he had not
got that free school etnrted? A. He said, tho folks concluded
not to start the school till fall.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. It is hardly necessary to have him
tell over the story, lie is telling it the same way.
Mr. BOYDEN. I desire, .Mr. Chief Justice, to see if he can
tell it twice in the same Avay. I think wo have a right to
examine him in that way. It may be a mado up story. It is
in that view I am asking the questions.
Q. What did you do then and Avhat did ho say after that ?
A. He said that the folks that Avere starting tho school rather
wait until fall. He said to Uncle Tom, no he was the occa
sion of it.
Q. Of thejschool not starting ? A. Yes, sir, he told Uncle
Tom that he was the occasion of not starting tho school. He
was the school committee.
Q. He was the school committee ? A. Yes, sir, Undo Tom
37

558 COUBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
was. He said Uncle Tom was the school committee and ho
had start the school in tliree weeks, if he did not he Avould
give him a whipping. I do notknoAV Avhether Uncle Tom said
lie Avould or not. Then ho said he must have that meeting
house there In tAVO or three Aveeks. He told him he must havo
u white folks' school and a colored folks' school, and then avo
bid him good night and wont down to Undo Monroo Froeland'a
und knocked nt tho door of Undo Monroe's.
Q. Did you Avhlp him ? A. Yes, sir, ho whipped him.
Q. IIoav much did ho Avhlp him i A. I don't know Iioav
much lie Avhipped him.
Q. I moan tho party, all these mon I A. IIo wanted us to
give him five licks apiece and avo would not do it, and ho
Avhipped him himself.
Q. Did any body strike a lick ? A. I shav nobody but him.
Q. Did they nil refuse? A. All refused but Paisley.
Q. He Avas the man who did all tho AA'hipping? A. Yes,
sir, he did the AA'hipping.
Q. He requested them to give h'nn five lashes apiece, and
they would not do it / A. Yes, sir.
Q. You say that/ A. No, sir, they Avould not whip him —
none but Paisley.
Q. Did they give him a severe whipping / A. Yes, sir, I
think they did.
Q. Was it on his bare back / A. No, sir, on the shirt.
Q. Did the blood run / A- No, sir, I did not see any blood.
If it did run I did not know it,
Q. How many lashes do you suppose Paisley gave him / — a
hundred / A. I don't reckon he gave him as much.
Q. Seventy-five, do you think / A- I don't know. lean-
not tell exactly.
Q: State it as near as you can / A. He gave him a dozen
licks, about that.
Q. That is all you think he gave him / A. I think all, but
I cannot 6ay for certain.

TRIAL' OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 550
Q. What time was it you went there at this place / A. I
don't know what time of the night it was.
Q. State m near as you can— giA'o your best judgment /
A. As far ns I can gueBS it was pretty lato in the night—
everybody Avns gone to bod.
Q. What hour of tho night do you think, about ? A. Twolvo
or ono o'clock, I reckon.
Q. Where did you go thon? A. Wo never wont any
whero oIho, 1 lo whipped Undo Monroe because ho said ho and
3 linton Itoburts had Htolo a bull. Ho said thoy wore aooiiBod
but thoy did not do It. Thon ho eallcd his son down from the
loft and ho said ho had beon tolling somo Btorioa about him and
he turned in and Avhipped his son.
Q. How many Lashes did Paisley give him? A. I don't
know exactly Iioav many.
Q. IIoav old a boy Avas Miko ? A. I reckon about nineteen
years. Q. What did they Avhip hiin for? A. He said that he had
been telling stories on him, then he told him there Avas some
young lady that ho must marry or ho Avould whip him again.
Q. That he must marry — they whipped him to mako him
marry ? A. No, because he told stories on him.
Q. And they told him ho must marry a certain girl ? A.
Yes, sii\
Q. What did you do then ? A. We then went up back to
Uncle Tom Woods' son-in-laAv's house.
Q. What time was it you got to Tom Woods' house? A, I
don't knoAV what time it A\-as — I guess it was pretty late.
Q. Getting to be pretty near daylight? A. It Avas not thnt
late. •
Q. What o'clock do you think it was /A.I reckon it aa-hs
after midnight.
Q. You think it was midnight then / A. It was after mid
night. Q. How long after/ A. I don't know exactly how long
it waa,

560 COUBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. Did you quit after you went to Woods' / A. We got
through and then went doAvn to his son-in-law's.
Q. What is his name / A. John Woods.
Q. What time do you think it was when you got there / A.
I don't know, I was not studying much about tho time. I was
uneasy being about among these folks.
Q. What did you do / A. He Avent into the house — Paisley
Aventinto Tom's son-in-law's house — inside, if I am not mistaken.
Q. Did any of the rest go in / A. I don't think any one
went in but Paisley ; I think he Avent in and he asked for
Tom's son-in-laAv, and they said he Avas not there.
Q. What Avas his name / A. John Woods. She said he
was over to Mr. Curtis'.
Q. Who did you ask for? A. For Tom's son-iu-law.
Q. Is he a son of Tom Words ? A. A son-in-law.
Q. Was he not the son of Tom Woods ? A. The son-in-law ;
he said he was not there ; he left a hickory and told her that it
was to Avhip him with.
Q. Whero did you go then ? A. We Avent to tho old field,
not far from Jim Foust's, nnd took off tho clothes.
Q. That ended tho businoss? A. Ho took off his clothes
and told Jim to go to his houso, and that if nnybody Avas there
he must give a Avhistlo.
Q. Ho camo back in tho field ? A. Ho Avhistled — that is ho
said he whiatlod, but I nover heard him Avhistlo.
Q. Yon did not hear him whistle? A. No, sir.
Q. Then Avhut Avas dono '( A. Thon avo Avent to tho houso.
Q. Whose house ? A. Jim's houso.
Q. Did you all go in ? A. No, sir.
• Q. Who didn't go in?. A. Paisley.
Q. Who did? A. Me and Jim Avent in.
Q. Who did you find in there ? A. The rest of them went
off home.
Q. Who did you find there when you went in ? A. Nobody
but his wife.
Q. Nobody else ?, A. No, sir.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 561
Q. Jim had not gone in at all ? A. Jjm went in, but Pais
ley, Albright and Duko went off, I reckon they went off home.
Q. What time was it when you broke up ? A. I don't know
what timo it Avas.
Q. Have you ever been threatened by anybody if you didn't
SAvear to this story that you havo told ? A. No, sir, nobody
but Paisley.
Q. But ho did not threaten you to make you tell the story ?
A. No, sir, he said not to tell it.
Q. He didn't AA'ant you to tell it ? A. No, sir.
Q. Has anybody threatened you what they would do if you
did not tell it? A. No, sir, nobody has threatened me if I
didn't tell as I know of.
Re-Direct Examination..
By Me. Gkaham.
Q. Did you have any idea of being examined before last
night or this morning ? A. No, sir.
Q. Nobody ever told you you Avould bo called upon ? A.
No, sir, tho commissary told mo ho Avas going to bring me to
toAvn. Q. And you told nothing about this to anybody until you
camo to see soino gentlemen in tho room at the capitol. A.
Yes, sir.
Q. At tho timo Woods, you say, Avas tho committeeman of
that township or district? A. Yos, sir, ho was the school com
mittee Q. Was thero any other officer whipped that night? A.
Not as I know of.
Q. He Avas tho only man having a commission who was
whipped that night ? A. Thoy nover whipped Tom Woods.
Re- Cross-Examination.
Q. Do you know of any Ku Klux going abqut in tlie coun
ty — did you ever seo any body going about in disguise ? A.
No, sir.
Q. You never saw any body going about with this disguise
only the night you went out ? A. No, sir, I never saw any.

502 COUBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. Do you know of any body having been whipped except
those you whipped that night— did you see any body that had
been whipped ? - A. No, sir, I have not seen any body who
had beon Avhipped.
Re-Direct Examination.
By Mr. Graham.
Oj. You say that Tom Woods Avas a school commissioner
and aviih not whipped, but was threatened by Paisley unless ho
started tho school within three weeks, ho would bo whippod ?
A. Yos, sir.
Q. Paisley expected to bo tho toaehor of tho school ? A.
Yes, sir.
Oj. When you Avoro takon up and triod boforo theso two
justices, Neere and Seymour Holt, they asked you whother you
Avcro guilty or not ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. You Avero not BAVorn Avoro you — they did not make you
put your hand on the Bible ? A. No, not as I recollect of — if
the)' did I forget about it.
Q. [By the Chief Justice.] You don't know Avhether you
put your hand on tho book that time or not ? A. No, sir, I
don't know ns I did now. If I did I havo forgotten it.
Mr. GRAHAM. Tho Avitness on tho cross-examination
was hurried on by tho questions bo that ho may very well
havo been confused.
Q. When you Avere brought before the court, who was tho
judgo? A. Mr. Tourgee
Q. Do you know Iioav Mr. Tourgee voted? A. I do not.
Q. It Avas before him that you Avent and yon did evory thing
under the direction of Mr. McAdam who was your lawyer ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You did what he requested you to do ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. When ypu mado your statement to the court AA-as not
this the way ? — — \
The CHIEF JUSTICE. Tho counsel has no right to lead
tho witness.

TBIAL OF AVILLIAM AV. nOLDEN. 563
Mr. GRAHAM. I don't desire to do it, but the witness is
a simple-minded boy and it is difficult
Q. Did you do any thing except what Mr. McAdam told
you to do ?
Mr. BOYDEN. Wo object to the question as leading.
A. Thoy mado us go ou to toll and sworn us to toll tho truth.
By tho Cuii'iK Jiwnw.
Q. H woro you to toll tho Avholo truth. A. Yes, sir.
IJ. Did you thoro toll Avhat you told horo to day? A. Yob,
sir. By Mr. Graham [resinning.]
Q. Wore you and Paisley and Albright all carried into court
before that day? A. Yes, sir.
Q. That is the only place Avhere y«>u made any publio state
ment about it ? A. Yes, Hir.
Q. It AA'as done in court ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Who called upon you to make any statement about iti —
did Mr. McAdam put you fonvard? A. Yes, sir.
Mr. BOYDEN. I object to the question as leading
Mr. GRAHAM, I really do not knoAV how to examine n
simple man like he is Avithout putting the questions in that
form. The CHIEF JUSTICE. I knoAV it is very difficult but tho
rule requires that you shall not ask your oavh Avitness a lead
ing question.
Q. Were you called upon to mako a statement? i. Yes,
sir. • Q. Do you Jciioav Avhether you were sworn about it or not,
or Avhether you Avere allowed to make a statement without
putting your hand on the book and swearing. | To the court.]
There are gentlemen hero Avho knoAV he was not sworn.
Mr. BOYDEN. You need not tell him that.
Q. You say you made a statement in the- presence of the
judge ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And the judge sent you and Paisley and Albright to
the penitentiary ? A. Yea, sir.

564 COTJBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Senator JOHN A. GILMER, a witness called on behalf of
the Managers, being duly sworn, testified as follows :
By Mk. Meekimon.
Q. Have you heard the witness Thompson who was last ex
amined. A. Yes, sir.
Q. State whether or not you were present at the session of
the superior court in Alamanco county when his case was tried
on an indictment on account of the transaction he has detailed
this morning ? A. I think I avrs present during the trial.
Q. Stato what transpired, and whothor ho made the state
ments then substantially as ho has made them here? A. My
recollection is that there was a submission by tho three defend
ants of whom this witness Avas one, and that it was entered of
record. Mr. McAdam Avas assigned to defend them, and I
think that he stated to the court that this witness was probably
a subject for a lighter punishment, because, as he alleged, he
had been led into a breach of the law, and he requested the
court to let him make a statement, Avhich request was granted.
Q. [By Mr. Graham.] Tho witne&s ? A. Yee, sir, I think
it Avns tho Biuno man. This witness avhb allowed to got up and
mako a statement, Avhich as near as I can remember was Mib-
stuiitlally what ho has stated hero to-day.
Cross-Examination, By Mn. Boyimcn.
Q. Do you think you recollect his statement, ovory bit of
it / A. I do not know that I can answer as to that. It Avas a
very long statement like tho ono he made here to-day.
Q. State as far as you can where it corresponded / A. Aa
far as I can recollect it was substantially the same. The points
ot his statement were that this man Paisley and another, whose
name I do now remember, went out on this expedition against
three of thoir colored neighbors. That was the only part in the
testimony that impressed me.
Q. I ask you now did you know of any secret organization
under either of the names which have been mentioned in tho
course of the trial, or any other namee /

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 5G5
Mr. GRAHAM. You mean in the county of Alamance /
Mr. BOYDEN. Anywhere.
Mr. GRAHAM. I object to the question beyond the county
of Alamance. They are tbe people who have been denounced
and imprisoned as in insurrection against the law, and the in
quiry is whether they Avere connected with anything of the sort.
Mr. BOYDEN. The point is, as Ave allege, that these secret
organizations extended throughout the state, that their object
was ro subvert the government of the state, as far as the
amendment to the constitution since the Avar is concerned,
except the emancipation of the slaves, and to subvert that
portion of tho constitution of the United States giving political
rights, except the abolition of 6la\rery ; that it was a large and
extensive organization extending throughout tho state, and all
connected and engaged in the same object. I desiro to nsk
this gentleman if ho has any knowledge of any such organiza
tion any where in North Carolina.
Mr. GRAHAM. That is tho question, Mr. Chief Justice,
which avo object to. It might bo asked of him Avhether ho
kneAV of tho existence of such an organization in tho county of
Cherokee or Currituck, or any where. Even lu enscs of
treason It Ib necessary to prove an overt net within tho district
where tho party charged 1« tried ; and until that overt act la
shoAvn In that district, nothing can bo shown which transpired
outside of It.
Mr. BOYDEN. I eonsldor the suggestion of tho loarnod
counsol wholly Irrelevant. There is nobody here on trial
for treason. That is a quostion simply of jurisdiction. To
enable tho court to hold jurisdiction, tho act must bo done In
tho state whero the cuubo is tried. But we insist that thia or
ganization oxlstod not merely in Alamance and CasweU, but
that it was a state organization existing through twenty or
thirty counties, and that it had got to be so bad in these two
counties as to compel the governor to issue a proclamation de
claring them to be in a state of insurrection. We say they
are all connected, that it is but one society, and if we can provo

506 COTJBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
there is an organization in Guilford county we expect to prove
it is connected with the organization in Alamanco and Caswell,
and if so, any act done in furtherance of the design of this
organization in Alamance Is the act of thi» general organization.
Mr. MERRIMON. This Is tho case, Mr. Chief Justice :
Tho respondent alleges that thoro was an organization in tho
counties of Alamanco and CasAvell. Tho Managers dony tlio
fact. Now, before they havo shown any net of insurrection,
they umlcrtako to show au insurrectionary body In Cherokee
Suppose there Avere an insurrectionary body in Guilford, does
that provo an insurrection in Cnswell nnd Alamanco? We say
that the proof sought to bo elicited has no relevancy whatever.
Mr. BOYDEN. Mr. Chief Justice, it is very clear that it
comes under the rule decided by this court. Can thero bo
anything clearer than that if this organization committed
these acts of violence in Cherokee and Currituck, and Avas a
part of a general organization, Avhich Ave say existed also in
Alamance or CasAvell, it Avas not just as much an insurrec
tion as if committed in Alamance or Caswell? Can any one
deny it.
Mr. MERRIMON. I do.
The CHIEF JUSTICE: The persiding officer ia of the
opinion that tho evidence is competent, not as a fact in tho
case, but as a circumstance tending- to show the existence of
an organization in the county of Alamance ; strictly, the evi
dence is not. noAV in order, but Avhen counsel say they expect
to connect it Avith other proof, it is usual to alloAV them to
tako their own course, depending upon their Avord that they
Avill produce the necossary proof to mako.it admissible.
Mr. MERRIMON. Mr. Chief Jiwtioo, the Manager* Avould
like to have a \'ote of the senate on tho point raised.
Tho Witness. Have no hesitation in ansAvering the ques
tion, or anything that may bo desired to be put.
Mr. MERRIMON. We desire to have the question settled
now.

TRIAL OF AVILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 567
A sufficient number seconding the call for a division by the
senato, The CLERK proceeded to call the roll of Senators on the
admissibility ot the question, and it Avas decidod in tho
negative. Thoso who voted in tho alllrmativo nro :
Messrs. Bcasley, Bellamy, Brogden, Cowles, Eppes, Flytho,
Hawkins, Ilyman, King, Lehmnn, McCottor, Moore and Rob
bins, of Rowan — 18.
Thoso who voted in negative are :
Messrs. Adams, Allen, Battle, BroAvn, Cook, Council,
Crowell, Dargnn, Flemming, Gilmer, Graham, of Alamanco,
Graham, of Orange, Jones, Latham, Ledbettcr, Linncy, Love,
Mauney, Merrimon, Morehead, Murphy, Robbins, of David
son, Skinner, Speed, Troy, Waddell, Wnrren, Whiteside and
Worth—30. Senator JOHN AY GRAHAM, a witness called on behalf
of the Manager*, being duly sworn, testified as follows :
By Mr. Mkkkimox.
Q. State to the court whether on the trial referred to in
the question put to Senator Gilmer you were present in
the superior court of Alamance county ? A. I was. These per
sons submitted to a verdict of guilty, and it Avas entered. Then
Mr. McAdam desired that this man who lias been examined
here to-day should be allowed to make a statement of his con
nection Avith the affair. I do not recollect that the Avitness
was sworn, but my impression is that Judge Tourgee told him
to tell the truth nnd the Avhole truth, and all the facts before
he commenced, lie made substantially the same statement ho
has made here to-day. I don't recollect that anything Avas
asked of Avhether he was brought before the magistrate or not,
but I don't think anything of that kind was stated at that time.
I suppose what Mr. McAdam said would not be competent to
be received here.
Mr. MERRIMON. Yon may state it unless there is objection.

568 COTJBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
A. He said that he did this with a view of mitigating tho
punishment of this man, for ho thought he had been led into
the matter by others, and that his sentence would bo lighter if
he were allowed to make this statement.
Cross-Examination. By Mr. Boyden.
Q. I wish to ask you a question, if you know ot any secret
political organizations in the county of Alamance ? A. I do
not, nor any Avhere else, except from hearsay.
Q. Have you ever seen any persons riding about in these
disguises ? A. I never have.
Q. Have you eA'er seen anybody with them on ? A. No, sir.
DANIEL WORTH, a witness called on behalf of the
Managers, being didy sworn, testified as follows :
By Mr. Graham.
Q. Where is your place of residence? A. Company Shops.
Q. What is your business occupation ? A. I have been a
merchant for several years until tho first of this last January.
Q. State Avhat Avere tho relations between tho black and
Avhite peoplo in tho county, at any timo Avithin tho hist two
years, Avhether they are friendly or not ? A. Thoy are good so
far ns I knoAV.
Q. And ordinary business aviib transacted between them, as
employer nnd employed ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. lins any colored man been refused employment, so far as
you know, by reason of tho way ho voted ? A. Thoro Avas not.
Q. They aro generally employed ns laborers by tho farmoi'B,
or in mechanical employments, whoro they aro skilled in that
way ? A, They wore.
Q. Do you know of any attempt being mado to control thoir
votes ? A. I do not.
Q. Do you know of any resistance to the laws in the county
of Alamance, or any resistance to an officer of justice in the
execution of his duties ? A. I do not.
Q. Is your place in the town of Graham ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Is there a magistrate at the Shops ? A, Yes^ sir.

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 569
Q. How is he as to party divisions ? A. I cannot say, but it
is understood he is a republican.
Mr. BOYDEN. The witness certainly is not competent to
speak. Q. Have you over known a state's warrant refused to be
issued by a magistrate in your town ? A. I have not.
Q. Did you ever know a constable to refuse to execute a
process on a person charged with any offence in your town ? A.
I have not.
Q. Did you ever know of any resistance to the revenue laws ?
A. I have not.
Q. The answer of .this respondent on page 7 says that school
houses were burnt in the county of Alamance. Do you know
of any school house having been burnt ? A.I do.
Q. Who did it belong to ? ' A. It belonged to me. ,
Q. It stood at Company Shops ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. You built it at your own expenses ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. With what political party do youA'oto? A. I vote with
tho conservative party.
Q. Do you knoAV of- any political motive which would lead
to tho destruction of your houso? A. I do not.
Q. Was it a school for Avhite children ? A. It was for white
children. Q. Burnt down in tho secret hours of the night? A. Yos, sir.
Q. You Avoro living at Company Shops at tho timo Kirk's
expedition invaded the plaeo? A- My family Avns thero, I was
not there myself.
Q. Whore were you ? A. I Avas in Lonoir county.
Q. Carrying on a farm doAvn thoro ? A. Yos, sir.
Q. Did you visit your family at tho timo ? A. I went home a
few days before thoy returned with the prisoners from Caswell.
Q. Did they stay any timo at the Shops before they went
down to Graham? A. I think they stayed there only one
day. Q. Did you observe what sort of discipline was kept up ?

570 COTJBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
A. I caimot speak much of that. I was there but two or three
times. Q. You saw the prisoners that thoy had in charge — Ala
manco and CiiBAvell citizens ? A. Yea, sir.
Q. What number do you supposo there wero? A. I do not
knoAV. Q. A considerable number of prisoners woro in thoir hands
at that time ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you seo much of the doings of Burgon and Kirk
while in command thoro ? A. Very little.
Q. Do you know anything of tho existence of a Union Loaguo
in tho county ot Alamanco ? A. No, sir.
Q. You did not see them havo any public parade, or havo
any public entertainment at any time ? A. I think not.
Cross-Exam ination.
By Mb. Boyden.
Q. Did you know a man liA'ing at the Company Shops by tho
name of Corliss ? A.I did.
Q. What Avas he engaged in ? A. He Avas teaching a colored
school. Q. Were you there at the time he was chastised? A. I was.
Q. Tell us all that you know about that Avithout my asking
you particular questions ? A. Between 12 and 1 o'clock the
cook came to my door and said there was somebody hallooing
at the gate.
Mr. GRAHAM. It is not proper to speak from hearsay.
Q. What time Avas this? A. It Avas in the night betAveen
12 and 1 o'clock. She said they Avere hallooing like a child. I
Avalked out and made some noise to attract attention, if there
was anybody there. I went back for a few minutes, and went
to bed again, and then I heard the dogs barking, and I became
uneasy — fearful that there was a child lost, and I got up and
put on my. clothes and walked up and down the road fifty
and it may be a hundred yards. When I Avas coming back
towards my gate I heard a noise across the railroad and I met
Corliss' wife.

TRIAL OF AVILLIAM AV. HOLDEN. 571
Mr. GRAHAM. Do not Bpeak of your conversation with
her. Q. What condition was she in with respect to dress/ A.
She had a shawl on, or something of that kind, aud hor shoes.
Q. Was she in her night dress / A. I think so.
Q. Goon? A. After some talk I went back into tho house.
The next morning 
Q. Did you hoar any more noise that night / A. I did not.
Q. The next morning, Avhat took placo. A. I Avent over to
tho houso of Corliss and found him lying on the bed. I saAv
some bruises about Iub head and perhaps some on his arm.
Q. What Avas the condition of this man — ia he a cripple /
A. lie Avas a cripple.
Q. Whero did he come from. Was he a northern ninn
or not? A. I think he Avas.
Q. lie Avas teaching a school there ? A. Yes, air.
Q. How long had he been there / A. I think he had been
there for four months.
Q. He had been teaching a colored school there? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was he a well behaA'ed man as far as you knew ? A. As
far as I know he Avas.
Q. I ask you now if it is not Avithin your knoAvledge that
there was'.a very bitter feeling against this man Corliss,, because
he Avas there teaching a colored school / A I cannot say that
there Avas.
Q. You do not know of any such feeling ? A. There was
6ome feeling against him, but I cannotsay that it was altogether
on account of his teaching the school.
Q. Thero was an unkind feeling towards him / A. There
was some feeling.
.Q You say it AA'as not altogether on account of his teaching
school? A. I do not think it Avas attributable to that.
Q. Do you think it was partially / A. It may have been,
although I can say that other men might ha>re come and taught
a colored school without 
Q.. That is not tho question, what other men could have

572 COCBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
done. W^hat was the other thing besides the school that caused
ill feeling against him / A. His general 
Q. Was it not because they thought ho was trying to get up
a colorod church / A.I never heard of that.
Q. Did you undorstand it was because ho told tlie colored
people they, had a right to go into the church where tho white
people wero — was that one of the reasons? A. I have heard
that spoken of. I havo mado some inquiry about it, but I
never heard anybody eny they heard him advise that way.
Q. You saw him that morning? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was ho in bed or up ? A. He was in bed.
Q. Tell us his condition — what ho said ?
Mr. GRAHAM. I object to Avhat ho said about that.
Mr. BOYDEN. Mr. Chief Justice, I understand the doc-
trino is A'ery avoII settled in North Carolina that where a man
is in bod suffering from illness what ho says about it iB to be
regarded as ovidonee. Tho witness says ho enAV bruises on two
different portions of his body, nnd it Avas tho morning after ho
had recoived this terriblo scourging, and his statements under
thoso circumstancos aro admissible in evidence.
Mr. BRAGG. Wo understand, Mr. Chiof Justice, that it
is proposed uoav by tho counsol for the respondent to give in
evidence the declarations of Corliss not only as to lus suffer
ings, and the condition ho wns in, but as to how ho came to be
in that condition.
Mr. BOYDEN. I havo not offered that. What I offered
to provo was Avhat ho said about his condition. I will put the
question so that it Avill be perfectly imderstood.
Mr. SMITH. This is tho question which wo propose to ask
tho Avitness. " What did Corliss say as to his condition."
There havo been four or five decisions in this state in which it
has been held that the declaration of a party ns to his physical
condition is always competent evidence as to the fact.
Mr. GRAHAM. Of course it is competent to tell how he
felt when he had the bruses, and the fact whether they gave
him pain or not. We do not object to that at all, but to under-

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 578
take to aimit his statement as to how he came to Win that
condition, is altogether inadmissible.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. They have not raised that ques
tion. Q. What did he say as to his condition ? A. He complained
of thO bruises. There was a cut on his forehead, and I think
ho was bruised on his arm.
Q. Was he apparently suffering from his wounds ? A. I
suppose he was.
Q. And they appeared to have been recent ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. I ask you Avhether Corliss had ever kept a colored school
at night in this school house that Avas burned ? A. I don't
know that ho Avns over in the school house.
Q. Was thoro a school kept thore at night ? A. Not in this
house that Avas burnt.
Q. Whero did ho keep the colored school. A. He kept it
at a houso that Avas used for that purpose.
Q. [By Mr. Graham.] Is that colored school house stand
ing there now ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was there a colored school kept in that house by a man
of the name of Meader ? A. There was not.
Q. You have said I believe that Corliss had been engaged
in teaching a colored school ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. After this difficulty Avhat became of him? A. He left
thero some time after that.
Q. How soon did he leave? A. I don*t recollect, but I sup
pose tAvo or three weeks— it may have been longer, or it may
have been shorter.
Q. Do you know how long he was confined by these wounds
which he had received ? A. I do not.
Q. What became of Meader ? A. He went home.
Q. How soon did he go after this difficulty ? A. I think he
went in December afterwards.
Q. In what month did this occur ? A. It was a year af-
wards. I think thia was in the fall. 1 am not able to give
• 38

574 COUBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
you the date, but it was some 8, 10 or 12 months after that,
that Meader Avent home.
Q. He avus a northern man? A. Yes, sir. -
Q. Was ho the postmaster at Oompany Shops ? A. No, sir.
Q. Who Avas the postmaBtor at Company Shops? A.George
Boone. *
Q. Was he a northern man ? A. No, sir.
Q. Was thoro not a northern man postmaster there at one
timo? A. Never that I knew. Thero never has been.
Q. Meader avoh a northern man ? A. Yea, sir,
Q. They haA'e never retuniod, oithor of them ? A. No, sir.
Q. Wa« there an unkind feeling towards him there that
you knoAV of? A. Not that I know of.
Q. Have you not heard men speak against him ? A. Not
that I know of.
Q. You heard no unkind feeling towards him? A. No, I
did not.
Q, What Avas his business? A. Teaching school.
Q. A colored school.? A. No, sir.
Q. A Avhite school ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Where Avore you at the time OutW avos hung? A. I
Avas home.
Q. It Avas Sunday morning that ho Avas hung. When did
you hear of it ? A. 1 heard of it that morning about 9 o'clock.
Q. Did you see bis body? A. Yea. sir.
Q. You Avent over to it ? A. Yes, sir, I Avas passing through
Graham. Q. Where did you seo his body? A. Hanging on a tree.
Q. Hoav near the court house ? A. I suppose about forty
yards, perhaps.
Q. He was hanging on a tree ? A. Yes, sir. .
Q. Did you examine his appearance / A I did not.
Q. He Avas hanging by the neck / A . Yes, sir.
Q. Was he dead/ A. I suppose he , was.
- Q. Ypu are certain of that ? A. I didn't go and examine
him, but I supposed he was dead.

TEIAL OF WILLIAM W. nOLDEN. 575
Q. Ho was hanging by the nock — thoro was no motion / A.
I didn't boo any.
Q. Havo you any doubt but that ho was dead / A. I havo
not. Q. Do you knoAV about this man Puryear ? A. I do not.
Q. You never Baw his body ? A. I did not.
Q. Do you know any person in that section of tho country
who was whipped or maltreated besides this man Corliss ? A.
I do not.
Q. Did you bco anybody that had been Avhipped ? A. I did
not. Q. Do you know of any secret organization in tho county of
Alamanco undor any of tho names that I havo montionod,
Kuklux Klan or any othor namo ? A. I nover did
Q. IlaA'o you any knowlodgo as to how tho echool house hap
pened to be burnt, and Avhat it was burnt for ? A. I have
some reasons for behoving.
Q. You can state what they are. A. I think it grow out of
a personal matter between myself and a man that lives thero
in the place.
Q. Who ? A. A man by tho name of Gray.
Q. What reason have you for believing that ? A. I came
to that conclusion from a little difficulty that occurred between
him and me just a short time before it Avas burnt.
Q. That is a more surmise — you have no accurate knowledgo
about it in any way ? A. No, sir ; I did not 6eo him sot firo
to it.Q. It is a surmise ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. You know of no facts touching the burning showing that
he did it ? A. No, I do not.
Q. Do you know of any threats being mado against either of
these northern men before they went there ? A, ,1 do not.
Re-Direct Examination, , ,..,,•".,: ,¦ <
By Mr. Gbaham. .,,,_ y . ;,,M .,.,;,,, , ,,;.,,]
Q. This man Gray was a gambler, and he kept a grog shop ?

570 _ OODBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
A. I believe that is his character. He was keeping a grog
shop. Q. He wanted to keep a grog shop at your door, or near
you ? A. Across the railroad a short distance.
Q. You refused to let him have the house '( A. No, sir, it
was a building which belonged to a man of the name of Sellers.
Q. You objected to permitting him, or anybody else to keep
a grog shop 60 near you as that ? A. If I can tell the conver
sation between him and me I will state the facts.
Mr. BOYDEN. We do not care anything about it,
although we have no objection.
Q. I think you had better tell ? A. He came into the store
one day and he told me he Avanted to 6ee me. I took him into
my counting room, and he told me that he understood I had
threatened to tear down the house he Avas occupying.
Q. Was it your building ? A. No, sir. I told him that I
had never mado any such threat, but said I, " I can tell you
" Avhat I have said, that you nor no other man can keep such a
" house as you are keeping in my yard." lie went on to say
that ho had tried to mako his living by his trade, but he hadn't
succeeded, and that he had gono there to sell whiskey to make
a living and support his family. He seemed to bo oiit of
temper a good deal. I didn't think any moro of it until that
night when I was awakened up by seeing the houso on fire, and
my impression Avas that he was the man who did it.
Q. It Avas a short time after this conversation in which he
showed considerable feeling against you about his keeping a
grog shop? A. Yes, sir.
Q. How long before the fire do you think that was ? A. It
may havo been two weeks, or it may have been a little longer.
Q. You were asked about a postmaster of the name of Boon.
He was never whipped, waa he ? A. Never that I know of.
Q. This man Meader had a colored school for some twelve
months after Corliss left ? A. Not a colored school — a white
school. Q. He left twelve months after ? A. I don't recollect, but

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 577
it was some time after that. He didn't leav^ however, on
account of fear or anything like that.
Q. In regard to this man Corliss, was there any prejudice
against him because he had taken a colored woman into a
church at Haw Fields, and seated her among the white people
who took offence at it ? A. I think that occurred at Haw
Fields. Q. Corliss got out a state's warrant againrt certain parties,
and there was a trial before a j ustice on a charge of whipping ?
A. I understood he did.
Q. Mr. Faucett was the justice of the peace ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were you present at the trial ? A. I was not.
Q. But you knoAV that such a trial took place, and that the
men were proved iimocent and discharged?
Mr. BOYDEN. He says he was not there.
Q. You have been asked as to the cause of the prejudiced
against Corliss : I nsk whether it amounted to thi3, that he Avas
a man avIio tried to produce bad feeling between the white and
tho black people? A. Have heard that charged against him.
Mr. BOYDEN. I object to leading questions.
Q. What were tho causes of prejudice against him particu
larly? A. Tho couroo that ho pursued outside of tho school,
mingling Avith citizens thero.
Q. What Avas thoro objcctionablo on that scoro?
By tho Chief Justice :
Q. Did he keep company with tho citizens too much ? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. Did they object to him because of his keeping company
with the negroes ? A. I do not knoAV that that was the objec
tion. By Mr. GEAiiAm. [Resuming.]
Q. Carliss remained about three weeks after this violence,
you think ? A. I think he was there from two to four weeks.
Q. He was an obnoxious man in the community from the
causes you have stated ? A. He was to some extent. "¦"
Q. Is there a colorod school there now ? -'

£>78 COUBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Mr. BOYDEN. I do not know how that has any connec
tion with this trial.
A. I do not 1<iioav whothor there is or not.
Q. Who built tho school houso In Avhich tho colored school
aviin kept ? A. It Avas built by tho citizens of tho plaeo.
Q. Tho Avlilto people? A. Yos, sir.
Q, By subscription ? A. By subscription.
Q. Th© school houso for tho colored children which Is still
standing, has never beon burnt? A. No, sir.
Q. It Avas built by tho white peoplo of tho town of Company
Sho])B by subscription ! A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was it built for a colored school? A. It Avas not.
Q, It Avas built for a white school ? A. Yos, sir, for Avhite
children. Q. But it passed into tho hands of theso others by purchase
by the bureau, or by permission of the inhabitants. Tbe in
habitants sold it to the government? A. The inhabitants 6old
it to the government for the colored people.
Q. That building has never been injured in an}' Avay that
you know of ? A. It never has.
Oj. It has been suggested to ask you as to Avhat political party
the justice of the peace is. I understood you to ansAver that
he was a republican ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Who is the constable in that neighborhood? A. Wylie
Wood, I think.
Mr. SMITH. We submit, Mr. Chief Justice, Avhether it is
competent to ask as to the political opinions of the constables
and judicial officers of the county.
Mr. GRAHAM. I Avas not disposed to go into this inquiry
at all, but the gentlemen on the other side have asked ques
tions in reference to the political sentiments of individuals.
Mr. SMITH. We have asked the political opinions of the
Avitnesses, not of other parties.
Mr. GRAHAM. Tho answer charges that there was a state
of insurrection in Alamance county, and it is also charged, I
think, that there Avas corruption in tho magistracy of the

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 579
county, and that tho magistrates did not perform their duties.
If it can be bIioavh that, in the locality Avhero one of the out*
rages was committed, the magistrate w&s a person who Avould
not bo dleposed to sympathize Avitli any such outrages by reason
of his political convictions, I contend that tho proof is compe
tent. I am perfectly willing to abandon the wholo inquiry ©n
that subject, if that is t© b© the rule. I should not have intro
duced it if it had not bean etnrted on tho othor sldo.
The CHIEF J USTIOE. The presiding officer i.i ot opinion
that tho evidenco is compotent. . j
Mr. MERRIMON. I am informed that Senator Gilmer
desires to make a further statement, and I ask that ho havo
liberty to do so.
JOHN A. GILMER, a witness on tlie part of the Managers
being recalled at his own instance, testified as follows :
The WITNESS : Being a senator, and one of the triers of
this cause, I thought that it might be inferred that I hesitated
in ansAvering the question of the counsel for tho respondent
I desire to state that I have no knoAvledge of any secret society,
except Avhat I liave derived from the newspapers, and other
hearsay. By Mr. Boyden.
Q. Do you believe that information is true ?
Mr. GRAHAM. I object to that
Mr. BOYDEN. I think I am entitled to an ansAver to that
question. The CHIEF JUSTICE. I do not think it is competent to
call for the belief of the witness.
SAMUEL J. CRAWFORD, a witness called on behalf of
the Managers, being duly sworn, testified asfolloios :
By Mr. Gbaham.
Q. Where is your homo ? A. Alamance county.
Q. What township ? A. Pleasant Grove township.

580 COTJBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. That is in the neighborhood of Lee's and MoCauley's
store ? A. Lee's store — Vincent.
Q. What is your age ? A. Forty.
Q. What do you follow ? A. I am a mechanic.
Q. Are you Well adquainted in that toAvnship ? A. Yes, sir.
I have lived there for a number of years, almost all my life.
Q. Are you pretty generally acquainted in the county of
Alamance ? A. In tho northern part of the county I am very
well acquainted.
Q. State to the court what, in the last two years, has been
the state of feeling between the black and white people in your
part of the country, whether it is friendly or otherwise ? A.
It has been friendly as far as I know.
Q. The business of society has gone on between employer
and employee? A. Yes, sir.
Q. They got employment whero they wished and persons
desired them for help ? A. Yes, sir, where they desired it.
Q. Do you know of any instance in which a colorod man has
been refused employment by reason of the ticket ho voted ? A.
I have not.
Q. Upon Avhat terms are they in the habit of working ? A
Different terms. Some aro hired for wages, somo are renters
and somo croppers.
Q. Getting a share of the wops ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Has that part of tho country during tho period I havo
been speaking of beon peaceable and orderly as a general thing ?
A. Generally so. There has been very little disturbance for the
last two years.
Q. Havo you evor known any resistance to tho law in that
part of the-country ? A. None whatever.
Q. Taxes have been collected, both federal and state ? A.
Yos, sir.
Q. Officers having processes against anybody served them
without resistence ? A. Yes, sir, so far as I know.
Q. Do you know of any instance in which there has been

TEIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 581
any attempt to influence the votes of colored men by force ?
A. No, sir.
Q. Were there persons as a general thing as safe as those of
Avhite people from unlawful violence ? A. I think bo. I know
of no reason Avhy they are not.
Q. Were you arrested yourself? A. I never was.
Q. Did you see Kirk's men have citizens in custody? A.
No, sir, I never saAv them havo any of the citizens.
Cross-Examination. By Mr. Boyden.
Q. I think you were called captain Crawford. When were
you called forward ? A. They call me by that name. I waa
never a captain. I was a lieutenant.
Q. You were in the military during the war? A. Yes, sir.
Q. In the confederate service ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. What position ? A. I was a lieutenant
Q. Wero you in active service or in the home guard? A.
In active service.
Q. You Avoro asked if you kneAV of any colored men ot good
character being forced to vote in a particular A\'ay ? A. No,
sir. Havo never known a man forced against his wish.
Q. Do you knoAV of any colored man being threatened with
dismissal from his employment unless ho voted as his omployer
wished him to?
Mr. GRAHAM. I object to the question unless tho Avitness
speaks of his personal knowledge.
Mr. BOYDEN. I am asking him if he. heard of any. A.
No, sir, I never knew any one to bo dismissed.
Q. Did you ever know of any one being threatened on that
account ? A. No, sir, I have not. I do not recollect any one.
Q. Do you know of any promises mado to them if they
would vote in a particular way ? A. No sir.
Q. You seemed just now to hesitate when you wore asked
the question whether a colored man was just as safe from injury
as a white man? A. I only hesitated in order that I might
think on the subject a little.

583 COTJBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. Do yon know of any colored men in your section who
havo been Avhipped ? A. I havo hoard of somo.
Q. I ask you If you know of any ? A. I do not know of
any of my own knowledge.
Q. Did you boo thoir persons whoro thoy had boon whipped ?
A. No, sir, I nover did.
Q. Do you ]<iioav of any thing about tho death of Outlaw?
A. Nothing only what I havo hoard.
Q, You didn't see him? A. No, sir.
Q. Do you know anything of tho death of Puryear. A.
No, sir.
Q. You did not see him ? A. No, sir, not that I know of.
Q. Do you know of any secret political organization such as
avo havo been speaking of here. I do not care by what name
they aro called? A. Nono Avhntcver— political I mean.
(). I do not allude to tho Masons. You live in what place *
A. In Pleasant Grove, Alamance county.
Q. I Aviah to ask you it a good many colored peoplo in Ala
manco county Avithin tho last year have left to your knoAV-
ledge ? A. Thero haA'O some left. I have heard of a good
many leaving.
Q. Do you knoAV the reason of tlieir leaving? A. No, sir,
I do not.
Q. You know no particular reason ? A. Not of my own
knowledge. Q. I understand you that the colored people are ju6t aa
kindly treated, and just as safe as white people in that county ?
A. I knoAV of no reason Avhy they aro not safe.
Q. That is your opinion ? A. That is my opinion. I think
they aro as safe when they conduct themselves properly, and
they havo tho protection of the laAv.
Q. But suppose they do not conduct themselves properyly, do
you think they are as safe from violence as white men. A.
I think bo.
Q. You say you have known of numbers yourself Avho havo
left ? A. Yes, Bir, I knoAV some.

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 683
Q. Do you knoAV what mado them leave ? A. Not of my
own knowledge.
Q. Did thoy toll you ? A. No, sir, thoy Hover told mo why
they left.
Mr. (1 ItAl IAM. Wo shall object to any hoarwiy.
(}. Did you seo any moil riding in dlsgnlso, or walking in
disguise lu tho county of Alamanco ? A. I never did.
Q. You live nonr tho Orango line ? A. Yob, sir.
Q, Did you ovor boo Ku Klux disgulsoa ? A, I nover did,
Q. What party do you belong to ? A. I bolong to the con-
ecrvntivo party.
Re-Direct Examination.
By Mit. Gkaham.
Q. Your army acquaintance enabled you to become very
Avcll acquainted Avith the young men of your district and town
ship? A. Yes, sir.
Mr. BOYDEN. Wo object to that
Senator ROBBINS, of -Rowan. I give notice, Mr. Chief
Justice, that I shall make a motion for a recess at the close of
the case for the Managers to give sufficient timo for the report
to bo printed and distributed among counsol for tho respon
dent so that they may havo an opportunity to prepare for their
defence. ALEXANDER C. McALLISTER, a witness called on
behalf of the Managers, being duly sworn, testified as follows :
By Mr. Meruimon.
Q.- State your name, residence and business ? A. Alexander
C. McAllister. I reside in Alamance county, Company Shops.
Q. How long have you resided there ? A. Since 1805.
Q. Stato Avhether you 6aw any armed men in the county of
Alamance during the months of July and August, and if so,
Avhat their character, appearance nnd demeanor were ? A. I
saw a body of men arrive at Company Shops in the month of
July, I supposo about two hundred in numbor. I cannot
estimate them accurately. s

584 COUBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. How did they come, and what did they do — what was
their disciphne ? A, They arrived on the cars. They were
very badly clad. I only saw them as they got off the train
and marched off to camp.
Q. Which way did they come from. A. From the west.
Q. State anything further that you know about them ? A.
They were uniformed in a few days. They had a military
camp a few yards from where my business was.
Q. State their discipline if they had any — whether thero was
order or disorder ? A. I was in the camp a few days and
their discipline Avas very bad, judging from the sentinels on
duty. Q. What was the appearance of the men ? A. They were
very rough looking men, and badly clad AA'hen they came.
Q. Wero they orderly or disorderly — had you seen soldiers
before ?
Mr. BOYDEN. Ask whnt Avas their behavior.
Q. What was their behavior? A. About tho stores nnd
about town they behaved themselves. I Avas not often around
tho camp.
Q. What did thoy do in tho county?
Mr. BOYDEN. Stato from your own knowledge.
Q. Do you knoAV whether they arrested anybody or not ?
A. I Avas trying to think Avhether thoro Avas anybody under
guard. I Avas trying to think whether they were taking them
to camp.
Q. State all you know. A. I suppose I saAv between 80 and
50 at one time.
Q. Give the names ot them if you can. A. I saw Mr.
Bingham, Dr. Mebane and two or three by the name of Whit-
sett. I saw Rogers and' Murray and Johnson and a good many
others. That is just as the names occur to me.
Q.^. Go on and mention them. A. I saAv Mr. Scott.
Mr. BADGER. Give him the list. He probably knows all
of them.
The WITNESS. If I had a list I could tell. I know the

TEIAL OF AVTLLIAM W. HOLDEN. 585
the persons I saw under guard. I may have seen them at dif
ferent times.
Q. Take this list and say if you saw any of the persons
named therein guarded, [giving the witness a copy of the
articles of impeachment.] A. [Referring to the list.] I eaw
Lucien H. Murray, Rogers, William Bingham, Alexander
Wilson. Q. [By Mr. Graham.] Is that Dr. Wilson ? A. Yes, sir.
I don't recollect certainly the next name nor the next. I saw
John Andrews, Frederick Blanchard, Adolphus G. Moore,
James N. Holt. I saw Patton, I think it is Alexander, but I
am not confident, Lemuel Whitsett. I saAv a prisoner by the
name of Steel. I don't know certainly whether it was Sidney
or not. I saw Thomas Ray, Henry Cook, William Andrews,
Thomas Gray ; I saw a man by the name of Younger — I don't
know his first name ; Dr. Mebane, William Whitsett ; I saw
tAA'o WhitsottB, I think ; I have forgotten their names ; I saw
Albert Murray, W. D. Montgomery — no, I omit tliat name, I
am not confident— I saw him down street ; I sbav John G.
Albright, and Robert Ilanna, Henderson Scott, William
Stockard. John G. Albright and Robert Ilanna woro required
to roport, and I saAv thorn in camp. James Foust, I saw him
reporting thero and others ; yes, I saw him under guard
another time. I saw John Curtis, Robert Stockard, James T.
Hunter and JameB S. Scott.
Q. Who commanded these armed men? A. George W.
Kirk waB addressed and understood to be the commander.
Q. Who else? A. The lieutenant colonel was named
Burgen. Q. Who else? A. The major waa called Yates; he was
addressed as major.
Q. He acted in that capacity ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know that there were two hundred men when
they first came ? A. I suppose about that number when they
first came.

586 COCET OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. State what was their reputation in the neighborhood for
violence and outrage if they had any  •
Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chiof Justico, we objeot to the question.
These aro facts to be proved .liko any ether facts, not by rep
utation. If there Avas violence and disorderly oonduot it is
easy to prove them Avithout seeking to obtain it by general
reputation. Mr. MERRIMON. The ruling has been already made that Ave
may shoAv tho violent character of this man Kirk, and wo pro
pose to prove that his men had the same reputation for miles
for these outrages.
Mr. SMITH. • The court has not ruled that point at all.
The court has ruled that you have a right to inquire into the
character for recklessness and lawlessness of the men engaged
in this service. What their character and conduct was at
Company Shops is a matter to be determined by proof of facts,
as any other facts are proved, and not by reputation. This is
not one of the cases Avhere reputation is admissible to show
the general character of a party. It may be material as shoAv-
ing motive to prove that, men of previous bad character were
appointed, but Avhen you undertake to hold any one respon
sible for the misconduct of troops it must not be done by
shoAving that the reputation of their conduct Avas bad, but
that in fact it Avas bad.
Mr. MERRIMON. One of the material allegations running
through these articles of impeachment is that the respondent
brought these desperate men, Kirk and his officers and sol
diers to, accomplish his purpose, and the court has held it Avas
competent to prove bad character and conduct as attached to
Kirk. We propose in the same way to show the lawless and
desperate character of the troops.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. You have not asked the Avitness
Avhether he knows their character before they came to Com
pany Shops.
Mr. MERRIMON. I do not propose, Mr. Chief Justice, to
confine the question to their oharaoter before.

TBIAL OF AVILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 687
The CHIEF JUSTICE. Tho presiding officer is of opinion
that the character of tho men before they came can bo proved
by general reputation, but in regard to their conduct and ac
tion whilo here, itnnust bo proved liko any other faot by somo
Avitness avIio saAv it, and knoAveit of his own knowledge.
By Mr. Mebbimon — [resuming.]
Q. Do you knoAV of any violenco on tho part of thoso mon
when thoy Avoro under arms in command of Kirk, Burgon and
Yates ? A. No, sir, no violence. I heard men cursing on
guard, but I saw no violent acts.
Q. State what you know about that cursing ? A. I havo
not heard them cursing the prisoners, but cursing among them
selves, showing a want ot discipline.
. Q. What was the state of the discipline? A. The only
means I have of judging Avas from the guards around tho
prisoners. Q. What was that ? A. It was bad as it could have been.
By the Chief Justice. .
Q. You mean that you heard them cursing while on duty ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were they drunk ? A. No, sir. By bad discipline I
mean they were sticking their bayonets into the ground, and
calling to the officer ot the guard that their timo was out, and
cursing about it and sitting down at times. There seemed to
be no discipline.
Q. They didn't behave as soldiers ? A. No, sir.
Q. Did you ever see any troops like these before ? A. I
never saw any with such imperfect discipline.
Q. What is the age of Henderson Scott ? A. He is an old
man. I cannot state, but he is probably 60 or 70 years old.
Q. State hia condition at the time you saw him if you know
it ? A. I had known him to be a lame man. I never knew
the particulars of his disease. I understand his leg was
diseased. .. :\ ., .;,,., : '. ••
Q. Do you know whether that was brought to the attention

588 COTJBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
of the officer there ? A. As I went into the camp I met a
party going out for medicine for him, but I don't know what
communication there was with the officer.
Q. Could anybody see from looking at him that he was a
lame and crippled man ? A. They coulJ not know otherwise.
Q. Was he a feeble man otherwise ? A. I think he showed
that he was. He had that appearance.
Q. What was the character of Mr. Scott ? A. He is looked
upon as one of the best citizens in the county.
Q. What is his character for morality ? A.I never heard it
questioned. He is a prominent man in the church.
Q. What church ? A. The Haw Fields church.
Q. State if you know the relations existing between the
white and black people in the county of AlamaDce — whether
friendly or unfriendly ? A. They are friendly as far as I know.
Q. Did you have an extensive acquaintance in that county?
A. I knew the people in the county, but I did not know them
at their houses.
By Mr. Boyden.
Q. Both races / A. Yes, sir.
Q. What was the state of feeling/ A. Thoy frequently
camo to tho store with tho parties who employed them.
Q. Did thoy intorohango labor / A. Yos, sir.
Q. Tho white peoplo employed tho blacks / A. Yos, sir.
Q. Stato whothor tho omployors and omployod camo to your
storo very frequently / A. Frequently.
Q. For what/ A. Trading.
Q. Do you know whether white men occasionally came to
your Store, and asked you to allow colored men to have goods
upon their credit / A. Yes, sir, - they have brought orders ;
but it were confined to persons in the village generally.
Q. Do you know of any transactions of that sort occurring
at your own store / A. I know we received orders to let " the
bearer" have goods, the bearer being a colored person.
Q. State whether you know of any case of resistance to the

TEIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 589
authority of a magistrate or sheriff/ A. I never heard of any,
and I never knew of any.
Q. Do you know whether the courts were open, and business
Was conducted as usual / A. They were.
Q. There is a magistrate's court in your town / A. Yes, sir.
Q; Who is the magistrate there / A. William B. Faucett.
Q. What is his political affinity? A. He Avas elected as a
candidate of tho republican party, as I understand.
Q. Who Avas the constable / A. Tho deputy sheriff did the
business in that place ; I think Wylie Wood was the last.
Q. State Avhether at any time you Avero charged with any
papers issued by the chief justice of this state, to be served upon
George W. Kirk, and if so, what you knoAV about it / A. I was
requested by Mr. Parker to deliver a copy of the Avrit of habeas
corpus to George W. Kirk; Mr. Parker being the counsol for
tho petitioners.
Q. Stato what you did, and under what circumstances, and
what Kirk Baid, if anything, and all you know about it ? A. It
was the day before tho return of tho writs before the chief
justico. I do not k iioav tho exact date, but It Avns about tho
ttovontconth. ! '
Q. Monday or Tuesday? A. It was on a Sunday, tho day
boforo the return of tho writs before the chief justice.
Q. State Avhnt you did ? A. I Avent nnd overtook tho com
mand on the road to Yancoyvillo,
The CHIEF JUSTICE. It was the Saturday that thoy
started. Q. Whero did they start from ? A. I think Kirk moved
tho day before, on Saturday, from Company Shops, in tho
direction of Yanceyville. I Avent the next morning with the
writs placed in my hands, and overtook him about ten miles
on that road. I saw the officer of the rear guard, and asked
him for Colonel Kirk, as I wished to see him. The regiment
was halted, and I was carried forward, and I communicated
with Kirk and told him-*I first met Lieutenant Burgon, and
approached him with tho papers. At the time I thought ho
39

590 COTJET OF rMPEACHMENTS.
was Kirk, and delivered the papers to him, he read them, and
asked me to go forward and see the colonel.. The gentleman
who was with me proposed to go, but Burgen intimated to me
that he would not be wanted. I reached the head of the regi-
mont, and Colonel Kirk had a portion of one of the writs road
over to him by Lieutenant Burgen and the matter explained.
Then tho troops followed up, as I reported the 
Q. You need not mention that, wo want you to tell the mat-
tor as if you had nover told it to nny ono before /A.I can
not recollect the conversation distinctly. If I could be alloAved
to refresh my memory I could stato it.
Q. State it as near as yon can ?
Mr. MERRIMON. We offer to let him look at his affidavit
to refresh his memory, [hands a copy of the affidavit as printed
to the witness.]
A. Can I be permitted to read from this ?
The CHIEF JUSTICE. You can read it over, and then
tell the court the facts as they enable you to recall them. A.
[After reading the affidavit.] I recollect that ho said that he
could not regard tho papers — could not notice them, or some
thing to that effect. I can't recollect his Avorda — that he could
not notice such papers.
Q. What Avord did ho send to the chief justice? A. That
was a part of tho message.
Q. [By Mr. Smith.] State Avhat he said ? A. Ho said he
could not notice the papers, that they had " played out." Ho
said take the papers back and tell them that a court has been
appointed to try — I suppose, the parties.
Q. Try who ? A. I inferred tho petitioners. Ho said tako
the paper back.
Q. [By the Chief Justice.] A court had been appointed to
try them, and that he must take the papers back ? A. Yea, sir.
Q. Do I understand you to say that he said for you to take
the papers back, that bucIi papei'B were "played out?"
Mr. SMITH. He did not say that.
Q. [By the Chief Justice] Stato it over again? A. Ho

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 591
said he could not notice, as I recollect it, such papers. And I
think in the connection ho said that they had " played out."
I probably mado some remark to ascertain his intention, and
he told me to take the papers back to the court, and that a
court acting under orders of the governor had been appointed
to try them, and he Avould not deliver them up unless force
was sent to tako them away from him.
Q. You returned to Raleigh ? A. I returned to Raloigh' the
noxt morning. Ho turned to tho lieutenant-colonel, and re
marked that ho had ordered him not to allow such papers to bo
presented or.brought to him.
(Q. What Avas his manner Avhen he said 80? A. He became
a little excited during the conversation.
Q. Do you know whether these armed men had possession
of tho court house at Graham ? A. No, sir, I was not in
Graham. Q. Do you knoAV of your own knowledge that squads of
men were sent over the country there to arrest porsons ? A. I
eaw squads gcing into the country, and I saw ono of the citizens
of the Shops arrested by a squad.
Q. Was any colored man in company with these squads ?
A. Yes, sir, a colored man aided in the arrest of captain
Thornburg in the village.
Q. What Avas his name ? A. Ruffin.
Q. What was his given name. [The witness hesitates.]
Mr. GRAHAM. One's namo is Aleck and the other'e
Hark ? A. It Avas Aleck.
Q. These colored men stayed about tho camp pjf £oldicr6 $
A. Saw them on duty as guard.
Q. Were they in uniform? A. Yes, sir,
Q. What as to their arms — musket* and pistols? A,
Muskets. Q. Did you seo them havo pistols and swords ? A. I don't
recollect any swords, and I am not auro that I »aw any plstplf,
Cross-Examination,
By Mr. Boyden,

592 COUBT OF'rMPEA'dHMENr^.
Q.' What political party do you belong to ? A 1 The Conser
vative democratic. / '
Q. Are you the member of the house of representatives
from that county ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know of any secret political organization in the
county of Alamance ? A. I have no knowledge, only from the
developments in tho bench warrant cases.
Q. You have no knowledge of them personally? A.
No, sir.
Q. You havo nover knoAvn them in their camps ? A. No,
sir. Q. You have never seen them in disguise ? A. No, sir.
Q. Do you knoAV of any violations or outrages committed
upon colored people in tho county of Alamance ? A. I saAV
Joseph Harvey tho morning after ho was whipped.
Q. What Avas his condition ? A. I saAv no signs of violence.
lie said ho had been whipped.
Q. lie is tho only ono you havo seen ? A. No, sir, I saw
Mr. Corliss.
Q. Do you knoAV about that matter of Corliss's ? A. I saw
him about flvo or sovon days after ho Avas said to havo been
hurt. Oj. Where was ho ? A. Ho Avas in my Btoro.
Q. Did you see any marks upon his porson ? A. I do not
recollect distinctly. There Avas somo scars on his face. I un
derstood a part of his head had been shaved.
Q. Do you know of any other ? A. No other.
Q. State if you knoAV tho feeling existing among the white
people or the conservative people, touching this man Corliss,
was it unkind ?
Mr. GRAHAM. I think the question is one of doubtful
propriety — whether the Avitness knoAvs tho state of feeling in
tho community. I do not think it capable of being proved as '
you can prove character.
Mr. BOYDEN. What I want to know is whether the wit-

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 593
ness knows the state of feeling in the , democratic party in
respect to Corliss.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. Do you mean some members of
the democratic party or the party generally ?
Mr. BOYDEN. I mean the state of feeling in the town. I
Avill confine it to Company Shops.
Mr. GRAHAM. How can the witness get information to
form that opinion except from tho hearsays in the county.
Mr. BOYDEN. I would ask the counsel how they knoAV the
stato of feeling being kind towards the colored people except
by hearsay.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. Tho presiding officer is of the
opinion that the evidence is competent. The Avitness may
know tho state of feeling.
Mr. MERRIMON. But tho question, Mr. Chief Justice, is
whothor a particular party had any prejudice toAvards this man ?
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. Tho question is whether there was
a bad state of fooling on tho part of the democratic party to
Avards him. I think tho question is competent.
The WITNESS. I cannot say that as a party thoro aviib.
Thoro was somo fooling against him on account of a report that
camo with him to tho Shops that ho carried a colored man into
tho church at HawlleldB, and tho young mon who stopped at
tho hotel whero ho boarded disliked him for intruding himsolf
in their conversations.
Q. Thoro was an unkind feeling among tho young men to-
ward him ? A. I do not know any more than I havo heard the
thing spoken of, that ho would come up without invitation and
join in conversation sometimes.
Q. I do not ask what caused it. I ask if such a state of feel
ing existed ? A. I don't know to what extent.
Q. Did it exist at all ? [No answer.]
By the Chief Justice.
Q. Was there an unkind feeling towards him on, tlie part of
the young men alone or was it of the party ? A» I cannot say

504 COTJBT OF IMPEA0HMENT6.
except as to my own feeling. The roan and his conduct were
discussed but I cannot say what the state of feeling was.
Q He was unpopular in his manners? A. It was so re
ported to me.
By Mb. Boyden, [resuming.]
Q. Do you live at the Shops ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were you there tho night he was chastised ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Tell us all you know about it ? A. I know nothing about
it. I did not hear it.
Q. You were not aroused ? A. No, sir, it Avas in a different
part of the village.
Q. You did not see him for some seven days ? A. For five
or seven I think it was.
Q. How soon after that did ho leave there ? A. I am not
certain, but I think he left the next week after the trial before
the magistrate.
Q. What trial do you speak of? A. He had a number of
men arrested in the village Avho were charged with whipping
him. Q. Were you at the trial? A. No, sir. The parties passed
through my store to the magistrate's room over the store.
Q. Did you hear what took place? A. No, sir.
Q. How soon was this after that occurrence? A. I think
it was the first I had seen of him — tho day of the trial.
Q. That was five or seven days after he had been chastized?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And he went away from there the next week? A.
That is my recollection.
Q. He has never been back? A. No, sir.
Q. Did you know a man of the name of Meader? A. Yes,
sir. Q. What sort of a man was he — was he a northern man ?
A. Yes, sir, said to be.
Q. Corliss was a northern man ? A. Understood to be.
Q. What was the state of feeling towards Meader? A. I
think it was kind.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 595
Q. When did he leave? A. After the burning of Mr.
Worth's school house. I think he went off in the neighbor
hood of New London. He was called back by Mr. Worth to
take a second school.
Q. He has left the county ? A.I cannot say. There was
a little feeling toward Meader at one time but that was re
moved I think before he left.
Q. Do you know Mr. Shoffner ? A. I met him a few times.
Q. When did he leave ? A. I don't knoAV the date, but I
it was soon after his return from the legislature.
Q. I ask you if you know the state of feeling generally on
the part of the democratic or conservative party towards Mr
Shoffner? A. I think it is pretty bitter.
Q. Why? A. On account of the introduction of what is
known as the Shoffner bill.
Q. Do you know anything of why he left the county ? A.
I do not.
Q. Was he a member of the legislature previous to the time
he left ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. How long did he remain in the county after he came
from the legislature. A. I cannot say, my impression is that
he did not remain there very long, whether a month or two
or a week I cannot say.
Q. Of which body was he a member? A. He was a
senator. Q. Did you hear any threats against his life ? A. I did not.
Q. Did you hear any threats about running him off from
the county ? A. I cannot say that I ever heard any threat of
the kind.
Q. Did yon hear any threats of any kind against him ? A.
No, 6ir, I don't recollect any threat.
Q. Have you any personal knowledge, or do you know any
thing about an attempt to assassinate him in any shapo ? A. I
do not.
Q. Do you know anything about men going after him there
for any purpose ? A. Not of my own knowledge.
Q. You did not see them following after him ? No, sir.

596 COURT OF IMPEA0HMENT8L
Q. Or hear them inquire after him ? A. No, sif. ,
Q. Have you no personal knowledge who it was that went
to near Gilbraith's bridge and turned back vrith Doctor Moore
when they were after him ? A. No, sir.
Mr. MERRIMON. I beg to submit, Mr. Chief Justice,
that that is an improper way to put the question. There is no
evidence that anybody went to Gilbraith's bridge.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. Is it not proper to. assune the
fact? Q. Do you know of Doctor Moore going to meet any man ?
A. Only from what I have heard said.
Q. Do you know anything about the death of Outlaw ? A.
I do not.
Q. You did not see his body ? A. No, sir.
Q. You knoAV nothing about the death of Puryear ? A. I
do not.
Q. You did not see his body ? A. No, sir.
Q. Have you seen any person thero at Company Shops with
what are called tho Ku Klux disguises hon ? A. I nover havo.
Q. You say that if thoro Avas any secret organizations, in tho
county of Alamanco you luivo no knoAvlodgo of them \ A. No,
sir, no knoAvledge.
Re-Direct Examination.
By Mr. Mebbimon.
Q. You say that you did not understand there was any preju
dice against Corliss on the part of tho people there as constitu
ting a party ? A. Nono, I think.
Q. You did say there Avas somo prejudice among the young
men about town and you went on to say and did state partially
the ground of that prej udice. I ask you to Btate the ground as
you understood it ? A.I said there was some report that come
with him that he took colored people into the church at
Mebanesville where there was no provision made for colored
people. Q. [By Mr. Boyden.] They did not permit colored people
there in the church ? A, It was a small house.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 597
Q. Did you understand that the colored man was seated
among the Avhite people? A. That was the report.
Q. [By the Chief Justic] What else? A. I heard the
young men complain of his approaching them in conversation
Avithout being invited.
Q. He was offensive ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Interfering with people engaged in conversation when he
was not im^ted ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was it understood that he would make offensive remarks ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. He Avould enter into conversation Avithout being invited
and make offensive suggestions? A. Yes, sir, that was the
understanding. Q. And they Avere prejudiced against him growing out ot
theso two matters ? A. There may have been some prejudice
on account of his teaching a colored school.
Q. Do you knoAV that.
By tho Ciiikf Justice.
Q. From "tho general talk Avhat conclusion did you come to
in that respect ? A. I think thero Avas somo projudico on that
account. Q. Do you remombor tho particular circumstances under
which ho took this colored man into church at Mobansvillo?
A. Tho report Avhich I heard was that ho carried a man into
church Avithout permission and Avithout asking. The colored
people had not beon in tho habit of attending that church and
there was no provision for them. One of tho officers of tho
church — I think ho Avas an ofllcer — proposed to furnish him a
seat at tho door whero tho colorod man could hoar.
Q. Thon Avhat Avas dono — Iioav did it terminate? A. I
think the colored man occupied the chair hear tho door.
Q. State whether theso two classes of people occupy thoir own
churches in your part of the coimtry ? A. They do generally.
Q. Are there any provisions made in the Avhite churches for
colored people ? A. In the Union church at Company Shops

898 COUBT OF rMPEACHMENTS.
there is the gallery, but I don't suppose there has been twenty
colored people in there since that time. > < -'
Q. Ii it customary for tho oolorod and white peoplo to lit
together in the same church ? A. No, sir.
Q. Thoy sit apart ? A. Yoi. sir.
Q. Stato whothor thoro was any complaint mado against Mr.
Corliss for having taken a colored man into a church and Boat
ing him among tho whit© people ? A. Yes, sir, that was tho
report that oomo with him and it Avas criticised froely. It was
the Bonrce of some feeling against him.
Q. State if you know when he sued on the state's warrant
when these parties were discharged by the magistrate ?
Mr. BOYDEN. The Avitness was not present, he can't
know anything about it.
Mr. GRAHAM. The fact Avas called out on cross-examina
tion by yourself that there was a trial.
Mr. BOYDEN. I asked him if he was present and he said
he AA'as not and I stopped him.
A. A portion of the trial Avas held in the office of the rail
road agent. I went to the door of the office when the trial
Avas progressing and remained for a moment. They adjourned
from that place to the magistrate's room over my store.
Q. Do you know whether thoy bound them over or not?
A. When they came down I understood they did not.
Q. You say there was considerable. prejudice against Shoffner?
A. I can't say there Avas — I don't recollect that thoro was any
feeling against him only on account of the introduction of that
bill. Q. He was a senator representing that county in the senate ?
A. That county and Guilford.
Q. And he introduced a bill called the Shoffner act? A.
Yes, sir, so I understand.
Q. You say that tho feeling against him grew out of that
fact. I ask yon whether that bill was very offensivo to the
people in that part of the countiy ? A. Yes, sir.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 599
Q. It is understood to bo a reflection upon thorn f
Mr. BOYDEN. Wo objoot to tho question,
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. You may provo with what fooling
tho Introduction of tho bill was received.
Q. Did that fooling grow out of tho introduction of that
hill f A, That Is my understanding, altogether. I know
nothing else against Mr, Shofftior.
Q. Was that bill especially offensive to tho peoplo of the
county there ? A. I think it Avas.
Q. Thoy complained of him in that conneotlon ? A. Yos,
sir. Q. Was ho offensive otherwise — was thoro any prejudice
against him simply because ho was a republican? A. Nono
that I am aware of.
Q. Was he a man of much character there ? A.I cannot
Bay I know his character any Avay.
Q. Had he any reputation as a political leader ?
Mr. BOYDEN. That is not the Avay to examine the Avit
ness. Tho witness must bo enquired of as to what was his
reputation. Q. State whether he had any reputation as a political leader
— whether he was prominent or obscure ? A. I don't knoAV
that ho was over in public lifo before — I cannot say.
Q. What Avas his business at homo ? A. I am unablo to
say, but I think ho lived on a farm. I don't know how he
mado his living.
Q. Had he any prominence or Avas anything said about him
except in connection with the introduction of this bill ? A. I
cannot think of anything now that gave him notoriety. I
don't think ho had much before.
The hour of half-past two having arrived, the court adjourned
till to-roorrow at eleven o'clock, A. M.

600 , OOUBT OF IMPEACHMENTS* l

FOURTEENTH DAY.
. Senate Chambeb, Fob. Htk, 1871.,,
The COURT met at eleven o'clock pursuant to adjourn
ment, Hon. Richmond M. Pearson, chief justice of the supreme
court, in the chair.
Tho proceedings opened by proclamation in due form by
the door keeper.
The CLERK called the roll of senators and the following
gentlemen Avere found to be present :
Messrs. Adams, Allen, Battle, Beasley, Bellamy, Brogden,
Brown, Cook, Council, CoavIos, Ci'OAvell, Dargan, Edwards,
Eppes, Flemming, Graham, of Orange, HaAvkins, Byman,
Jones, King, Latham, Ledbetter, Lehman, Linney, Love,
Mauney, McCotter, Merrimon, Moore, Morehead, Olds, Rob
bins, of DaA'idson, Robbins, of RoAvan, Skinner, Spoed, Troy,
Warren, Whiteside, Worth— 39.
Senetor WHITESIDE moved that tho reading of the
journal of tho proceedings of yesterday bo dispensed with.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE put the question on the motion of
Senator Whitesido and it avus decided in tho affirmative.
JAMES S. SCOTT, a witness called on behalf of the Man
agers being duly sworn, testified as follows :
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. What is your name, ago and residence? A. James S.
Scott, ago forty-throe, residence Graham, Alamance county.
Q. Stato Avhether in tho months of July and August yon
saAv any armed men in tho neighborhood of where you live,
und if so, under what circumstances, any if they did anything
to you, Avhat? A. In the month of July a squad of armed
men came to my store aud an officer calling himself Burgen
said he Avanted to see me. He asked me ray name, and after
asking mo about some purchases of bacon he asked me to go

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. noLDEN. COl
out in the street. He had a piece of paper with names on it,
and he said he wanted mo to go to the Shops. I then askod
him if he belonged to the militia at tho Shops, and ho said he
did. I asked him by what authority he arrested me ; ho said
he could not show any authority but his authority vas from
tho governor and the president of the United States for my
arrest and that 1 must go along.
Q. Go on and giA'e us a statement of what he did with you ?
A. He then arrested, I think, two other men.
Q. Who were they ? A. Mr. Boyd and Mr. Hunter, and he
placed us under guard and started us for the Shops.
Q. Were tho guard armed? A. Yes, sir, they marched us
with fixed bayonets and pistols in their hands. Tho com
mand was given by this man Burgon to go in this condition,
Each of us Avas placod botween tAvo soldiers with fixed bayo«
nets. I was marchod bosicle an officer Avith Avhat I supposed
to be a navy pistol in his hand. He carried it in his hand all
the way.
Q. How far ? A. About two and a half miles to the Shops
from Graham. I was carried within ten feet of my wife and chil
dren and was called upon to stop to know Avhat Avas the matter.
They told me to go forward, that I could not stop. After Ave
got a little on tho cdgo of tho toAvn this squad of mon halted
and this man Burgen remarked that if Ave had any word to
send back to our families ho Avould wait afoAv miuutesto enable
us to Bond back any word ; that ho Avas going to send us to
camp. Thoro was nobody I boliovo that wanted to send any
word — at least thoro was no Avord sent. Wo Avere thon placed
each with two soldiers before and behind each prisoner, and aa-o
were marched to tho shops in that condition.
Q. What was done then ? A. When we got there, this
officer reported to a man he called Kirk, and told him he had
been directed by Colonel Burgen to deliver these prisoners
with his compliments. We were seated under a tree Avith a
guard placed around us, and Avith the Orders if we crossed a
line made by bayonets—I don't know anything about military

602 oomsr or impeachments.
operations— -they mnst shoot us down. I remarked myself
At the time I did'nt know anything about military operations,
but that I would bo very careful not to cross the line as I did
not como there to be shot. I took a seat on a box undor tho
tree and thero we stayed all day. We sat for an hour until Kirk
came to us to know if we had any arrangements made to have
any thing to eat. I told him that we had no time to make any
arrangements as we did not expect to be brought to his camp.
He remarked that array rations were pretty rough for gentle
men, but he said, " I will provide you with dinner, and per-
" haps by night you can have Bomo arrangements made." That
was on Friday. We were detained there in the camp during
that night. This man Burgen had a talk with me in refer-
once to what was to become of us. I had made some inquiries
during the'day of Colonel Kirk to know if we could not have
a speedy hearing before some tribunal or give bail, and said that
we would be willing to give any amount of bail he wanted.
There was then only four of us in the camp and we said we could
give $500,000 bail for our appearance before any tribunal. He
said he was not authorized to admit us to bail, but to hold us in
close custody. I asked if he knew when we would have a
trial. He did not give me any answer. That night in a con
versation with this man Burgen he asked me if colonel Kirk
had told me anything about how we were to be tried and what
was to become of us. I told him he had not, that I had asked
him 6ome questions but had got no information. He then re
marked, "I am surprised at Colonel Kirk. It was his place to
" tell you. But I tell you now, you are all to be tried by a
" court martial. You are to be tried at Yancey ville ; " and he
remarked " I am one of the court martial and colonel Kirk ia
" one, but you will all have a fair trial ; but the thing is fixed,
"you are to be tried in that Avay; yon are to be carried to
" Yanceyville. I am surprised that colonel Kirk did not tell
" you so that you could provide some means of going there as
" you are not used to walking and it will break you down."
Tlie next day something was said to colonel Kirk about tho

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 60S
timo wo were to bo tried. I asked the question myself. Ho
counted up on his fingers and in a little while he said, " you
will lcavo here in about five days." During that timo some ot
tho friends were thoro and found out that the command was
going to move that evening to Yanceyville, and they sent us a
conveyance to ride. There was a"number of prisoners, among
whom was a crippled man, an uncle of mine.
Q. Tell ub what you know about the arrest of Henderson
Scott ? A. On Saturday, Henderson Scott came to the camp,
bo he told me 
Mr. BOYDEN. That will not answer, you must tell what
you know yourself about it.
Q. He came tb see you ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Who was Henderson Scott? A. Ho was a man who
lived, near Haw Fields church — in the HaAv Fields countiy.
Q. What is his age ? A. He was then about fifty-six years.
Q. What was his condition ? A. He was a crippled man ;
he Buffered a great deal from an ankle which was broken ten or
twelve years ago. He was unable to walk except with a stick,
and was in a very lame condition. He had a wound that was
nmning all the time, and for one or two years, he had medical
treatment at least twice a day.
Q. State what, if anything, Avas done or said to him in your
presence ? A. While we were setting there we took some din
ner that he had brought over with him for us. Colonel Kirk
came up and asked him if his name was Henderson Scott. He
said it was. He told him to keep his seat that he was a
prisoner. Q. To keep his seat ? A. " Keep your seat you are a pris
oner." After hiB arrest, I suppose that was about 12 o'clock,
on Saturday, it was mentioned among us, though we did not
know whether it was true or not, that the command was to
move that evening. Arrangements seemed to be making for
some move. They were, striking tents, taking them down. It
was about throe o'clock. I think in tho evening that the com
mand did move.

604 COCBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. Before you get away from that point, let me ask what was
the character of Henderson Scott, in respect to morals, whether
ho was a religious man, and zealously bo ? A. He was an elder
in the Presbyterian church at Haw Fields, and was looked upon
as being one of the prominent members of the church. I never
heard anything alleged against him in my life.
Q. Proceed ? A. I reckon it was three o'clock in the evening
the command moved forward. We rode in a conveyance that
had been provided for us, and we had got about ten miles to a
place called Moore's store, and there we staid all night. Every
thing seemed to be quiet. They permitted Henderson Scott
to sleep in a houso that was near by, Avith some officers Avith
him. Ho Avas a man in such feeble health, and in such a con
dition, that it Avas not safe for him to sleep out. The next
morning avo moved forAA'ard until tho middle of tho day— it may
havo boon a littlo after, Avhen tho command Avaa allowed to rest
an hour. Tho mon Avere fatigued by walking. Then tho
command moved forward, and avo all got in our conveyance
again. Thoro woro seven of us. Ju»t as wo woro about to
move, tho throe officers commanding those troops Avoro standing
right near this conveyance avo Avoro riding in, and I think it
avuh Kirk avIiq remarked that ho had just received news that
his command was going to bo attacked, and we Avere to bo
taken from him or released, and ho said " you must all get out
" and Avalk. Your d  d Ku Klux friends have threatened to
" attack mo and roleaso you all ; but, if there is a gun fired
"at. any of my men, I will shoot the last one of you down."
That was on Sunday. At that time we were all out, and some
thing was said about this old gentleman being crippled and
unable to walk. Some of our men remarked this to one of
tbese officers that he was not able to walk, although he was
getting out of the carriage. They told him that he might keep
his seat in the carriage, and then he directed the carriage to be
filled with some of his oavu men who were tired, and then the
command moved forward.

TEIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 605
Q. That was in your conveyance? A. Yes, sir, it had been
supplied us.
Q. By citizens? A. By citizens for us to ride in.
Q. Most of tho prisoners walked all that evening ? A.
Some of them — I think Mr. Boyd, was told to get in the con
veyance and ride after he had walked awhile. After I had
walked a few miles, I was told I might get in a buggy and ride.
I think there was another one told he might get in and ride ;
but the balance I think walked all that evening. We went on
to a place — I do not know any name for it — about eight miles
from Yanceyville whero we encamped that night. There was
a tent put up for us all to sleep in and a guard placed around
ns. We staid there all night. The next morning we moved
to Yanceyville. We got to Yanceyville I BuppoBe about twelve
o'clock — it may havo beon a little after. There seemed to be
some mooting up stairs in the court houso. I did not see any
thing of it but we wero carried into tho court house and placed
in a room and wo remained there two or three days.
Q. State what was said, ifanything, when you wore put into
the room by Burgen or anybody else Jn charge ? A. Burgon
inarched us into that room. It was the south room of that
building. He said, " Gentlemen you are to occupy this room —
" it is where Senator Stephens was murdered — this is tho
room you gentlemen from Alamanco will occupy." I forgot
to fitato in a conversation I had with him on the way —
on Sunday. He remarked to me that he felt sorry for
some of us men — there were only seven of us altogether — that
we were to be tried and he said " some of you will never see
" home again."
Q. Did he mention any particular one? A. He. did not
mention any names.
.Q Was Mr. Adolphus Moore among you ? A. Yes, sir, he
was Avith as.
Q. Who all were there together prisoners ? A. Henderson
Scott, A. G. Moore, John Ireland — John Rich Ireland they
40

600 COUBT. OF IMPEACHMENTS,
call him— James E. Boyd and James T. Hunter. >
Q. And yourself ? A. And myself.
Q. How long did they keep you in Yanceyville, and what
did thoy do with you there ? A. I think I was. there some
thing over tAvo weeks. I do not remember the exact time. . I
was confined in tho court house all the time I was there. I
Avas in this room I first spoke of for tAvo or three days, and
then Avas put in the com-t room Avith the Caswell peisoners, as
they called them. We all staid there until I was paroled and
sent home.
Q. Was this court houae guarded during that time ? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. Soldiers in the court house and about it ? A. In the
court house and around it most of tho time. There was — I
don't know Avhat they call it — a baricade built out of logs to
prevent an attack or anything of that sort in front of the court
house. I nover have been a 6oldier, and I do not know the
names of these things.
Q. I want to read over certain names to you and see if you
remember eeeing them in custody, and would be glad to ha\re
you say so, Lucien II. Murray ? A. There was a great many
arrests made in Alamance that I heard of Avhen I Avas in Yan
ceyville, and I saav some of the soldiers in charge of persons
after I got home.
Q. Did you seo them in custody? A. I saw soldiers in
charge of them.
Q. Look OA'er that list and »oe whom you saAv ? A. I bbav
Rogers. Q. Which Rogers ? A. George Rogers, Alexander Wilson,
Lucien II. Murray, Adolphus G. Moore, James N. Holt,
Sydney Steel— I suppose it is the samo man. I saw a man
named Steel in custody, but I don't know his given name, at
tho timo, bnt I see it put down hero. Benjamin McAdams,
James Henry Anderson, Jefferson Younger, William Moore,
D. W. Weeden, David Moore. There was a young person, I
don't knoAV what his name Avas, but a red-headed boy about

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 607
sixteen years old. William Whitsett, Albert Murray, John G.
Albright, Robert Hanna ; I did not see him in custedy, but I
saw him reporting backwards and forwards to the camp.
William Johnson, Henderson Scott, Thomas Lutterloh, James
Foust, Robert Stockard, James T. Hunter, John R. Stockard.
Those are all the names I see here.
Q. Do you remember anybody who was not there ? A. I
remember that Thomas N. Holt was arrested.
Q. Do you remember seeing colonel Bingham under arrest ?
A. I did not see him — he and Dr. Mebane. I did not see
them. Q. State what was the manner of Kirk and Burgen as you
passed on to Yanceyville, whether coarse or otherwise to the
prisoners t A. With the exception of a few curses they gave
us  Q. Did they curse the prisoners or otherwise / A. Thero
was cursing on several occasions.
Q. By whom f A. By both of them.
Q. Give us some idea of the cursings/ A.T have never
been used to using curse words. They seemed to better versed
in them than we were.
Q. Go on and give us a sample ? A. On several occasions
they called us"d — d rebel Kuklnxes" — an epithet Ihadjiever
heard in Alamance before. I looked upon that aa rather coarse
language for a gentlemen to receive.
Q. Did they apply them to you frequently/
Mr. BOYDEN. That is leading.
Q. State whether they did or not / A. I don't remember,
I think I heard it several times.
Q. Did they curse you violently on any occasion/ A. As
I said before, he stated that ho had been informed that they
were to be attacked and we released, and then both of them
cursed us very violently for a little time, That was on Sunday
after we wero on our way to Yanceyville. After we got' in the
court house there were three or four oursing spells iri the pros-

608 COUBT OJ IMPEACHMENTS.
once ol tho prisoners ; whether it was intended for the whole
crowd or not I don't know.
By the Chief Justice.
Q. State how it came up / A. On one occasion the colonel
commander himself — this man Kirk — came up there and cursed
a man by the name of Weeden, giving him a most terrible
cursing — told him he was a d — d Kuklux and a d— d traitor.
Q. How did it originate ? A. I don't know how it started,
but he just came up and called him that.
By Mb. Meerimon, [resuming.]
Q. You don't know how it was provoked? A. I don't
know. It was in the presence of all the prisoners. On several
occasions there wero curses of that kind in relation to " Ku
klux," " rebels," and such liko. On one occasion, at the shops,
tho soldiers— I don't know whether thoy woro on guard or not,
but thoro was a crowd standing around-— said of one of our
mon who was lying asleep, " You seo that d— d robol— I could
" plok him off d— d quick j and If I could havo my way I
" would shoot thorn all."
Q. Who avos it that said that ? A. It was ono of the sol
diers, but I don't know whether lio was on guard or not.
Q. Stato, if you oan remember, what thoy said when they
mado you got out of the vehicle, if any threats wero made that
day ? A. I have repeated that when we got out of the con
veyance we wero riding in, the remark was, that he had just
got news that tho camp would bo attackod for our release, and
ho said "If any of your d— d Ku Klux frlonds undertake that
" thing, or fire a gun, I will shoot the last ono of you."
Q. Who was that? A. Kirk and Burgen. There was one
man who did not curse any — or I don't remember that he
cursed. I recollect that he came forward and told me that the
colonel was very violent, but it would wear off after awhile,
I recollect he said he was a preacher.
Q. He told you in that conversation that he was a preacher?
A. He told me once or twice on the road that he was a Baptist
preacher.

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 609
Q. He belonged to the church militant I suppose. Did you
seo the troops — these armed men ? A. I saw them after I was
arrested. Q. Describe tlieir appearance — discipline if they had any —
and their intelligence, all that you observed about them. Their
general conduct ? A. I don't know any thing about military
operations. Q. State Avhat you saw in these men ? A. If there is any
system in military operations, it looked to mo that this Avas
about the worst I had ever seen. I would not be surprised
that any army should loso a cause they were fighting in, if they
were like them. That was my idea.
Q. Was there any order ? A. No, sir.
Q. Was there any subordination to authority ? A. No, sir,
the privatcB would curso tho officer of tho day — I heard that
frequently, when they wore on guard duty. I heard them eay
sometimes that thoy had remained on duty as long as twenty-
four hours and thoy would bo d— d If they would not throw
down their guns and go homo, that thoy wero not disposed to
remain on guard all tho time.
Q. What was thoir grade of Intelligence? A. Really, I
don't think thoro was any, as far as I was ablo to judgo. Thoro
were some officers who seemed to bo moderately intelligent
mon. Q. How wore tho soldlors ? A. I don't think there was any
intelligence among them as far as I saw. There were a great
many boys among them.
Q. Can you say whether they were like ordinary citizens of
the state — whether better or worse ?
Mr. SMITH. I don't think that is a proper question.
Q. State tlieir demeanor at tho court house at Yancyville—
how they bohaved themselves. A. I did not get to see much
of their behavior. I was inside the court house.
Q. Did you observe them from the windows or otherwise!
A. They did not seem, to* behave like the men raised in my

610 'COUET OF IMPEACHMENTS. t
section of tho country. I don't know how to describe tlieir
manners. Q. Did you seo them strip and wash at the public pump ?
A. No, sir, I nover saw thorn do anything of that sort. I saw
thoin washing their faces but I never saw them strip.
Q. I understand you to say there were a good many boys
among these men ? A. Yes, sir, they appeared bo to me.
Q. What age apparently ? A. There was some I saw who
certainly did not appear to be more than sixteen or seventeen
years old. I did not ask them their age, but they had that ap
pearance. '
Q. Did you talk with any of them ? A. I talked with a few
of them when they would carry us out.
Q. Were they intelligent or otherwise ? A. I think the
ones I talked with could neither read nor write, The most I
talked with represented themselves as being from Tennessee.
There was some feAv who said they were from the Avestern
counties of tho state. I think Mitchell or Yancey counties.
But most Avere from Yancey that I talked with.
Q. I Avish you to state whether or not you know that Hen
derson Scott paid to Burgen any amount of money ? A. I
know this, that as I came from Yanceyville I came in company
Avith Burgen — or rather he brought me home. He told me that
he had orders to arrest Henderson Scott a second time. He
said at the same time " He knoAVs all about this Kuklux mat-
" ter ;" and he said "I have sent word for him to report to me
" at camp to-morrow." The next morning Henderson Scott
came to my house — he is my uncle — and he told me he had
been ordered at camp. He had some provisions in a blanket.
Q. (By Mr. Smith). Are you Bpeaking of what Scott said
to you ? A. Yes, sir.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. You may pass over that.
Tho WITNESS. He came to, my house with provisions and
a knapsack and wont over to the Shops— ho Avont in that direo-
iion and Avas gone about two hours and camo back to mo and
romarkod — —
Mr. SMITH. Never mind that.

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 611
Mr. GRAHAM. We claim, Mr. Chiof Justice, that this is
a part of the res gestoe. We expect to prove that upon the re
qusition of Henderson Scott, the witness Bent some money to
Burgen. The CHIEF JUSTICE. You can prove that.
Tho WITNESS. About two hours after he came back and
told me he had no money Avith him.
Mr. SMITH. Does the Chief Justice think that is proper.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. Upon the theory that they will
connect the fact that the witness took money from Henderson
Scott and carried it to Burgen, it is proper.
Mr. MERRIMON. No, sir, Ave propcse to show that the
witness loaned Henderson Scott some money, and put it in an
envelope and sent it to Burgen and that Burgen received.it.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. That is competent connected with
the fact of the loaning of the money.
The WITNESS. He said he had no money with him and
that he wanted fifty dollars. I told him he could have it. He
then told me Avhat he Avanted with it. He was sitting inj my
parlor. I stepped over to the etore and got fifty dollars and
brought it to him Avith an envelope He sealed it up in the
envelope and directed mo to back it for Colonel Burgen. I
did so and 6ont it.
Q. What did he say he wo wanted with it.
Mr. SMITH. We object to that.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. I think that is a part of the act
of the borroAving of the money.
Mr. SMITH. The borrowing of the money ia competent ;
that is a fact, but for what purpose he intended to borrow it,
depends entirely upon the declaration of Henderson Scott.
Mr. MERRIMON. It is an act accompanied by a de
claration. The CHIEF JUSTICE. It is necessary to explain the
matter. < •
Q. What did he say ho wanted it for ? A. Ho said he
wanted it for Colonel Burgon— that Burgen hod told him ho

612 COUET OF IMPEACHMENTS.
would parole him and never interrupt him any moro if he
would pay him fifty dollars. »r ; i.
Mr. SMITH. I would ask the Chief Justice if that is com
petent even under the ruling which he has made. : . ;
The CHIEF JUSTICE. I think it comes in as a part of
the act of borrowing the money.
Q. You sealed the money up ? A. He sealed the money
up. I saw the money put in.
Q. Did you address it ? A. I addressed it myself.
Q. To whom ? A. To this man Burgen and I maked Hen
derson Scott's name on the back as from Henderson Scott.
Q. From Henderson Scott ? A. Yes, sir, and I sent it up by
one of my clerks.
Q. Did you deposit that envelope in his hand ? A. I don't
know whether I gave it to the clerk or whether he did himself ;
if I did not hand it to him Henderson Seott did.
Q. Do you know the young man who got it ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. What is his name ? A. Robert S. Hunter.
Q. Was he in your employ at that time. A. Yes, sir.
Q. What was his business ? A. He was a salesman in my
store. Q. Is he in your employment now? A. Yes, sir.
Q. What became of the young man after the paper was
given him ? A. He went off to the Shops.
Q. In that direction ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. [By the Chief Justice.] He went off and was absent ?
A. Yes, sir, he went off, as if he were going there.
Q. State to the court whether you saw these troops in the
building at the court house at Graham ? A. Yes, sir, they oc
cupied the court house.
Q. How long / A. I can't say exactly how long they were
there, but I reckon two weeks. I did not pay much attention
to the time.
Q. Were they in the court house and about it / A. Yes,
sir, they encamped there and they occupied the court house
and offices, I think.

TBIAL OF WTLLIAM W. HOLDEN. 613"
Q. They had armed possession of it / A. They had a guard
around the court house, because on one or two occasions I at-
attempted to go in and I could not go in.
Q. Did they have any prisoners in it / A. Yes, sir.' ¦'
Q. How long were they kept in prison / A.I don't know
exactly, but my recollection is about three weeks. I did not
keep the time, but it was about three weeks altogether.
Q. What was done with you / A. I was paroled, as they
call it.
Q. Allowed to go at large ? A. I was alloAved to go homo
but to go no where else.
Q. Under an injunction to do what ? A. Not to talk but to
go to my store and my house and remain there. I was after
wards carried before Judgo Brooks at Salisbury.
Q. What did he do with you ? A. Ho discharged me.
Q. Discharged you all from custody ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Woro you over prosecuted for any offence ? A. No, sir.
j Q. Had you committed any ? A. Nono in tho world.
Q. Stato to the court whothor you havo a gonoral acquaint
ance with tho peoplo of Alamanco county ? A. I havo beon
raised among them.
Q. What has been your businopa ? A. I was a railroad man
ten years doing business and connected vqth the peoplo in that
way. Bofore that I was for a while a salesman in the store of
my father up to the time I went on the railroad. Since 1800
I have been merchandizing myself, with a partner.
Q. Havo you a pretty general acquaintance with the people ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know the black people there much ? A. I have
some acquaintance among them.
Q. State if you know the. feeling in 1869 and 1870 and even
up to this time existing between the whites and blacks in your
country ? A. So far as I know, in passing to and from my
store and about toAvn, the feeling seemed to be a kindly one be
tween the two races. ¦ ,. \- <;.
Q. Do you know of any^ other feeling? A. -No, sir. ¦[

614 COCBT OP,. IMPEACHMENTS,, ;
Q. Do you know that'any colored man or woman Was dis
missed by reason of his color or politics ? A. No, sir,i I have
jiever heard of anything of the kind. , i
Q. Do you know whether the people there were submissive
to legal authority ? I think they were.
Q. Did you ever knoAV an instance where legal authority
was resisted ? A I never did.
Q. Are' the courts kept open or otherwise ? A. Always
kept open.
Q. You live in the town ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. People came and went as usual ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Wero the black people generally employed by the
whites? A. Yes, sir.
Q. They depended on the whites for labor and employment ?
A. I think so, and as far as my acquaintance is concerned, they
were employed by the Avhites. There were some few renters
and 6ome few blacks who were mechanics and got employment
about toAvn.
Cross-Examination. . By Mr. Smith.
Q. Was any reason assigned to you Avhen you were arrested
for the arrest ? A. No, sir, though I asked for it.
Q. Was anything said to you about information being
lodged against you ? A. No, sir.
Q. Where do you reside? A. In Graham, Alamance
county. Q. If I understand you, there was no act of unnecessary
violence beyond the arrest and custody of the parties by any
one upon any of the prisoners ; that the only harsh treatment
was the harsh language used and the confinement? A. That
is what I speak of. The treatment I considered to be pretty
rough on account ot tho language used, and the intimations
thrown out of course left ns in doubt Avhether we would be car
ried to exeoution. We could not tell anything about what was
to bo dono with us. i
Q. Do you know whore these soldiers wero from whom you

TEIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 615'

(

Baw — where their homes were ? A. Only what few I talked
with. I think a majority of them whom I talked with repre- '
sented themselves as being from Tennessee.
Q. Were they not from the western part of tlie state?
A. Some few spoke of being from the western part of the state.
Q. Any from the county of Buncombe, Avhere my friend
Judge Merrimon formerly resided ? A. I don't recollect any
of thom speaking of having come from Buncombo. I knoAV
that Yancey county and Mitchell county were spoken of.
Q. Thoro wore somo from that section of the state and Ten
nossoo? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were there not a good many from Wilkes? A. I don't
remember talking with any one who said he was from Wilkes.
Q. Don't you remember there were 6ome Avho said they Avere
from Madison county ? A. I do remember that there were
6ome who said they Avere from Madison.
Q. Were not the bulk of them from this county ? A. Not
the bulk of those I talked with.
Q. Where were they from ? A. They said they were from
Tennessee — the bulk that I talked with. I didn't talk with
a great many.
Q. What officer Avas in command of the company? A. I
do not remember. These Avoro guards. I talked with men
Avho Avere on guard duty and Avould go out with us occa
sionally. Q. How many were there in the company? A. I don't
know that.
Q. When they arrested you? A. They looked to me—
I did not count them— but I suppose there Avere thirty or
forty men. I did not know who was in command of the men
although I Avalked Avith him.
Q. I believe you said that Kirk told you that he had infor
mation that thoy wore going to be attackod and if thoy wero
you would all be shot. What was the information which ho
had received ? A. He just remarked that he had received ih«
formation— whether he had received it while wo. were stop-
; /, ' ¦¦¦

616 COtJST OF IMPEACHMENTS.
ping there, I didn't know — " That your d— d Ku-Klux rebel
"friends-are going to attack my company to rescue you." ;
Q. Did he tell you that some of his men had been disarmed
at a bridge ? A. I didn't hear anything of that sort. <> ¦ ¦
Q. All you remember is that he said be had understood you
were to be rescued and his company Avere to be attacked to
accomplish it ? A. Yes sir.
Q. And if that took place you Avould be all shot. ? A. He
said "If there is a gun fired by your d— d Ku-Klux rebel
friends I Avill shoot you all doAvn."
Q. But there Avas no attempt to shoot you? A. No, sir,
not that I know of.
Q. This language merely Avas used ? A. This was repeated
by both him and Burgon. Both entered into tho conversation.
Q. Thero was no attack — no gun fired at you in exeoution
of that threat ? A. No, sir.
Q. Wore you treated kindly at Caswoll ? A. Wo were
treated by the oitizens very kindly. I lived as well there as
I ever did in my life. 1 don't thiuk I evor lived better. With
the exception of the rough language I cannot say there was
any rough treatment of the prisoners Avhile I Avas in tho oourt
houso. Q. You Avere subsequently discharged, or released on parol?
A. Yes, sir, after having boon thero for sometime. I don't
recollect how long.
Q. Do you know whether Burgon Avas put undor arrest for
his conduct towards you or any one else, by order of the gov
ernor ? A. Not ot my own knowledge.
Q. From what you heard said either at the time you have
spoken of for his treatment of prisoners, or for any miscon
duct ? A. Not at the time I have spoken of. I heard of it
afterwards. Q. Did you see any of them put under arrest ? A.' Any of
the men ? , i .
Q. Or any of the officers ? A. No, eir. ; 
Q. Did you see any of them after they were arrested— -any
of these officers ? A. I think not.

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 617
Q. Do you know that Burgen came to Raleigh soon after
this ? A. I saw him in Raleigh, I think, the next week after
we were released at Salisbury. I was released there, it strikes
me, on Thursday.
Q. [By Mr. Merrimon.] What day of the month — what
time in the month ? A. I do not recollect the date.
Q. When you saw him in Raleigh was he under arrest ? A.
Not when I saw him.
Q. Whore was he ? A. I saw him at the National hotel. '
Q. He was not in charge of anybody? A. No, sir, I only
know from hearsay that he was arrested.
Mr. GRAHAM. You need not speak anything of what
you heard.
Q. Was your Uncle Henderson Scott released by orders of
the governor, or by whose order ? A. I heard Kirk say that
he was released by order of the governor.
Q. Ho was released by order of the governor? A. Yes, sir.
That declaration was made at Yanceyville.
Q. He was in fact released ? A. Yes, sir, he was sent away
from there then.
Q. Do you know whether he was not arrested a second time
and released a second time by order of tho governor — I mean
arrested without the governor's order and released a second
time by his orders ? A. I do not know that.
Q. Do you know whether Thomas M. Holt was also released
by ordor of the governor ? A. I don't know of my own
knowledge. Q. Did you hear it stated at the time ?
Mr. GRAHAM. I object to that.
Mr. SMITH. You have gone into that yourself.
A. I did not see him when he went from the camp. I only
heard his own declaration after I got home. '
Q. Did you hear Kirk at the time yon have testified, or
Burgen say how he was released ? A. How Thomas Holt was
released? <¦¦¦'¦:¦'¦. .¦,<¦-' -;•>•". "''••' '"'¦ •:-'¦'¦;¦*¦>¦¦¦¦:•'¦, '¦¦¦'¦¦"• V
Q. Yes, sir. A. No, sir. v.« — "! ' ' ••/ ¦ * - '•¦'< *•"' ',; •' *:¦'

018 • OOUBT Or rMrBACIIMENTI.
Q. Were you and Mr. Holt in the offloo of the Jfcvernor
after you wore released ? A. - 1 think wo were. 
Q, How long after ? A. It was sometime the next week
after my roleare— I don't remember what day.
Q. How wore you treated by the governor when you wero
in his office.
Mr. GRAHAM, We object to that, It is of no consequence.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The question is not competent if
it is objected to.
Mr. SMITH. The whole of this examination has been
made to prove harsh or ill treatment on the part of the gov
ernor or his agents. We have not asked for any declaration
but we have asked the treatment he received from the governor
when he was in his office. It seems to me the whole inquiry
is as to what was the animus.
Mr. GRAHAM. The witness was then out of custody.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer takes it for
granted that the governor treats every citizen who calls upon
him politely.
Q. I understand you to say that these soldiers were1 below
the average of men in intelligence and moral conduct) or1 do
yon mean that they behaved as soldiers generally behav'o?
A. I looked upon them' as being below the average of men in
the way of intelligence.
Q. How do they compare with soldiers generally ? A; lam
only able to carry a comparison with the federal soldiers who
Avere there. The behavior and discipline of the two were not
at all alike.
Q. Those soldiers yon speak of were a part of the regular
army of the United States ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know how the conduct of these soldiers undor
Kirk's command would compare with that of volunteer soldiers
gonerally ? A. I do not know how volunteer soldiers behave.
I know nothing about the volunteer armies of the countiy.
Q. Do you recollect whon Outlaw was killed? A, I don't
remomber tho date, but I knoAV ho was hung.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. IIOLDBN. 619
Q. Did you see his body tho next morning? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Hanging fVom a tree ? A. Yos, sir.
Q. When did that take place— what timo of thei night?
A. I don't know that. I was awakened up the next morning1
by my family.
Q. You did not hear any disturbances in the night ? A. No,
sir, I hoard nothing of it.
Q. Was thoro any firing of guns that night that you heard 7
A. Nono that I heard.
Q. How far was the place Avhere he lived from where you
resided ? A. Not a great ways ; I cannot tell, I might say it
was four or five hundred yards.
. Q. How far from your house was it where he was hung ?
A. About the same distance.
Q. How far apart were the two places — his residence and the
tree where ho was hung / A. It might be called a short eighth
of a mile. I don't know exactly the distance. '
Q. You heard no disturbances that night / A. No, sir.
Q. You did not know ot any disorder going oil in town /
A. I did not know anything abont it. • '
Q. Until the next morning / A. No, sir.
Q. What was the behavior and conduct of Outlaw / A. I
never heard anything against the nigger in my life.
Q. Was he well behaved and peacableand respectable/ A.
So far as I know.
Q. You never heard aught against him / A. No sir.
Q. You stated a little while ago, in answer to a question by
Judge Merrimon that the peoplo were submissive to 'legal
authority. Do you mean to include the hanging of Outlaw as
among the acts of submission to legal authority /A. I mean
that the people whenever thero was any legal precept to' be
served were submissive.
Q. You moan they did not resist a process/ A. No, sir,
thoy did not. ¦ ! " '• •' '",; "• V"
Q. You. did not mean to say that the people observed the
law and that there were not acts of violence / A. I don't mean

620 COUBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
to say that there were not murders and outrages in our. county as
much bo as there are in other countiesi
Q. There were murders and outrages in that county/ ' A.
Yes, sir.
• Q. And you did not* have reference to this when you spoke
of the people being submissive to the law / A. No, sir, I
don't suppose the law had any thing to do with them. It was
an outrage.
Q. Somebody had something to do with it / A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know anything about the drowning of Puryear —
the colored man / A. I only know from hearsay.
Q. Has anybody been arrested, tried and punished for any
of these offenses / A. Not that I know of.
Q. Nobody has ever been arrested, tried or punished for either
of these homicides that you ever heard of / A. Not to my
knowledge. Q. Do you know a man named Corliss ? A. No, sir.
Q. Did you know a man whipped by that name — a northern
man ? A. I heard of it.
Q. You knew the man? A. No, sir, I never saw him that
I know of.
Q. Do you know a man named Meader, a northern man who
resided there ? A. No, sir, I don't know him. If I ever saw
him, I did not know it
Q. Do you know anything about these secret organizations
to execute vengeance or violate the laws ? A. I do not.
Q. You know of no secret organizations of any kind in
that county ? A. Not of my OAvn knowledge.
Q. Have you never seen disguised persons going about ? A.
Never in my life.
Q. Did you notice the next morning when Outlaw was found
hung whether there were any marks or tracks of horses show
ing that a considerable crowd had been on the spot ? A. I
think I noticed tracks of horses.
Q. A good many of them ? A. I could not tell ; a good
many had been there afoot before I got there.
Q. And defaced the tracks ? A. Yes, sir.

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 621
Q. Were there not tracks all about the streets of horses
hoofs — fresh tracks? A. I cannot tell as to that, I did not
notice. It was rainy next morning and the streets, were Wet ?
Q. Do you know of any company of disguised men or other
men going through there sometime before this night making a
row and shooting ? A. Not of my "own knowledge. I was
not home at that time.
Q. You were not at home then ? A. I was not in the state.
I heard of it after I came home.
Q. Did you notice the house of Outlaw after he -was hung,
whether it had been fired into and whether there were marks
of shots ? A. No, sir, I don't remember that I was ever at hie
house afterwards.
. Q. Do you co-operate with the conservatives or with what
party ? A. I have beon voting with the conservative party.
Q. I am not asking you with a view of reflecting on your
acts — it might perhaps reflect upon myself? A. I am not
aBhamed of my politics.
Q. Did you know Shoffner ? A. I knew him when I saAv
him. I have seen him a few times in my life.
Q. Did he reside any where near you ? A. I don't know
how far, but it was some ten or twelve miles distant
Q. Do you know how he come to leave the state ? A. No,
sir, only from hearsay.
Q. Do you knoAV of any threats being made against him ?
A. No, air.
Q. Do you know of any attempt to take his life or mob him ?
A. Only from hearsay.
Q. Do you know whether he went secretly or publicly ? A..
I don't know of my own knowledge. I can only state what I
heard. - .•,.„¦
Mr. GRAHAM. Do not state anything you heard. .
^ '. Q. You don't know how suddenly he disappeared ? A. No,
Q. He has gone away from there? A. I understood he had
gone away sometime before I heard of it
41

' 622 . OOUBT OF ; IMPBAOBMSZTM.
Q. Ho hoi not been there since? A. Not that I heard of.
Jle-Direot-Ebaaminatioiu :•'!.„[ V-
By Mr. Mesbtmon. ' ' " o
Q. I understood you to state on your examination in chief,
that Burgon said he had been ordered to arrest Henderson
Scott a second timo ? A. That is what he stated to me.
Q. I wish to ask you another question about what Henderson
Scott said to you at the time he borrowed some money.
Mr. BOYDEN. We have not cross-examined about bor
rowing money at all.
Mr. MERRIMON. I ask that we may be permitted to put
the question.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. If it is objected you cannot go
into that matter.
Q, If you know, state whether there was an inquest held
over the body of Outlaw.
Mr. BOYDEN. That is new matter. We did not go
into that question on the cross-examination. j
The CHIEF JUSTICE. That is rebutting your new
matter. A. There was.
Q. Was a jury empanneled by the coroner/ A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were you present at the inquest / A. I was not present.
Q. Did you have any personal knowledge that the coroner
was there and a jury assembled ? A. I saw them together in
the room where the body Avas lying.
Q. You do not knoAV anything about the examination / A.
No, sir.
Q. You know they were there taking aotion ? A: Yes, sir.
Q. As to Shoffner — was he a prominent person in the county
—a man of political influence or otherwise / A. Not that I
over heard of. >
Q. Was he an obsouro man? A. I never know anything
about tho man. If he had been a prominent man I should
have heard of it. • He was a mau who lived in an extreme

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. H0LD1N. : Ci3
comer of th© oounty ; and as to any prominence in th© way
of politics I novor heard it alleged of him.
Q. If there was any ill foeliug against him In tho oounty
you will say ao if you know, and if there was any cause that
raised that ill feeling, you will also state it. A. I cannot Bay
that I ever heard any ill feeling expressed towards him as a
man. There was some feeling in relation to a bill which he
introduced in tho legislature, knoAvn as the Shoffner bill.
There was some indignation felt about that bill.
Q. That was a bill offensive to the community / A. Yes,
sir, I heard complaintB made in regard to that bill, but I never
heard anything else alleged against him.
ROBERT S. HUNTER, a witness called on behalf of the
Managers, being duly sworn, testified as follows :
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. What is your name, residence and age ? A. Robert S.
Hunter — Graham — age eighteen years.
Q. What is your business? A. I am a salesman.
Q. State whether at any time Mr. James S. Scott placed in
your hands an envelope containing something, and if so, what
did you do Avith it? A. I never received any from him.
Q. From whom did you get it ? A. I received one from
Mr. Henderson Scott and I carried it to Mr. Burgen—- called
Col. Burgen.
Q. Where Avas that? A. At the timo he was at Company
Shops. Q. Was it last summer? A. Yes, sir
Q. Do yon know whether Henderson Scott had been ar
rested ? A. He had been onoe.
Q. Was that about that time or after that? A. After he
had been released onoe. '
Qi What did you do with the paper yon received from Hen<
dorson Soott? A. I carried it to Burgen, " ¦ >
Q. What did he say? A. He said it waa all right, '
Q. He reoeived it? A. Yea, eir.

624 COIJBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. What waa on the back of the letter ?< A. It was directed
Col. George W. Kirk,' I believe.  >• -,¦>,¦,,< 1 •-.. ;;!;...,. '».,
Q, Kirk Or Burgen? A, Burgen.' ,¦:.:'»'" u
Q. Address to Burgen? A. Yes sir. •<- ,; ,'
Q. Do you know whether Scott's name was written on? the
back of it? A. I didn't notice particularly. > ,
Q. You delivered it to Burgen and he said it was all right ?'
A. Yes, sir.
Cross-Examination. By Mr. Boyden.
Q. Where do you reside ? A. Graham, Alamance county.
Q, Were you there when Outlaw was hanged ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Where were you that night? A. I was standing doAvn
at ShaAv's hotel.
Q. What time did you retire that night? A. I don't rood-
loot exactly what time it was, but I supposo it was betAvixt
nine and ten o'clock.
Q. Did you go te sleep direotly ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. What time did you get up in the morning? A. I sup
pose about sun-up.
Q Did you hear any noise in the town during that night?
A. No, sir.
Q. Did you hear any guns fired ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. What signs did you see in the morning of there having
been a large number of men on horseback — horses' tracks —
there ? A. I could not see any tracks that morning, it AA-as
Bort of rainy.
Q. But you could tell if it was rainy whether there had
been any ? A. There had been a few — there was a few tracks.
Q. Didn't it look as if there had been fifty at leaBt ? A- It
looked as if there might have been about as many. • < \
Q. What time did you see the body. A. Just as I got up.
Q. How far from where you slept ? A. I suppose about a
hundred yards. ..... . > • ,.¦ ., , < .,, ;•••., , t„
Q. Which side of the house from where you were %i A* The
front side — the south side. .>.,'/ / r •, ,.,. .,.,.., <j ¦;,, m
O. The south side of the house ? A. Yes, sir.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 625
Q. And about one hundred yards from him? A. Yes, sir.
Q. You say you heard no noise that night?' A.: No, sir, I
never heard any.
Q. Were there any guns fired — any disturbances of any
kind? A. No, sir.
Q. State if you ever saw a crowd there at any time previous
to that riding through the toAvn ? A. I did once before.
Q. Tell when that was ? A. I don't know what time it was
now. Q. I do not care about the particular time ? A. I suppose
about twelve months before.
Q. Tell Iioav many there wore ? A. I cannot tell.
Q. I don't moan exactly just how many, but give an esti
mate ? A. I supposo thirty or forty.
Q. Woro they ou horsobnok? A. A part of thorn woro.
Q. What timo of day was It? A. I supposo it was botwlxt
ton and olovon at night.
Q. What sort of disguises did thoy havo? A. They woro
dressed in White.
Q. Did they have points indicating horns from the head ?
A. I beliovo they had.
Q. Did you go out when they rode through there? A.
Yes, Sir, I came out.
Q. You went out among them? A. No, sir,' I did not go
where they were. I was twenty-five yards from them.
Q. What did they do ? A. They never did anything, but
passed through.
Q. Did they make any noise ? A. Not when they passed.
Q. You didn't hear any noise made by any of them? A.
Not there. '¦¦ ' -; ¦'-
Q. Anywhere ? • A. After they got up street they com
menced groaning and hallooing. ¦•¦' > ' ', ¦ '' ,!' i .'
Q. You think there might have been how many / •' A. Be
tween thirty and forty. .>.-.. :•<! 1 1 ' >¦
Q. Don't you think there WOr* fifty or ' iixty I1 ! A.' No, sir,
I don't think there, conld have been so many.

626 COUET OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. How long did they continue in the town ? A. I suppose
Bome hour and a half.
Q. Did they ride about town a good deal— different parts of
it ? A. No, sir, they just passed on through.
Q. Which way did they seem to be going ? A. They went
north — out north street.
Q. In the direction towards Salisbury ? A. No, sir, towards
-Caswell. Q. Did you know any of the men ? A. No, sir.
Q. Did you know any of the horses ? A. No. sir.
Q. Were the horses disguised too ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. What sort of disguises did tho horses have ? A. The
tame kind.
Q. White ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Disguised so that they could not bo told at all ? A. Yes,
sir. Q. Did you hear any of them talk when they were near
by you ? A. No, sir.
Q. Did you know Puryear who was drowned ? A. Yes,
sir, I have seen him.
Q. Did you see his body after he was drowned ? A. No,
sir. Q. Do you know of any person that was whipped in the
county ? A. No, sir.
Q. Did you see any who had been whipped ? A. No, sir.
Q. Did you know Corliss ? A. No, sir.
Q. Do you know of any secret political organizations in the
county of Alamance ? A. No, sir.
Q. I ask you if you do not belong to the Kuklux Klan ? A.
No, sir, I do not.
Q. Do you know anybody who does ? A. No, sir. .
Q. You say you do not know of anybody that was whipped
whipped ? A, No, sir, I have heard ot some being but I don't
know it to be so. ,.¦¦,-..,
Q. Which party do you co-operate with I A. None. m ¦ ;

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 627
Q. I do not ask you about voting, but I ssk which your sym
pathies are with ? A. The conservative.
Q. I suppose so ? Of course.
Q. What did you mean by stating that you did not co
operate with any party ? A. I thought you wanted to know
what party I voted with.
Q. Did you see Outlaw's body hanging ? A. Yes, sir, the
next morning. *
Q. As Boon as you got up ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you ever see any parties disguised at any other time
than that one ? A. No, sir.
THOMAS M. HOLT, a witness called on behalf of th
Managers, being duly sworn, testified as follows :
By Mr. Merrmon.
Q. What is your name, place of residence and business ? A.
Thomas M. Holt. I reside in Alamance county at Haw River,
two miles east of the court house, and manufacturing is my
occupation for a liA'ing.
Q. State to the court whether or not you saw any armed
men in the county of Alamance during the year 1870, and if
so, about what time you saw them, and what you know of their
actions. A. They came about the 1st July.
Q. Who ? A. Colonel Kirk's command it was called. I
saw them as I passed on the railroad. On the 15th July they
came to my house and arrested Mr. Moore.
Q. State all you know about that arrest? A. It was on my
birthday, and I had a little party that day, and several of my
friends were thero. Colonel Burgen came with forty odd
men. My father counted them, and said there were forty-three.
Before we knew anything about it the house was surrounded.
It is on a hill with ravines around, and they came up on all
aides. Some twenty of them camo in front, with guns , drawn.
My father and Henry Freeze and myself were sitting on the. .
piazza. My father said .they , ao«4 not, be in a hurry to ahoot,
that nobody would ran. They had their guns drawn on me.

728 COTJBT OF IMPEACHMENTS. •'
They came up and Burgen asked me my name. I told him.
He asked if Mr. Moorewas there, and he said I waa. • ' ¦
Q. Who is Mr. Moore? A. He is my brother-in-law, A. G.
Moore. I went in and called him out. Burgen met him at the
door, and told him he was his prisoner. He asked him by what
authority ; he said it would not be given him, that it was by
orders of the governor and the president of the United States.
Afrer that the men came running towards the house and
Burgen ordered them back. They came around and got off
the Avalks on the turf, and he ordered them back and made the
remark that they were green troops and that he could not keep
them orderly.
Q. Were your family present and alarmed ? A. Yes, sir,
there were several ladieB there.
Q. Were they alarmed ?
Mr. BOYDEN. That quostlon is loading.
Q. Stato whether thoy wore alarmed or otherwise / A. The
children and ladios Avoro of conrso alarmed, but the gentlemen
woro not scarod.
Q. What happened then ? A. They took Mr. Moore off In
front about fifty or soventy-flve yards, and after a while ho
came baok and told me that if I wanted to I might take my
buggy to convey Mr. Moore up to the camp. I ordered the
horse and buggy up, and Mr. Moore and I got in, with a guard
before and behind, and we went in that condition to the
Shops. Mr. Moore went into the camp^ but they would not
let me go fn. What happened there I do not know. I went
from there to the railroad office, and then I came back to th©
camp and asked Burgen if he would allow bail for these men,
that we could give any amount of bail, but he said bail would
not be allowed. ¦. r .. .'¦¦
Q. State whether you saw troops there, and if you did> what
was their character, and what their behavior- was* and any
thing eke / - ' A. I1 didn't see much of them. • I only saw then*
in camp' ad' guards around these prisoners. *'¦' '. ¦ u-\ >,'< .r.n :. >
• Q: State if? you saw anything? of them afterwards / •> A* 1-

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 620
had a good deal of conversation at different times. They were
men of very ordinary intellect and very ignorant. They were
pretty rough.
Q. What. was tlieir discipline so far as you observed/ A.
The discipline I should say was bad.
Q. What was tlieir action towards their officers / A. But
for the dress you could hardly tell who were the officers.
Q. Were they orderly or disorderly / A. They were disor
derly. Q. Much so, or otherwise / A. For soldiers I should call
them very disorderly.
Q. Did thoy look like an army or a mob / A. They were
uniformed liko an army but thoir actions were more like a
mob. Mr. BOYDEN. Wo object to tho answer.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. Toll what their notions wore.
A. Thoy seemed to go where thoy ohoso, and thero was gen
erally no order, from what little I knoAV of military discipline.
Q. What became of them ? A. Tho chief portion went to
Yanceyville. They loft a company there. I kneAv little about.
them until they arreBted me. They came to my houso one day
whon I was at my office on the opposite side of the river.
There was a gentleman from New York at the time with me,
and I said I expected when I saw them that they wanted me,
that they were arresting everybody. I locked my Bafo and
went over, and as I got to the river, they had men at the bridgo
to prevent me from passing. There was about a dozen or fif
teen marching with a negro.
Q. Who was the negro? A. I do not know. He was one
of the Ruffins. He asked me what my name was ; I told him.
He said he had orders for me to report at 7 o'clock the next
morning, under arrest I told him that 7 o'clock was a little
early, and I asked him if it would not do later. I said I could
get there by eight Avithout any trouble j he said' "come at eight
"o'clock, and it Will be All right." "I told him that I would
come up.! ; The next morning I reported to Burgen five minutes

680, OOUST OF . IMPEACHMENTS. , : ., , ;¦
before the time. Ho didn't seem to know mo, although I
had soon him on several occasions, and he asked me what my
name was. I told him ; he said " Oh I yes, I have an order to
"carry you to Yancoy ville." He said, "Are you ready?" I
asked him what time he wanted me; he said whenever it
Avould suit me. I told him it would not Buit me to go at all ;
but I must do whatever he wanted me. He eaid bring your
buggy up to-morrow, at 9 o'clock, that he waa going over, and
that we would go together. My buggy was then at the rail
road, and the boy who carried me up Avaited tO see what would
become of me. I told him to remain at the railroad office until
I sent him word to return. I asked Burgen if that was all he
Avanted, and he said that was all he wanted that day. I then
went to the railroad office, and told the president that I was
arrested, and I had got to go to Yanceyville the next day. He
said " If I can do anything tor you I will do it." That was the
president — Major Smith. I told him I didn't know of any
thing he could do, that I had orders to report the next morning
to go to Yanceyville. We started out and met Burgen at the
door, and after a few minutes consultation between them, they
-came into the office and he said " Major Smith tells me you
" are a gentleman, and that you have nothing to do with this
•" Kuklux business, and though it is contrary to orders, I will
" release you."
Q. You were released ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. You did not go to Caswell ? A. No, sir.
Q. Do you know when the persona arrested were brought
back from CaBwell — arrived at Company Shops ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. When was it ? A. I think it was in August
Q. What was the condition of the weather the day , .they re- ,
turned ? A. Very inclement. ! .
Q.. Describe it? A. It was a very rainy, wot day. /
Q. Cold? A. Not very cold, it was in the eummor.time.,
Q. 'T^t w~3 done with., tho pri&c~oro,.tl:~t rJ^htV A., I
•don't know. I wont home before any of them crxj^. I went,
on Monday morning and carried some provisions and I re-

TBtAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 681
malned during the day ; I understand they went to Graham—
I saw them there tho next morning.
Q. Do you know whether any peoplo wanted to put them in
the church ? A. So said, I didn't hear it,
Q. When they got back to Graham where were tho prisoners
put ? A. In the court.
Q. State whether the court house was occupied and sur
rounded by troops ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. The prisoners were croAvded in there ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know whether any persons were arrested and put
in jail? A. It was so said, I don't know it.
Q. State whether you are acquainted Avith the people in
Alamance, black and white ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Have you an extensive acquaintance with the black
people ? A. I think I have.
Q. State whether or not you have in your employ blacks,
and if you have had, for how long a time / A. I had thirty in
my employment last year during that time.
Q. Do you know the relations existing between the white
and black people ? A. They are friendly so far as I know.
Q. Do you know, of any colored persons being dismissed
from employment tor exercising their political privileges or
having their political notions / A. Not that I know of.
Q. Did you ever tako a course of that sort ? A. No, sir, I
never did.
Q. Do you know whether there was any resistance to tbe
lawful authority there ? A. None that I ever heard of.
Q. You don't know of any resistance ? A. None at all.
Q. Do you know whether the courts were regularly held ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What was the business of the colored people yon employ
ed ? A. Some of them were working' about tlie mills and
factory, some as draymen, and I had twenty-five or thirty, more
or less, in the briok yard and doing odd jobs abont-mleaning
out Uio canal . ' •* » ,;: :.„¦•. l ->r -r ' ,-*\\ • ?< •>"'!¦ 1 1 v/':i.' ' {>¦

' , ; ;.- ¦.),:.:> ' :
632 COUBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. I understood you did an extensive business with blacks-
and whites ? A. Yes, sir. i v
Q. And you don't know any difference between them I A.
No, sir.
Q. There was a good feeling? A. A good feeling as far
as I know.
Q. State to the court whether yon knew Mr. Shoffner ? A.
I did. ,
Q. Who was ho ? A. He was raised within three miles Of
me, I suppose. I never heard anything against him as a man.
Q. What was his business ? A. He was a blacksmith.
Q. Stato whether he had any prominence as a politician —
Avhether ho was a political leader ? A. He had no prominence
that I eA'or heard of until he waa nominated for the senate.
Q. Was there any prejudice against him. A. None at all
deA'olopod. Q. State whether he was liked rather than otherwise?. A.
During the first year of the legislature he was liked.
Q. On what account ? A. The votes he gave on railroad
measures caused the people to rather approve his course and it
was remarked that he did well considering his chances and his
intelligence. After the introduction of the Shoffner bill the
people were indignant.
Q. Was that bill very offensive ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did he become unpopular after the introduction of that
bill ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. The people were indignant about it ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. But he had no political notoriety or prominence except
what grew out of that bill / A. No, sir.
Q. Was he an humble person rather than otherwise. ( • ¦
Mr. SMITH. That is a leading question. >>:><¦' '.
A. Yes, sir. ¦< >'¦'. .,. .• n
Cross-Examination. -!.> r , ,*.»"<
; ¦ By Mr. "Boyden. i. '¦ - ••" ! > ', . . -: -ulr ¦., ,- .' -.
Q. How far do you live from Graham/ A. I' live about
two miles east.

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. nOLDEN. 633
Q. Did you see Outlaw after he was hung? A. No, sir, I
did not.
Q. You didn't go up to the court house ? A. No, sir, I
never heard of it until the next day about twelve o'clock.
Q. Do yon know how you happened to be released— whether
Governor Holden had given any orders ? A. No, sir, I don't
know anything of my own knowledge.
Q. What was said to yon, if anything, when you were re
leased ? A. Burgen told me that he had released me on his
own authority.
Q. Was anything said about Governor Holden's having
given orders ? A. Burgen said it was contrary to his orders,
but that he would release me on his OAvn authority.
Q. He was not tho head man — I mean Kirk was the man in
command? A. Yes, sir, he was the colonel.
Q. Burgen said it was contrary to orders for him to release
you, but he would do it? A. That Major Smith had told him
that I was a gentleman, and that he would not interfere with
me, but would release me on his OAvn responsibility.
Q. Do you know anything of persons Avho were chastised
and whipped — colored people ? A. I have heard of some, I
never knew of any of my own knowledge.
Q. I heard there was ono whipped at your factory? You
know nothing about it ? A. A man whipped at my factory ?
Q. A man working there, or who had been in your employ
ment ? A. I never heard of it before.
Q. You never 6aw one that waB whipped ? A. Not that I
know ot.
Q. You never saw the marks of the whipping ? A. No, sir.
Q. Do you know anything about the6e secret orgaizations in
that county ? A. Nothing in the world. ,
Q. Did you ever see any men disguised?' A. Never in .my
life. ¦/ '!
Q. Do you know of any secret political organizations 1 A.
None at all only from rumor. I, have heard of, the Kuklux
Klan, but I don't know anything about it.

'-'• 684 - > - 00UBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
' i Q. Yon never saw any of them disguised,' and were never
in any camp? A. No, sir. .ti«i . i
• Q. You know nothing about any judgments that wero
passed upon anybody ? A. No, sir; nothing at all.
Q. With which party do you co-operate? A. The Conser
vative. Q. You think the state of feeling is very good between tho
colored people and the whites ? A. I have heard nothing to
the contrary.
Q. Have you not heard of a great many chastisements of
colored men ? A. I believe I have heard of one.
Q. Is that all ? A. That is all I recollect at present — that
is I understand you, colored persons who havo been whipped ?
Q. Or maltreated in any other way ? A. Outlaw was hung
and that other nigger, said to be crazy — I never knew him —
who was drowned. And then Caswell Holt was whipped. .
Q. [By Mr. Graham.] That is by hearsay? A. By hearsay.
Mr. GRAHAM. We shall object to any evidence of that
nature. Q. Don't you think that is some evidence of bad feeling ?
A. It was said that Caswell Holt was whipped for stealing.
My father raised him. He was a very bad nigger.
Q. Is there bad feeling ? A. I cannot say there is any bad
feeling. That is the only case of whipping that I have heard
of or that can recollect at present. I have a groat many niggers
about me and they all respect me. I havo had considerable to
do with them.
Q. You nover hoard of anything against Mr. Shofmor. A.,
No, sir.
Q. He was a olever man ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. You think that after he had been in the legislature during
the first session they woro very much pleased with him? A.
Yos, sir, ratlior pleased with him than otherwise.
Q. 'But afLor he introduced tliat bill thoy became indignant
against him? A. Yes, sir.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM AV. HOLDER. 685
Q. Thore was a bitter feeling against him T ¦ ¦ • A* They didn't
like it.
Q. Don't you think that the feeling was bitter?' A. Yes,
sir, I think it was bitter. .
Q. What time did he leave the county, do you know ? A.
I do not know. He was gone before I knew it. I never saw
him at all after the adjournment of the legislature.
Q. You do not know whether he went off secretly or how ?
A. No, sir, I didn't know anything about it. '
Q. Did you ever hear any threats made against him ? A.
No, sir.
CHESLEY MOORE, a witness called on behalf of the
Managers, being duly sworn, testified as follows :
By Mr. Merrimon :
Q. State your name, age and business ? A. My name is*
Chesley Moore, I am fifty-five years old and am a farmer.
Q. Where is your residence ? A. Twelve miles south-east
of Graham.
Q. What is the name of the township ? A. Newlin's town
ship. Q. You know the people in that township? A. Pretty
generally. Q. Do you know anything of the black people ? A. I know
some. There are not a great many colored peoplo there, and
I believe I know the most of them.
Q. Stato if you know of any fooling existing between the
blacks and tho whites ? A. I think the fooling is generally
good. Q. Friendly ? A. Yes, sir. I know nothing else.
Q. I refer to the yean 1800 and 1870 ? A. It has beon so-
all the tlmo sine© the war.
Q. Stato whother the white people have employed the oolorod
pooplo ? A. Yoi, sir, some oroppon and somo hired. They em
ploy all thoy can get. They don't get a* many as thoy want.

636

COOBX, OF. IMPEAOHMENTS. i

Q. State whether law, is executed in your vtownahipt A.
Yes, sir. ¦.,; .:,;
Q. Do you know of any, resistence to authority (there? A.
None at all. „ >, .',, ¦¦¦:
Q. Have yon a geueral acquaintance in the county? A. I
have a right smart acquaintance over the county. .,':..
Q. State the feeling through the county between whites and
blacks ? A. As far as I am acqainted it is good generally. I
am pretty well acquainted all over the south and I am some in
the north part.
Q. Have you ever seen the legal officers in tlie exercise of
their authority about there ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you attend the courts ? A. Yes, sir, regularly every
oourt. Q. Aro tho courts open? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you know Mr. Shoffner ? A. Yes, sir, I knew him
when I saw him.
Q. Did you havo any acquaintance with him ? A. No, sir,
not very extensive. I was with him in the army about a
month, once.
Q. Was he a man of any prominence there ? A. No, sir, I
don't think he was.
Q. Do you know what his business was ? A. No, sir, I do
not. I understood he was a blacksmith. I lived some distance
from him — twelve or fourteen miles.
Q. Do you know anything about an armed movement in
Graham last summer ? A. Some little — not very much. •
Q. State whether you saw squads of men about there in the
country ? A. Yes, 6ir, I saw them passing. They passed my
house — armed men.
Q. What sort of men were they ? A. I was not right close
to them at the time — they were soldiers — had uniforms and
guns. The neighbors' boys were passing after them— were
with them — they had them arrested. . /
Q« Any negroes ? A No, sir, I didn't see any. ' . My house

TRIAL Of WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 637
»s a litt'e off. There was a neighbor's boy or two passed. They
did not stop at the house, but they just passed on.
Q. Did you see them arrive vrith guns at all ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Have you seen them in camp ? A. Yes, sir, I saw them
in camp at Graham.
Q. Describe your notion of them, what was their appearance,
demeanor and discipline? A. Their appearance was rather
bad. They looked to be of very low character to me.
Q. Orderly or disorderly ? A. They were right smart die-
orderly. Q. Did they seem to be insubordinate to those over them ?
A. I did not bco them exorcise any authority over them. They
wero running about town in stoves and about the camp.
Cross-Examination, By Mr. Boyden.
Q. You did not see them under command ! A. Yos, sir, I
eaw them right at thoir camp,
Q. You spoke of them as being around at stores ? A. I
uaw the wholo bunch pretty much. The officers and all. I
did not boo thorn taking any command over them. They
seemed to bo going at large.
Q. You did not «eo them under word of command ? A.
Only on the calling of tlie roll.
Q. They answered as other men 2 A. They answered to
their names.
Q. That was all that was required ? A. It might have been
et that time.
Q. You say they looked like men of Ioav character? A.
That was their appearance.
Q. Do you mean they were ignorant ? A. They appeared
to be ignorant men, what we consider low characters — trifling
men. Q. You judged they were trifling men because they were
there as soldiers ? A. I judged it from their natural appear-
*nce— they were very dirty. Some of them were without
42

688 COUBT OF IMPEAOnMENTB. , •
shirts— some of them had so coat*— they were pasaing. about
in that way. , , ,
Q. That was before they were in uniform? A. They had
uniforms— some had them on.
Q. They were badly clad? A. I suppose they. had clothes
about somewhere,
Q. You did not know about their having clothes anywhere ?
A. Some of them were clothed well enough.
Q. You did not understand my question ? A. I recollect
ono going about without any shirt, but he had a coat on.
Q. You did not know anything about their having clothes
anywhere else ? A. No, sir, I do not know that they had.
Q. How far do you live from Graham ? A. Twelve miles.
Q. What part of the county? A. The south-eastern part.
Q. There is a general impression there that anybody who is"
a radical is rather low down ?
Mr. GRAHAM. We object to that.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. I did not hear the question.
Q. My question is this : isn't it the general impression that
any man belonging to the radical party where you live, is rather
low doAvn ?
Mr. GRAHAM. We object to the question. To admit
that class ot questions Avould lead to interminable examinations.
Q. [By the Chief Justice]. Explain Avhat you mean by low ?
A. I consider people Ioav here in our country Avho have bad
habits — men whom you cannot rely upon and have the appear
ance of that kind of men. These looked liko men who had
no character.
Q. But you know nothing about their character? A. Only
thoir appearance.
Q. You judgo their character by their clothes? A, No, sir,
I judgo by tho countenances very often more than by thoir
clothes. , i , ,
Q. But it is tho clothes you have given a particular aocoupt
of., You judge, you say, by, tho countenances an4 from the-
clothes / A. I generally look at a man's countenance.

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. flOLDBH. 689
Q. You have been describing why you think these men are
low, and you have said they were badly clothed / A. Not
because they were badly clothed.
Q. What did you say about their being badly clad ? A. I
epoke about their dress. I think that a man 
Q. But I thought it did not have any effect upon your
opinion — tlieir dress ? A. I think that a man who had any
respect for himself would not be fixed in that way.
Q. Then the dress did have 6ome effect on your opinion ?
A. I think that men who had any respect would have fixed
themselves a little better when they had an opportunity to
do so.
Q. Men who had respect for themseves would haA'e dressed
better ? A. They would have had on tlieir clothes. I think
they had some other clotlies. A part had on all their uniforms
and a part did not.
Q. Then you answer the question now that you do estimate
a manrs character by the Avay he dresses ? A. Not altogether.
Q. I don't mean "altogether" but somewhat? A. I take
the general appearance of a man.
Q. I ask you if you did uot state just now whether your
estimate of their character being low, was not in part
formed by the dress which they had ou ? A. By the general
appearance of the man.
Q. Confine yourself to the drees ? A. I dou't oonlffiie my
self to the dress altogether.
Q. I am not talking to you about what you regard " alto
gether," I said in part
Senator WORTH. I insist that the chief justice take take
tho witness into his own hands. It is a perfect outrage, 1
think, upon this court to allow such a course of proceeding m
has been carried on for tho last ton minutes. If I am wrong
I will yield, but I think it tho duty of tho chief justice in'. such
•a caso to take the examination into his 'own hands.
Mr. BOYDEN. I submit, Mr. Chief Justioe, that these
questions are ^competent, The witness k ^endeavoring to

640 COUBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
speak of the charaoter of people whom he knows nothing
about and has spoken of; their dress and appearance in con
nection with misjudgment of .their charaoter. I think I have
a right to make the Avitness state precisely on what his opin
ion is formed — to say if he knows anything more about it.
That is what I. am trying to get out of him.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer has no right
to control the manner of examination of witnesses so long as
tho counsel keeps within legal rules. That lays within the
discretion of the counsel.
Q. I want you to state if your opinion was not formed, of
tlieir being Ioav characters, by their dress and general appear
ance and whether really you did not know anything about their
oharaoter ? A. That is Avhat I said, thoir general appearance.
I know only from the general appearance of the men.
Q. That Avas what I was trying to got you to answer? A.
The countenances of tho meu and tho Avay they put on their
clothes and every thing had gave them the appearance of in
dolent, Ioav down characters to me.
Q. That is answering my question. Do you knoAV any
secret political organization in the county of Alamance? A.
No, sir, I do not.
Q. Do you know of anybody's being Avhipped there ? A. I
do not.
Q. You have no personal knowledge ? A. No, sir.
Q. Did you see any who had been Avhipped? A. No, sir,
not of my knoAvledge.
Q. You have not seen any stripes on them ? A. None.
Q. Have you seen any body going about disguised in the
county of Alamanco ? A. Never in my life.
Q. Do you keep yourself confined at home pretty much after
night ? A- No, sir, I am travelling about a good deal after
night Q. You never have met these disguised men ? A. I never
have, ,. t.. ,(i . , • : . . '",.;,"

TBIAL OF' WTLtiAM W. HOLDEN. 641
; Q. Did you ever see these disguises 'which they Wore ? A.
No, sir, I never saw them.
Q. Did you ever see any of these disguises being made? A.
No, sir, I never saw them in my life making or any where else.
Q. TIave you heard of a great many chastizements in the
county ? A. No, sir, I have never of but a feAV. ' ' !
Mr. MERRIMON. We object to this class of questions.
Q. What party do you co-operato with ? A. I co-Operate
with the conservative party.
Q. Do you attend the court ? A. Yes, sir, I believe I hardly
over missed one.
Q. Do you know Avhether there have evor been indictments
presented for killing Outhvw and Puryear? A. Not that I
knoAV of. I don't know that thero was any evidence given to
justify a presentment.
Q. Havo thoro beon any steps taken that you are aware of to
find out the murderers of those men ? A. I don't know.
Q. Havo you beon on tho grand jury ? A. I have not been
on it si nee that time.
Q. Do you hold an office in the county ? A. Not at present.
Q. When did you ? A. I haA-e not held any since the new
constitution was ratified.
Q. Do you knoAV that there was a considerable determina
tion on the part of the people of Alamance not to permit tho
colored people to have their rights ? A. Nothing of the kind
there that I know of among the people.
Q. You know all about how it is there ? A. I know right
smart about a large scope of the country.
Q. You answered the question very broadly ? A. I have a
riirht broad acquaintance all over the there.
JAMES G. MOORE,' a witness called on beialj ' hf ' th
Managers, being duly sworn, testified as follows :
'By Mr. Gbaiiam! ""'
Q. Where do you live? A. Company Shops.
q. What ^ your age? A, Forty. .

64£ COTBT OF rMPEACHMENTS .1
Q. What is yonr business ? A. Merchandising at Company
Shops. , i /
Q. Were yon living there at the time this man Corliss was
there ? A. Yes, air.
Q. Do yon know whether Corliss sued out a warrant and
brought persons before the justice of the peace on charge of
having whipped him ? A. I do.
Q. Were you present at that trial ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Who was the magistrate ? A. Mr. Wilham D. Faucett.
Q. Ib he a conservative or a republican in his political con
nection ? A. He is understood as acting with the republican
party. Q. Elected by them as their candidate in the district ? A.
I can't eay that he was elected entirely by them.
Q. Corliss made an application and obtained a warrant
against certain persons whom he charged with having com
mitted this outrage upon him ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were witnesses examined before Mr. Faucett ? A. Yes,
sir. Q. What disposition was made of the case? A. He dis
charged those who were arrested.
Q. Was the matter pretty fully discussed before him? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. Did Corliss make a speech himself? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Mr. Faucett upon the testimony offered before him dis
charged these persona whom Corliss alleged had committed the
outrage? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were you foreman of the grand jury recently? A. 1
Avas foreman at the spring term, 1870.
Q. Your body then passed upon all the bills of indictments
that tho solicitor sent to you ? A. As well as I remember.
Q. Did you inotituto an examination among tho grand jury
us to thoir knoAvlod^o or thoir information in roforenoo to crimes
In tho county ? A. Yos, sir, I called on all tho members of the
jury to know of anything that mrjht have happened in their
rcspootlvo neighborhoods. I asked thorn ono by ono. >

TBIAL OF 'WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 043
Q. Was your grand jury constituted of people of different
politics ? A. I suppose so— it was understood so by me.
Q. Hota many colored men Were there upon it? A. Three.
Q. You say the grand jury was called upon by the foreman,
each man to answer for himself, whether he had any information
as to crimes, ao as to bring up witnesses and have the matter
examined? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did these colored men, or any body else, allege they had
any information as to the murder of Outlaw, or ask that witnes
ses be examined and sent for in regard to it ? A. No, sir. I told
them that it was impossible for a grand juror of one section to
know what was going on at a distance, and taking it for granted
they were selected from different parts of the county, each one
must represent his oavh section. I gave them a day to think
about it, and told them it mattered not what had happened, or
who it was charged, it was our duty to give tlie names and we
woidd present them and that would end our business as far as
Ave were concerned.
Q. You announced this the day before hand, and told them
that it would be brought up the next day ? A. I cannot say it
was just a day. But I gave notice that each one could think
over the matter — that they could go home and think over it.
Q. Did any ot the colored men or any other man on tho
grand jury profess to have any information in reference to the
death of Outlaw, and ask witnesses to be sworn on that sub
ject ? A. No, sir. I called on Abraham Boyd, who was a
colored man in Graham, and a very intelligent man, and told
him that he must answer for Graham, that I would answer for
Company Shops, and that the others around must do the same
thing. Q, Abraham Boyd waa a colorod man, was a member of tho
grand jury living in tlie town of Graham I A. Yes, sir, and
Potor Ruffin, alio a colored man, and a sorvant of Judgo
Ruffin, was another ono. ' '
Q, Peter was on the grand Jury ? A, Yei, sir.
Q. Tldi was Potor Ruffin and not Alook / A. Yei, sir.

Q.,,Peter.did not becojne,a aokher ft tho war(?l!MA,,r]Sto, tfr,
not to my knowledge. . , . , ,, ¦,, , ..,.,.', r ,; .,,,),
Q, You remember speaking to both these , colored mombere
of tho grand jury, Peter Ruffin and Abraham Boyd/ , A. I
don't know tliat I told Peter Ruffin, but I know I tpld;,Abra-.
ham Boyd, because he lived close by. , : ¦ , .
Q. Abraham made no motion on tlie subject, and, did, not
communicate. to the grand jury that he had any reason to sus
pect any person of the murder ? A. I took them as they wero
sitting on the grand jury each ono by oue, and asked them if
they had anything to present I would make a note of it.
Q. There was no motion made by any man to institute pro
ceedings as to the death of Outlaw ? A. No, sir.
Q. Mr. Bulla was the regular solicitor at tlie court / A.
Yes, sir.
Q. He sent in a number of indictments of various kinds t
A. He sent some, I don't now remember how many, but I
remember one or two.
Q. You remember one against Allen Paisley and two other
negroes / A. Yes, sir.
Q. They were charged with whipping Henderson Coble X
A. Yes, sir.
Q. A true bill was found against them, and the case disposed
of at that term / A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know in the case of another colored man where
a bill was preferred against him for a capital crime and he was
convicted ? A, Yes, sir„ Tarpley.
Q. He was convicted and executed / A. I heard he was.
executed — that is my impression.
Q. Your body found a true bill against him? A. Yes, .shy
Q. For this very heinous crime? A. Yes, sir. i ,,, ,
Q. Do you know whether he was arrested in due course, ot
law, and not by a mob ? A. Yes, shy .; •  ;; :, -
Q. That occurred in the neighborhood of Company Shops-rn
this horrible crime?, A, Yes, sir. ..., ,, , .,,,,.,,.,,:,.»-.
Q. How long before the court sftt which tried him,?,, A," I

TOTAL OF WILLIAM W. 1I0LDEN. 646V
do not remember, it may have been tAvo. months it may havo
been three. I did not charge my memory with iti!'
Q. Was any violence dono to him until ho was ; regularly
tried and executed according to law ? A. No, sir.1 I think ho
had been tried before I heard of the crime. I mean 'by tho
magistrate. '
Q. Ho was examined and committed by the magistrate ?
Mr. BOYDEN. The witness doos not know anything
about that.
A. I do not know of my OAvn knowlodgo.
Q. You told us about theso investigations and proceedings^
in tho grand jury. Was thero any inatanco in Avhich tho gi|and
jury, where there was sufficient ovidonee, failed to find a truo
bill, or mako a presentment? A. I think, if anything, it waa
tho othor Avay. I think avo put in too many. If wo orred at
all, we erred that way. My object waa to put a stay to crime,
and I thought it was tho object of all tho others. '
Q. Did you see these soldiers that Kirk had at Graham
¦while they were there, before going to Salisbury, and after
they returned from Caswell ? A. I do not know whether it
was before. I saAV them at Graham while they wero encamped,
Q. Had they prisoners at the court house ? A. Yes, sir —
at least I think they had. I saw the guard. It was on Sunday.
Q. Describe to the court what was the behavior of these
men — where did they encamp ? A. Their camp was east of
the jail and south of Mr. Clapp'B hotel.
Q. Is that a public square, or is it an open space ? A. It is
an open square.
Q. An open lot ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. It fronts the hotel in the place ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. It is not very far from the house ? A. It is close by.
Q. Describe to the oourt how these men behaved themselves
as to decency in the public place in the principal town in tha
county/ A. I do not think they were very well behaved. It
was Sunday morning I went down. • Will you allow nie: to tell
how I happened to be there ? ' " ' ;;

"646 v OOTOT OF TMPEACHMENTS.
Mr. BOYDEN. It does not make any differenced- ' " rt ' !
The WITNESS. While I was there they were'ptoparing
their toilet for Sunday. ',...>
By the Chief Justice. ' ' ' '* ' lUU ''"• ;t (;i '-'
Q. What? A. Washing for Sunday. ¦•" > '
Q. Fixing up? A. Yes, sir, for Sunday. That is what I took
it for. ";
By Mb. Geaham, [resuming].
Q. You were in the hotel ? A. I was sitting at the hotel
piazza just across the street, only the width of the street be
tween us.
Q. State what you eaw there on the part of these soldiers?
A. I didn't see anything except I thought they were not good
in their manners in so public a place. There was preaching
and playing cards at the same time.
•Q. In the camp ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Some people attending to that and some people playing
cards? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you see anything of the men stripping themselves/
Mr. BOYDEN. That is a leading question.
Mr. GRAHAM. Perhaps it is. I did not intend it.
Q. Describo what you saw in that way, if anything / A. I
only saw them undress as if they Avanted to wash tlieir necke.
Q. Pull their shirts off / A. Yea, Bir.
Q. In the presence and in the sight of ladies or anybody
else AA'ho would be passing ? A. Yes, sir. The ladles who sat
on tho front piazza got up and went in the house. The lady
of the house called iny attention to it.
By the Chief Justice : <
Q. How many pulled off their shirts? A. There was not
more than two or three.
Q. To wash thoir necks? A. Yes, sir. And they seemed
to be frolicking, ono would run after another around the tents.
By Mb. Geaham, [resuming] . > . ;
Q. What was the object / A.I don't know what the object
was. They looked as if they had put themselves in that con-

TBIAL OF .WILLIAM W, HOLDEN. 64?
dition to get ready for, Sunday, and when they were in that
condition somebody else to do mischief, would come around
after him. - f
Q. In that state of nakedness they ran around the tents /
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you have any conversation with Burgen in regard to
arresting you ? A. Yes, sir, a colored man and a white soldier
went te the house after my son. I went and started after them
after they had taken him. They came and told me that I had
to go too. I told them all right. When I got there they put
me under a tree where the other prisoners were, and I remained
there, I suppose, an hour. Col. Burgen then came down and
went to his tent, and after coming out ashort time, he hallooed
to know if Mr. Moore was among the prisoners. I hallooed
" Yes." He asked me to step over, that he wanted to see me.
He asked me what I was doing here. I 6aid, " That is exactly
what I Avant to know myself," He said, " Do you belong to
this Kuklux organization ?" I told him tliat he could find that
out as he had found it out by the others. He 6aid, " I suppose
we have made a mistake in arresting you." I said, " I would
like to know by what authority you arrested me." Ho said,
" I got a dispatch from Raleigh, this morning, to arrest you,"
and he pulled a paper out of his pocket as if to read it.
{Objected to.] He said, " I believe you may go home, you are
the hardest case I have struck yet."
Q. State whether or not this negro and white soldiers were
in uniform ? A. Yes, sir. i
Q. Did they curse Mrs. Moore and offer any indignity ? A.
Not of my own knowledge. I did not hear it. I was out in
the barn or lot when they come and my wife sent out for me
to come. All that occurred in that regard was before I got to
the house. (!.¦,••
Q. Waa anything said in your presence after, yon got back
to the house, to her / A. No, sir. ." ¦<-
Q. yon lived at the Shqps and you had an opportnnity of

648: '- eOCBT OF impeachments-. '
seeing^thk- camp. 'Kirk passed overto'YanceyvillodntWo'or
three days, did he ?' A. Yesj sir. '" ' »»i<'.- ...
Q. And Bergen was commander-in-chief ? ',l,; '¦ ¦
Mr. BOYDEN. Let the witness tell himself.' '• ! ' " ' "
Q. State whether Burgen was commander-in-chief at that
camp generally / ' ' ¦' :|
Mr. BOYDEN. Who was commandeisin-chief / A. It
wbb understood that Col. Burgon was. '
Q. State whether or not you saw parties going out and
bringing in citizens time and again /
Mr. BOYDEN. That Is a leading question.
Mr, GRAHAM. I think it is not loading to enquire whether
or not ho saw such things.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer thinks, tho
question is proper. A. I saAv tho parties going out and I saw
parties coming in with prisoners. As to whether they woro
tho same parties that went out I could not say.
Q. Was there a negro in the squad generally ?
Mr. SMITH. I submit that that la not a fair way to ask tho
witness. The information wanted is suggested In ovory ques
tion. Mr. GRAHAM. I only ask to know whether there was or
not ? A. There was.
Q. [By the Chief Justice.] Was it the same negro ? A.
Nearly invariably.
Q. Who was he ? A. Alick Ruffin.
Q. Was he in the uniform of a soldier ? A. He was uniformed
as the others.
Q. Was he armed with a musket ? A. Yes, sir, sometime
with a gun and sometimes with a pistol. When he would go
out he would generally carry a pistol. I only eaw him a few
times when he went out. '*
Q.1 He went ont on these expeditions with a pistol'? A.
Yes, sir. '-• J '" " •¦='" ' '"
Q. When they came back with the prisoners was lie usually
armed or not ? A. I cannot say for that. I did not go out

TBIAL OF, WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 649
much more than I had necessity, for, I have seen as many as
two or three squads come in and some three or four going out,
Q. State whether you were present When the prisoners were
cursed and abuse? .'.:•-¦.»!> m
Mr. BOYDEN. That question assumes that they were
abused. A. Only once and that was the Sunday that the writ
of habeas corpus waa served upon Colonel Kirk. - ( ,
Q. Did you go along when the writ waa served ? A. Yes,
sir, Colonel McAllister and myself wont in a buggy together.
Q. Describe that seeno ? A. We overtook Kirk's command
about two miles north of Union chureh and about ten miles
from Company Shops. As soon as we overtook th© rearguard
of tho army wo told thorn that wo had papers for Colonel Kirk,
Thoy snld avo would havo to wait until tho time camo around
to rest again. W© told thorn that it was very important, that
thoy had better sond forward and lot the Colonel know
thero woro important papers in tho rear and perhaps he would
stop, if not wo would wait. Wo had not gono very far when
thoy halted, and when thoy halted we drove up to the rear
guard ; and tho gentleman who seemed to be in command just
opened the rear guard and Ave drove in a little piece. It was
very warm and the soldiers fell out on each side of the road
under the bushes or anything that would protect them. In a
few minutes Colonel Burgen — -I did not know him then — came
forward and Colonel McAllister gave him the papers. He
looked at them and told him he might come forward. I asked
him if a man could Watch my mule while I went. He eaid,
" your presence is not needed there." While he was gone one
of the soldiers asked another if they had ever seen any Ku-
kluxes. " I have seen one " he said, " I see one now." The
officer asked me what papers had gone 'forward. I told him it
was a package of papers for the Colonel. He said "By God 1
" I know Avhatit is, it is a reprieve or release of some of these-
" Ku-kluxes we have got. I will be d — d if I don't get one
" of them before he gets away from here, if it is." That Waa
all that was said.

650 OOUBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. Were you admitted into the presence of Colonel Kirk ?
A. No, sir, I did not move except to turn around and go
back home.
Q. Colonel McAllister after having an interview with Kirk
returned ? A. He got into the buggy and we turned around
end went back home.
Q. Have you a pretty extensive acquaintance in the coun
ty ? A. Yes, sir, I have lived at Company Shops for a num
ber of years.
Q. What is the feeling between the black and the white
people there? A. I think it is good.
Q. I mean what Avas it in 1869 and 1870 ? A. I think it
has always been good generally, speaking. There are ex
ceptions. Q. Is there any resistance to the law in that part of the
county, that you have heard ? A. I never heard of any such
thing, in that country.
Q. When this man Corliss undertook to bring up people
before the magistrate, charged with having committed this
outrage upon him, the process was served without any diffi
culty ? A.I don't know anything about it except that I was
at the trial.
Q. At the trial before the magistrate the parties accused
Avero discharged ? A. Yes, Bi'r.
Q. Is there another magistrate in your district besides Mr.
Faucett? A. Yes, sir, Mr. Hardin.
Q. He lives in the toAvn of Graham ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. What is his polities? A, He is understood to bo a re
publican—or an old lino whig. Ho mod to be known by
that. Q, In the modern divisions ho is understood to bo a repub
lican ? A. Yes, sir.
Q, Tho two magistrates in that distrlot are republican* 7
A. Thoy are understood to be acting with that party.
Q. Have you ever known them to fail to issue a warrant

TBIAL, OF WILLIAM W. »OLDEN. 651
when called upon by any man claiming, to bo injured? A,
No, sir. , ,- ,
Q. When the soldiers came back from CasweU, with the
prisoners was it an inclement time ?, A. Yes, sir, it was very
rainy. Q. State if you know whether or not there was a disposi
tion to allow the prisoners to take shelter in the church dur
ing the rain ? A.I don't know it.
Q. Kirk encamped at the Shops when he was there that
time ? A; Near by.
Q. And moved from there to Graham ? A. Yes, sir.
Cross-Examination. By Mr. Boyden.
Q. You say you never knew one of these magistrates to re«
fuse one of these Avarrants Avhen asked ? A. No, sir, I never
did. Q. You never were present when asked for ? A. For these
outrages ?
Q. Yes, sir ? A. No, sir.
Q. You only state that if they were refused you know noth
ing about it. When were you foreman of the grand jury ?
A. The spring of 1870.
Q. When you wero on the grand jury you instructed each
one to answer for his own neighborhood ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. You considered that the duty of grand jurors ? Had
you heard of Outlaw's death ? A. Yes, sir.
Q, You did not think you had anything to do with investi
gating tho facts in reference to his death, that these colorod
men mint attend to that ? A. I did not refer to anything par
ticular. Q. You thought that if thoro was anything done it must bo
on tho suggestion of the grand jurors from Graham, although
you had heard of it ? A. I asked every body—— ¦ i '
Q, Had you heard of the death of Puryear ? A. Yes, sir.
Q, tYQu,dkinot think it. was your duty to take any steps
unless tlie men came forward who lived in that section and

$52 OOUBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
complained— -that was your idea ? A. That was the only step
I thought I could take.
Q. That was your idea of the proper course ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. How many whippings and scourgings had you heard of
before that court met — I mean in that county ? A. I havo
heard of several but I can't give the dates. I do not know
when it was. Some were before and somo since.
Q. You had heard of a good many before ? A. I had hoard
of a boy named Joo Harvoy.
Mr. GRAHAM. If tho counsel aro allowed to'provo facta
that tho witness has hoard wo shall expect tho privllogo of in
quiring what ho hoard thoso mon woro punished for, otherwise
wo object to this goiu'BO of examination.
Mr. BOYDEN. I havo but ono object, Mr. Chief Justice.
The Avitness says that ho was foreman of tho grand jury. What
I propose to show is that ho had hoard of scourgings and a
number of them and ho did not think proper to make any in
vestigation into these scourging, but satisfied himself by in
forming the colored man who lived at Graham that ho must
attend to matter* in his own neighborhood and that he made
the same statement to each of the other grand jurors. He said
he did not think it his duty to do anything further than that.
That is the very point I have been seeking to get out, that
although he had heard of these murders and scourgings and
other offences against the law he did not regard it as his duty
as foreman of the grand jury to investigate and ferret out the
perpetrators at all.
Mr. GRAHAM. I object, Mr. Chief Justice, to any hearsay
on the subject. As to the duty x>t the witness as foreman of
the grand jury, unless he had reason to believe that particular
persons had been guilty of offences, he could not make any
examination unless somebody came and informed tho grand
jury tliat suchthings had taken place and suggested the names
of witnesses who' could prove the fact. In such a c£:3, or if ho
had been aware of the Avitnesses himself, it would have been his
duty to have instituted an examination. They must have

TRIAL CF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 653
Somebody before them to give evidence on which to base their
action. It is an entirely new duty of a grand jury now suggest
ed by the learned gentleman, and I think he will find himself
mistaken in his conclusion upon a little reflection. As I under
stand tho duty of the grand jury to bo, if any man has any
reason to suspect a particular person can provo a crime, it is
their duty to havo that person brought before them to give
ovidenoe. Mr. Jaine3 Bullock, of Granville, was shot doivn
in tho road within tho last four years, and from that day to this
there has never boon any discovery of the man avIio killed him.
What would tho grand jury of Oniuvlllo havo to do with that,
unions somebody comes forward and says ho has reason to
belle vo that Mr. Bullock Avns assassinated by somo particular
porson In order that they may Institute any Inquiry.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. Tho presiding officer is of tho
opinion that Avhat you say Avoukl woakon tho force of the
argumont. Ilo thinks tho counsel havo a right to cross-exam
ine to sIioav tho Avitness' feelings by asking him Avhether ho
had heard of any AA'hipping and had any ovidenco.
Q. You li\'0 near Graham ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. The court Avas held in Graham ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. You Avere apprised of tho fact that Outlaw had been
murdered in that town ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And you did not haA-o summoned before you a solitary
inhabitant of that town to 6ee if ho knew of anything about it ?
A. No, sir.
Q. You started no investigation ? A, No, sir.
Q. You hoard of scourging in different parts ot tho county ?
A. I hoard of scourging just as a rumor.
Q. You did not offer to start an investigation into any one
of them? A. No, sir.
Q. You had heard of Puryear's case too ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. You asked no particular questions about that? A. No,
»»r * we were perfectly at sea, and did not know who to ask.'
Q. Had you heard of Shoffner's being run out of the1 oounty f
43

654 coubt or impeachments.
A. I had heard of his leaving. I did not know tliat he had
been run out.
Q. You live at tlie Shops? A. Yes, sir.
Q. You knoiv of Corliss being chastised ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Where Avere you tliat night ? A. At home, I supposo.
That is whore I usually am.
Q. Did you hear any noise that night, any outcry ? A. No,
sir, it was nearly a mile from Avhere I live.
Q. Did you know, or had you heard about a large number
of men being in Graham and disguised in these Ku Klux
dresses ? A. Yes, sir, I had heard ot it at one time.
Q. Did you over offer to summon anybody to endeavor to
find out who they were / A. I don't knoAV whether it wa&
before I Avas on the grand jury or afterwards.
Q. It has been stated they Avere there before Outlaw was
murdered ? A. I don't remember.
Q. You had heard of it ? A. I had heard of thoir being
there on one occasion, but what time that A\*aa I don't knoAV.
Q. If it was before you did not offer to start any investiga
tion as to the fact ? A. No, &ir.
Q. You say you recollect of finding two bills? A. I don't
recollect Iioav many.
Q. I Avas under t'ao impression that you eaid you recollected
of finding two. A. There may have been many more.
Q. Do you remember a solitary bill found against a white
man? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Who was it ? A. No, I will not say that a bill Avas found.
1 remember a presentment. I did not charge my memory
with it, and would not have remembered theBe other cases if
they had not been prominent cases.
Q. You don't know whether any bill was found against a
white man. A. I don't know that any ono was sent by the
solicitor. Q. You don't remember? A. Unless it was put down
" colored," I cannot tell.
Q. Don't you know that it is always stated " colored " in the

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 655
bill ? A. No, sir, I do not, bocauso it is tho first time I had
any thing to do with ono of thom.
Q. You had hoard of Corliss's whipping before you woro on
tho grand jury ? A. Yos, sir, I Avas present at the trial.
Q. You did not offer to investigate that? A. No, Sir.
Q. You did not attempt to find out who committed the out
rage? A. No, 6ir.
Q. Although you Avere present at tho trial before the magis
trate, and heard Corliss say that he knew tho men ? A. He
eaid he did not knoAV, but that he was satisfied who they were
from their size and A'oices.
Q. He told who they Avere ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And ho told that in your hearing ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And when you A\rerc foreman of that grand jury, you did
not think it proper to investigate that matter at all ? A. Tho
magistrate had discharged them.
Q. I am not talking about the magistrate, I am talking about
your duty as a grand juror. You heard Corliss swear that he
knew the men who came thero disguised and AA'hipped him ?
A. Yes sir.
Q. He said who they were 1 A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did they prove an alibi — that they Avere someAvhere else
at the time ? A. I don't knoAV Avhether they proved that they
were somewhere else, or that tho magistrate thought the evi
dence was insufficient.
Q. You don't recollect any testimony — only that this man
swore they Avero there disguised, and that ho Avas satisfied, from
their sizes and voices, ho know thom ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Then thoy Avcro discharged ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And the grand jury took no notice of tho matter? A.
No, sir.
Q. [By the Chief Justice.] How many witnesses were sworn
oh that examination ? A. Only two, I think— Mr. Corliss and
Mrs. Corliss. .....¦¦
Q. Those were all who swore / A. Those are all I now re
member, there may have been more.

656 COUBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.^ ¦
Q. The magistrate woidd not bind them over on that testi
mony? A. No, sir. . . .
Q. What did Mrs. Corliss swear to ? A. She swore posi
tively she knew one of them.
Q. [By the Chief Justice.] Did the defendants have any
witness ? A. Yes, sir, I think they had. I did not charge my
memory with it, I nover expected to hear of it again. I think,
although I am not positive, that 6ome were examined.
Q. If there AvaB anybody you cannot remember ? A. No,
Bir, I don't remember.
Q. Did Mrs. Corliss provo that she was struck on the head
with a pistol ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. She stated that positively? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And alio knoAV avIio did it ? A. I had forgotten that
fact until you called it to my mind.
Q. Did she sIioav the placo Avhoro sho was struck ? A. I did
not seo it.
Q. Did she say she knew the porson Avho struck her? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. Was she in her night clothes avIioii this was done ? A.
Must I speak knowingly — • —
Q. What sho swore to ? A. If that was said I don't re
member it.
Q. You say that generally, when a squad went off or came
in there was a colored man Avith them / A. That is what I
saw. I don't knoAV how it was when I Avas not there.
Q. I understood you to say that you saw them going out in
two or three cases ? A. I said so.
Q. And in three or four cases coming back ? A. As many
as that, it may be more, I only speak from recollection.
Q. I wieh you to state whether you know of any secret or
ganization in the county, I don't care what name they go by ?
A. I do not.
Q. Have yon "ever eeen any one disguised? A. I never
did.

TRIAL OF AVILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 657
Q. Did you ever see one of the disguises they put on ? A.
I never did.
Q. What political party do you belong to ? A. Tho con
servative — at least I act with it.
Q. I understood you to answer tho question when you were
asked about the feeling betAveen whites and blacks to say it was
very good, but that there Avas some exceptions in rcteronco to
colored men. A. Thero wero somo exceptions.
Re-Direct Examination.
By Mr. Graham :
Q. Whon you acted as a grand juror was Corliss in tho
county or out of it ? A. Ho Avas out.
Q. Your superior court is held in Juno ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Corliss and his wife had left tho county? A. Yos, sir.
Q. In relation to thoso tAvo cases of OutktAV and Puryear, and
that of CasAVoll Holt — did anybody bring any information to
your attention ? A. Not a soul.
Q. Had you any moans of knowing about it/ A. Nono in
the world.
Q. Did you havo tho means of knowing anybody or any
thing about any of tho cases you ha\*o been asked about/ A.
None at all.
Q. Did the solicitor ever bring yon in a bill of indictment
or did he come before the grand jury and call your attention to
anything of the kind / A. Yes, sir, he did, and he compli
mented the grand jury ; be said it was the best one since he '
had been on the circuit as solicitor.
Mr. BOYDEN. We do not care about his compliments.
Q. My question was whether the solicitor came before the
grand jury and called attention to anything which you failed
to notice / ' , '
Mr. BOYDEN. We have no objection to that. ' "
Q. He did come before you? A. Yes, sir.
Mr. BOYDEN. We do not want' anything about/ compli
ments given. We understand about these compliments — what
they mean*,

658 CODBT. OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. I ask you whether tho solicitor came to the grand jury
during tho session and called attention to other offences that ho
wished them to investigate.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. I understand the witness to say he
did. Q. Did you attend to his suggestion in every matter to which
your attention Avas called ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was there any information laid before you in reference
to the matter of Outlaw and Puryear or any other cases of
crime that you failed to enquire into ? A. None whatever.
Q. You say that the solicitor, about the time you concluded
your duties, came in and had a conversation with the grand
jury ? A. Yes, sir.
Mr. GRAHAM. I submit Mr. Chief Justice that the wit
ness is at liberty to relate what that conversation was. The
respondent has gone into the secrets of tho grand jury room
and the only thing they have found to object to is that the so
licitor approved of the proceedings of the boiy. They say
this is a political quarrel and they are determined to make it
out so ; we desire to show Iioav a republican solicitor regarded
the conduct of the grand jury.
Mr. BOYDEN. We say Mr. Chief Justice, that it was a
manifest duty of the foreman of the grand jury, as Outlaw
was murdered right in Graham, to have summoned every man,
Avoman and child, Avhite or black before the grand jury and to
question him or her on tho subject ; that as the offence took
place right there, he had a right to 6uspect that some one in
tho town knew it.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. That will be competent when you
come to comment upon the witnesses' testimony, but the pre
siding officer is of tho opinion that tho managers have a right
to show that tho solicitor camo in and stated that he was sat
isfied with their action.
Q. State what Mr. Solicitor Bulla said on that occasion /
A. When ho came in he said tho court was about adjourned.
Tho grand jury hold on a little longer than tho court. It held

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 059
on a day after the judgo had left. Wo were not through. H©
camo In to let us know where ho could be found, and he said,
" This is the best grand jury I ever had on tho oironit sinco I
have been solicitor."
Q. That was Mr. Bulla/ A. Yes, sir.
Q. You have been asked in regard to hearing of outrages in
the county; you say you have heard 'of two besides that of
Outlaw's and Puryear's / A, Yes, sir, I heard of Joe Harvey's
and Caswell Holt's.
Q. What was Caswell Holt 6aid to have been whipped for —
do you know whether there was any report/
Mr. BOYDEN. The question is outside of any fact of that
kind, whether the grand jury should present a man for such an
outrage 

The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer thinks that
the question is carrying the evidence a little too far.
Mr. GRAHAM. I am endeavoring to rebut what was said
on the other side.
Mr. MERRIMON. It is competent in another point of
vieAV. The respondent alleges that Holt was whipped on
account of his political affinities ; we offer to show that he was
whipped on account of his stealing.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. You cannot call that out with
reference to the conduct of the witness as a grand juror.
Re-Cross Examination.
By Mr. Smith.
Q. How many indictments did you find that term / A. I
don't remember, I did not charge my mind with it.
Q. I understood you to'say two"?
A. There were two that I remembered because they were
rather noted cases.
Q. They are tho only ones you do remember to have found
at that term? A.' Yes, sir. , ,,.,,
Be-Direct Examination. , ¦..•/.<
By Mr. Graham. r  , ,
, Q. You passed upon all the bills ,&e solicitor sent you ? A.

660 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS. -
Yes, sir, I think there was one we did not. That was a man
tor stealing a sack of flour in Lenoir county — that was against
a Avhite man.
Q. Was any presentment made that term of white men or
black ? A. There was a presentment made there for Kukluxing
but whether he was white or colored, I don't know. I remem
ber of writing on the bill that way, " presented for Ku-kluxing."
Q. These three men Allen Paisley, Thompson, and Albright,
you found a bill against them ?
Mr. BOYDEN. You have gone over that once.
Mr. GRAHAM. My associate thought that I had not.
LUCIEN H. MURRAY, a witness called on behalf of the
Managers, being duly sworn, testified.
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. Stato your name, place of residence and business ? A.
Lucien H. Murray, Graham, a merchant.
Q. Stato whothor at any time during the year 1870 you
Avoro arrested by armed mon, and if so, under what circum
stances, and Avhat Avas done Avith you? A. On the 27th of
July I returnod homo. I had left home on the 26th and on
the 27th when I got back I was informed by my employer —
I was then a salesman — that Col. Burgen had been there on
the 26th to arrest me, and he had left the orders for me to
report at the Shops at their camp the next morning. As soon
as I got home, I Avent up to the shops and into the oamp and
reported myself to Col. Burgen, He then ordered me under
arrest. I was then arrested and kept there until that evening
about four o'clock before he said anything to mo. He then
called me to his tent and said that he had nothing against
me only as a Avitness, and he asked me in regard to the Ku
klux being in town on the night Wyatt Outlaw was hung,
and I told him all I knew about it.
Q. [By Mr. Smith.] State all you Baid ? A., I told him all
I knew about it, that that night — some time in the night — I
did not know the hour — I was awakened up by hallooing in

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. nOLDEN. 6Q1
the street. I raised up from my bed and looked out of tho
Avindow and saw no cause for the fusa — I saw no person at all
and I laid down, though I did not sleep — but I am too fast; — I
remarked to a young man who was sleeping with me, what all
tho fuss Avas about. He said he did not know. He said " I
eupposo it is the boys after the breaking up of the 6how."
There had been a little bear show down at Mr. Hunter's. In
a short timo after that I heard horses on the street and I raised
up again and looked out of tho window and I saw two men
riding down the street and stop under a tree near whero I was
Bleeping and they stayed there a short timo. After a short
time, there was a A'ehicle of some kind camo up the street — I
suppose it came up street — and they drove across under that
troo. As tho vehicle came up, theso two mon on horso back
rodo off East street, thon tho buggy pasaod through in the samo
direction. Burgen insisted that I know moro than that. I told
him I did not, that that Avas all I know. Ho thon remarked,
"If you don't toll, I will break your damned nock to-night."
I rcinarkod that I Ichoav nothing more. Ho said "Go back to
your prison, uir." I Avent back into tho prison. That night
betAveen ono and two o'clock, or about that timo, he como to
iny tent, whero I was sleeping, with a candle inhls hand. I
Avas not asleep at tho timo bnt I raised my head and ho remark
ed " la that you Murray ?" I said " Yob, it is." Ho thon
Avalkcd back to his tent and in a short timo he come back Avith
out any light and touched me on the foot. He said " Get up
and como out." I said, " Very well." Ho spoke to mo very
low. Said I, " Can I put on my shoes." Ho said, " No, yon
will not have any use for them long." I got up and wont out
and he took hold of me and led me into his tent.
Q. Without your shoes? A. Yes, sir, in my stocking feet.
When we got into the tent there Avere three men Avith pistols.
He sat down and he said, " You must tell me all you knoAV
about the Kuklux." I said, "I don't know anything about
them." He said " You are telling me a d^-d lie" or "You
are a d—4 liar," I have forgotten which, but I kndAt that tho

062 COCBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
41 d— d lie " was passed. I told him that I did not know any
thing about it Then he asked me if I did not soe Adolph
Mooro tie the ropo around Wyatt's neck. I told him that I
didn't seo anybody I could recognize that night.
Q. By "Wyatt" he meant Wyatt Outlaw ? A. Yes. sir. I
told him that I could not recognize anybody that night. He
said " None of your d — d lies." Then he got up and taking
his pistol he put it at my breast and the other three men did the
6ame. Four pistols wero presented at my breast and cocked,
and ho told me that they would " blow my d — d heart out
" if I did'nt tell." I told him that I knew nothing about it.
He then demanded a confession and asked me if I was a Ku
klux. I told him I was not. Ho said I must confess or he
Avould " blow my heart out." I said " I have no information, —
I have nothing to confess." He said " Patton and Rogers
could not confess anything until they got a rope around their
necks and then they could tell about it, and you must do it." I
made no reply. He picked up a rope under the bed and put it
around my neck and carried ino out seventy-five or one hun
dred yards to a tree and threw the rope over the limb.
Q. Did. the other soldiers go Avith you ? A. The four were
along. Q. Armed? A. All armed with pistols. We went out to
the tree and the rope was thrown over the limb and then he
asked me if I was ready to make my confession I told him
I had no confession to make, that I knew nothing to confess.
He then dreAV me up and held me there a' little time — not
very long, and then let me down. The same confession was
otill demanded, if I saAv Moore put tho rope around Wyatt's
nock. I told him I did not. Ho thon Baid " If you don't
confess I will break your d— -d neck," and he again took hold
of the rope and then he dreAV me up. How long he held me
thore I don't know but I soon became unconscious. On be
ing let down, I was unable to stand and could not spoak or
anything else. When I oarae to I was sitting against the
tree with the militia on each side of me rubbing .me. My

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN, 083
arms vero untiod, and the rope was taken off my neok, Af
ter I got so I oould talk and stand up, the oonfesaion wus still
domandod. I again told him that I had no oonfesaion to
make, that I kneAv nothing to confess. He then said to the
sergeant, " Hang him on to that limb until eight o'clock to-
" morrow morning, and then cut him down and bury him
" under the tree on Avhich he is hung." He said " Mr. Mur-
" ray, if you havo anything to say I give you permission to
" speak." I just remarked " All I have to say to you is that
" when you hang mo dead you have just threo more days."
A pistol was then put to my breast again — the four pistols us
well as I rccolloct — and ho asked me an explanation of tho
words I used — Avhat I meant. I said " You may live if you
" hang mo until to-morroAv, but I will not insure you for
" more than threo days." Ho thon stopped awhilo and folded
his arms and said " Sergeant tako him back to his quarters."
Then he said to me, " I Avill give you till ten o'clock to-raor-
" row to make your confeesion ; if you don't give it by tliat
" time I Avill take you out and kill you dead." He then told
me that I should say nothing about Avhat had passed — he
said if you ever divulge what has passed here to-night I will
kill you on sight. I said " very Avell," and I walked back to
my camp. Of course I never said anything about it until I
Avas released.
Q. Where were you released ? A. Salisbury.
Q. By whom ? A. By Judge Brooks.
Q. How long were you kept in custody ? A. I was kept
from tho 27th of July until tho 10th of August.
Q. Whero wero you kept? A. At tho Shops a part of the
timo, until Wednesday boforo election. On Wednesday night
boforo tho election, Col. Burgon told mo that he should give mo
a parol to report to his camp tho next morning to come to
Raleigh. Col. Albright was there and he insisted on prolong
ing the time until Friday morning. Col Burgen did so,
and he told mo I could remain homo on Thursday, and to
report to him on Friday morning. Friday morning came and

,^64 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
I did so.. I was then sent to Raleigh under gnard, and after I
got here we were turned over to Col. Clarke. Col. Clarke did
not keep us under guard, but ho told us to stay around tho
National hotel until called for. I stayed; I think, two days,
when I was called up before him, and I went through some
kind of an examination.
Q. Before whom ? A. Boforo Col. Clarke.
Q. At the hotel ? A. No, sir, in the capitol.
Q. What part? A. Ono of tho rooms here.
Q. Tho governor's offlco? A. I suppose not — I don't knoAV
what offlco it Avas.
Q. [By the Chief Justico.] What comer? A. That corner,
[pointing to tho oast.]
Q. On tho lower floor? A. Yos, sir.
Q. Who was In thoro bosldoa Clurko? A. Col. Clarko and
his adjutant woro nil who woro in there.
Q. Who was ho ? A. I don't knoAV, I think his namo waa
Parker. I may'bo mlstakon about his bolng his adjutant.
Q. Who oxamlned yon ? A. Col. Clarko went through with
tho examination.
Q. What was done with you then? A. He asked me about
tho Kuklux, but I know nothing, and could not tell him any
thing. Q. He asked you about the Kuklux ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And you told him you knew nothing about them ? A.
That I knew nothing about them.
Q. Did he make any threats? A. No, sir, I was treated
very kindly while in his custody.
Q. What did he do Avith you ? A. He then paroled me.
Q. What became ot you then ? A. I then went home —
went back to Graham and remained there, and had to report
to Col. Burgen every day.
Q. Until you were taken before Judge Brooks? A. Until
I Avas carried before Judge Brooks. > . ¦.<•¦¦
Q. You were not carried to Caswell ? A. No,' air- '¦

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 665
Q. Did you see much of the troopa while you were in prison
t'.iere / A. Yes, sir.
Q. Describe them to the court, their behavior, discipline
and intelligence ? A. Their discipline was veiy bad as sol
diers. It did not seem as if they had any respect for the offi
cers at all.
Q. What waa the grade of intelligence? A. I don't think
I am capablo of judging of that, but I think there was very
llttlo intelligence about thom.
Q. Woro thoy orderly or disorderly ? A. I don't know as
to that.
Q. Ilavoyou any acquaintance with tho troops? A. Yes,
sir. Q. You havo boon In tho army / A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did those troops behave liko soldiers at all? A. No,
sir, thoy did not behave as avo used to havo to behave.
Q. Stato whether you saw many persona brought to tho
camp ? A. Yes, sir, I saw a good many brought into camp.
Q. Who brought them there? A. They were brought in
under guard.
Q. Squads of soldiers with them ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. What persons were along — what was their color ? A.
Do you mean the guard ?
Q. Were some white and some black when they came in ?
A. Yes, sir, as a general thing they took one or two blacks
with them on their raids.
Q. Did they say they went on raids ? A. I mean when
they went out to get men.
Q. Did the soldiers say they were going on raids ? A. No,
sir, I don't know as they did.
Q. They generally took one or two black men -with them?
A. Yes sir.
Q. What was the usual sized squads who went out ? A.
They were different sizes — sometimes ten or fifteen, and some
times not so many. <
Q. Were they armed ? A. Yes; sir.

666 COTJBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. You saw these sqads depart and return? A. Yes^ sir.
Q. When they returned they brought persons with thom ?
A. Yes.
Q. What number of persons do you think you saw in cus
tody ? A. I don't know, there Avas at ono time thirty or
forty — about that number.
Q. I understand you to say that Burgen arrested you ? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. Did he curse you after you were discharged ? A. Do
you mean after I Avas discharged by Judge Brooks ?
Q. Yes. A. No, sir, I never saw him afterwards.
Q. Do you knoAV Avhether they hanged anybody else ? A.
I did not see them.
Q. He told you who had been hanged ? A. Yes, sir, Rogers
and Patton, and he said they could not tell anything until they
were hanged and then they could tell it all.
Q. Did they have you in prison at the court house at Gra
ham ? A. No, sir, I was then on parole.
Mr. SMITH. We do not admit that what was there said is
competent evidence — the fact that any other persons had been
thus treated. We object to the statement if it is intended as
evidence of the maltreating of these others persons.
Mr. GRAHAM. It is an admission by Burgen that ho had
hung two other men.
Mr. SMITH. Wo object to that as evidence of the fact.
Wo admit it may be received in connection with the treatment
of this prisoner but not as truth of tho facts stated in tho con
versation. Tho CHIEF JUSTIE. The presiding officer thinks it ia
competent with the view of allowing that Burgen waa trying
to scare the witness.
Mr. SMITH. But not as evidence of the facts stated.
Q. Did you know any of the black men there ? A. I knew
some of them.
Q. Who were they? A. I knew one named Hark Ruffin,
another was named Aleck Ruffin. There was one by the name

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 66T
of Travis Ruffin, one by the name of Alfred Bamhill, and
another by the name of Levi Dickey. Those are all I know.
I know there were Bome others that belonged to the camp after
I was paroled.
Q. Who Avere they ? A. Dick Hurdle, Allen Freeland and
Dan McAdam.
Q. Did you aak Burgen by what authority ho had arrested
you, at any time ? A. I don't recollect that I did.
Q. You had committed no offense ? A. No, sir.
Cross-Examination. By Mr. Boyden. ,
Q. Are you a relation of the former sheriff of Alamance ?
A. No, sir.
Q. You live in Graham ? A. Yes, sir. !
Q. You were there the night Outlaw was murdered ? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. And you heard a voise ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. You rose up and went and looked out of the window ?
A. Looked out of the window from the bed.
Q. You saw no cause for the disturbance ? A. No causo.
Q. Afterwards you heard a noise again ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. You looked out and saw two men and you heard a vehicle
drive along ? A. I saAv that too.
Q. Was it a top buggy? A. I don't know whether it was
a buggy or not but it Avas a top vehicle.
Q. They were about how near the tree where this man was
hung? A. It was thirty or forty yards from that place.
Q. And they drove off? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did they go towards the place where the body was found ?
A. No, air, they went directly from it.
Q. When they came along did they come as if they were
coming from where tho body was ? A. This noise was some
time after I heard the hallooing. There was no fuss on the
street except the horses when I saw these men. -
Q. Which way were these men coming — the body was hung
on West street-r-were they coming from West street ? A. No,

6,68 COTJBT OF IMPEAOHMENTa.
Bir, they were coming from the appearance of the noise down
North street. - . <
Q. What time of the night waa this? A. I suppose it was
twelve or one or two o'clock.
Q. Did you hear any guns fired / A. No. sir, I heard no
guns. Q. When you got up in the morning did you see this body /
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you look to see which way the vehicle went / A,
No, sir, it Avas raining tho next morning.
Q. You did not try to traco that out ? A. No, sir.
Q. You did not try te do It? A. No, sir.
Q. Was thero an appearance n« it there had boon a good
many hoi'Beg In toAvn ? A. I cannot say as to that. It aviis
very late that morning Avlion I got up, and thero had boon a
good many people around tho troo. I saw some horsos tracks
thero. Q. Did you see any men disguised in Graham / A. No,
sir. Q. How were these men dressed you eaAV that night/ A.
They looked as if they were in black. They were not in white,
I know ; if they had been I would have noticed it.
Q. Was there any effort made that morning to search and
find out who was connected with that hanging ? A. Not that
I know of.
Q. What sort of a man was Outlaw — was he a well behaved
man / A. As far as I knoAV he was.
Q. There is nothing against him that you know of? A.
Nothing that I know of.
Q. Had he been in any office in that county ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. What office had he held ? He had been town commis
sioner. Q. Have you any knowledge of any secret political organ
ization in the county by whatever name it may be called ? A.
I don't know anything of my own knowledge. ... - ; .- •

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 669
Q. Have you heard any persons admit they belonged to it ?
Mr. GRAHAM. We object to the question.
Mr. BOYDEN. We don't ask with a view of having those
etatements of the witness taken as evidence. We wish to find
out in order that we may send for them.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer thinks the
question is not competent.
Mr. BOYDEN. I do not offer it as any evidence of tho
fact. The CHIEF JUSTICE. Thero is no rule by which a party
can fish out ovidenco in that way unless ho goes to tho witness
after ho has loft tho stand.
Q. You havo nover soon anybody dlsgulsod? A. No, sir.
Q. And you havo nover soon any of tho disguises ? A. I
nover did.
Q. Do you knoAV anything about Puryear? A. I do not.
Q. You did not boo his body ? A, No, sir.
Q. Did you over boo any body with marks on whero they had
beon scourged ? A. No, sir.
Q. Do you know anything about Burgon being arrested by
order of tho governor for his treatment of you ? A. No, sir,
Q. Burgen told you ho was coming te Raleigh when you
wore required by him to report? A. I did not say that.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. I understood the witness to say
that he said the witness was to come to Raleigh ?
The WITNESS. Burgen sent me to Raleigh under guard,
he did not come himsel£
Q. You did not see him here ? A. No, sir.
Q. You don't know of his being called before the court
martial ? A. No, sir, I don't know anything about it.
Senator ROBBINS, of Rowan. With the view of arrang
ing for time to be given for the defense to prepare for their
case, I would like to ask the managers when they -will probably
get through with their testimony, it they can state.
Mr. GRAHAM. We cannot anticipate. The cross-exami-
tions ot our witnesses have been a great deal longer than we ex-
U

670 COITBTOFTMFBAOHMENTB.
pected. The colored inan waa on the stand yesterday: for Over
two hours, but my impression is that we will get through with
our testimony in two days. I will state however that I 'have
not consulted with my brethern on that point. It will depend
a good deal on the cross-examinations.
Senator ROBBINS, of Rowan, offered the following order.
Ordered, That in view of the fact announced by the managers
that they will be through their testimony in two days, the
respondent ia allowed until Monday, February twentieth, to
open the caso for the defence.
Mr. GRAHAM. We do not Avish to be bound by the
statement mado, because it is possible wo may require a longer
time. The recital in the order seems to imply an admission
AA'hich I do not intend to make.
Senator ROBBINS, of Rowan. Tliat recital is not binding
upon the managers ; they can have the whole time until the
twentieth. We desire to have some time fixed in order to
allow the respondent to have his Witnesses ready.
Senator GRAHAM, of Orange. Mr. Chief Justice, I think
the motion is premature, and therefore I move the court ad
journ. The CHIEF JUSTICE put the question on the motion of
Senator Graham and it was decided in the affirmative.
So the court adjourned. . •

. TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. MOLDEN. 671
FIFTEENTH DAY.
Senate Chamber, Feb. 14th, 187.1.
The COURT met at eleven o'clock, A. M., pursuant to
adjournment, Hon. R. M. Pearson, chief justice of tho supremo
court, in the chair.
Proceedings wero opened by proclamation made in duo form
by the doorkeeper.
The CLERK proceeded to call the roll of senators when tho
folloAving gentlemen wero found to bo present :
Messrs. Allen, Battle, Bcasley, Bellamy, Brogden, BroAvn,
Cook, Council, Cowles, Crowell, EdAvards, Eppes, Flemming,
Gilmer, Graham, of Alamance, Graham, of Orange, HaAvkins,
Ilyman, Jones, King, Latham, Ledbetter, Lehman, Linney,
Love, Mauney, McCotter, Merrimon, Moore, Morehead, Olds,
Robbins, of Davidson, Robbins, of Rowan, Skinner, Speed,
Troy, Waddoll, Warren, Whiteside and Worth — £0.
Senator GILMER moved that the reading of. the journal of
tho proceedings of yesterday bo dispensed with.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE put tho question on tho motion of
Senator Gilmer, and it was decided in tho affirmative.
Sonator GRAHAM, of Orange, moved that Henry A. Lon
don, Jr., bo directed to act as clork of the court In the absence
of Mr. W. L. Saunders, the clerk, who was tumble to bo present
by reason of Illness.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE put tho question on tho motion of
Senator Graham, and It was decided In tho affirmative,
Senator 0 1 LMK Jt offered flic following order :
Ordered, That from to-day the hoars of tho sitting of this
court shall bo from cloven o'clock, A. M., to one o'clock and
thirty minutes, P, M., and from throe P, M,, to five, P. M., exoept
on Saturdays, whon the session from three P. M. to five V, M.
•hall'not bo held. {< . ¦>>n ¦<¦ > >
The CHIEF JUSTICE put the question on the adoption of

679 court or impeachmbnts.
the order of Senator Gilmer and a vote was taken thereon.
Before the decision was finally announced,
Senator GRAHAM, of Orange, called for the yeas and nays.
A sufficient number seconding the call, the yeas and naya
were ordered.
The CLERK called the roll on the adoption of the order
submitted by Senator Gilmer and it was decided in the
affirmative by the following vote :
Thoso who voted in the affirmative were:
Messrs. Battle, Boasley, Brown, Council, Cowles, Crowell,
Gilmer, King, Ledbotter, Lehman, Linney, Love, Maunoy,
McCottor, Merrimon, Morehead, Robbins, of Davidson, Rob
bins, of Rowan, Troy, Waddoll and Whitosldo— 21.
Those who voted in the negative wero :
Messrs. Allen, Bellamy, Brogden, Cook, Edwards, Eppes,
Flemming, Graham, of Alamance, Graham, of Orange, Hawkins,
Hyman, Latham, Moore, Olds, Skinner, Speed, Warren
and Worth— 18.
WILLIAM PATTON, a witness called on behalf of the
Managers, being duly sworn, testified as follows :
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. State your name, age, residence and place of business.
A. William Patton, I reside in Melville toAvnship, Alamance
county, and I am a farmer.
Q. How old are you ? A. 40.
Q. State whether at any time during the year 1870, you
saw any armed men in the county of Alamance, and if you
did, state if they did anything to you and if bo what — give us
an account of the whole matter a& far as you can ? A. I was
arrested by armed men, Lieut Hunnicutt, Aleck Ruffin and
others, about three miles from home. I waa out with a thrash
ing machine.
Q. State the county ? A. Alamance. I waa carried to the
camps at Company Shops.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 673
Q. At whose house were you .? A. I was at no house, I was
on the big road going down to James Bratche's farm.
Q. Under what circumstances ? how many men was their
armed ? A. Eight men arrested me and one black man named
Aleck Ruffin.
Q. State what they said to you ? A. They told me that I
must conaider myself under arrest, they wanted to make a
witness out of mo and they carried me up to the camp.
Q. What did thoy do to you ? A. At night at a late hour,
Col. Burgon called mo out and told me to como to his tout. I
wont in. Ho told mo that I was a Kuklux, that I was along
whon Wyatt Outlaw was hung and that I would havo to como
out and tell what I know. I told him I did'nt know who Avas
along, and he Baid that I was a God d — d liar, and he intended
to shoot mo and he got his pistol and presented it to my
breast, and told me if I had anything to say to come out
W,ith it. He then called for a rope and tied it around my
neck and swore that he was going to hang mo. He took me
out to the woods, about 150 yards from tho tent, and throw it
over a. limb, and drew it up and stretched my head up. Before
ho did this he told me if I had any confession to make to come
out with it. I told him I had none ; he kept me for some time,
and then he let the rope down. I told him I had nothing to
Bay and he started back to the tent. I fainted on the way
going back. He was around cursing me, and he tried to
get me to come out with things I did not know anything
about, and ordered me to be taken back to his tent, and swore
that he intended to have everything out of me that night. He
talked to me for some time, and I told him I did'nt know any
thing to tell him, that I didn't know at that time why Outlaw !
Avas hung, or about the Kuklux, or anything about it, and'
he took the rope off my neck, and tied it arourid; one of my
wrists, and took me outside to a large goods box and kept me '
there till the morniug. Next morning he came and cursed the
guard for not undoing me before daylight' come. ¦}- He' took me
in hi? tent and JPaid bo had a paper Avritten out there which J

674 COUBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
was to sign that > paper, and in the excitement I did so.
I didn't know what was in it. He toll me it was what he had
taken down, and he then ordered me back to the tent, and put
me in there by myself for three days, and gave orders not to
talk with the other prisoners in the camp, and then I was at
liberty to go about with them after three days ; I was kept
there until I was ordered doAvn here by GoA'ernor Holden.
Q. State what was done after you came down ? A. Gover
nor Holden examined me hoAv I was treated by Burgen. I
did not come out and tell him hoAv bad I was treated. I told
him the rope was used around my neck.
Q. Why didn't you tell him how you were treated? A. I
was right smart alarmed and was scared and was under arrest
and! didn't come out to tell him all about it.
Q. He examined you ? A. He examined me a little and
asked me some questions about it.
Q. Who else examined you ? A. Douglas examined me
and Colonel Clarke in the capitol.
Q. What office? A. In Colonel Clarke's office, and Doug
las examined me a little in regard to it in his office.
Q. What office did Douglas hold do you knoAV at that time?
A. Ho Avns general I think, sir.
Q. Adjutant general? A. It was my understanding that
he was.
Q. Whore did the governor examine you ? A. In his offlco.
Q. Do you lccollect the time ? A. I don't recollect exactly
tho timo. It avi'h somo time in July when I Avas arrested, and
I avub brought doAvn hero in August.
Q. Boforo or after the lection? A. Tho day before tho
election, I think.
Q. How long were you kept here? A. About throe days.
Q. Did you sign a paper doAvn here ? A. I did.
Q. Under Avhat circumstances ? A. To go home — circum
stances to go home.
Q. . Where did you sign it ? A. I signed it in Colonel Olark'a
room. Morris presented it to me to sign.
Q. Captain Morris ? A. Yes, sir.

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 675
Q. Did you know what you signed ? A. I did not knoAV
exactly what was in it, They named over sotoe things I didn't
know — something like treatment that Colonel Clarke gave me
— Hunnicutt.
Q. Where did you go when you went back ? A. I stayed
here until I was discharged by Governor Holden.
Q. Stayed here in Raleigh? A. Yes, sir ; I Went home after
I left Raleigh.
Q. (By the Chief Justice). You Avere not put under guard
again ? A. No, sir.
Q. At the time they wanted you to sign the paper down
here, state whether the governor said anything to you about
signing it t A. No.
Q. State what he said, if anything, about any disclosure that
you had to make ? A. He told me that he wanted me to come
out, and tell him all that I knew about the concern in Ala
mance, he wanted to know something about it. I told him I
didn't know but very little about it, and could not tell him
much about it. He said that his intention was to put doAvn
these fusses up there in Alamance.
Q. .Did he tell you anything about signing a paper that
Douglas drew up ? A. No, sir.
Q. State whether Douglas read any paper that was presented
to yon to sign, and urge you to sign it/ A. He did in his own
room, in his office.
Q. Where was his room / A. It was over in tho National
hotel, as well as I can recollect. I did not sign it then.
Q. Who avos Avith him then? A. Tho guard was with him.
Q. Any threats mado against you? A. No, sir, he told me
ho wanted mo to sign that paper.
Q. Did you soo Burgon Avhile you woro down here? A. I
didn't, boo him wliilo I Avas hero.
Q. Stato whothor any person urged you to sign that paper,
and said to yon, the sooner you signed it the sooner you Avould
got away from hero ? A. Captain Morris told ine if I signed
that paper I might go home.

676 COPST OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. Who was Captain Morris ? A. I don't know, sir.' I sup
pose he belonged to the crowd here at this place. I never saw
the man before. : ,
Q. Are you sure about that name? A. That is what he
told me his name was.
Q. Morris ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Are you sure of that ? A. I think so, sir.
Q. Did he have on soldiers' clothes ? A. Yes, sir, I think
he had.
Cross-Examination. By Mr. Boyden.
Q. What is your christian namo ? A. William Patton.
Q. How many papers do you say you signed ? A. I do not
recollect but signing two hero.
Q. You signod two here. A. Yos, sir.
Q. Do I understand you to tell tho court thoy wore not read
over to you, and you didn't know what was in them ? A.
There were some words named over to mo, but I don't recol
lect it being read over.
Q. I wish to put the question to you distinctly — was not
each paper read over to you, that you signed, in your hearing
before you signed it ? A. No, sir.
Q. Where did you sign the first one ? A. I signed the first
one in Douglas' office, in his room, I suppose.
Q. The first was in Douglas' room, in the National hotel t
A. I don't recollect about signing ono there, sir, but he had
some talk with me there in that place. I don't recollect about
signing one there.
Q. I understand you, you were asked to sign a paper there I
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Whether you signed it there or not you do not recollect l
A. I do not recollect.
Q. Was that the first time you had been asked to sign a
paper ?
Q. [By the Chief Justice.] After you came to Raleigh I
A. I think I was asked to sign one before that.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 677
Q. Where waa that / A. It waa m the house here in one
of the lower rooms. I do not know which room it was.
Q. Who asked you to sign ii ? A. I think Douglas asked
me to sign that paper.
Q. Did you aign it ? A. I think I did.
Q. Was it read to you before you signed it? A. I don't
think it waa. I don't recollect that it was.
Q. Did I understand you to tell the court that you don't
recollect whether it waa read OA'er to you or not ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. You do recollect that you signod it / A. Yob, sir.
Q. Do you know what was in it ? A. Ho told me some
thing about what waa in it. I cannot recollect now.
Q. You don't recollect what ho told you was in it ? A. No,
sir. Q. Did you sign any other paper after you came hero ? A.
I signod two papers.
Q. Whore was tho other one signed — this ono — whero waa
tho other ono signed ? A. In Colonel Clarke's office.
Q. Was Colonel Clarke present ? A. He was not, sir.
Q. Who were present / A. Morris.
Q. You don't say Douglas was there/ A. No, sir.
Q. Was anybody but Morris there when yon signed it ?. A.
No, sir, not at that time.
Q. Whose room was it in ? A. In Colonel Clarke's room.
Q. Was there but one person there and he represented
his name to be Morris ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. What dress did you say he had on ? A. He had on citi
zen's clothes.
Q. Did you sign any paper before you came to Raleigh ? A.
Yes, sir, I signed one.
Q. Who was present when you signed that? A. Mr.
Burgen. Q. Who else? A. No one else but the guard — he was
present. I was brought down here one evening, and kept here
till the next morning.

678 COURT Of IMPEACHMENT!.
Q. I ask yon if you didn't sign a paper before William R.
Albright? A. I think not,
Q. Look on that paper (producing a paper and handing
to the Avitness.)
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. Chief Justice, we object to the proof
of any such paper. I say that a man in duress as this witness
was at the time these three several papers were signed by him
cannot be bound by anything he said and cannot be contradicted
by anything which he signed under such circumstances. I un
derstand this to be one of the papers he signed after he had
been hung and that he signed it while he was still under arrest.
Such a paper cannot be given in evidence for the purpose of
affecting his credit as a witness. Suppose he were on trial for
?reason or any other crime and that a paper were offered in
evidence us one he had signed after he had been hung by the
neck and tortured and tied down on a box during an entire
night, and then sent under guard to the seat of government;
and then suppose he had been brought before the highest officer
in the state, whose snbordiato officers had committed these out
rages upon him — to say that a paper should affect his credit on
his trial is to contradict the settled principles of evidence. Sup
poso ho had mado a contract under theso circumstances with
these men with their bayonets and BAVords raised over him on
the highways or whon thoy had then carried him to a prison
to Company Shops and had hung him up to a tree, I submit
that such a contract Avould boot' no binding forco; and that in
this caso no such statement can bo received for any purpose
Avhatovor. Mr. BOYDEN. Mr. Chief Justice, I am not a llttlo sur
prised at tho proposition laid iIoavh by the honorable counsol
for tho managers, lie supposes tho caso of a contract signed
by the Avitness undor duress upon which ho is hold. Tho gen
tleman alleges that such a paper cannot bo offered in evi
dence. Sir, it is a universal rule that such papers aro to be
received for what thoy are Avorth. If tho counsel for the man
agers shall satisfy this court that tho papor we now offer waa

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 679 '
signed under duress and under threats, then It will go for
nothing. But aurely it is .to be received and taken for what it
ia worth. The gentleman assumes that all that he has proved
by the witness aa to his signing the papor is the truth ; that,
sir, is a question to be investigated here by this court. Wo
deny the truth of it. The question comes up when the case is to
be finally passed upon,whether he signed that paper voluntarily
and knew every Avord that was in it,or Avhether there were threats
and ho signed it under duress. I admit that, if it is established
to the satisfaction of the court that he signed it under duress it
would go for nothing. But, sir, it ia the first time I reckon the
proposition was made in a court in North Carolina, that a
paper signed by a party cannot be offered in evidence against
him. It is testimony — beyond all controversy. It seems to
me thero is no lawyer in this body but knows it is competent
to be received ; and nothing is clearer than if it turna out that
it was signed under dnrees, it will bo of no avail.
Mr. MERRIMON. Mr. Chief Justice, if this witness woro
on trial for somo alleged offence and a statement, oven sworn
to by him, Avero ottered, and it appeared to tho court by tho
preliminary evidonco that it AA'as extorted from him, tho court
would not hear tho paper nor would it allow tho papor to bo
read in ovidonco becauso it aviih extorted. If it shall turn out
by-and-by, upon further proofa, that it was not extorted, thon it
may bo competent for tho respondent to introduce it. But, in
as much as tho witnesHs swear that he Avns in duress at tho timo
tho papers woro executed, that ho did not know what avub in
thom, that ho signed whatever waa presented' to him Avithout
tho papers being read ovor to him, I Bay it la liko a ciibo Avhere
ho Ib Indicted and thoy trying to provo against him a statement
that ho had mado whon ho was undor duress, and controlled
by thoso who had him in custody. IIoav is this caso different
from that? Iloro is a Avitnosa on the stand before this court.
He swears that a ropo was put around his nock after ho had
been arrested by a party ot armed mon, that ho stated ho know
knew nothing to confess when a confession was demanded ;

680 COUBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
tliat he was then tied down to a box during a whole night
and was then taken into the tent of his captor and was
interrogated ; that then a paper was drawn up, and the con
tents of Avhich he did not know and which he signed
without reading or hearing read. Yet, with this fact staring
tho court in the face, the gentlemen in a remarkable style of
declamation insists tliat statement may be admitted as evi
dence in the first instance! I shall not engage in any
such declamation. These are facts, and sir, it is a plain
principle of law that extorted statements prima facie — (and
they are so hero for he swears to it,) are not to be admitted in
evidence and never can bo until the prima facie case is de
stroyed by testimony.
Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chief Justice, it is precisely becase it is
the case of a witness, and not case of a party on trial that the
rulo stated by the gentlemen does not apply. You cannot
givo in evidence tho character of an accused man when he is
on trial, nor can you give his confession obtained by any
amount of undue influence, whether addressed to his fears or
to his hopes. The character of the witness is also a matter
to bo investigated. He brings his character into court when
ho oomos here to testify, It is beoausethe jury are asked to
believe him, that his oharaoter becomes au element to be con
sidered Avith the view of ascertaining the oredit to whioh his
testimony is entitled. Lot us look at this ; suppose these
statements were all true, Avhich the witness makes. The gen
tleman assumes tho truth of Avhat the witness has said though
that is the enquiry now before this court.
Mr. MERRIMON. I say it is prima facie true because he
has sworn to it.
Mr. SMITH. All prima facie cases are open to contradiction. -
Mr. MERRIMON. So vve admit. ...
Mr. SMITH. Hence we are no av offering proof to show that.
the credit of the witness is not such as to. command the respect
of the court. Has the counsel for the managers a right to as- -
sume that everything the witness states is correct and we not boi-

TBIAL OF WILHAM W. HOLDEN. 681
permitted to pursue a course of enquiry calculated to diminish
the credit which the witness is entitled to ? That, sir, is the
scope and extent of the ground taken on the other side.
Again, sir, a written statement is no more to be excluded
than a verbal statement. Have they not gone into verbal
narrative of what/>ccurred? They ask witnesses any questions
they please. They ask him what he did and what he said
while he was in this state of duress. But when we ask ques
tions, we are met with the objection, that he was under duress
and that hence it is immaterial what he said. They oan show
what they please, but we cannot examine the witness about
the facts in relation to which he has testified. I ask again
what is the difference between written and parole evidence
in regard to its admissibility if produced by threats or any
other improper influences ? None in the world. The written
declarations are just as competent as the spoken declarations.
We have no more right to ask him what he said than we havo
a right to ask what he put in writing and signed. The gen
tleman cannot make a distinction between the cases as I have
put them, and it is competent, as I submit to this court, to in
vestigate that transaction fully and not let it rest upon the
mere direct examination of the witnesss.
But, sir, the paper that we have offered is not one of the
papers which the gentleman has enquired about. The witness
has denied that he executed any such paper. Wo exhibit
him a paper which purports to have his name signed to it, and
which was executed before a clerk of the court. There is no
evidence that there was any duress when that paper was given,
if it was given by the witness at all. The gentleman assumes
that they have a right to interrogate the witness as they please
and then shut our mouths the moment we undertake to ascer
tain what his Avritten declaration was. Is not that as important
as a spoken declaration when the statement of the occurrence
is in writing, and about which there can be no mistake ? Is it
not as competent and as reliable evidence as the recalled words
drawn from the witness long afterwards I

682 CODBTOF iM&EACHMENfS.
• But, sir, how is it about this question of duress i : This is an
erroneous view of duress as a matter of defence on atrial. It
it turns out that the act with which a person is oharged was
done under duress, which destroyed his voluntary agency and his
legal freedom, that avoids the instrument just as it diminishes
and defeats evidence offered here. But this evidence is com
petent and it comes out as a matter of right ; but what weight
shall be given to it, what effect it shall have are to be ascer
tained when the senate have possession of all the attending
circumstances. Suppose we can show that deliberately and
carefully the witness read over the paper or that it was read
over to him, and that he not only subscribed but solemnly swore
to it, are we not to show that fact to his discredit as respects his
memory or his integrity? And will the managers, ask this
court to believe testimony the truth of which we have beeu
prevented from rebutting ? That is substantially the argument
on the other side. We respectfully submit, on the part of the
respondent, that this paper coming out as it does on the cross-
examination is competent and proper evidence.
Mr. GRAHAM. It will be remembered by the presiding
officer of this court that there is a decision made ia the trial of
Judge Henderson in the case of the State vs. Roberts to the
effect that whero a man has once made a confession under in
ducements of hope or fear, any admission he makes afterwards
in relation to the matter, oven when he ia not under duress, ia
not competent evidence. If the gentleman could ahow that
this man signed these papers before he Avas arrested, very well ;
but after he was put under arrest in the mannor he was ; after
ho was rudely taken up on a public road and told that he was
wanted as a witness, and was carried to the camp and sought
to be cajoled and flattered and then was threatened in order to
get evidence out of him and failing that, the ropo was applied,
I say that any confession made after he had been thus treated
Ib not admissible. It is not admissible for the sake of human
ity. If a man should contradict himself under a fear of instant
death or threat of being summarily dealt with by, a military

TELiL OF WILLIAM ,W.,JI0LDEN. 688
court, the contradiction, ought not to weigh afeather. I say this
duress was upon him, that he was not a free agent and having
been put in a state which deprived him, of free agcnoy he was
not responsible for any thing that he said or did. Sir, if they
want to contradict him, they should have restored to him his
free agency before he made hia statement. Here his declara
tion cannot affect him in any way, for that he was in duress is
manifest. It Avas an attempt to apply the rack and to extort
evidence ; and to admit statements procured in that way, has
never been permitted by the common law, and it has been a
a reproach to those countries which have practised it, in all
times. Mr. BOYDEN. I wish' it distinctly understood, Mr. Chief
Justice, that I am not seeking to justify any conduct or
attempt to extort confessions from witnesses. I am Avilling to
admit that the proposition laid down by Chief Justice Hender
son, in the case referred to, is good law. We practice upon it
every year in this state. What is it ? That where a man is on
trial, and it is alleged that his confessions have been procured by
threats, by hope or by fear, when the court inquires into that,
if it ascertains the fact to be as alleged, they are no evi
dence against the man on trial, and all subsequent confes
sions being attributable to tho same motive are rejected.
But that is not our caso. A witness ia brought here and
we deairo to silt hia testimony. When he says that ho
signed thia paper under duress, we want to know what was tho
duress and what was tho threat that was made. We say ho
swore to this papor boforo a citizon — a clerk of the court — and
we want to know if every word was "not read over to liiim Wo
want that testimony first, because wo believe the papor contains
the truth and that he was telling tho truth and nothing but tho
truth, and that he swore to it as the truth, and second to show
that he has now come here prepared -to tell an untruth and
swear te it. We wish to examine him upon that point,- and
surely we have a right to know all about this matterv-all the
circumstances which induced him to sign this paper. Further-

684 COUBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
more, this paper is not one of those which has been alluded to
in the direct examination of the witness. The point has been
decided time and again in our courts. A "witnesss was asked
whether he had not committed the crime of perjury in the
state of Georgia. It was objected to, and the case went to the
supreme court ; and the court there decided that the inquiry
being In reference to what took place in the state of Georgia,
ond beyond tho jurisdiction of this state he was bound to
answer it. And the court has decided recently that you may
ask a witness any question which tends to disparage him, to sIioav
that he is not worthy of boliof ; and though if the answer to tho
question would tend to convict hira of the crime, he is not
obliged to answer, still the question may be put to tho witness.
Senator JONES. Before the counsel conclude tho argu
ment I ask whether, if the witness admits signing the document,
it is designed to offer tho paper as evidence of the facts con
tained in it, or whether it is merely to contradict the statement
of the witness as to his signing such a paper.
Mr. BOYDEN. Mr. Chief Justice, I suppose it is very
clear, under the law; that it can only be received to discredit
the Avitness.
Mr. MERRIMON. What is the date of the paper ?
Mr. BOYDEN. The 2d of August, 1870.
Mr. MERRIMON. This paper is offered to impeach this Avit
ness. K these declarations were made under duress, if they
were extorted from the witness, they are absolutely Jnull and
void, and just the same as if they had never been uttered. I
take it that my frienda will not deny that proposition. Then I
say that they are not competent for the purpose of contradict
ing the Avitness any more than they would be evidence affect
ing him if he were on trial for an alleged offence. And why?
Upon the ground that whenever the court hears anything it
must hear something that has weight in it, something that is
evidence, something that can be thrown into the scale to enable
the court to make up its judgment. This being extorted, it
can have no such weight, and therefore it is as null and void as

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 685
if it had been never uttered. It cannot be heard by any court
or anybody, and for any purposo, even for the purpose of con
tradicting a witness. Will the gentlemen on the other side
say they intend to bIiow that it Avas not extorted Prima
facie, it waa extorted, because the witness has sworn that it
was. When they rebut that presumption, and the court is sat
isfied that it is rebutted, thoy may offer these papers for tho
purpose of impeaching tho witness ; until that, tho court is to
judgo upon tho presumptions raised by tho prima facie caso.
Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chief Justico, I think tho gentleman
confunda a distinction that exists between this tribunal and tho
administration of justico in tho ordinary courts of the country
AA'here there are certain functions belonging to. the judge and
certain functions belonging to tho jury. This court is to try
the facts and the laAv both. And no harm could result if this
docrtine were true because the court must hear the species of
evidence offered to judge of its admissibility.
It being then before them they would give Avhat weight and
effect they saw proper to it. But, as I said, the gentleman
confounds utterly and entirely the distinction between the man
on trial for a crime and the relations of a witness to the cause.
If I sue a person upon a bond and he pleads duress and estab
lishes that fact, it is a defense to the action. But the evidence
is not ruled out ; it is heard, to ascertain whether there was
duress, then the court instructs the jury that, as a matter of
law, it Avas not obligatory and binding. It is the jury who
find, aa a fact whether there was such duress. The court do
not determine that, like any other fact and it is to be passed
upon by the jury.
Mr. MERRIMON. Does the gentleman wish me to reply
to him now ?
Mr. SMITH. I have no objection.
Mr. MERRIMON. The argument of the gentleman, Mr.
Chief Justice, is more specious than solid. Where a deed is
offered prima facie it is valid and not executed under duress.
Hence it is admitted and the duress has to be proven. But
45

G&Q COCBT OF IMPEACHMENTS'.
this is a different case. Here- the witness swears that he signed
these papers under duress and a prima facie case is made
out that the statements were extorted from him ; and we say
they cannot be admitted until that presumption ia rebutted by
proofs. Mr. SMITH. But the difficulty is that instead of leaving
that fact to be passed upon by this court as a jury deciding the
facts, the gentleman undertakes to rale out the eA'idence. I
contend, sir, that the eA'idence is not to be rejected and taken
from the consideration of the jury upon the allegation that the
act Avas the result of duress. That fact goes to the jury like
any other fact. The instruction of the court to the jury Avould
be that if they believed that it waa procured by duress it Avas
not obligatory and so the jury should find. But, sir, the evi
dence is not kept from the jury. The court does not rule it
out. They do not attempt to pass upon that. If they did it
Avould be invading the province of the jury and assuming func
tions that do not belong to them.
There is no cas9 to be found in the books Avhere a court ban
undertaken to rule out evidence from the jury in a case of
duress. The fact of duress is the matter of inquiry. Tho
question is, Avas there duress? And if the jury find that there
Avas, the act is void. Hoav do the gentlemen meet this case?
They haA'e gone into an examination of the very subject about
Avhich Ave propose to crose-examin© tho Avitness. They havo
themselves introduced this evidence to the court, by this very
witness. And iioav they propose to close the door on the
cross examination upon the ground that the rule did not pre
vent them from introducing it. They allege the fact and
assume it to be true ; and call upon this court, in advance of
the decision on the merits, to hold that the Avitness has stated
truthfully. Suppose, in the further stage of this case there-
shall be an amount of evidence that Avould satisfy the court
that instead of their being in duress, the statement was entire
ly voluntary, if you exclude the proof we will not have had
the benefit of it. The witness may have gone. We have

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 687
no opportunity of proving the fact at all. Did ever such
a case as that occur in the judicial practice of the state ?
Was there ever an instance in Avhich a disputed question
of evidence was ruled out and not pennitted to go to the jury
when it was a fact to bo passed upon by tho jury? I
insist we havo a right to inquire into the Avhole transac
tion whether what the witness said under oath heretofore
is the truth or what he noAV states on oath is the truth, to
show a conflict between his testimony then and his testimony
now. It is a part of the argument of the managers to show
that the court ought to give credit to the 6worn statements
of the witness now and not to his sworn statement at a former
time because of an alleged duress. It is prejudging a point
not now before us, to rule out the evidence and call upon tho
court to say, in advance and before the cross-examination is cx-
haused, that the testimony avo propose to extract from tho Avit
ness was tho result of coercion and duress and is for that reason
not admissible.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. Tho presiding officer decides that
the ovidenco is competent and ought to bo heard and bo passed
upon for Avhat it is worth. Of course if it Avas obtained under
duress, it Avill pass for nothing. The principle upon which tho
evidence is heard is, that it forms a part of the transaction which
has already been inquired into on tho part of tho mana
gers. It is a rule of fair play, that if you hear a part you
must hear the Avhole. Tho caso of the State agents Roberts,
referred to, is good laAV, but that applies to a man put on
trial. If ho was forced to mako a confession, that confession
cannot bo hoard to convict him. But tho caso is different with
a witnesa. Tho jury havo a right to knoAV all that was said
and dono at tho tlmo, and then thoy pass upon tho question.
Tho presiding officer can only say that in all his reading and
experience on tho bench ho has not como across a single caso
in any law book or a single passage from any writer on evi
dence that raises this queetion. They all seem to take it

688 COUBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
for granted that if a part is heard the whole must be heard
and then let it be paaaed upon for What it is worth.
Senator GRAHAM of Orange. I would ask the opinion of
the chiof justice if this is not correc? law that whon a case is
once established tliat duress has been used, the presumption
does not continue until it Ib rebutted.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. Tho presiding officer replies by
stating that there ia no such rule, bocaueo it canot bo cetab-
llBhetl boforo the matter is fully hoard. Tho general rule is
that whon you hoar a part you must hoar the whole, not AvltU
tho view of taking for granted what Is contained in tho paper
Is truo— but taking it for granted that tho paper was signod.
The circumstances under which it was signod is another
question. Senator JONES. I Avould liko to undoi-stand tho seopo of
tho decision of the presiding offlcor, whothor it tho witness
admits he did sign this paper it will be competent to be read
to the court, if it ia to be read as evidence in the case.
Senator EDWARDS. I undorstand the question to be
whether or not tlie paper offered in evidence is admissible as
affecting the character of the witness. That is the question as
I understand it.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The question is not whether the
paper contains the truth but whether as a fact he did under
some circumstances or other sign the paper.
Senator GRAHAM, of Orange. I desire that the question
shall be stated.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer understands
it to be this. The Managers have proved that under certain cir
cumstances a paper was signed. The question is whether the
respondent has a right to offer the paper as part of the transac.
tion, not with the view of proving that its contents are true
but with the view of impeaching the credit of the witness.
A sufficient numbor seconding the call for a decision of the
question by the senate,
The CHIEF JUSTICE put the question on the admission

TEIAL OF AVTLLIAM W. HOLDEN. 689
of the question offered by the respondent's counsel and it was
decided in the affirmative by the following vote :
Those who voted in the affirmative are :
Messrs. Allen, Beasley, Bellamy, Brogden, Brown, Cook,
Council, Cowles, Crowell, Edwarda, Eppca, Flemming, Hawkins,
Ilyman, King, Latham, Ledbotter, Lehman, Love, McCottor,
Merrimon, Mooro, Olds, Robbins, ot Davldflon, Robbins, of
Rowan, Speed, Warren, Whltcaldo, Worth— -29.
Thoso who voted In the negative aro :
Mohhi'8. Battle, Gilmer, Graham, of Alamanco, Graham, of
Orange, Jones, Linney, Morehead, Skinner, Troy, Waddoll— 10.
So tho quoBtson was admitted.
Q. Look at tho papor purporting to havo boon SAVorn to and ¦
signod before Mr. Albright1— did you Blgn that papor boforo Mr.
Albright ? A. I don't recollect that I did— I think not.
Q. Did you sign that othor papor ? [a second ono produood].
A. Not before Albright.
Senator EDWARDS. Is the counsol introducing another
paper ?
Mr. BOYDEN. There are two papers signed by him. WJ>
ask about the ono first signed before Albright, and ho says he
didn't sign that. That ends that.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. He don't recollect signing that
first paper, so now tako tho other.
Q. Look at the other paper signed before Colonel Clarke ?
A. I signed one before Colonel Clarko.
Q. Look at tho signature to that paper [handing papor to
witness] and say whether it is your signature? A. It looks
like it.
Q. I ask you whether it is you signature or not ? A. I think
it is, sir.
Mr. GRAHAM. I understand that he identifies that as the
one sworn to before Colonel Clarke.
Q. I wish to know if when you signed this paper you knew
what it contained ? A.. Clarke's.'*
Q. Yos ? A: I knjow some part of it, I suppose.

690

COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.

Q. Toll ua what part of it yon knew ? A. I suppose it was
Bomothing concerning tho affidavit made out while I was under
arroat boforo Colonel Clarko. It waa Bomothing concerning the
White Brotherhood.
Q. Yon know thoro Avas something concerning the White
Brotherhood in it ? A. Yea, sir.
Q. You have a distinct recollection of that ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was there any coercion used on that occasion, or did you
sign that paper freely, and Avithout any threat, or any fear of
any kind ? A. I had some little fear about me at that time.
Q. Was anything said on that occasion to excite your fear ?
A. I Avas right smart excited at that time.
Q. I ask you if there Avas anything said by Col. Clarke there,
or any other person present, to excite your fear, and if so,
Avhat did they say ? A. They told me they wanted me to
come out and tell them all that I knoAV about the concern.
Q. About what concern ? A. About the White Brother
hood. Q. Did they Avrito down Avhat you told ? A. Yes, sir, I
suppose 60. **
Q. As you repeated they wrote it down ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Then you didn't understand that it contained exactly
Avhat you stated Avlion you signed it t A. I supposo I did.
Q. Waa it not read over to you after it Avas Avritten before
you algnod it, every Avord of it ? A. I cannot recollect, sir, iioav.
Q. (llvous your best Impression about It? A. I cannot
recollect Avhothorlt was road or not.
Q. You cannot answer that question yea or nay ? A. I
cannot, Q. You cannot recollect whether it Avas road over or not ?
A. No, b!i\
Q. Did you state on that occasion that you joined tho Ku
klux about a yoar before, or Whlto Brotherhood about a year
boforo you signed that paper? A. I stated that I knew
some llttlo about it.
Q. Did you state on that occasion tliat about a, jear before

TRIAL CF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 691
you joined the society called the White Brotherhood or the Ku
klux ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Waa that the truth ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Didn't you state the place where you became a member?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Whero Avas it that you became a member ? A. It was
out in a piece of Avoods where I stated, not far from home,
about a milo from home.
Q. Between Fisher Clendenen and Alexander Wilson's ?
A Yes, sir.
Q. You stated that ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. That Avas the truth, Avas it ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And you say noAV it is the truth ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you state that Dr. Wilson, Tait Turner, Alexander
Patton, senior, and Alexander Patton, junior, were present ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And were they present when you joined? A. I think.
they Avere
Q. Stato if, when you joined, the men that were present
had on any disguises ? A. They had not.
Q. Was any oath administered to you ? A. There AAras somo
kind of a rhyme read over to me, but I could not recollect much
about it after it avub read over.
(}. You stato hero, and I Avant to know whothor it ia true,
that " William Carr administered tho oath to mo ? " A. Yea,
sir. Q. That Is true ? A. Yen, air.
Q. And you now nay It Is truo ? A. Yes, sir.
(,}. You stato "I hold my hand up whon I took this oath ?"
Is that truo ? A. I don't recollect about stating that'.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. Did you hold up your right hand ?
A. I cannot recollect Avhether I did or not.
Q. You Btato here " to the best of my recollection I swore to
fulfill and obey tlie orders of the officera of the society "—is
that truo ? A. Yea, air.
Q. " I was told that the object of the association, was to keep

692 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
down steahng, and if any one, white or black, was caught stealing
he was to be taken out and whipped ? " — did you state that ?
A. I don't recollect about stating that.
Q. Do you recollect that that was so — whether you stated it.
or not ? A. No, sir, I don't recollect that that was so.
Mr. GRAHAM. I think the regular couse would be to read
tho papor and thon boo Iioav hia statements correspond with it.
Mr. BOYDEN. Wo havo no objection to road tho papor,
but avo have a right to cross-examine the witness according to
our own taste, and not according to tho taste of the managers.
Mr. MERRIMON. It is not a matter of taste, but a matter
of law.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. You had better read the paper.
Mr. BOYDEN here read the paper signed by the witness in
tho presence of Col. Clark, of which the following is a copy :
I, William Patton, a citizen of the county of Alamance, state
of North Carolina, do freely and voluntarily state that I became
a member of the society called the "White Brotherhood," or
Kuklux, about one year ago. I was made a member by William
Kerr, in the woods between Fisher Clendenen's and Dr. Alexan
der Wilson's, Tate Turner and Alexander Patton, Sr., and Alex-
der Patton, Jr., were present. William Kerr administered the
oath to me. I held my hand up when I took it. To the best
of my recollection, I swore to fulfill and obey the orders of the
officers of the society. I was told that the object of the asso
ciation Avas to keep doAvn stealing, and if any one, white or
black, Avas caught stealing, he was to be taken out and whipped.
This was at night, and they gave me one sign, which was
pressing the thumb on the back of the fingers when shaking
hands. I was told there were other signs, but it was not neces
saiy to give them, and I never received them. I attended
another meeting, something like three weeks after, near the
residence of Dr. Alexander Wilson. There were present
Dr. Wilson, Tate Turner, James Johnson, Levy. Johnson,
Michael Tear and others I cannot now remember. This
meeting was at night and Avas held in a patch of woods in a

TRIAL OF AVTLLIAM W. HOLDEN. 693
field. Wm. Kerr was the head man on that occasion. They
called tho. meeting a " camp."
I attended another meeting, at night, in an old field near Tato
Turner's. Nothing waa done but talk a 'little. Jake Long was
said to be the head man. I auppoae that there were camps all
over the county. William Johnson told me that he had taken
the oath.
I disapproved of tho organization and had as littlo to do with
it as possible.
I know nothing of tho hanging of Outlaw and tho drowning
of Puryoar, and wm never present Avhen any ono was whipped.
William Patton.
Raloigh, August 5th, 1870.
Witness :
Wm. J. Clarke.
Q. I understand you to state then now that when you stated
you joined this organization cf the White Brotherhood or Ku
klux a year ago that is the truth ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. You did join? A. Yes, sir.
Q. I understand you to say that you were made a member
by William Kerr ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. In the wood between Fisher Clendennen's and Dr. Wil
son's — is that true ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. I understand you to say that Dr. Wilson, Tate Turner,
Alexander Patton, Sr., and Alexander Patton, Jr., were
present — that is true ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. I understand you to 6ay that William Kerr administered
the oath to you ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. I understand you to say that whether you held up your
right hand when you took it or not you do not recollect. A.
I do not recollect.
Q. I understand you to say that you took the oath to fulfill
and obey the orders of the officers of the society — is that bo — ia
that true ? A. Yes, Bir.
Q. I understand you stated that if any one was caught steal-

694 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
ing, either white or black, he was to be taken out and whipped ?
A. I don't recollect about that, sir.
Q. You don't recollect whether it was so or not — you wiU
not say it didn't ? A. I cannot recollect saying 60.
Q. Yon don't recollect is all you answer ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. I ask you now if that was the fact ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was that fact although you don't recollect saying it ? A.
I don't recollect saying it.
Q. That Avas the fact whether you recollect 6aying it or not ?
A. Yes, sir.-
Q. Yon state that they gave yon one sign — what sign was it
that they gave you, just tell us — pressing tho thumb on tho
back of tho hand ? A. I forget, sir.
Q. Pressing tho thumb on the back of tho fingers when
shaking hands — did they givo you such a sign as that? A.
I cannot recollect whether thoy did or not.
Q. Did thoy givo you any sign after thia ? A. I cannot re
collect Avhether they gave mo any sign.
Q. You say you attended another meeting near tho resi-
denco of Dr. Alexander Wilson — is that so — did you doit?
A. I met somo of my neighbors there ono timo.
Q. You had a meeting Avhere — Avhoro Avaait? A. It Avaa
closo by there.
Q. In tho Avoods or Avhoro? A. I think it was a patch of
AVooda close by, air.
Q. Thero avus a patch of avooiIb closo by — Avoro you in that
patch of Avooda? A. I think I waa in tho edge of It.
Q. I will aHk you Avhy thoy held the meetings in tho AvoodB?
A. I don't know.
Q. Was Dr. Wilson presont at that mooting ? A. I think
ho was at that time.
Q. Was Tate Turner present ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. AVas James Johnson present ? A. I think bo.
Q. Was Leroy Johnson 'present? A. I don't know a man
of that name.

TRIAL OF AVILLIAM W. nOLDEN. 698
<J. Do you know Michael Tear or Fear ? A. Yea, sir.
Q. Was ho present ? A. I supposo so.
Q. You recollect now that he Avas ? A. I think he was.
Q. That meeting you state here was at night — is that so ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You state here they called the meeting a camp? A.
I did. I cannot say it was any camp ; it was no regular camp.
Q. You say it was called a camp — is it true that they called
that meeting a camp ? A. The regular meeting place I sup
pose they called tho camp ? A. I didn't attend them but threo
meetings, and then I quit off'.
Q. Thoso that belonged to this particular camp — this Avao
their camp? A. Yes, sir.
Q. You say hero that you attended another meeting near
Tate Turner's — is that true — did you do so ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was that at night ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was it in tho Avoods or in an old field ? A. In an old
field, Q. You state hero that Jake Long Avas said to be the head
man — is that so ? A. I don't supposo so.
Q. Whut avuh said ut, tho meeting? A. I don't recollect
hearing thom nay anything that night.
Q. I Ioav many olhcr camps do you knoAV of in tho county of
Alunuuico. Just tell the number? A. I don't knoAV of any
more, Hir.
Q. You knoAV of only that one? A. Yob, sir.
Q. You state hero that Ihoro woro camps nil over tho coun
ty ? A. I do not knoAV ns there avuh, sir.
Q. You state hero that William Johnson told you that he
had takon tho oath—is that true? A. I don't recollect as ho
told mo that ho hud takon tho oath.
Mr. GRAHAM. Wo object to that— what William John-
sou told him is nothing. This is hearsay altogetlier. If it is
intended to provo that William Johnson Avas a member, prove
it by somebody who knows. As to proving what William

696 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Johnson said to him is precisely of a class of evidence which
has been rejected. It is all hearsay.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer thinks where
a communication is made by one member to another it can be
proved. He thinks that is competent because it is carrying
out, and in furtherance of a combination whioh has bocn
proved. Q. You state near the close of your affidavit that you dis
approved of the organization ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Wore you not afraid to break with it after you had
joined ? A. I Avas not.
Q. Why didn't you break it at once then if you disapproved
of it, and Avere not afraid to break Avith the society — why didn't
you do it at once the moment you disapproved of it? A. I
didn't know anything about it.
Q. You don't understand the question — I understand you
to say you disapprove of the organization — that is so is it not ?
A. Yes, sir, in a short time I quit off, and never had anything
moro to do Avith it.
Q. Did you quit off at once Avhen you disapproved of it, and
attended no more meetings? A. Yes, sir.
Q. You attended then bnt three meetings ? A. Bnt threo
meetings. Q. Can you give us tho timo of the last one ? A. No, sir.
Q. What hour in the night did thes* meetings take place as
Avell as you can recollect the time ? A. About dark.
Q. IIoav long did they continue ? A. For a short time.
Q. What was done or said which is not in this paper at tho
first meeting, do you recollect anything ? A. I cannot recol
lect anything now.
Q. What Avas said or done at the second meeting that is not
stated in your affidavit, do you recollect anything? A. I can
not recollect uoaa'.
Q. Then as to tho second meeting? A. I don't think thero
Avas but very little aaid. .
Q. Do you resollect what that little waa now ? A. I do
not.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 697
Q. What was the object of the meeting ? A. As I' under
stood it to protect ourselves and property against barn burners.
Q. [By tho Chief Justice.] What were you called there
for? Mr. GRAHAM. Thoy were called thore as I understand
for tho purposo of taking measures against barn burners and
thlovoB. Q. What woro you called at this 'second mooting for? I do
not know as I waa called for any particular purposo. I wont
out to moot somo of rtiy neighbors there.
Q. Was anything said at tho mooting why you woro called
thoro? A. No.
Q. I understand you to Bay that the object of tho mooting
was to protect yourselves against barn burners ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. In what way did you expect to protect yourselves ? If
you suspected a man, were you to tako him up and punish him
by this society ? A. No, sir.
Q. How then ? A. We would try to find out about the
barn burning and stealing, and report it to the justice of the
peace and assist each other in that way. That was my under
standing of it.
Q. Did you ever report any one to the justices of the peace ?
A. No, sir.
Q. Did you disapprove of reporting these things te the jus
tico of tho peace ? A. No.
Q. What part of it was it that you disapproved of— was it
tho whipping them by the society if they were caught stealing ?
A. I disapproved such aa that, but I never knew any whipping
to be done.
Q. What do you mean by saying you disapproved of the
whipping ? A. I thought it was not right to do bo.
Q. Was that a part of their object to whip men if they were
caught in these crimes ? A. I do not know whether it was or
not. Q. What do you mean, you disapproved of it. I cannot com
prehend you. You disapproved of that part of it ? A. If

698 COUBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
there was any such thing belonged to it I disapproved it. I do-
not know whether there was any such thing done or not.
Q. What was it then that you disapproved of when you;
left ? A. I got tired of it, and quit off.
Q. There waa nothing in particular that you dieapproved of?:
A. No. sir, nothing in particular.
Q. And do I understand you noAV to say that it Avas not a part"
of tlieir object if they detected men in stealing and had the full
proof of it that they Avere not to Avhip them — Avas not that a
part of their object if they had full proof of it ? A. I do not
know that.
Q. Your recollection is not as good at this time as it was
when you made that statement before Col. Clarke? A. I
think it is as good.
Q. You said nothing then but Avhat you recollected, did
you ? A. No, sir.
Q. I ask you noAV if you knoAV of any person being chastised
or Avhipped in the county of Alamance ? A. I do not.
Q. How far do you livo from Graham ? A. Six miles.
Q. Have you any knowledge that any ono of theso camps
decreed tho death of Outlaw? A. I havo not.
Q. Whore Avere you on tho night ho Avas executed ? A. I
waa homo, sir.
Q. Woro you at homo all night? A. I Avas.
Q. Whore Avoro you on Sunday morning? A, I Avas out
at church on Sunday morning.
Q. Whoro do you go to church? A. IIiiav Fields.
Q. Whon did you hoar, and Iioav soon after tho doath of
OuthiAv did you hear that ho had boon hung t A. Hoard it
at tho church the next morning.
Q. Did you go to Graham ? A. I did not.
Q. How Boon after that did you go to Graham ? A. I can
not recollect. It was eoine time after.
Q. Hoav far do you live from Avhere Puryear's body was.
found ? A. One mile, about a mile.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM AV. HOLDEN. G99
Q. Whose mill pond was hia body found in ? A. In Dr.
Wilson's mill pond.
Q. How far is Dr. Wilson's residence from the mill pond ?
A. About a mile.
Q. Is his house or tho mill pond nearest to your residence ?
A. Ifris some nearer him.
Q. Is tho mill pond or Dr. Wilson's house nearest to you ?
A. It is about tho samo distance I Biippose.
Q. Did you see tho body of Puryear ? A. I did, sir.
Q. What A\'as his condition — were you present when ho was
got out of tho Avater ? A. I was.
Q. What was his condition Avhen he was taken out ? A. In
a A'ery bad condition.
Q. State Avhether there was any rock tied to his feet ? A.
There was.
Q. How large Avas that rock ? A. It was a very large rock.
Q. Give us an idea Iioav large ? A. I suppose the rock
Avould Aveigh 15 lbs.
Q. Large enough to sink tho body ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. [By the Chiof Justice.] Was it as large as thia pitcher?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Ab largo aa a man'a head ? A. Yob, air.
Q. It Avaa big enough thou to sink the body and koop It
doAVll ? A.I BlippOHO 80.
Q. Hoav long had Puryear boon absent boforo his body Avas
found — boon missed ? A. About tAvo months, I think.
Q. IIoav noar did ho live to this mill pond ? A. Half a
mile. Q. Ilia rcsidonco thon was within half a mile of tho pond?
A. Yob, sir.
Q. Who eleo waB presont when he waa taken up ? A. Dr.
Wilson, Fisher Olondonnen, and Jack Woods, I cannot re
member all tlieir names. We had a jury of twelve men sum
moned. Q. Had it been ascertained before you met there that hia
body was there ? A. Yes, sir.

700 COUBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. And a coroners inquest had been summoned ? A. Yes,
sir. Q. Were you one of them ? A. I wa» one of them ?
Q. You cannot recollect all the names that were present ?
A. No sir, I cannot recollect
Q. Name just as many as you can recollect of the persons
present ? Who was the coroner ? A. Viebbett Foust.
Q. Now begin with the jury/ A. Fisher Olendennen,
Goorgo CraAvford, Jack Woods, Dr. Alexander Wilson, George
Clcndennon and Jasper Woods, I think. I don't know as I
remember the others. There were twelve men present.
Q. Do you recollect tho names of all of thom — givo ua thoir
nainee. I will give you time to think over/ A. William
Goppa, I think was one of the others, sir.
Q. You have answered that you joined this society — did
you ever seo any of them with disguiaea on themf A. I
nover did.
Q. On no occasion / A. No, sir,
Q. I understand you to say you never saw any persons after
they had been whipped, with marks on them ? A. I never
did. Re-Direct Examination.
By Mr. Merrimon :
Q. Who Avrote that paper [the one already produced and
signed by witness] ? A. I think Mr. Clarke wrote it.
Q. Did he write it at your request, sir ? A. No, sir.
Q. Was he your counsel ? Had you employed him as your
counsel ? A. I had not.
Q. Did he ever do any business for you before that time ?
A. No I think not.
Q. Ho was a military man at that time ? A. I think he
was. Q. Commanding troops ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. If you had had your choice would you have selected him
to Avrite your statement / A. No, sir.

TRIAL PF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 701 1
Q. Did you say a while ago that Mr. Douglas wanted you to
sign a paper ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did he or did he not ask you to say that you were not
hanged ? A. Ho asked me to say something about that. He
asked if I was hung up off the ground, and I told him I was
not pulled off' the ground.
Q. Did he ask you to sign a paper to that effect ? A.
He Avrote out a paper, I think he asked me to sign it to that
effect. Q. Did you sign it? A. I don't recollect about signing it.
Q. Was there a guard thoro at that time ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. That paper that he presented to you, did it atate whether
you had been hung or othcrwiso f A. It stated that I had
been hung.
Q. Did it state that you had been hung, or that you had not
been hung ? A. I said that I had been hung.
Q. Was it that Avay Avhen ho asked you to sign it ? A. That,
Avas my understanding.
Q. I understand you to say that you signed any paper that
they oresented to 3011 ? A. Yes.
GEORGE S. ROGERS, a witness called on behalf of the
Managers, being duly sworn, testified as follows :
By Mr. Merrimon.
'Q. State to the court your name, age and residence ? A.
George Rogers, 20 years old, I live about three miles out of
Graham. Q. What is your business ? A. Farming.
Q. State whether at any time during the year 1870, if you
saw any armed men, if y6u say you did, and.they arrested you,
Avhat you know of any such arrest ? A. I saw some on the
26th of July at Graham.
Q. Describe what they did, and who they were/ A. There
was 10 men including two colored men.
Q. Were they armed ? A. Yea, sir, they were all armed,
all had their muskets, except one, Aleck Ruffin, and he had
46

702 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
pistols. He had had a gun, and had given it to his brother, I
think, Henry Ruffin.
Q. Were thoy in uniform ? A. All but one.
Q. Were the negroes in uniform ? A. All but one nigger,
Q. State what they did to you ? A. Aleck Ruffin came up
to Mr. Hanna's and asked if I was there, and some one remarked
that I was. The white men bad gone past the door, and he ran
down and told them I Avas in the store. They came back and
Lieutenant Ilunnicutt rode up to the door and asked me my
name. I told them, and ho said I must consider myself undor
arrest. I eaid " all right." Ho told mo to go along with theso
men. I asked him Avhero he wanted mo to go ; he said ho
wanted mo to go into the country a piece. I AA'ent along with
them. I asked him it they Avould let me ride, and he told me
he would. I asked him Avhat authority ho had to arrest me ;
he said he was acting under orders of the Governor of the State ;
that he was acting under tbe orders oi Burgen and Burgen was
acting under orders of the Governor. They carried me all over
the south part of the country. I suppose I rode fifty miles
that day. Between nine and ten o'clock Ave got to Company
Shops ; I stayed there until the next day, at ten o'clock, Avhen
Burgen asked mo to come into his tent. I Avent Avith him ; he
naked mo if I kneAv anything about the hanging of Outlaw; I
told him I did not, and he told me it Avns a d— d lie, that I did,
and then ho aekod mo if I didn't knoAV that Adolphus Mooro
hung OutlaAv. I told him I didn't k iioav, and ho called me a
d— =d liar again, and ho toll in j to go b.iek to my tout, and said
ho Avould give mo till ton o'clock that night to tell about it. I
Avont back in tho tent and atayoil there until about ten o'clock
that night, avIicm ho' camo thoro and called mo out again to hi*
tent, and he told mo I must confess Avho hung Outlaw; he sayw
I know you were one ; Ave know that Adolph Mooro and Jim
Hunter Avero others in tho party who kneAV about it. • I told
him I did not. He said Patton didn't knoAV anything about it
until ho was himg, and if I didn't tell he would hang me. I
told liim I didn't knoAV anything about it. He picked up a

TRIAL OF AVILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 703
pistol and called for a rope, and there was a man standing in
the door — I think it was Hunnicutt — who handed him a rope.
I stepped outside of the tent, and he put the rope around my
neck, and led me down some seventy-five yards to a piece of
woods. Q. Were they armed men? A. Four armed men, Bergen,
Hunnicutt, and two other men. He threw a rope over a limb
and ordered the lieutenant to pull me up. He pulled the ropo
until it Avas fetched tight and choked me. He didn't pull my
feet quite off the ground. He held it about a minute and a
half, and he told the lieutenant that that would do, and the
lieutenant let the rope slack. He asked me if I would tell. I
told him I knew nothing about it at all. He then made somo
threat that if I didn't tell he would shoot me. I told him I
didn't know anything. He then let the rope down, and on the
way back he said " I believe you are telling the truth," or
something that way, and he would do all he could to release me,
but he could not do so, as he was acting under orders of the
Governor. I stayed in the camp then until tho 3d day of
August, Avhen we started for Yanceyville.
Q. Who told you that — Bergen ? A. Yea, Bir, thoy started
tlio third day for Yanceyville, and went over to Mooro'B store
and stayed all night.
Q. Whero Avas that? A. At Moore's storo. Thoro Avas
somo mon who Avantod to Btay thoro until tho polls woro opened
and vote, but ho Avould not lot them stay.
Q. Was that in Alamanco county? A. Yob, sir, wo got to
Yanooyvlilo that evening about tAvo o'clock, and avo woro put
Into a room and kept there till we were brought back to Com
pany Shops. I don't recollect the day.
Q. What was the oondition of the weather when you got
baok to Company Shops ? A. It was raining. We were put
in the tent.
Q. What sort of a tent ? A. Small tent. There were some
8 or 10 of us in the tent.
Q. Where did you go for a place of shelter? A. We were

704 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS. >
in an old field under the tent. We were carried to the court
house at Graham, and from there we were brought to Salis
bury before Judge Brooks on the 19th of August, and he re
leased me.
Q. Had you done any crime ? A. No, sir.
Q. Bid you seo tho troops? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did they offer any evidence against you at Salisbury?
A. No, sir.
Q. They had no charge against you ? A. Nono at all.
Q. Stato a little moro fully if you can, what he said about
hanging Patton ? A. He eaid that he had hung Patton up
threo times, He told mo that in the old field, and tho last
timo ho said he hung him until he Avas dead, till ho fell and
was not ablo to stand. I Avas told that by threo of his men
af'tenvards. Q. Did he state Avhether Patton had made any confession
or not? A. He told me that Patton kneAv nothing about it
till he Avas hung, and then he could tell all about it.
Q. Did you see much of the troops ? A. I suppose I saw
nearly all of them.
Q. Describe to the court their discipline and demeanor to
Avards each other and the officers, and all you knoAV about
thom ? A. They cursed the officers just the same as they
would each other. There was no discipline at all. They
Avere hallooing and hooting all the time they were on the
post. Q. What sort of a looking body of men Avere they ? A.
They wsre a bad looking set and mighty ragged when they
came. I saw a good many of them a. 'hen they drawed their
clothing. They didn't hardly have clothing on enough to
hide themselves, and they Avere nearly all barefooted.
Q. How old were they? A. Some boys looked to be 15 or
16. I saw some Avho looked as if they might be old men
about 60 or 70. Their heads were right white, some of them.
Q. State to the court whether or not you saAv any squads
of men leaving the camp aud returning ? A. I did.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 705
Q. State whether they were Avhite or black? A. Some
Were Avhite and some were black.
Q. When they returned did they bring any one with them ?
A. Sometimes they Avould.
Q. State Avhether or not it was usual to have black men
along with theBe squads ? A. Nearly always ono or more.
Q. Do you knoAV Avhether these squads Avent over the
county or not? A, Only hearsay .
Q. That day that thoy rode with you what did thoy do?
A. Thoy wore hunting other men.
Q. Whore did they go? A. In tho first place thoy wont
to Mr. Foust's.
Q. Did they take anybody there ? A. No, sir, Mr. Foust
avub in his room asleep, and his folks didn't know where ho
was. Q. Where did thoy go then ? A. They Avent into Jasper
Wood's, and carried mo along.
Q. What did thoy do then ? A. They Avent to Foust's mill
and got a man to put them across the river in a boat.
Q. Did they arrest anybody there ? A. No, Bir.
Q. What did they go there after ? A. They Avent across
tho river.
Q. What did they do across the river ? A. They started to
to Henry Thompson's, the nigger pretended that he kneAv
the way, but he went up to Mr. Allen's — not quite to the
house — and I asked him what Thompson it was, and he said
Henry. I told him it Avas not the way there and told him tlie
way ; and then we Avent doAvn to the house.
Q. What did they do Avith Henry Thompson ? A. They
inquired for his son Mike, and he was not at home.
Q. What did they do next? A. They went up to Dr. Wil
son's and arrested Tate Turner and Dr. Wilson there.
Q. These men that they arrested did they take them along ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Where did they go from Wilson's? A. To Jack Thomp
son's.

706 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. What did they do with him ? A. He was not at home.
They sent after him. They carried him along, and then went
on to the Shops.
Q. What did they do then ? A. They took all these men
in and put us in a tent.
Q. Were they polite to these men ? A. Yes, sir, they were
polite. They treated them very well. They treated me very
well that day.
Q. How long did they keep you in the court house at
Graham ? A. I don't recollect. I was there until tho 18th
of August, when we started for Salisbury — from the time we
came back from Yanceyville.
Q. How far do you live from Graham / A. Three miles.
Q. Do you know whether there was a company of federal
troops there f A. Yea, air.
Q. When did they go away ? A. They came there about
tho 1st of March, and never left until after the militia went
away. Q. A company? A. Yes, sir, there was a company, I don't
know how many men — about 60 or 70 men.
Cross-Examination. By Mr. Boyden.
Q. Where do you live ? A. I live about three miles south
of Graham.
Q. Will you tell us whether you recollect the night on which
Outlaw was executed ? A, Yes, sir.
Q. Tell ua where you were that night ? A. I was at home.
Q. Were you at home all night? A. Yes, sir.
Q. What time did you hear that he had been hung ? A,
The next day about 12 o'clock.
Q. When you heard that did you go to Graham ? A. Not
at that time. I went up in the evening.
Q. Did you see the body of Outlaw ? A. I did not.
Q. What time in the evening did you go ? A. I got there
about three o'clock— I suppose about that time, it may have
been later.

• TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 707
Q. Whom did you see there / A. I met Mr. Foust, who
had been there, and who said Wyatt had been buried or car
ried off.
Q. I ask who you saw in Graham ? A. Mr. Foust and two
or three others. I saw Wylie Nceso and Georgo Steele.
Q. Did you have any talk with anybody else ? A. No ono
•else. Q. Where did you stop ? A. I stopped about 100 yards
from the court house. I met them, coming out, and went back
with them.
Q. Do you knjAV anything about a socrot organization — any
political organization by the name of tho KuK-lux klan, White
Brotherhood, Constitutional Union Guard, Invisible Empire or
any other name ? A. I know of one.
Q. Tell us all yon know about it — what is it ? A. I know
one by tho namo of the Whlto Brotherhood.
Q. Aro you a member ? A. Yes, sir, I was.
Q. Toll us Avhen you joined ? A. I don't recollect the date,
but I think it was in 1868.
Q. Where did yon join 1 A. Joinod in an old field near
Maria Foust's.
Q. Who was present when you joined ? A. I do not know
the men who were present. They Avere all in disguise.
¦Q. You don't know any of them ? A. No.
Q. Have you no idea who they wero ? A. No.
Q. You didn't know any of them ? A. No.
Q. How many wore present? A; I think there was four.
Q. And you joined them ? A. I joined them.
Q. How did you join, what was dono to make you a mem
ber ? A. They administered an oath to me.
Q. Did you hold up your hand ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. What sort of an oath did they administer ? A. Before I
went into iti inquired— —
Q. What oath did they administer to you ? A. They ad
ministered an oath that I would never reveal the man's name
who initiated me, and that I would obey the officers ot the

708 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS'.
command aa far as I was able. That was about the substance
of it.
Q. What waa to be the penalty if you didn't do this ? A,
No penalty that I heard of.
Q. You only took a solemn oath to do it ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. I ask you now how you knew where to meet, them — did
you knoAV any ono that avub there ? A. I went with a man
thoro. Q. Who aviis that? A. Mr. John R. Stockard.
(}. Then you know ono man that was present ? A. He was
not present.
Q. You say you took an oath not to divulge tho name of tho
man Avho savoi-o you in ? A, Yes. sir.
Q. Why did you tako that if you admit you didn't know
who he was ? A. I suppose if I had had a suspicion who ho
AA'as, or knoAV his voice, I would know his name.
Q. Did you tell the court that you had no idea ? A. I had
no idea.
Q. You can tell men by their voice ? A. Yes, I can tell
some men by their voices, but I AA'as not familiar with his.
Q. Do you know now Avho it was ? A. I do not.
Q. What sort of disguises did they have on ? A. They had
on Avhite disguises.
Q. What about the' face ? A. They had on a sort of smooth
face — a cap or some sort of 
Q. Was there any thing sticking np like homs ? A. Some
of them had.
Q. How many had them that way ? A. I think one or two.
Q. Did you ever attend any of their meetings ? A. I at
tended tAvo others.
Q. Tell us the next meeting you attended ? A. I attended
a meeting at the school house.
Q. What school house ? A. Known by the name of Holt's.
school house, near Col. Holt's.
Q. Near Colonel Holt's, the gentleman who was sworn, her©
the other day ? A. Yes, sir.

TRIAL OF AVILL1AM W. HOLDEN. 709
Q. Who was present at that meeting ? A. Mr. Anthony's-
threo boys were there — know only two of them.
Q. Who else ? A. Two of Mr. Whitsell's sons were there.
Q. There were only four besides you ? A. Yea, sir.
Q. How happened you to know of the meeting ? A. Tho
meeting waa appointed te got moro members.
Q. Hoav did you happen to know of it ? A. I don't recol
lect exactly, I waa inforniod by somebody.
Q. Was it in tho night or in the day that you woro notiflod
of tho mooting 3 A. I don't recollect whether it waa tho day
timo or not. The mooting Avaa held at night.
Q. You don't knoAV avIio notified you ? A. I do not.
Q. What timo was that mooting, in the day or in tho night ?
A. In tho night.
Q. What hour of tho night, as near a* you can recollect ?
A. About half past 7 o'clock.
Q. What time in tho year ? A. In the fall of tho year.
Q. What time in the fall of the year ? A. Before christmas.
I don't recollect exactly Avhen.
A. After you met Avhat took place — AA'hat Avas said and done ?
A. They expected more members, but they did'nt get any one
else, and there was nothing at all done.
Q. Hoav long did you continue together ? A. About hall
or three quarters of an hour.
Q. Tell us everything that was talked over thero ? A, I
don't recollect anything being said that night only concerning
getting in more members. That Avas the substance.
Q. What did you want more members for — waa anything
said about that ? A. Nothing waa said about that.
Q. You did'nt knoAV what they wanted them for ? A. They
wanted to make the organization as strong as it could be.
Q. What camp did you belong to ? A. I didn't belong to
any particular camp at all.
Q. Did'nt they have particular camps? A. Not that I
know ot.

710 COURT OF IMPEAOHMENTS.
Q. Where was your next meeting? A. About a mile and a
half from Graham — about two miles I guess.
Q. At what place ? A. It was at the forks of the big road.
Q. In the woods or in the road ? A. In the forks of the big
road. We wont a piece off into the woods.
Q. Did you have any light ? A. I think not.
Q. You had no light ? A. No, sir.
Q. Tell us how many were present at that meeting ? A. I
euppose 15 or 20.
Q. Tell us the names of as many as you can recollect/
A. Mr. Curtis was there.
Q. What Curtis ? A. Clem Curtis.
Q. Who else ? A. John Stockard.
Q. John R. Stockard ? A. Yes, sir, Jasper Wood, Jacob
Long, Henry Albright, Jacob Michael. I do not recollect the
name8 of any others.
Q. Yon cannot recollect any others? A. No, sir.
Q. We; have got but six names — yon said there were 15 or
20. Did they have on disguises ? A. There were ono or two
men disguised there.
Q. Did not they all have on diagulaea there ? A. I only eaw
ono or tAvo with diagulaea, it may be threo or four—I would
not say positively.
Q. There was not moro than four that had on disguises? A.
No, sir.
Q. Tell us all that wai said at that mooting? A. Thoro
had bocii somo whipping going on in tho neighborhood. It
was alleged to have been dono by that party, and tho meeting
aviis to put It down If it Avas that party, but there was no evi
dence ot it.
Q. And you wore going to inquire into it? A. Yes, sir.
Q. That was the sole object of the meeting? A. Yes, sir.
Q. You talk about nothing else ? A. Nothing else.
Q. Tell us the name of every man in the county that
you know to your own personal knowledge belonged to this
organization. A. Mr. Jacob Long, Mr. Clem Curtis, John

TRIAL OF AVILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 711
Stockard, George Anthony, Daniel Anthony, Daniel Anthony
again, Joseph Wood, Henry Albright, Jacob Michael, Robert
Ilanna. I don't recollect any others.
Q. You state that that is all the names that you recollect
belonged to thia organization in the county of Alamance ? A.
That ia all. i
Q, At these meetings when you were together did you hear
it said how many there was in the county belonged to tho
organization ? A. I did not.
Q. With what political party do you co-operate ? A. The
conservative party, but I am not old enough to vote.
Q. How old are you ? A. 20 years old.
Q. Do you know of any scourging that took place ? A. I
do not.
Q. Do you know of any one being sentenced at any one of
these camps to receive a whipping or any other punishment ?
A. I do not.
Q. Who received Avhippings or anything else ? A. I do not.
Q. Have you any knowledge of the persons who Avere en
gaged in the hanging of OiftlaAV ? A. I do not.
Q. Do you knoAV of any one that waa engaged in the drown
ing of Puryear t A. I do not.
Q. Did you hear tho firing ot any gmiB toAvards Graham on
tho night Outlaw Avas hanged ? A. I didn't.
Q. What tlmo did you go to bod that night ? A. About %
o'clock. Q. What month wm It ? A.I think It was in February. I
don't recollect.
Q. Do you knoAV CasAvell Holt? A. I do.
Q. DoyouknoAV anything about his being whipped? A,
I do not,
Q. How far does he live from you ? A. At the time he was
whipped he lived about three miles from me.
Q. Did you see him shortly after he was whipped ? A, I
did. Q. How soon ? A. Some five or six days. .

712 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. Did you see any marks or stripes on him ? A. I did not.
Q. You didn't examine hia pereon ? A. I didn't.
Q. Did yon aee him after he wae ehot ? A. Not until some
time afterwards.
Q. Hoav soon after ? A. Two or three months afterwards.
Q. Did you boo tho wound ? A. I did not.
Mr. MERRIMON. I object to this as it has nover boon
proved that Caswell Holt Avae shot.
Q. Havo you any knoAvledge that ho was shot / A. I havo
no knoAvlodgo of It.
Q. And you didn't boo tho Ai'ound ? A. I did not.
Q. At tho timo you say thero Avas a mooting, and thero were
four men in diaguiso — AvaB thoro anything said on that occa
sion about Avhipping CaaAvell Holt ? A. Nothing at all, sir.
Q. Can you tell why they happened to have on dlsgulaefl
whon tho othera Avoro thoro Avithout ? A. For tho purpoao of
taking in moro members.
Q. Whon thoy took in anybody those persons were always
diHguiacd ? A. I do not know that they wero alwaya so. When
I Avaa takon in they wore.
Q. Do you know Avhy tho men that took them in wore dis
guises ? A. Yes, air.
Q. Tell us Avhy ? A. The object Avas if any one came up
and refused to go in why they would not know who belonged
to it.
Q. What objection had they to having it known ? A. I
don't knoAV the objection.
Q. I belieA-e you answered the question you didn't knoAV
Iioav many camps there were in the county ? A. I do not.
Q. Who Avas the head man of this camp to which you be
longed ? A. I belonged to no particular camp.
Q. Who seemed to be the commander? A. Mr. Jacob
Long. Q. Mr. Jacob Long appeared to be the commander of that
squad in which you operated ? A. Yea, sir.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 713
Q. Have you any personal knowledge who waa the head
man of the county ? A. I have no personal knowledge.
Q. Have you any personal knowledge who was the head
commander in tho state of North Carolina ? A. I have not.
Mr. GRAHAM. Tho decision of tho Benate confines this
inquiry to the tAvo counties of Alamance and Caswell. Tho
question assumes that tho organization existed over tho whole
Btato. There is no proof that it did or there was any head to
it at all.
Re-Direct-Examination. By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. Whon did you join this organization? A. In 1868.
Q. What waa tho object of tho organization ? A. For the
protection of tho mombora interested.
Q. How protection ? A. There wero outrages committed all
• over the county in different parts, and they wero assisting to
put thom down.
Q. What sort of outrages ? A. Rapes, barn burning and
everything. Q. Thia organization was gotten together in order to put
that doAvn. A. Yes, sir.
Q. What were the ages of the men that were there that you
speak of? A. About 20 or 21.
Q. Young men ? A. Yes, generally. Some of them were
old men.
Q. They were generally young men ? A. Or middle aged
men. There wero men of nearly all ages, but no right old
men. The majority of them Avere young men from 20 to 25.
Q. Wero you brought to Raleigh? A. I Avas not under
guard when I came here. I came down here after I Avas
released from Salisbury.
Q. You didn't come down here before that time ? A. No.
Q. State whether there were any other secret organizations
in the county of Alamance besides this White Brotherhood ?
A. I think there was no other.
Q. You said something about the meeting at the forks of tho

714 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
road. I wish you to repeat what you said about the object of
that ? A. It was alleged that our party was doing the whip
ping, and we went to break it up if it waa so.
Q. It didn't appear that it was the White Brotherhood who
were doing the whipping, therefore no action ? A. No, sir, no
action was taken.
JEREMIAH II. ALBRIGHT, a witness called on behalf
of the Managers, being duly sworn, testified as follows :
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. State your name, age and residence ? A. My name is
Jeremiah Albright. I am twenty-three years old the nine
teenth of next November, and I live eight and a quarter miles
west of Graham.
Q. What ia your business ? A. I am a farmer a part of the
time, and the rest of the time I work at blacksmithing.
Q. Note whether at any time during the year 1870, you saw
any armed men in the county of Alamance and if you did, state
Avhether they did anything to you and what it was? A. I saw
armed men, both black and white.
Q. Describe thom, their number and appearance ? A. I don't
know how many there were, but there was a right smart body ;
there were somo ton or twelve dressed in uniform clothing from
Company Shops. Three of tho black ones and three of tho
Avhites camo up and arrested mo.
Q. Where ? A. I Avas at Barbara Bason's, four miles thia
side of tho Haw river.
Q. Four miles east of HaAv river ? A. Yes, sir, I was there
Avith a thrashing machine. I came there botween, eleven and
twelve o'clock at night, after they said they had orders to take
me under arrest. They surrounded the house. I was asleep
in the loft and they called for thatg— d d— d Albright in there.
They said he was in there and if I did not come out they
would put a ball through me in three minutes. As soon as 1
heard this, I asked them if4they would let me put on my clothes.
and they said, " G — d d — n you never mind your clothes."

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 715
I 6tarted and Avent down to them, they asked which was Al
bright, I stepped out myself, two of the black ones cocked their
guna and aaid if they had their way they would shoot my heart
out. Then the sergeant, named Wiggins, jerked a revolver out
and cocked it and SAvoro that if I said one AArord he would shoot
my g — d d — n heart out right where I stood. I did not say
auy thing— I didn't think I Avould dare to speak to him after he
had forbidden me.
Q. Had you put on your clotlies ? A, I had got on my
pants and one of my boots, and tho other I held in my hand.
Then one of these niggers, Barnhill was his name, said " G — d
d — n him let ua hang him ; that is the orders we have got" and
then he called for a rope. There was none of them had a rope
and there Avaa no ono who lived there that made any answer.
Then he repeated again and said g — d d — d you have you got
any plow lines about hero. Still there waa no person answered.
Thon he said, havo you got any gun strops. He swore he would
hang mo with that. Thoy got a gun strop and camo and
tied it around my left arm and thon around my right arm,.
tied my anna back and then said that he had orders to
get mo dead or alive and to get my revolver. They said I
had a revolver, and that I had said I Avould shoot any one who
arrested mo, and ho demanded that. I told him I did not
havo any. In fact I did not havo any. Thoy searched for the
revolver in tho satchel that I had along with my clothes in, and
which I had taken with 1110 in going about with tho machine.
Ho called for that and it Avas handed to him, and they Boarchod
for tho revolver until thoy Avero satisfied. IIo thon sworo that
I had thrown it out, and I told him I had not. Ho said he
had ordors from tho govornor to tako my body and that, pistol
and box it up and send it to him. I told him I would give
tho pistol to him if they would let me go and get it. I told
him that my father had a pistol at home, and if they would let
me go and get it I would do so. He said I must send for it ;
I told him I could not send unless he gave me a chance, and
then he said he would hang me on an elm tree in the yard if 1

710 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
did not get the pistol. Then Miss Bason asked them not to
hang mo in the yard, but to take me somowhere else and hang
mo. He said he would not hang mo inside, but said he
to her, " Q — d d— n yon, I ought to hang you for having
" such a g— d d— n sot of scoundrels in your houso, and
41 1 havo a g— d d— d good notion to burn your houso for I bo-
" Hove you havo got somo other d— d rascals in thoro." lie
thon told mo to march out in front and I walkod out. Thoy
had my arms tied on my back, threo men, one on each side of
mo marched with me Avith their guns cocked, and they said if I
made ono step out of the Avay they would shoot me down ; that
thoy were afraid I was going to got away. I told them that
they need not be uneasy to shoot, that I had done nothing to
try to get away, and for that reason I did not want to get away,
&nd that I would go anywhere he wanted me. He marched
me that way tied, until near Haw river between threo and a
half and four miles. Then he untied me. They had some
other prisoners that they had got and they said they tied me
because I had tried to get away. I had come over there with
that thrashing machine and they supposed that I had como
there to try and run away. He said these other gentlemen had
acted like gentlemen, and he had treated them like gentle
men, but I had acted like a d — d rascal and he would treat
mo like a d — d rascal. That Avas the orders he had ; on
going along, Alfred Barnhill stated that if I had not run off
and put them to so much trouble the sergeant would not have
been bo hard upon me.
Q. Who was the sergeant ? A. His name was Henry
Wiggins. He Avas one of Kirk's militia. I told him I had
not tried to get away, that I had promised to go with the
machine that evening, that I was hired as a hand to go along
with it and that I went off to do my work according to the
promise which I had made. After I went four miles, he said
he would untie me and give me a chance ; but if I started ho
Avould have balls into me before I got many steps. He then
carried me across the river to Mr. Dixon's and got Borne liquor.

"TETAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. '717
'They had somo whiskey. He made thom drink somo whiskoy.
Q. Who did that ? A. Tho sorgoant at Ed. Dixon's, a half
'inilo tho othor side of Haw river. Thon wo wont back by tho
•way of Graham and went to Rod-oyod Bill Albright's, and ho
•called him out and told him ho wanted somo of his best brandy,
¦and ho mado him go into tho cellar and draw somo brandy and
bring it out and ho mado thom drink it. He then carried ub
to Graham station, and whon tho train camo ho made it stop
and put us on tho train and carried us to tho Shops, and from
¦there he took us to tho camp and carried ua to Lieutenant Hun
nicutt, who told him to take ua out and put ua into the bull
pen Avhere tho balance of them wero.
Q. Was any thing said to you about a gun that they
had along Avith them .? A. Yes, sir, this Alfred Bamhill had
a short gun. He came up to me and showed it to me, and he
said " Ave have got the king, and here is his gun," and he.
showed it to me. " He said the load is in it that he put in. They
" Avere going to shoot us and g — d d — n you if you try to
Hi get away I will give it >to you." He had it cocked and held
it in bis hand.
Q. Who was the king ? A. Mr. Turner. He said he Avas
king of the Kuklux.
Q. He said they had the king ? A. Yes, sir, and that thie
was his gun.
Q. Was this Bamhill a black man? A. Yes, sir. He was
'the first who ordered them to hang me.
Q. Now we will come to the time you Avere in camp ? A.
He marched on Tuesday morning about day light, starting
.from the camp at the Shops and kept going uDtil between
four and five o'clock. He started vrith us for Yanceyville —
five of us. That night we staid at Moore's store. The next
morning we started and went to Yanceyville and got there
just before night. They carried us to the court house and put
us in the clerk's room and kept us all there until the next
¦evening, I suppose about five o'clock, when we left Yanoqy-
ville and they carried vs then back to Company Shops.
47

718 COUBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. What was done with you then ? A. He kept us there
in the camp at Company Shops and then carried us the next
evening and put us in a box car on a train and can-ied us to
Graham and put us in the court house, and they kept me
there until that day week, which was Monday night. Then
they carried us to the depot and put us ona'train and brought
us here on Monday night
Q. You were brought to Raleigh? A. Yes, sir, was
brought on here.
Q. What was done with you ? A. I was brought before
Judge Brooks and released.
Q. Was any evidence brought against you ? A. No, 6ir.
Q. Were you charged with any crime ? A. No, sir.
Q. Were you discharged ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. While you were at Graham court house Avas any prisoner
put in jail? A. Yes, sir, Daniel Weeden, Frank Wylie, Tom
Cray and Josiah Turner.
Q. [By Mr. Smith.] Do you knoAV that? A. I saw thom
taken away and I aaAV them go in tho jail. I never eaw any
thing moro of thom until thoy atarted for Salisbury.
Q. Did you hoar tho soldiers say they put them in jail ? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know Daniel Wooden 2 A. Yes, sir.
Q. Where is ho ? A. I don't knoAV. I havo not seen him
since the militia left but once. I saw him onco at Graham.
Q. Then you don't know Avhere he ia now ? A. No, sir.
Q. When were you first arreeted, before or after tho 'elec
tion ? A. On Monday morning before tho olection.
Q. Do you recollect the date when Judgo Brooke discharged
you ? A. I think it waa the 24th day of Auguat.
Q. Describe the troops you saw, what sort of men they
Avere as to discipline ? A. I don't know whether I hardly can
or not.
Q. Were they good looking or bad looking, well behaved oi
badly behaved ? A. I did not see but. one or two good looking
men in the crowd, and I did not see any that behaved welL

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 719
Q. What do you mean by behaving well ? A. They were
cursing about, going on abusing one another. They did not
obey their officers, and they abused the prisoners by talking at
them. Q. Cursing the prisoners? A. Yes, sir, of course they did.
Q. Often ? A. Yes, sir, every day, more or less, and every
hour in the day.
Q. Who cursed the prisoners, the officers or soldiers ?
A. Both.
Q. Did the black men curse them any ? A. No, sir, I did
not hear the blacks once curse the prisoners after they were
carried into the camp.
Q. [By Manager SparroAV.J Did they curse them before?
A. Yes, sir, they cursed me and all the rest the night they ar
rested me.
Q. Stato whether any rocks were thrown into the court
house at Graham ? A. Yea, sir.
Q. Woro you in the court houso under guaid at tho time?
A. Yes, sir, I was standing in tho room whon Captain Franklin
thrcAv a rock in tho window at Adolphns Moore, it wont over
my head and foil on the floor.
Q. Ho was a captain in this army ? A. Ho was ranked as
a captain. A man by tho name of "Wilson, who was tho color-
bearer, threw one at Adolphus Moore, and then ho got a
gun and came to tho head of the stairs to tho guard and swore
that he intended to shoot him the first sight he got on him.
He stood there some fifteen or twenty minutes with his gun
cocked and no person said anything to him or made him go
away. Q. Where was Kirk and Burgen then ? A. Down in tho
court house. We were up stairs in the court room and they
were below. Captain White, I think, was the man. who made
Wilson come dovm with hia gun. He went down, put his gun
away and got his pistol and went on the north-east corner of
the court house, which was the room that Moore was in, and

720 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
he stood there again with his repeater cocked for a half an
hour and said he was going  '• '
Q. [By tho Chiof Justice.] What was he going to. shoot
him for? A. I did'nt hear any reason given at all.
Mr. MERRIMON. Mr. Chief Justice, we desire to raise
tho question whothor it is a part of tho duties ef the presiding
ofllcor to examine witnesses.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer has no pur-
poso to examine witneseoa any further than to have them un
derstood. Cross-Examination. By Mr. Badger.
Q. How far wero you atanding from Adolphua G. Moore
•when thoy threw tho rock at him? A. I was some seven or
eight feet — I think it may have been eight or ten feet. I was
in the jury room up stairs. I was just inside of the door a few
steps and ho Avas standing at the Avindow looking out
Q. Did you hear him make any remark just before that? A.
Who ?
Q. Adolphus G. Moore? A. No, sir.
Q. Was he standing looking out? A. He Avas standing
looking out of the window.
Q. He was silent? A. I did'nt hear him 6ay anything,
Q. Did you not hear him make any remark ? A. No, sir,
I did not. He may have made a remark but I did not hear it.
Q. Were you where you could have heard it? A. Yes, if I
was paying attention.
Q. Were you paying attention ?' A. No, sir, I was talking
with another man — me and another person were standing
together talking.
Q. You don't know whether he made any remark to the
men outside or not ? A. No, eir, I do not.
vQ. Did you hear any remark made by those who threw the
Toek? A. No, sir, I did not hear any. ' *•
<Cj. Did you see them throw the rock ? A. No, air, 1 saw it
.come .through the window. " •' "¦'

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 721
Q. Did that man stand on the staircase silent who had tho
gun cocked ? A.I heard him say that if he saw Moore come
to tho door he would shoot him down.
Q. Ho did not give any reason for that ? A. He might
have given a reason for it but I did not hear it.
Q. You did not hear Adolphus G. Moore say anything to
any body outside Avho threw rocks and you did not hoar tho
man who camo and cocked his gun or pistol give any reason
why he would shoot him ? A. No, sir.
Q. Wero you where you could have heard ? A. I suppose I
could have heard if I had been paying attention.
Q. Were you not paying attention to a man who was stand
ing with a gun threating to shoot ? A. Not when he first
came. Q. Were you at any time paying attention ? A. No, air, I
came out of the room where I was standing and I saw the man
standing there with hia gun cocked, I heard him say he was;
going to shoot that G — d d — d Moore the first 6i'ght he got. I
went back and shut the door because I did not want to see hinru
shoot him.
Q. What part of Alamance do you live in ? A. Right in.
the upper edge.
Q. Did you belong to the White Brotherhood ? A„ Yes>
sir. Q. To what camp ? A. I don't know.
Q. Who waa the chief of that subdivision. A. I did not be
long te any regular camp, I never went to a camp but twice
after I was initiated.
Q. You did not belong to any regular camp ? A. No, sir.
Q. You were a member of the White Brotherhood without
belonging to a camp ? A. Yes, sir. i
Q. But you went to the camp? .A. I went to the camp
twice in which I waa initiated.
Q. What was it? A. The cainj>» above Graham. | I don't
know the name.
Q. Who presided at the meeting? A. I don't know.
Q. Wej:e the. irm disguised 1 A Yes, sir.

722 COURT OF IMPEAOHMENrS.
Q. In what sort of disguise ? A. They had on white goAvns.
Q. Any thing else ? A. No, sir. They had a false cap on
over their faces. • '
Q. You did not know any of them ? A, No, sir. ^
Q. You did not know any man there ? A. No, sir, every
one I saw was disguised.
Q. How were they disguised ? A. I was told.
Q. Who told you ? A. Daniel. Anthony's son.
Q. Which son ? A. Daniel.
Q. He told you what ? A. He told mo that if I wanted to
aee them, if I would come to that place* I could see them.
Q. Is that all he told ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did he tell you he was a member ? A. No, sir.
Q. What did you 6ee when you went there ? A. I saw these
men. Q. These disguised men ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. How did you get where they were ? . A. I walked there.
Q. Were thero any sentinels put outside? A. They told
mo what place to go to.
Q. Who told you ? A. Anthony's son.
Q. When was that ? A. I don't remember exactly when it
waa. Q. About what time ? A. It Avaa in 1808 I reckon.
Q. The fall, spring or winter ? A. It Avas in the Avintor.
Q, Whore was the camp ? A. It was above Graham.
Q. Waa it the latter part of the year 1808 ? A. Yes, sir,
it was very late in the year, towards the latter part.
Q. Where did you say the camp was ? A. Above Graham —
west of Graham.
Q. On whose land ? A. I don't know whose land it was.
Q. How were you directed to get to it ? A. I was directed
to go to that place in the woods. There was a roai that went
through the Woods — a country road.
Q. What road ? A. I cannot give any description.
Q. Hoav did you tell — describe the place how you were 'to
. . , V xi "

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 723
find it ? A. By a road that run through that piece of woe da
to a certain field.
Q. What field ? A. A road between widow Rich's field and
Colonel Holt's, near the school house.
Q. Were you challenged by any one as you approached ? A.
There was one of the disguised men with me.
Q. Where did you meet him ? A. He met me near there.
Q. What did he say to you ? A. He Avanted to knoAV what
I wanted and what I was doing there, what I camo there for.
Q. What did you tell him ? A. I told him I came to see
him. Q. What did he do then or say? A. I don't remember
what else he said,
Q. Did he ask you if you were a member of the White
Brotherhood? A. No, sir.
Q. He did not ask you that question? A. No, sir.
Q, Did he ask your name? A. No, sir.
Q. Did he say he knew who you were? A. No, sir, he did
not. Q. What took place? A. Ho carried me — he asked me
what I came there for, I told him I camo to go Avith him.
Wo went a little piece thon, and there was some moro dis
guised men.
Q. How far did you go? A. Fifty or Bixty yards I reckon
aud they came and stood around me.
Q. How many of them ? A. I don't know, I suppose five
or six.
Q. All disguised? A. Yes, sir, I did not see anf others.
Q. Whrt did they do? A. They asked me what I came
for and I told them I come there to be a coming. They want
ed to know what my object Avas, I told them I came just to
see them, that I heard they were going to be there. They
asked me if I wanted to join them, I told them I did not
hardly know. They said if I did to tell them. I told them
if there was no harm in it They said there was no harm in

X2£ COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS".
it,, no danger. Then they oome over some few. words to me>
of an oathi ¦-- • '
Q.. Were you a member of the organization before .that?
A. No, sir, I never Avas. i. >¦>
Q. Bid they put a rope around your neok? A; No, sir,
they never touohed my neck and they did not make any
threats. Q. Bid they administer' an* oath? A. I don't know, what
they called it„ but they come oven some words as I have de
scribed. Q. What were they ? A. I cannot telli— I cannot memorize
them, it has been so long.
Q.. Did you hold up your right hand \. A.. I don't re
member. Q. Did they give you any sign, by which you would! kjoow
the Kuklux, or any sign or word of distress ? A. No, bun.
Q. Did they say anything about "Shiloh?" A- No, six..
Q. What was done after they had gone through those*
Avords ? A. There was nothing more done. They told me I
could go home, and they told me I should never tell anybody.
Q. What was the nature of the obligation you took ? A\,
The meaning, as I understand it, was of the words they come
over, that if any one did any crime, or anything that deserved
any punishment and the law did not take hold of them, then
it was necessary to do something with it. That was about the*
substance of what I read.
Q. What was ? A. What I told you.
Q. What was the last part of it, I did not hear you? A. If
there was any rapes committed, or anything burnt, or any one
abused in any way, and the law did not take hold and do any
thing vrith them, then it was necessary to take it in hand, and
see whether there would be anything done with it or not. '
Q. Was any part of the oath binding you to obey the offioers •
of the company. A. There may have \e,en% but' I'dpn'tf "reQ0^
loot, I don't memorize it now.

TBIAX OF WILLIAM W. nOLDEN. 725
Q. Were you told who tho officer was? A. No, sir, I waa
not told any person's name.
Q. Wero you told that there was no danger in the thing
bocauso you would bo protected in the court house by false
•wearing t A. No, siv; I was not.
Q. You aro certain tiiat was no part of tho obligation t
A. Yes, sir, I am.
Q. Was It any part of you* obligation that you wore to bo tho<
law to yourselves in case the civil laws did not punish crime?:
A. No, sir.
Q. You say that if the court did not punish thoso people who.
committed crimes you were to tako into consideration and that'
you would punish it yourselves. A. No, sir.
Q. You would not ? A. Not that I know of.
Q. What did they mean by that ? A. I don't know — I didi
not find out the meaning of it.
Q. But you wore to take it up f A. If it was anything-
that we thought deserved to be punished for.
Q. Were you to punish ? A. There was nothing said that
we were to punish but te see that they were dealt with accord
ing to law. There was nothing said that we were to punish..
Q. What was to be done then? A. I don't know that.
there was anything to be done.
Q. Did you ever meet them at any other place ? A. I met
them once.
Q. Whero was it? A. It was near Holt's factory, on the
Big Alamance.
Q. What Holt's? A. Old EdAvin Holt's.
' Q. How many were there ? A. I don't know.
Q, About how many ? A. I think there was some four, five
or six it may have been.
Q, Wero there not a great many more than five or six t A..
Ii there was I did not see them.
Q. Were they tbore disguised t A. No, sir, they were not
there disguised.
Q. Who were they? A* George Anthony— I believe ho*

726 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.

* .

was along — Daniel Anthony, George Cheeks, AJvis, Cheeks
and John Gant. ' ,',
Q. Anybody else? A. No, sir. ; ' J '/
' Q. Was Ellison Boon? A. Not that I know off '
Q. Jacob Boon ? A. Not that I know of.
Q. Was Henry Boon there ? A. I believe he waa — and I
believe Jake Boon was there too.
Q, Was Jacob May there ? A. Not that I know of, he was not.
Q. Jerome May t A. Not that I know of.
Q. Jerry Coble f A. I don't know any such man.
Q. You say they were not disguised ? A. No, sir.
Q. Who waa in command of them t A. I don't know that
there was any person in command.
Q. Who presided at tho meeting? A. I don't know that
there waa any person. They all just met and talked together.
Q. Tell all that was 6aid and done there ? A. I cannot,
because I don't recollect.
Q. Tell as much as you do recollect. A. I do not know that
I recollect anything that passed between them to be positive
about it.
Q. How came you to go that night ? A. I was told to go.
Q. By whom ? A. This Anthony.
Q. Which one? A. Daniel.
Q. Did he say who had called the meeting ? A. No, sir.
Q. You say that you don't recollect anything that was said
or done that night ? A. No, sir, I do not.
Q. I want to ask you if, on tho 8th day of August, in the
year 1S70, you Avere not in company with John Curtis in
Robert L. Mebane'slane, and if the first thing said was not said
by you to Curtis, " Are you one of Bob Mebane's Kukluxes ;"
and further, " This is not all the time we Will have ; we will
" have better times after a while ; we will make these men
" do as that poor nigger did the night we put a rope around
" his neck before we are done ?" A. No, sir.
Q. Was not that said in the presence of Roberi L. Mebane's
two daughters, Mary A- and Mentona Mebane ? A. No, sir.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 727
Q. I ask you, if you did not at the same timo and in tho same
presence, tell John Curtis that you would hang " a good many
" niggers as you had hung Wyatt Outlaw ? " A. No, sir. ,
Q. You did not ? A. No, sir, I saw Curtis that day but I
did not see him in Mebane's lane.
Q. Where did you meet him ? A. I met him right between
the end of Mebane's lane and New Chureh.
Q. What took place between you and him? A. I said
"Good morning, Kuklux." He said "You are damnably
mistaken," and he asked mo why I called him that. I said
Rob Mebane says you are just so. '
Q. What else ? A. I don't remember that there was any
thing else said about Kuklux or anything else.
Q. At the time and place described, did you not state to him
that " this is not all the times we will haA-c, we will make these
" men do as that poor nigger did the night we put the rope
around his neck ? " A. No, sir.
Q. Or words to that effect ? A. No, sir.
Q. Did not you say " we will hang a good many more
" niggers as we hung Wyatt Outlaw ? " A. No, sir.
Q. In the presence of Mary A. and Mentona Mebane? A.
No, sir, there was no such Avorda uaedas that about any niggers
being hung.
Q. Where were you tho night OutlaAV was hung ? A. I
Avaa at Peter Holt's.
Oj. Who was therewith you ? A. No person there with me.
Q. Was not Peter Holt and his family there or were they
away ? A. Peter Holt and hie wife and daughter and his boys.
Q. What time did you go there ? A. I went there Saturday
evening. Q. What hour ? A. It was about sun doAvn.
Q. How long did you remain there ? A. I remained there
till Sunday evening.
Q. What time did you go to bed ? A. I don't know exactly
what timo it was. We were all sitting in the house singing
awhile after eating supper and before we went te bed.

?28 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS'.
Q. How far is that from Graham ? A. Three miles or three1
nnd a half. »
Q. How soon on Sunday did yon hear about Outlaw's mur
der ? A. I don't know what tlmo of day it was on Sunday.
Q. About what time ? A. It was sometime after the middlo
of tho day.
Q. What did you do when you hoard of it ? A. I didn't do
anything. Q. Whoro did you go ? A. I M'ont homo whon I loft thoro.
I did not go away from thoro until I started for homo.
Q. Did you go through Graham in going homo ? A. No,
sir, I was on the other side of Graham.
Q. Who told you about the murder of Outlaw ? A. Pete
Holt himself I think.
Q. Had he been to town ? A. No, sir, I think he said that
Levin Woods had been over to toAvn and he came home and
told him.
Q. Did you not know that Wyatt Outlaw was to be hung?
A. No, sir, I know nothing about the nigger. I never saAv
him in my life.
Q. Did you not know he was to be hung that night ? A.
No, sir, I never heard any body make any remark about him
in any way.
Q. Do you know of Jerry Smith speaking of it ? A. No,.
sir, I don't know of any Jerry Smith.
Q. Were you present when Jerry Smith, son, and a colored
boy Avere whipped by Isaac Woodward, Rufus Nichols, Elison
Boon, Jacob Boon, Henry Boon, Jacob May and Gerrold May ?
A. No, sir.
Mr. MERRIMON. I object to the question, there has been
no proof that there was any such man. He takes it for granted
that there was such a man, and that he was whipped. Tho
question is calculated to produce an improper impression.
Mr. BADGER. He answers that he was not present.
Q. You say you were not present when any such persons
were whipped ? A. No, sir, nor When any one was whipped.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 729
Q. How did you know that Robert Mebane Avas one of tho
Kukluxes ? A. I did not know he waa. I meant, when I told
Curtia that, that I had heard Ruben Mebane aay he was a Ku
klux. I aaid that I had heard he said he was one. That was
all that was said about it.
Q. [By Mr. Merrimon.] When was that ? A. It was the
Monday whon I started with the machine to thresh wheat— I
was arrested that night.
Q. [Tho Chief Justice.] Tho day before you started with
the machine ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. What political party do you belong to or co-operate with ?
A. I claim to belong to the conservative party, if any. That
is the party I vote with.
Q. Do you know of any person who has been whipped in
Alamance or Caswell within two years past ? A. No, sir, I
don't know of any person at all that has ever been whipped,
of my own knowledge.
Q. Have you never seen the back of one with scars on ?
A. No, sir. I have seen a man who was 6aid to have been
whipped, but I never saw any marks that I could say he had
been. Re-Direct Examination.
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. When did you say you joined this organization ? A. I
cannot tell anything more than it was the latter part of the
year 1868.
Q. How long did it last? A. Do you mean the order?
Q. Yes, sir ? A. I cannot say ; it did not last very long with
me. I do not know how long it did last, but I never met them
but twice.
Q. You spoke about the obligation. Was there any obliga
tion to do any criminal act if you wero commanded te ? A. No,
eir. Q. Was any part of the obligation requiring you to resist
tho laws ofthe land ?

780 COtTBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The question is not competent to
be asked of your OAvn witness. You may ask him what the
obligation was. He is your OAvn witness and you have no right
to lead him.
Mr. MERRIMON. We did not go into this examination,
Mr. Chief Justice. The witness has been asked the question
as to whether he belonged to an organization called the
White Brotherhood. He says he did. To that extent the
respondent has made him tlieir witness, and we have a right to
ascertain about that organization upon re-examination, It is
alleged on the other side that one of the objects of this organ
ization was to perpetrate crime in pursuance of the order of its
leaders and one particular means of securing immunity in doing
it was securing the release of their owm members by false
b wearing and by having the juries made up ot the friends of
the accused and acquitting them in that way. Since it baa
been ehown that there waa an obligation taken, I think
testimony ia competent to show whether thero Avaa any obliga
tion to commit any such offence.
Mr. BOYDEN. Tho objection is that you cannot ask your
oavh wltncas a loading question. It is our right to do so ou
cross-examination. Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. Tho prodding offlcor is of tho
opinion that a loading question cannot bo put to a wltnoss by
tho counsel for the mangers and that tho question ho pro
pounded ia leading according te the definition laid down in tho
booke. Senator WARREN. I ask, Mr. Chief Juatice, that the
opinion of the court be taken on admitting the question.
The CHIEF JUSTICE put the question on the admitting
the question proposed by Mr. Senator Warren and it was,
decided in the affirmative.
Q. The question is whether any portion of the obligation
required you to resist the law or to sWear to a lie to acquit a
party oharged with orime or if put upon a jury to find a false

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 731
verdict ? A. No, sir, nothing of the sort. If there was any
thing of that sort I never heard of it.
Q. I understand you to say you were not in it a long time?
A. No, sir.
Q. I put the question this way: If a party were indicted in
a court for whipping a colored man or a white man, as one of
that brotherhood, if you were called upon as a witness to tes
tify against him — was there any obligation restiug upon you
as such member to testify in a particular way ? A. No, sir.
Q. What would you be bound to testify in a case ? A.
Nothing binding to testify any way at all.
Q. [By the Chief Justice.] Mr. Merrimon desires to know
whether you would regard your oath in court as binding on
you to tell the whole truth without any reference to your being
a member of that order ? A. I Avould be bound to tell the truth.
Tho oath I had taken did. not bind me to swear to anything
else. I would consider I was bound to tell the truth in what
I SAvoro to. I Avould not tell it in any other way.
Q. Who is John M. Curtis ? A. He is a son of Sammy
Curtis and tho brother of Clem Curtis.
Q. A Avhite man or a colored man ? A. A Avhite man.
Mr. MERRIMON. What Avoro thoso girls' names you men
tioned. Mr. BADGER. Mary A. and Montana Mebane.
Q. Did you boo these girls the day mentioned ? A. No, sir.
Q. Wero thoy present when you were talking with Curtis T
a., No, sir.
The hour of half past two having arrived, the oourt ad
owned 'till to-morrow at eleven o'olook, A. M.

782 . OOURT OF IMPEACHMENTS,

8IXTZ2XZNTH DAY.
Senate Cuambeb, Feb. 14th, 1871.
Tho OOURT mot at elovon o'clock, pursuant to adjourn
ment, Hon. R. M. Pearson, chiof justico of the supreme
court, in tho chair.
Tho proceedings Avoro oponcd by proclamation mado in due
form by the doorkoopor.
The CLERK proceeded to call the roll of senators, when tho
folloAvlng gentlemen woro found to bo preseni.
Messrs. Albright, Allen, Barnott, Battle, Bellamy, Brogden,
BroAvn, Cook, Council, CoavIos, Crowell, Edwards, Eppes,
Flemming, Gilmer, Graham, of Alamance, Graham, of Orange,
IlaAvkins, Ilyman, Jones, King, Latham, Ledbettor, Lehman,
Linney, Love, Mauney, McClammy. McCottor, Merrimon,
Morehead, Robbins, of Davidson, Robbina, of Rowan, Skinner,
Troy, Waddell, Warren and Worth— 38.
Senator TROY moved that reading of the journal of the pro
ceedings of yesterday be dispensed with.
The CHIEF JUSSICE put the question on the motion of
Senator Troy, and it wbb decided in the affirmative.
Senator GRAHAM, of Orange, moved to reacted the order
•adopted yesterday providing for two sessions of the court
daily. Senator MERRIMON called for the the yeas and nays.
Not a sufficient number seconding the call the yeas and nays-
^vere not ordered.
The CHIEF JUSTICE put the question on the motion of
Senator Graham, of Orange, and it Avas decided in the nega
tive. Senator OLDS offered the following order :
Ordered, That the evidence and proceedings of the court of
impeachment for each day shall be printed in preference to other

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 73tf
matters and laid on the desk of each member of the court by
cloven o'clock tho next day.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE put the question on tho adoption of
tho ordor of Senator Olds, and it was decided in the affirm
ative GEORGE N. WAITE, a witness called on beJiaJf of th
Managers, being duly sworn, testified as follows :
By Mr. Mkhuimon.
Q. What ia your age, name, place of residence, and business i
A. Goorgo N. Waite. I am a conductor on tho North Carolina
railroad aud reside in Charlotte
Q. Your ago ? A. Twenty-seven.
Q. Stato to tho court Avhether, at any timo during tho last
year, you romoiubor of any persons, armed men, black or AA'hito,
rushing upon tho train at Graham station, and if so, under Avhat
circumstances? A. A party of men came as I stopped at the
station. I do not remember the time, or what month.
Q. Was it about August ? A. I cannnot say Avhat month it
Avas, nor tho number of men. They had about five mon with
them. There were tAvo negroes and the rest white men — they
wero soldiers.
Q. What did they do? A. They jumped on tho train and
Avent to Company Shops.
Q. What time in the day or night was it ? A. I think about
tliree o'clock in the morning.
Q. Describe the manner in which they came on, and how
'thoy behaved themaeh-es? A. I cannot tell you Iioav they be-
liaved ; they didn't havo far to go. They didn't do anything
wrong as I. know of.
Q. State Avhether they woro armed ? A. They wore armed
— thoy had pistols and guns.
Q. Was there cursing and BAvearing ? A. Yes, they wero
cursing and swearing at each othor and telling them not to lot
the prisoners get off.
Q. Did thoy curso the prisoners ? A. No, not cursing tho
48

784 COURT QF IMPEACHMENTS.
prisoners, cursing and swearing not to let the prisoners get
loose. When they got to the train, I heard them remark to hurry
up and get on or the train would leave them.
Q. Did they force themselves on the train — did they go on
without your consent ? A. No, sir, they rushed right in as
any one else would. Nobody asked my consent to go on the
train. Q. Did they continue to curse all along the road to the
Shops ? A. No, sir, they got quiet ; they placed a guard at
each door and alloAved no man to go in and out but themselves.
Q. Wero there passengers on the train ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. When you got to Company Shops Avhat did they do ?
A. They got oft'.
Q. Was there any cursing or 6Avearing or threatening then ?
A. No threatening as I knoAV of. They ordered them to get
in ranks, and march off'.
Q. Did they have any pistole draAvn ? A. Yes, they had
their pistols cocked.
Q. Wero they cocked while the train Avas going ? A. Yes,
air, thoy had them ready for service if any thing happened.
Q. Hoav Atoro thoso prisoners dressed? A. Some wero
drossod in citi/jeim clothea. I think tho two negroes had on sol-
diors clothes—I cannot Bay for certain. Tho two negroes had
on bluo clothes, and the othera had on common clothes.
Q. The men thoy had in their custody — Iioav wore they
dressed ? A. They were dressed in citizens clothea.
Q. Were they fully dressed f A. I cannot say for certain
whether all of them was or not — somo of them were.
Q. Do you recollect Avhether they had tlieir coate or shirts.
on ? A. Yes, sir, they had as far as I remember.
Cross- Examination waived.
AUSTIN WHITSETT, a witness called on behalf of the
Managers, being duly sworn, testified as follows : '
By Mr. Graham.
Q. State where you live, your name, place of residence and

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. nOLDEN. 735
business f A. I live in Alamance county, my name is Austin
Whitsett and I carry on farming.
Q. What is your age f A. Sixty.
Q. Stato Avhether whilo the troops of Kirk woro at Company
Shops you had any intercourse with tho officers, and how it
began ? A. The first I kneAV, I had heard about their arriving
at the Shops. A gentleman rode to my house and called for
me. I went to him and he told me they Avanted me to take my
wagon and team and haul baggage for Col. Kirk to Yan
ceyville. Q. What reply did you make ? A. I told him it was hardly
possible for ine to do it, situated as I Avas, and he told me it was
no use to offer any excuse, that it Avas important business, that
he was acting for Governor Holden and tho president and I
must do it.
Q. What president? A. Tho President ot tho United
Statea, that ia Avhat ho aaid — tho president.
Q. Ho AA-as acting under tho authority of theso officers, and
you must do it ? Yes, sir, and ho told mo ho wanted mo to be
at tho Shops in half an hour.
Q. Hoav far avus tho Shops from your placo ? A. A mile
and a half. I told him I could not do it — get ready so soon,
that iny team Avas out in tho field loading oate. But ho said
I must como right along. Ho aaid if I refused to do it, he
would send a detachment for mo. I told him that there Avas
no use of that, that I would unload and come there as quick as
I could. Q. When you came to the Shops AA'hat was dono then at the
camp? A. I drove up in tho old field, and inquired of a sen
tinel near, where I could find Colonel Kirk, as a gentleman told
mc I must report to Colonel Kirk.
Q. Who Avas the gentleman at your house ? A. Colonel
Burgen. The sentinel pointed to a tent, and told me where he
was, and I said would I be permitted to go to him, and would
he say that I was there, he said he would' walk with me ; when
wo got opposite a tent he pointed to a gentleman, and 6aid that

730 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Avas him. He was sitting in tho tent reading. Just as the
«ontlnel spoke to him ho rose and flung the papor down with
some rough language, and said that he would kill some of them.
Q. What was tho language ? A. He said ho would bo d— d
if ho would not kill some of them.
Q. Somo of whom ? A. Some of tho rebels, was what ho
aaid. The sentinel told him I wanted to sec him, and ho said
ho didn't Avant to boo any d— d rebels. Burgon was just
behind him and ho said " you are too fast, this ie the man who
ia to do tho hauling for you." Kirk then said to excuse him,
that he had been reading somo lies that tho rebels had been
publishing on him, and ho was mad.
Q. What did he order you to do ? A. I told him what
Colonel Burgen had told me, and I made the samo excuse to
him ; he said he would hear of no excuse, and that I should be
paid according to my own charges;- and to make myself ready.
I told him I was there with my Avagon but said I hadn't
brought any proveuder for my horses, as Burgen told me I need
not do that— he said I would have to look out for myself. He
ordered me to go and do so, and I did so, and went and got
some feed for my horses.
Q. Did you go along Avith them ? A. I loaded my wagon,
and hauled a load from thero to Yanceyville.
Q. Was there any other wagon along ? A. Yea, sir, Squire
Albright's two wagons and Hardin's.
Q. Were you present Avhen Mr. McAllister came up with
the writs on the \A'ay to Yanceyville? A. I was present.
Thoy came to a halt. It was very warm weather, and we
travelled but a short distance when we stopped to refresh our
teams and take some water and cool off', Avhile wo were resting,
Colonel McAllister passed up the line, and went to the head of
tho battalion, and was thero but a little while whon he returned,
guarded by Mr. Bergen and Mr. Yates, I think it waa along.
McAllister said to me as I passed by " I am not allowed to
" talk te any ono, do you want to send any word ? " I told him

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 737
to tell my peoplo that I would bo home when I got there. I told
him as ho just pasBed along the line.
Q. Did you hoar any conversation botweeu the soldiers and
officers on that occasion ? A. The soldiers and officers around
my wagon asked mo if I know that man. I told thom that
I knoAV him, and thoy said that thoy would hot anything that
he had somo kind of precept or Avriting for theso men, pointing
to tho hack tho prisoners wore in. Directly after he passed
down, we Avere put in a lino of march again, and the next rest
Kirk said nobody could got thoae men but the governor, that
he AA'as acting under the governor's orders and he AA'ould give
them to nobody but the governor.
Q. Kirk made that observation ? A. Yes.
Q. After McAllister had been up and had the interview
with him ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you hear any observations from him or any person
under his command at that time about shooting these men,
or anything of that sort ?
Mr. BOYDEN. That is a leading question.
A. The soldiers on guard asked me several times if I would
not hate very much to see my friends shot. I told them I
certainly would, and they said it Avas very likely they would
be shot before they got to Yanceyville. That was talked
frequently to me backwards and forwards by the officers and
privates. Q. Did they mention any of the particular ones that were
going to be shot. A. Mr. Moore was one and Mr. Hunter was
another. Q. Mr. Adolphus Moore ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Which Hunter ? A. James T. Hunter.
Q. The soldiers remarked that they Avould probably be shot
before you got to Yanceyville ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you hear Kirk say anything about shooting the
whole of them ? A. Just before we got to Yanceyville for
two or three miles there was a good many people coming in
out of the road to see tho battalion, and amongst them a good

738 OOURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
many, colored people, and they all seemed to have business
with the Colonel, and it was reported at my wagon that the
Colonel had received information 
Q. State what occurred ? A. He said that he had been in
formed that the Kuklux were going to fire on him before he
got to toAvn, and that he would kill every one of the prisoners
if they fired on them, as fast as powder would burn.
Q. You went on and delivered your freight at Yanceyville ?
A. Yes, sir, I stayed there from 12 or 1 o'clock to a little af
ter sundown Avhen I Avas discharged.
Q. Did Kirk pay you for your service ? A. They did not
pay me. I have never been paid.
Q. What Avas the state of order or discipline among the
troops? A. Among the soldiers?
Q. Thoir behavior? A. I don't know hardly Iioav to describe
it. I thought it was very bad all tho time.
Q. In Avhat respect? A. As te thoir manners, tlieir be
havior and their conversation,
(J, Diaordur? A. Disorder, and thoy soemod not to oaro
much about tho orders from Colonel Kirk. Thero avuh a good
deal of fruit along the line of tho road and thoy Avoro contin
ually in tho orchards pulling doAvn tho green apples. Kirk
ordered tho officers to keep them out, and when he stopped
to rest ho marched doAvn the lino, gave tho order himself that
if ho saAv any ono in the orchards ho Avould have them shot.
After that nobody Avould go in the orchard until they Avound
around out of sight, then they Avould go in again.
Q. Tho subordinate officers did not keep them out of the
orchards? A. They did not have any command over them.
They would tell them that they would report them but they
Avould go right along and get just as many apples as they
Avanted .
Q. Did they keep up talking all the way ? A. Talking and
hallooing all tho time.
Q. What aged men did they appear to be f A. Boys of 15
years up to my age, some of them were.

TRIAL OF WIXLIAM W. HOLDEN. 739
Q. You say that their behavior was such as you have de
scribed — very little obedience to their officers ? A. They had
very little regard for them.
Q. Talking and cursing backwards and forwards to each
other t A. Yes, sir, abusing the rebels and Kuklux all the
time. Cross-Examination. By Mr. Boyden.
Q. To Avhat political party do you belong ? A. I am a dem
ocrat, sir, I haA'e been ever since I was 21 years of age.
Q. How far do you live from Graham ? A. Midway be
tween Graham and Company Shops.
Q. Where Avero you on the night OutlaAV Avas hung ? A. I
was at home.
Q. Hoav soon did you hear that ho waa hung? A. I heard
it Sunday as I Avont to church. I livo about three quarters of
a milo from tho church, and I mot a colored man Avho worked
on tho section.
Q. Did you go up to Graham that day? A. I did not.
Q, Thia colored man told yon ? A. Yos, air,
Q. You didn't inquire into it ? A. No, sir,
Q. Do you knoAV of any other person being hung, or any
person being Avhipped in tho county of Alamanco ? A. No
of iny oavii knowledge I do not.
Q. Do you know of any socret political organization in tho
counties of Alamanco or Caswoll known as tho Kuklux klan
White Brotherhood, Conatitutional Union Guard or the Invisi -
bio Empire? A. Not of my own knowledge.
Q. Have you evor seen any persona in diaguiso ? A. I never
did in my life.
Q. Have you aeon any pereon that have been whipped with
marks of being mutilated ? A. I never have.
Q. You say you have no personal knowledge of any of theso
organizations ? A. I have not.
Q. You say you are sixty years of age ? A. I will be, if I
live until next summer.

740 COURT OF impeachments; '
Q. Yon say you have not been paid, do you expect to be>
paid for tho service t A. I do. I do not know whether I shall
realize It or not.
Q. Do you know Daniel Whftsett? A. I do not. Thore
Is no Whltsott in Alamance county of that name. Thero is n
man nnmod Danlol Wliltosoll, I think ho Is tho man yon meam*
Q. Do yon know him ? A. I don't know as I do. Thoro
uro a good many of thom. I could not designate thom.
Q. Doos ho live in your neighborhood ? A. Whitesoll Htos
above me some feAV miles.
Q. Do you know anything about the drowning of Puryear.
Did you aee hie body ? A. I didn't Bee his body. I heard of it.
Re-Direet Examination.
By Mr. Graham.
Q. When was the time you hauled this freight?' A. I
hauled it about the 10th or 15th of July.
Q. What day of the month or week? A. The day of the
week we started from Company Shops was on Saturday.
Q. That was the time? A. Yes, sir.
HENRY F. BRANDON, a witness called on behalf of
the Managers, being dhdy sworn, testified as follows :
By Mr. Graham.
Q. State your name, place of residence and employment ?
A. Henry F. Brandon. I reside at Yanceyville, Caswell
county, and I am clerk of the Caswell county superior court.
Q. What is your age t A. I will be 41 years old the ICth
of March.
Q. State whether the courts of justice in the county of Cas
Avell have been interrupted at any time for the last two years,
or whether they havo been constantly in session at the proper
time. A.#They haA'e not been interrupted since my connec
tion with the business of clerk until they were Btopped by tho
military occupation of the county by Colonel Kirk in July last-
Q. The court of probate and registration, and the superior-
courts, the courts of magistrates, and the registration of deeds,

TRIAL OF WILLIAM AV. nOLDEN. 741
and the sessions of the county commissioners, all had beon in
operation during this tlmo ? A. Until Kirk camo.
Q. Was thero any disturbance In tho administration of justico
In tho county until ho camo? A. No.
Q. Stato Avhothor thoro Avas any instance to your knoAvledge,
ef any person applying for process, Avhich Avas not obtained if
ho made.tho proper affidavit, or complied with the conditions of
the Uav entitling him to it? A. There AA'as not.
Q. Waa there a sheriff constantly in office during tho time?
A. Yea, sir.
Q. And constables in the several districts ? A. In somo of
tho districts there were no constables.
Q. How did that happen ? A. They resigned, and they
could not get any other person to fill their places.
Q. Wero there magistrates in all the townships ? A. Yes,
, sir. Q. Was there any instance of any magistrate who would
not grant process to anybody Avho made application in a lawful
Avay to entitle himself to it ? A. Not to my knoAvledge.
Q. When Colonel Kirk arrived describe the scene ? A.
Col. Kirk arrived thero with a detachment of soldiers on the
18th July between the hours I suppose, of ono and 2 o'clock in
the day. There Avas public speaking that day by the candi
dates for congress. General Scott and General Leach were the
persons who spoke. I was in my office at the time of tho
arrival of the troops, and there Avas a pretty large audience in
tho room. The troops arrived under the command of Colonel
Kirk. They entered the inclosure of the court house through
the gate. In entering they deployed around the court house
encircling themselves in a double line, and placed sentinels at
tho gates to prevent the entrance either way of persons to
and fro.
Q. There was an iron railing around the court house 1 A.
Yes, sir, about tour feet high.
Q. They formed inside of it? A. Right around the build
ing. The lot is about tliree quarters of an acre. After de*

742 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
ploying the troops around the court house, I think in double
line, they then came through the passage of the court, and
placed a guard at the south door of the court house, which led
outside of the enclosure. I then came out of my office and
started into the court room, and asked the sentinel, who waa
standing in the passage, if I could go outside of the inclosures
he told me that I could not, that any one could come in it, but
no one could go out. I then went into the court house building,
General Scott opened a speech of an hour and a half, perhaps
more, and at the conclusion, General Leach proceeded to reply,
and he had got about half through the time General Scott had
occupied when the meeting Avas interrupted and broken up.
A squad of two or three soldiers came into the court room
and commenced arresting persons. The first one that I saw
arrested thero wao Dr. Ro-n, then I saw them arrest Dr.
Yancey, and tho next that followed wna Mr. W. B. Boavc I
think it Avaa Colonel Kirk avIio approached Dr. Roan and asked
him if that Avas hia name. Ho told him it was ; he said ho
aviis hia prisoner. Dr. Roan got up and folloAVcd him. It waa
tho aame Avith Dr. Yancey; ho camo next te Mr. Boavc,
and asked if ho avus Mr. Bowe, and ho aaid ho was, thon
ho aaid ho Avas hia prisoner. Mr. Boavo naked by Avhat
authority ho arrested him. Ho aaid nover mind by Avhat
authority but to get up and folloAV him. Boavo asked him
a second time, llo cursed him and cocked hia pistol.
That Avaa Kirk. Right by him 6tood Yates, his major.
Thoy then seized hold of Mr. Bowe, and led him by forco
along — they didn't drag him. I suppose there Avere tAventy-five
Boldiera in the court house at that time. They flocked in, aud
a most frightning 6cene Avas exhibited. There were the moat
tearful yells I ever heard. They were crying out at the top
of their voices "Shoot the damned rebels, shoot the last one of
them doAvn." They had their guns cocked and they said " Shoot
thed — d old rascal if he don't come." They carried him out. At
length order was restored in a degree. There Avas three soldiers,
one ofthem was Lieutenant Banner, and anotlier was Lieutenant

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 743
BroAvn, the third one I don't know his name— and after ordor
Avas restored, they came through the building with their 'mus
kets in hand, cocked, crying out at tho top of their voices,
" Now lot any damned rascal open his mouth about anything
avo have done, and wo will put him through." The third
man I don't knoAV who he was. But I am rather too fast.
After deploying the men around the court house, they pointed
their guns, cocked, up to the windows. While in the court
houso I reckon there was at least fifty, perhaps more, caps
popped outside, I do not know by who.
Q. Were you there when these lines A\'ere formed ? A.
Yes, 6ir, Ave Avere all kept in the court house till 5 o'clock in
the evening, when Ave were allowed to return home.
Q. Theso were all citizens avIio had assembled there to hear
public affairs discussed, and they Avcro kept there till 6 o'clock ?
A. Yes, air.
Oj. Thoy Avoro detained in the court house till 5 o'clock in
tho evening? A. Yea, air.
Q. You Avoro then told thoao avIio had not been arrested
might go oil'? A. Yes, the lino Avas opened and avo wont out.
After going out I wanted to go into my office on aoino busi
ness. I obtained an introduction to Col. Kirk, who informed
me that I could go in my office at my option, and instructed
his guard to let mo pasa in in tho day timo, but not at night.
I then asked tho privilogo of bringing out threo hooka and a
bundlo of papers, that I might employ myself at home in tho
business of the office Ho alloAved mo to do this. I had access
to tho offlco until Wednesday or Thursday night. I kept tho
key, and had access to tho office until Thursday night ; then a
company of threo men — a. lieutenant — he had tho badgo of a
lieutenant — tAvo soldiers Avith muskets came to my houso
and demanded the key, saying that Colonel Kirk wanted the
office and must have it. I surrendered the key to him. I Avent
down te the office next morning and asked the Colonel to let
me have it again. He repliel that he could not. I found that

744 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
tho door had been broken open before they had got the key
there. Q. And was not capable of being locked afterwards until it
Avas repaired ? A. No, sir. I had to havo it repaired before
it could be locked. I asked the occupant of the loom, Captain
McDowell, where tho key was. He said he hadn't seen the
key at all — that the door was entered Avithout the key. They
kept the key until the troopa Avent away, when I got possession
of it.
Q. When did they leaA'e there ? A. I am not certain as to
the day or month. It Avas sometime between the first and
middle of September, I think.
Q. When Kirk left there Avith his prisoners did he leave a
forco behind? A. Ho left a detachment behind under com
mand of Major Yates.
Q. Were you restored to the possession of your office until
after Kirk left ? A. No, sir, I Avent and sought an interview
with Major Yates. I stated that I was under a heavy bond for
the safe-keeping of the records, and on account ot my own pe
cuniary interest as Avell as the public, I desired to haA'e the
control of the key it I could not of the office. We replied that
it was necessary to keep the key, I could not get it AA'hile he,
remained there.
Q. Did you got into tho office occasionally, and 6eo Iioav
matters stood there. A. I Avas alloAved to go in under guard.
Q. What became of your papers? A. I found a great many
of the papers when I went back scattered over the court houso
yard and in the rear of the building for about 50 or 60 yards
in an old field or at least an unimproved and uncultivated lot.
Q. Some of them remained in the office, but quite a number
of them you found scattered over the court house yard ? A. As
far as 50 yards from tho building some ofthem had been trampled
in the mud by the horses. I found some in the basement.
I searched over the lot after they left in order to see it I could
find any valuable papers that might bo scattered about, and I
got a little box full holding about a half bushel, and among

TRIAL OF AVILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 745
them I found one half of a decree in equity filed in 1885. It had
beon torn in too. I could not tell Avhat the title of the cause was.
Q. What did the nature of it appear to be ? A. It waB
a partition in equity to sell some slaves belonging to minor
children. Q. You found the papers scattered about in that way ? A.
Yes, sir, I found an order to the sheriff to lay off a dower for a
AA'idow, on the public square fronting the court house. That
was done before they left. I didn't find it — a gentleman
picked it up in my presence and handed it to me.
Q. So that the papers A\rere thrown about in a wanton and
mischievous way ? A. I found about a flour barrel of them
scattered about over the building when I took possession.
Q. Any of the records gone? A. Record N cannot be found
since they left. It is a record of inventories and account of
sales, &c.
Q. Belonging to the court of probate ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. These were under the old system ? A. Yes, sir. The
book included the year 1835. I don't knoAV Avhen it commenced
or ended. Have had occasion to search for it since that time
to find the settlement of an estate, and I cannot find it.
Q. This was one of the books of record, and the othera which
you found Avere papers Avhich had been filed in the office?
A. Yes, sir, filed up in' bundles and labelled, and belonging to
the county, the superior courts and the courts of equity.
Q. State Avhether you had any correspondence Avith the gov-
ernorofthe state in regard to the condition of your office and
the necessity on your part of getting it if possible? A. I did.
Q. (Handing letters to witness.) Look at these papers and
say if they contain the correspondence ? A. Yes, sir, that is
the correspondence.
The witnesses here read the correspondence in the words fol
lowing: . Yanceyville, N.C., Aug. 24th, 1870.
Gov. Wi W. Holden: ... . . • .,  "
Dear Sir.— I am clerk of the superiour court of this county,

74G COURT OF IMPEAOnMENTB.
and as such most respectfully ask to make a plain statement of
facts to you. Soon after the arrival of Col. Kirk at this place
the key of the clerk's office was demanded of me by Col. Kirk
and of course I obeyed the demand and gave him the key, since
which time I have not had possession of said office which con
tains all the records of the county, for the safe-keeping of which
I am bound in a heavy bond with security. When Col. Kirk
left hero with the prisoners, thinking that he would not need the
use of the office any further, I applied to Major Yates (left in
command) requesting him to let me have the key ; at the same
time stated to him that I waa under a heavy bond for the safe
keeping of the office, and that my OAvn safety and that of the
public required me to keep the key. He refused my request,
saying he must have access to the office and must keep the
key and, therefore, could not let mo have it. During the whole
of this time, I have been prevented from doing any public busi
ness except such as I could do outside of the office, as I was enabled
and permitted to take out a feAV papers and hooka that I could
Avork on at my home. I most respectfully submit the foregoing
facta to you, hoping that you will require the office to be restored
to me for my own protection as well as that of the public, as I
haA'e on several times found papers belonging to the office lying
in the streets since I have been deprived of the use of it.
Your early attention to the above request will greatly relieve
me. Very respectfully, II. F. Brandon, C. S. C.
Executive Department, )
State of North Carolina, >
Raleigh, Aug. 29, 1870. j
//. F. Brandon, Esq., Clerk Superior Court, CasweU Co.:
Sir. — Your letter of the 24th inst. has been received.
The county of Caswell being still under military authority,
and the court house required for quartering the militia, the key
of your office cannot be returned to you for the present.
I exhibited your letter to Col. Kirk and he assures me that

TRIAL OF AV1LLIAM W. nOLDEN. 747
he gave strict orders for the preservation of the papers and
recoids in the different offices.
Respectfully, W. W. HOLDEN, Gov.
Q. Did you make application to Kirk to restore you to pos
session of the office ? A. Yes, sir, several times, and he made
the same ansAver that Major Yates did, that it was necessary
ho should have the use of the office.
Q. Hoav Avas it occupied ? A. I heard it was occupied as a
hospital. I heard this from the men Avhen I visited the office.
I do not Iciioav this of my oavh knowledge.
Q. State whether the building and enclosures received any
injury while the troops A\'ere there? A. I think thoy did.
Q. In what respect? A. The building was very much de
faced, the walls Avere A-ery much scarred up, there were holes
punched in the plastering, and the iron railing Avas broken in
a dozen places — the uprights.
Q. Do you knoAV any court house in the 6tate, or any en
closure about public grounds in any county in any better con
dition than that AA-as ? A. I do not.
Q. Was there any court house in the countiy that waa equal
to it in elegance ? A. I do not knoAV but one court house that
is equal to it.
Q. Was it a A-ery elegant building? A. Yes, sir.
Q. You say that it was very considerably damaged ? A. My
opinion was that the building was damaged $1,000 — the build
ing and enclosure. I was sustained in that belief by the
opinion of others.
Q. Yon state that they left there, you think, early in the
month of September ? A. Yes, Bir. I cannot be positive as
to tho date. It was after the prisoners had all returned home
from this place, and they had been diecharged about the first
or middle of September.
Q. Do you know of any instance of resistance to the law in
the county of Caswell at all? A. I never'heard any.'

746 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS,
Q. Wero the United States and state taxes collected regu
larly ? A. Yei, sir.
Q. With regard to tho prisoners, who were arrested, what is
tho age of Dr. Roan ? A. I think ho is about 04— from 04
to 70.
Q. What is his standing as a physician and a citizen ? A.
I don't know that you could find a man of better standing any
where. He has high standing aa a physician, and hia character
ia above reproach aa far aa I have heard.
Q. What is his reputation as being a pious man ? A. He
has the reputation.
Mr. SMITH. Does the court think that is competent ?
Mr. GRAHAM. We wish to let these gentlemen be seen
as they are seen at home.
Q. What is tho standing of Mr. Bowe ? A. Mr. Bowe is
a very exemplary gentleman, as much 60 as any man in the
state of North Carolina.
Q. He is a gentleman of reputed piety connected with the
church ?
Mr. SMITH. I submit that proof of a gentleman's connec
tion with the church is not proper.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer is of opinion
that the proof ia not admissible.
Q. What is Mr. BoAve's age ? A. I suppose about 65 or 70
years. Q. How long has he lived in the county of CasAvell ? A. I
have known him 30 years. I do not know how much longer
he has been living there.
Q. Has he been in public position in the county ? A. Mr.
Bowe was a magistrate when I first knew him. He was a
member of the county court and one of the special court of
the county, and a shlreman a part of the timo. Since the war
he has been elected to tho legislature from that county, and I
think ho was a magistrate at the time Kirk was there. . ¦ , ,
Q. At tho time Kirk arrested him ? A. Yes, sir. .
Q. Did Kirk's interruption break up tho meeting, or woro

"TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN, ~7$)
t'tho candidates allowed to go on with their dlsoussion? A.
"Thoy broke it up, and porfoct terror rolgnod.
Q. Kirk arrived before Mr. Scott began ? A. Yos, sir,
Q. And surrounded tho house ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. He made a speech of an hour and a half in length ? A.
I suppose about that length.
Q. General Leach had proceeded about half his timo when
these men came into the house and began to arrest ? A., Not
'more than that.
Q. After arresting somo three or four' this yell began ? A.
Tho meeting Avas not broken up until the arrest of Mr. Bowe.
' The arrest of Dr. Roan and Mr. Yancey didn't broak up tho
' meeting. Q. MivBoAve Avas arrested, and. this scene of confusion com
menced, and there Avas no further speaking of the people ? A.
' The people got aAvay as fast as they could at that time. I
believe everybody got away as fast as they could at that time.
Q. They had a guard at the door, and .'permitted nobody to
go Out ? A. No ono to go out but any -bcnty could come in.
Q. Until 5 o'clock in the evening? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Have you an extensive acquaintance Avith the peoplo of
the county? A. Yes, sir, I reckon I know four fifths of tho
people of the county.
Q. Both complexions ? A. Yes, Bir, I think I do.
Q. State Avhat as a general thing Avas tho 6tato of feeling
existing between the blacks and" whites ? A. There was a good
friendly relation betAveen 'the two.
Q. Were the colored people in the employment of tho whitca,
and renting land from them generally ? A. Yes, sir, thero
were two or three kinds of employment. Some wero laborers
on a farm, some were tenants, some rented lands and gave a
portion of tho crops, and othera rented houses and worked
around Avhero they pleased. I bolievo they all got employ
ment. Some wore house servants — cooks, and some attended
rto the gardens.
Q, That was the state of things when Kirk came to Yancoy-
•40

750 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
ville ? A. In almost every Avay they were employed1. AH
were employed that could be trusted with employment.
Q. How long had tliat been the case up to the time Kirk
came with this expedition ? A. Ever since the surrender.
Q. The two races you aay were living harmoniously together l
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know of any instance to your knowledge oi any
colored man complaining of being injured to a magistrate or
other authority, asking for redress and its being refused ? A.
I do not. There Avere magistrates there of both colors.
Q. You had a colored magistrate in the town ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Who Avaa the other magistrate ? A. Mr. J. W. Stevens
was tho magistrate at one time ; Mr. Bowe Avas a magistrate
after that.
Q. There avb* a magistrate of each complexion fn the toAvn-
ahip where the court house was situated ? A. Yes, sir..
Q. Did Mr. Bowe succeed Mr. Stevens aa a magistrate f A.
Yos, air, ho Avaa appointed magistrate.
Q. Stato Avhether you hoard any conversation* betAvowi
Kirk und his men with regard to tho treatment of tho citizens
on oortain occasions? A. I did on woverul oocasioiiH.
Q> State anything of tho kind that you hoard? A. Upon
his arrival when Mr, Boavo aviis arrested, as I said just now,
thero av»h great ooufiuion in tho houso, and throats were
made in thero by Kirk and this man Banner that if therowas
any resistance offered to their authority they Avould shoot tho
citizens, the last one of thom, and bum tho- town.
Q. Who said that? A. I heard that spokeit by Kirk when
he arrested Bowe.
Q. He Avould shoot the prisoners and bum the town if there
Avas any resistance ? A. Shoot the prisoners and the other
citizens too. I heard that spoken by Kirk when he arrested
Mr. BoAA'e.
Q. Was anything said about burning? A. Yes, sir, he
would burn up the toAvn I heard that repeated several
times by the men. I heard him make that threat in a public

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. nOLDEN. 751
speech on the square in the toAvn on tho Saturday before the
election. Q. What was the subject of his harangue? A. His sub
ject was Kuklux and rebels. He said that he was not a speak
ing man, that he was a working man and he came there to
put down the Kuklux and he intended to stay there until the
last child^was grey, but what he would do it. He remarked
ho had got a court constituted and he would try them, and if
they were found guilty they would swing, and if there was
any resistance offered to his authority that the last one in the
toAvn Avould go up, and the toAvn Avould go. up Avith them, I
heard that in a public speech.
Q. In this oratory did you hear what he said he
would do with the women and children ? A. They were
classed with the others, he would shoot them. too.. That was
said by his men on repeated occasions.
Q. They would shoot tho prisoners and the citizens, burn
doAvn tho town and kill the Avomen and children? A. That
Avaa tho general remark. Part of it avus uttered at the time
ho urroatod Mr. Bowe. The next was moro explicit Avlion ho
mado his speech. I hoard it uttered by him almost any time,
Whenovor ho became excited about anything ho Avould make
that remark, and not only myself but almost all tho prisonoi'8
heard it.
Q. Did you have any United States troops there before
Colonel Kirk came ? A. We did. They came there about ten
days before Colonel Kirk did.
Q. What waa tho character of those troops. A. They be
haved themselves very well, aa far as I know..
Q. How about the discipline and order prevailing among
them ? A. They stayed in their tents and didn't move with
out permission, and they beliaved very respectfully.
Q. Respectfully to the citizens? A. You would not know
except by their uniforms that thoy were not citizens.
Q. On good terms with them? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did those United States troops commit any trespass or

'752 OOUBT OF 1MPEAOHMENTS.
rpillago or plunder? A. I cannot, of my own knowledge, say
tthat they did.
Mr. BOYDEN. State from your .own knowledge. Wo
.don't want any guessing.
Q. How was it with Kirk'a men ? A. fftthink they did.
Q. I Avant to know whether they entered the gardens or
.orchards or otherwise and helped themselves to jvhat they
wanted ? A. I speak of my own knowledge when I state that
thoy entered my garden, and Mr. Yancey's garden, and stole
the vegetables and fruit.
Q. What was the general behavior of theso troops of Kirk's.'?
,A. Very bad.
«Q. In what respect? A. In almost any reajaect you may
-.call for.
Q. Specify some ofthem. A. They were very jprofane. I
have never heard auch swearing in my life before or since they
.arrived. Q. State whether or not they kept it up. A. They kept it
up all the time publicly wherever they went, and upon every
and all occasions. They used the most indecent language and
epithets, both in the sight of malea and femalea, that I have
ever heard.
Q. Profane and obscene •? A. Yes, sir, in every conceiv
able Avay.
Q. State Avhether you saAv .them -expose .themselves in public
places ? A. I did.
Q. Where? A. At the public well .on the public square in
the town.
Q. A Avell at Avhich there is a pump ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. State what you saw ? A. I saw one of them I know
stripping himself and washing in thejmblie square. He pulled
off his pants and washed tbem — -his drawers,. and then he took
his shirt off and washed that.
Q. In a prominent place where it could lhe seen by the
families of the citizens around? A.1 Yes, sir, in the public
square Of the town. I suppose there was a hrilf'cdozen families

TRIAE OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 75lf"
or more whoso doors aro in plain view of the pump, and it waa'
in a public business part of tho town. The public square may
liave an acre and a half to two acres of ground or moro.
Q. Did Kirk state or not Avhen he mado theso terrible threats-
to the peoplo whether he had any orders upon tho subject, andl
if so, from Avhom ? A. Yes, sir, I heard him applied to several'
times to parolo mon on- bond, or to otherwise release them.-
Ho replied that ho could not dene, that he liad orders from
Governor Iloldon to hold theim all subject to his order. Ho
told me myself that ho had orders from Govornor Holden to.
arrest every man he had arrested.
Q. Did he Bay he had order's to treat the citizens of the town
in that way ? A. He said that the Governor's orders were that
if there Avas a hair of his mens' heads hurt, the prisoners and:
men Avere to be shot down — the women and children were to'
be butchered, and the toAvn burnt. He was in an excited state
when he spoke.
Q. [By the Chief Justice] Had he been drinking when he
said that ? A. No, sir, I do not mean that. He was mad ; ho
said it in a passion.
Q. Theso United States troops had been there ton or twelve
days before Kirk came ? A. One company hadj. and another
company came about the night succeeding,' tho time when the
prisoners Avere taken away.- I think, they left there Satur
day eA'ening — and the next day anothen company came under
command of Major Smith.-
Q. Where were theso troops on the day of the election ?
A. In their camp, so far as^I'know.
Q. Where were Kirk's* men on the day of election ? A.
Parading the streets a portion' of the time. Their tents were
inside of the court houso railing — it was full of tents and a por
tion ofthe soldiers wer^ihithere — but there was a guard or de
tachment that were parading the streets in Bquads of a half-
dozen at a time with tlieir bayonets on their muskets, and they
were going all through1 the crowd on the day of election.
Q,. Were, they, organized, in. squads? A., They were. in.

754 OOUBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
squads under command of an officer — they seemed to be in
command of a sergeant.
Q. The election was held at the court house ? A. No, sir,
it was held under the porch of Mr. Albert Mitchell who keeps
a grocery store. The court house was occupied by the troops.
Q. These soldiers had their camp inside the court house in-
cloaure, but the squads were parading about the public square
and elsewhere, Avherever they wanted to go. A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know whether detachmenta were Bent off to su
perintend the polls at other places ? A. I paw them coming
in, and I was informed by their officers that 
Mr. SMITH. Wo object to that,
Mr. GRAHAM. We insiat that it waa a part of the outrage
that the troopa wero aent to attend the election in the different
precincta bb well as having thom about the place where the
election was held at the court house.
Mr. SMITH. That is not our objection. It is attempting
to provo the declaration of thoBo men as to Avhat transpired na
a part of tho res gestrn : It is only In tliat view that any proof
has boon admitted as to tho conduct ot tho troopa and thoir
general liohavior. When they undertake to stato what took
place narratively It is not competent to show that ono of thom
aaid ho had boon off at a distance to accomplish somo purpoao.
Mr. GRAHAM. Wo think It la competent to show anything
the men said while they were acting under military orders.
¦ They Avero detached and sent off and returned after the election.
It is competent to show the object of their leaving.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. It is very clear you can ask him
Avhat was sard or done.
By Mr. Graham,
Q. State whether you heard anything said as to Avhere they
Avere going? A. I saw them start out the day before the elec
tion to various parts of the county, in various directions.
Q. Did some of the troops go towards Milton ? A. They went
in the direction of the different precincts in the county, but they
had to tako the same roads in leaving the town. They divided

TRIAL OF AA'IXLIAM W. HOLDEN. 755
when they got out of the village I saw detachments going in
each direction on that day and they returned the next day.
There were eight detachments.
Q. That ia the number of your townships? A. No sir, there
are nine townships.
Q. Eight besides the one in which the court house stands ?
A- There ore nine townships, and there Avas a detachment for
every toAvnshipas far as my recollection extends. Let me cor
rect that statement ; there was no detachment .sent to one
precinct, that was Pelham. I do not know that of my OAvn
knoAvledge. Cross examination.
By Mr. BOYDEN,
O,. You Avere asked if you knew of any process being applied
for by any person, and that process refuaed, and you said yon
did not? A. Yea air, I aaid ao.
Q. Do you knoAV of any being applied for at all — have you
any personal knoAvledge of one being applied for ? A. Yes, sir.
Q, 1 Ioav many? A. I don't recollect Iioav many.
Q. Mention ono Avkieh you recollects A. I do not know
that I can givo you the title of tho case of any ono.
•Q. What sort of process do you mean was applied for — civil
or criminal? A. Both.
Q. Mention one criminal application that Avas mado at any
time during that year t A. I recollect one. Mr. Griffith, tho
sheriff of tbe county, BhoAvod me a process — ¦
Q. I am talking about the application to a magistrate or judgo
for a process. Do you knoAV of any such application, yourself
being present 1 A. I was not "present when the application
was made.
Q. You know of no application being made for any process —
any criminal process? A- Have never been present when one
was made. . ,
Q. Where were you on the day Mr. Stevens was murdered ?
A.. I was at home. . ,  ,

790 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS,*.
Mr. MERRIMON: I object to the question as it has-notc
bben proved that Stevens was murdered.
Mr. BOYDEN. Wo understand that we have a right to .
put the question in the form we have on the cross-examination..
Q. Did you soo Mr. Stevens after he was murdered? A. I
did not.
Q. Where were you on that day ? A. I was in the town at
home. Q. You didnrt see his body tha*; day or the next day ? A. .
I saw him alive that day.
Q. You didn't see him after he was dead ? A. No, sir.
Q. Where wore you the next day ? A. Part of the day I
Avas in town, at home.
Q. Were you in the count house at all the next day ? A.I,
think not,
Q. How did it happen that y«u didn't go to the.court house ?
A- I did go.
Q. Did you go inside ? . A. I was in the vestibule of the
court house, but didn't' go inside.
Q. Did you have any of the keys on that driy ? A. I only •
had my office key. .
Q. You had your office key ? A. It was at my house — itr
was in my possession, I did not have it . at- that time in my-
pocket. Q. Where was the key the day fie is said to have been mur
dered? A., I had it in my possession — in my. pocket part »f.'
the time. I Was at home part of the day, and at the clerk's «
office a part of the time
Q. What portion of the time were you in the clerk's office ? V
A. A short time in the evening...
Q. Wore yon in there when thbteppaklngwaa going on ? A..
Iwas In there just before the Bgoaking^ commenced. I re
mained during the timo the .. mooting lAvaa (..being held until it
bi'oko up, and moat of the people loft.
Q. Wore you in youv,offlaejuBt.ibeforo.thbt«poflking begun,)
A.. .Yes, ,suu,

TRIAL'.OF WIXLIAMW.'. HOLDEN. 757'
Q. And you continued there in your office ? A. Yes, sir,
and then went in the court house.
Q. What time did you go upstairs? A. At the timo the
speaking commenced, between one and tAvo o'clock.
Q. How long did you remain up > stairs/ A. During the
whole of the meeting.
Q. When did you go into the office again ? A. After the
meeting was over. . I stayed there until the whole crowd left.
There was not more than five or six-in the court building when.
I left. Q. Did you see Mr. Stevens in the meeting ? A. I did.
Q. How long did he continue in.the meeting ? A. About :
half the time.
Q. Did you see him leave ? A. Iidid.
Q. Who left just before him, or just after him ? A. I haAre <
no recollection who did, my attention was not directed to it,
Q. Don't you recollect that Mr. Wylie went out just before-
oi* just after him 2 A. I recollect that Mr. Wylie did go out,
but Avhether just before or just aftenl do not recollect. Mr.
Wylie and myself were sitting close together, when he left to
go out. I think it was sometime bbfore Mr. Stevens left.
Q. You thiihk it Avas before he left? A. . Yesy-sir;
Q. Define"the length of. time -ass near r as you can? A. T.
cannot. Q. Was it 5' minutes- or anlfoun?? A. 15 or 20 minutes I
reckon. My. attention., was.- not ; directed to it and I did not-
look at the thmer.
Q. Wh'atttimei^ofitho day do you think it was when Mr.-
Stevens -left?? AV I reckon ¦ it was somewhere about 4 o'clock, ,
it may have been beforei or, after but it was about that time.
Q. Did you hear any violent denunciation of Stephens at
the meeting ? A. No. sir.
Q. Didn't a man by tho namo of Hodnett? A. He de
nounced him.
Q, What did ho say about him? A. Ho had an aot of the
legislature in hit handi, which showed .that hojiod.j'ocolvodjia*

758 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
appropriation for payments of money mado to him, for, a cer
tain service called the spy service, and that is all he said.
Q. Did he not denounce him for engaging in that business ?
A. He called the attention of the people to it.
Q. Did he speak of it being proper or improper? A. He
didn't say Avhether it was improper or not. He called upon
the people, and remarked that "your representative haa re
ceived so much for this Bpy service."
Q. Didn't that excite a good deal of indignation against him
in tho meeting? A. I cannot say that it did.
Q. Can you say that it didn't? A. That was generally
knoAvn before Mr. Ilodnett. referred to it.
Q. Did it cause a good deal of unkind feeling against him ?
A. No, sir, I do not think it did, I had heard it spoken of by
n number. ,
Q. You Bay it Avas generally known ? A. It Avas contained
in tho auditor's report.
Q. You had scon it in tho auditor's report? A. Yos, sir,
and I had hoard several others apeak of it.
Q. After tho mooting Avas over, you wont into your offlco?
A. Yea, air, I remained there about twenty minutes, as far as
I can recollect.
Q. Did you seo Mr. Stevens after he left tho court houso?
A. No, sir.
Q. You saw him leave the court room ? A. Yes, sir, I saiv
him get up from his seat, walk to the head of the stairs, and I
have not seen him since.
Q. You cannot tell who followed immediately after ? A. I
cannot, my attention was not called, I was listening to tho
speaking. Q. Do you know the room his body was found in? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. How near that room was your office ? A. I suppose that
it was about as far as from here to the door of the house ot
representatives. . , -.- ..,,.-
Q. What was the next office to the place -where the body

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 759
was found ? A. That was the room knoAvn as the grand jury •
room. Q. For what was it used generally at that time ? A. It was
not used for any purpose generally, but on that day it was used
by the tax assessors.
Q. I understand you that the room adjoining the one in
which Stevens' body Avaa found was occupied on that day by
the tax commissioners ? A. Yes, and had been for two or
tliree days previously.
Mr. GRAHAM. I beg leave to interrupt the examination
at this point. I don't see any purpose in it. I have not
objected to proof that Stevens was killed, but I do not suppose
that this court is sitting for the purpose of ascertaining avIio
killed him. That belongs to another tribunal; hence I con
ceive that all this proof in reference to the situation of the
rooms about the building ia irrelevant to any Inveatlgiitlon that
designed to bIioav Avhether or not thoro wub insurrection In tho
county of CiihavoII.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. Tho presiding offieor is of tho
opinion that tho proof In relevant if it is offered with tho vIoav
of impeaching the AvitnenB,
Mr. HOYDEN. That Ih ono of tho object*. But Bir, it Ih
alleged on tho part of tho respondent that mon Avere not pun
ished in that county for violations of tho Iuav. It is alleged
also, that this man Stovena avon murdorod in the court houso
in the day time Avhen the building Avas fillod Avith mon and
publio speaking was going on. in a publio offieo whore busi
ness had been transacted, with only a thin partition betAveen
the apartment and tho rooms adjoining, and we think there must
have been numerous persons thero Avho Avere well aAA'are that*
this murder was committed Avhile this meeting was being held.
We allege also, that no indictment has been presented, and no
punishment has been inflioted against the perpetrator and
we insist that the fact that a man could be thus murdered
under the circumstances which I have stated and has gone
unpunished is a strong circumstance to establish the fact that

7330 ' COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS*.
there was a determination on the part of those seoret'organi~
mtions existing to prevent any man from being punished.
who committed any of these orimes against persons who were
ih favor of carrying out the amendments to the constitution,
and tho laws passed thereunder. And certainly, the testimo
ny is oorapetont to impeaoh the witness.
Mr. GRAHAMi I do* not see,' Mr. Chief Justice, that it
Has any tendency in -that directions It is not proved that Ste-
A-ena Avas killed that day and, so far' as I have heard it is not
proved that he was killedlthat night. If I may be permitted
to Bay what I understand! will come out on i cross examination,.
Stevens disappeared! att four, or fi\re o'clock in the afternoon
and that his body was found the next morning; and whether ••
lie was killed in this room or not does not appear. But if it
did appear that he Avas killed there, I do not see what occu-r
pancy of the next room has to do with it. The question is-
whether there was an insurrection in the county of Caswell-
To go into every breach of the law or into every act of violence -
is to protract this investigation to such an extent as to- make it
likely Ave shall never get through Avith iti.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding offieerr is of the
opinion that the evidence ought to be heard. It tends to sup
port the allegation . that there/ was this state of things in the
county of Caswell, that the civil authority was unable to pro
tect life and property. . Ifc.eah .be offered ito show the existence
of that state of things-.
Senator JONES. I dislike,' MK Chief Justice, to take any
part in regard to deciding upon the admissibility of the testi
mony, but it seems to me that if this species of proof is admit—
•ted it will extend the investigation to an interminable length.
And, sir, being responsible in part for the consumption of tho
publio time I ask that the question of other admisaibility of the
proof be put to the Senate
Senator EDWARDS. I second the motion. Tlie inquiry/
here is Avhether or not tho respondent is guilty of the charges-
preferred against him. in the articles of, impeachment. Howv

'TBIAL CF 'WILLIAM WV. 'HOLDEN. 7$
(this inquiry tonds'to shed any light upon that subject I do not
porcolvo. Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. Tho ..Senator has no right to
discuss the question unless by;pomriiBBlon.of tho Sonate.
Mr. BRAGG. And there is this further consideration, Mr.
Chief Justico : Questioneihave been asked, which we forbore to
¦ object to, hoping they would take, some* direction which would
make the examination relevant. !But if the time of this body
is to bo devoted to .an inquiry as to whether Frank Wylie
killed Stevens, where is this thing .to end ? I cannot see the
propriety of trying that case in this ^proceeding unless it is to
have some effect before this body. That crime has been here
tofore fully investigated, and the evidence laid before the public
authorities in Caswell, and it is not a matter to be investigated
here as to who was the perpetrator of thatimurder. This court
is not setting as an examining court to determine who are guilty
•of individual crimes. This is a court for the trial of officers on
, articles. of impeachment.
A sufficient number seconding the call for a decision by the
: sen ate,
The CHIEF JUSTICE put the- question on admitting the
question propounded by the counsel for the respondent, and it
^\was decided in the negative by the following vote :
Those who voted in the affirmative are :
"Messrs. Barnet*, Bellamy, Eppes, IHawkins, Hyman, King,
Lehman, McCotterand 01ds^9.
Those who votod 'in tho negative are :
Messrs. Albright, Allen, Battle, Brown, Cook, Council,
Cowles, Crowell, Edwarda, [Flemming, Gilmer, Graham, of
Alamance, Graham,. of Orange, Jones, Latham, Ledbetter, Lin
ney, Love, Mauney, McClammy, Merrimon, Morehead, Rob
bins, of DaAudson, Robbins, of Rowan, Skinner, Speed, Troy,
Waddoll, Warren and Worth— 80.
Q. I askyou Mr. Brandon, if you havo any knowledge of
any secret political , organization in tlie oounty of, Caswell no
.matter by what name thoy are called.? .A. Yes, sir.

702 COUBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. J Tell us what you know about it? A. A society c&llen
the Loyal League, that is all I know.
Q. Is that a secret society? A. They called it a secret
society. '
Q. What do you' know about it? A. I know nothing
about it.
Q. Answer the other question— do you know of any secret
political organization known by tho name of the Kuklux Klan,
the White Brotherhood, Constitutional Union Guard, the Invis
ible Empire, or any other secret political organization ? A.
No, air, none except the one I referred to juat now.
Q. You eay you do not know that ? A. No, I have not
seen that in operation.
Q. Are their meetings Becret ? A. I understand they are.
Q. I ask your knowledge ? A. I havo no knowledge of it
at all. I havo scon them on their parados and I havo soon
thom in thoir processions with their regalia on and drum
and tjfe.
Q. Thoy Avoro not concealing tho fact that thoy belonged to
It ? A. I havo talked with thom about it, and thoy have given
me to understand that while these displays in tho streets wero
publlcno ono knew anything about the business transacted m
their meetings except themselves. ^
Q. There was no attempt bo far aa you knew te< conceal the
feet that they belonged to- these organizations?' A. None that
I know ot.
Q. You say that you know of none of- these others ? A..
No, sir.
Q. I think I understand you to say you- didn't aee Stephens'
body ? A. I didn't aee hia body.
Q. Have you aeen any persona in disguise ? A. I never
have, sir.
Q. Do you know of your own knowledge of any colored
man being killed in the county ? A. No, sir.
Q. Do you know of any colored or white man in the Comity

TRLiL CF AVTLLIAM W. HOLDEN. 763
being whipped ? A. No, sir, not to my knowledge. I can
only speak from hearsay.
Q. Have you seen the body of any persons that had been
whipped shortly after he had been whipped ? A. I don't know
that I could answer that in that way — not to my knowledge I
have not. I have seen men who said they were whipped.
Q. Did you see any marks ? A. I never saw any marks.
Q. Do you know Robin Jacob ? A. I never knew him.
Q. You don't know how far he lived from Yanceyville ?
A. No, 6ir.
Q. You say you are clerk of the court ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Has there been any prosecution instituted in your court
for the murder of Stevens against anybody ? A. There is no
bill of indictment found.
Q. Has there been any bill of indictment sent ? A. Not to
my knoAvledge.
Q. Has thoro boon any bill of indictment sent for the -mur
der ot a man of tho name of Robin Jacobs ? A. Not to my
knoAvIedgo, Q. Hub thoro been any bill sent for whippings in tho county
of Caswell ? A.I think there Avas a bill for tho whipping of
three colored persons,
Q. Was it found ? A. No, sir. The witnesses Avere called
but didn't ansAver. The case is now continued.
Q. No witnesses were sent before tlie grand jury for any of
these offences that you know of? A. Not to my knowledge.
Q. Were there a number of persons bound over at the last
superior court by the judges of the supreme court to appear
at your court? a.. Yes, sir, three.
Q. Were there any bills sent against them ? A. Not to my
knowledge. Q. No bills- sent or found to your knowledge ? A. No, sir.
Q. You attended to the business of the court as clerk. A.
Yes, sir.
Q. If any such bills had beetr sent you would have known
of it. A. I suppose so.

7764 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. Did I understand you to say that Kirk said Governor
'Holden ordered him if there was any resistance, or attempt to
rescue the prisoners which he took that he should shoot men,
'women and children ? A. I said that Kirk said if a hair of his
mens' heads was hurt, or if there was any resistance to their au
thority, he had orders to shoot 'the prisoners, murder the
'women and children and burn the town.
Q. And to murder the women and children — was that his
. language 1 A. That was what he eaid — or kill them.
Q. I ask you for the exact language according to the best of
your Tecollection. A. That was it.
Q. Hevwas to murder the women and children ? A. Shoot
the prisoners, kill the men, murder the women and children
:and burn the town, that is as near his identical language as I
^can express it.
Q. Who heard 'that besides you? A. I don't know any par
ticular person. It was a general remark by him.
Q. Was it made in a public speech ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. There was a good many that heard it ? A. I should think
there Avas.
Q. Tell any one of them — I would like you to name thom?
A. I cannot refer to any particular individual.
Q. Tell us how it happened that you didn't go and see the
'body of Stevens/ A. Two reasons. I went down town after
I got my breakfast and went in the vestibule of the court
house. When I got there I found the passage crowded and
no chance to get in unless I jammed through and I didn't
care about going in particularly, and have to rush through the
crowd. Q. Did the crowd > continue there all day? A. Until the
body Avas i emoved. 'I didn't remain there all day.
Q. You only made that one attempt ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. That wasyour reason ? A. Yes, sir. ,
Q. No other treason? A. None in the world. I started in
thero but the-crowd was bo thick that I turned back, and didnit
.have anxiety<.enough to push my way through it

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W* HOLDEN. 705
Q. During that night after the meeting whore were you ?
A. I was at home.
Q. Do you know of any persons riding about on horseback
during the night f A. It waa a remarkably quiet night as far
<ia I know.
Q. You were not out ? A. No, sir.
Q. Hoav far do you live from the court house ? A. About
200 or 300 yawls.
Q. Do you knoAV anything about a guard being placed around
the court house that night ? A. Not to my knowledge.
Q. When did you first hear he was missing? A. I heard it
in the morning.
Q. You did not hear about it that night ? A. No, sir, I heard
it in the morning, I reckon about sun up.
Re-direct examination.
By Mr. Graham,
Q. How long had Stevens been dead before Kirk came ? A.
lie Avas said to have been murdered on the 21st May. Kirk
arrived there ou the 18th July.
Q. Nearly two months ? A. Yes, sir,
Q. Were thero any bills of indictment sent against any body
for the murder of Stevens- — state anything that took place at
the last term of the court on that subject. A. There were
three men bound over by the chief justice — Mr. F. A. Wylie,
Mr. James Mitchell ond Mr. Felix Roan. The papers were
handed to me by Mr, Bulla sometime during the week.
Q. Who Avas Mr. Bulla ? A. The solicitor of the circuit.
During that timo Messrs. Watt and Withers, who were the
attorneys for tho persons bound over, moved the judge to dis
charge tho prisoners, as there Avas no bill against them. The
judge called upon Mr. Bulla to know Avhether there was any
bill or not. Mr. Bulla arose and stated that he had not been
furnished with the names of any witnesses, and he knew of no
one to summon as witnesses, and that he had been informed
that the material witnesses for the state could not be found.
They had been called in another case and failed, and judg-
50 *

700 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
ment nisi had beon entered against them. Further, he
said that he had examined into tho evidence, and he
had not drawn a bill for the reason that he did not think
the grand jury would find a bill on that evidence, and conse
quently he would not draw one unless he was ordered to do
bo bv the judge, and that he had no furthor use for their being
bound over any further. The judgo then inquired if ho asked
to have them further bound, and ho said ho did not. He said
that he had examined the testimony and oven if he could find
the witnesses he didn't think there Avas sufficient testimony to
find a true bill on, and they Avere consequently discharged by tho
judge Q. This Avas a court held by Judge Tourgee ? A. That Avaa
tho language aa near as I can remember.
Q. Both tho judgo and tho solicitor, Avhat Avas tlieir poli
tics understood to be ? A. They Avoro understood to be Re
publicans. By Mr. Smith.
Q. Do you knoAV anything about Judgo Tourgoo's politics ?
A. I haA'o hoard him mako a Republican speech.
Q. Hoav do you knoiv about Mr. Bullaa ? A. I have heard
him announce himself a republican.
By Mr Graham [resuming].
Q. The solicitor said he had no evidence upon which he
could ask the grand jury to find a bill ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. He Avas asked by the judgo if he Aviahed to bind these
men for their further appearance ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. In Avhat sum had they given bail ? A. I cannot be posi
tive, but I think $5,000.
Q. They were bound to appear, and they did appear, and
the eolicitor was asked Avhether he Avished them to be further
bound, and he said he didn't, and they were discharged. A.
Yes, sir.
Q. Have you seen a public procession of the Loyal League ?
A. Yes, sir.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN, 767
Q. They had secret meetings ? A. That is what they told
me Q. Were they composed of white or colored people or both?
A. I never saw any one in thom but colored people.
Q. Colored people constitute the league ? A. Yes, bo far as
my knowledge goes. I know nothing of any except the one
in the place.
Q. Is it a political society ? A. That is what they say,
Q. Do you knoAV whether they as a mass voted the same
ticket from your observation ? A. Yes, I think they did.
Q. As to tho issuing of processes from tho superior court,
aro all tho civil processes of tho court issued from your offlco
aa clork ? A. Yob, sir,
Q. Did any colored man over apply for process who Avas en
titled to it and have it refuaed? A. No, sir.
Q. You knoAV of no instanco of refusal by any officer of tho
county? A. I know of no refusal by any ono whoso duty it
was to iasuo a process or oxocute it.
JESSE C. GRIFFITH, a witness called on behalf of the
Managers being duly sworn, testified as follows :
By Mr. Graham.
Q. State Avhere you reside, what office you hold, if any, and
Avhat is your age ? A. I reside in Caswell county, two miles
from Yanceyville I am sheriff of tho county and am fifty years
of age.
Q. How long havo you been sheriff ? A. I havo been sheriff
ten years or more, and deputy sherifi'ten years or more. I have
been altogetlier twenty years, nearly twenty-one.
Q, Are you acquainted with the people of the county, of both
complexions ? A. I am.
Q. What have been the general relations between the white
and the black peoplo of that county the last two years? A. I
think it has been a friendly relation as a general thing.
Q. State whether or not they have had contracts together,
and business relations all the time ? A. Yee, sir.

70S , COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. Woro tho colored people generally engaged in agricul
ture ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Thoy had contracts for labor and service in various ways
with the whites ? A. Yes, sir, some worked for wages, somo
gave part of the crops, somo were renters and somo worked
about by the day. There is a great many of that class about
tho village of Yanceyville.
Q. Do you know of any of them being proscribed, cr re
fused employment, or acts of good neighborhood by reason of
their political sentiments ? A. Nary one
Q. Do you know of any instance in Avhich there has been an
attempt by force to control their votes ? A. None whatever.
Q. Or to frighten them ? A. No, sir.
Mr. SMITH. I do not desire to be captious, but it does
seem to me that every question that baa been asked by tho
counsel so far of the Avitness, will admit of an answer yes
or no.
Mr. GRAHAM. I think that when a question is put in
tho alternative form it cannot bo regarded as a loading ques
tion. Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. The truo way of asking a witness
on his direct examination is in reference to the condition of
things. Mr. GRAHAM. I submit we can ask the further question
whether or not he knows of any instance in Avhich a colored
man has been refused employment by reason of hia political
sentiments. Mr. SMITH. That I contend is a leading question. Tho
teat of Avhether a queation ia leading or not ia Avhether it aug-
gests to the witneaa tho reply that ia wanted, Avhether tho quea
tion Ib put in tho alternative form or not. I do not desiro to
charge my friend with any desiro to violate tho rule, but I
think that the true question to ask tho Avitness on his direct ex
amination is Avhat took place, what Avas said and dono, and thon
occasionally it is propor to suggest some particular topic to which
his attention may bo called.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 700
Q. You said you woro sheriff, I ask you whothor you havo
had a gonoral acquaintance with tho people of tho county or
not? A. I havo had a gonoral acquaintance with thom.
Q. I havo asked you alao whether or not you had known any
instanco of a colored man being denied employment or other
wise mistreated by reason of his political sentiments ? A. I
knoAV of no instance of that sort.
Q. I ask you Avhether or not theso colored people wero
usually engaged in agriculture ? A. Yes.
Q. And Avhether or not contracts betAveen them and tho
whites as to business ? A. Thero were contracts between them
of various sorts. Somo worked for wages, some gavo half of
tho crop, aonio rented Iioubcb and Avorkcd about by tho day.
Q. Stato Avhether or not thero has been any instance of resis
tance to tho hiAV for a long period. A. Not at all, none
whatever. Q. As sheriff have you or not found it necessary to tako
assistance with you to make arrests ? A. Not at all.
Q. Arc you a collector of the taxes ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Has there or not been any resistance to the collection of
the state tax or United States tax ? A. No resistance to tho
collection of the stato and county revenues or the United. States
tax. I have had the funds placed in my hands frequently to
pay the taxes of persons avIio lived in places remote from the
court house
Q. This killing of Stevens, when did it occur? A. The
21st May, it Avas said to be
Q. Did any United States troops como to the county after
wards ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. What time? A. Thoy came there, I think, about tho
Oth or 10th July.
Q. Who was their commander t A. Major Rodnoy, and
Captain Fiold.
Q. Stato whether anything passed botweon you and theso
commanding officers upon thoir arrival shortly afterwards, and
what it was? A. Theyarrivod at Yancoyvillo on Saturday

770 COUBT OF IMPEACHMENTS".
evening. Major Rodney was in a buggy with a gentleman
from Danville, Mr. Chambers. I was acquainted with Mr.
Chambers. I was sitting in a crowd and Mr. Chambers called
me out of the croAvd and introduced me to Major Rodney.
Mr. SMITH : I do not understand what this has to do with
the matter on trial.
Mr- GRAHAM. We desire to show Avhat this military
officer's view ot hia duty was, and to prove that Avhen he ar
rived ho went to tho sheriff and told him that he had come to
aid him in tho diechargo of hia duties if ho should need a mili
tary force.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. Tho presiding officer lo ot tho opinion
that tho testimony Is competent.
Tho WITNESS. After tho usual salutations, Major Rodney
remarked to mo that ho had como Avith somo troops, and wm
ordered to report to mo to assist mo In tho execution of thy
law. I politely replied that I didn't think that I would havo
any need of his ecvvlces, that I could execute any precept In
my hands without any assistance I found Major Rodney to
be very much of a gentleman.
Q. Wero you at Yancoyvillo on the day of tho arrival of
Kirk? A. I Avas.
Q. The United States military arrived on the Oth? A. Tho
United States troopa came on Saturday, and the next Monday
Aveek Kirk came there, the 18th July. Major Rodney camo
there tho Saturday week before
Q. Will you state to the court what took place upon Kirk's
arrival ? A. There Avas a public meeting called for that day.
General Leach and General Scott were to make speeches that day.
They Avere the candidates for congress. We were expecting
Kirk on that day. The speaking waa fixed for one o'clock. I
Avent down with General Leach and General Scott from the hotel,
and he asked me to make a proclamation tor the audience to as
semble I made the proclamation, and very soon after the court
house was surrounded by armed men. It was said that no
body was allowed to go out. I went down below, tbe coin-

TRIAL OF AVILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 771
room was up stairs. When I got down I found the coutr
house all surrounded by armed men. I saw a negro point me
out to Kirk. I didn't know who Kirk was at that time but
I afterwards ascertained Avho he was, and he walked up to
me with his pistol cocked, and with three or four men, and
told me I was their prisoner. I asked him by what authority,
he says, "D — n you, come on here, you are my prisoner." I
remarked to him that better men than I had been taken pris
oners. Then he carried me into the room Avith Alamance
prisoners. There Avere six or seven men in the room Avhich
Avas tho one in Avhich Steven's Avas murdered or hia body waa
found in. I Avaa in there a short timo when he carried me into
another room by myself. Somo one of Kirk'a men, I don't
knoAV Avhich, told them to search mo and tako my anna. I
told him I had nono but Avhat God Almighty gavo mo
Homo ono of thom thou aaid, " Tako him out of hero." Thoro
Avoro throe or four of hia men—and thoy carried mo then Into
this othor room and sat my down.
Q, Sat you down thero ? A. In a chair. I asked Kirk
who ho Avas and what hia mi mo avus, and ho eaid hia name Avas
Colonol Kirk.
Q. Ho carried you into this room ? A. Yes, sir, I eat there
sometime. Presently they commencod bringing in prisoners,
Judge Kerr, Dr. Roan, Mr. Hill, Thomas J. Wommack and
Bazilla Graves.
Q. They brought in these gentlemen one after another as
they arrested them in the room in which you were? A. Yes,
sir. After staying there sometime and while in there they
brought in Mr. Bowe. Before they brought him in thero
seemed to be a considerable disturbance at the court house,
and after a while they came in Avith Mr. Bowe, making a
fuss. Some four or five of Kirk's men commenced cursing
and abusing him. They were around the windows on the
outside, and they called him a d-— d old Kuklux son of a
b — h. One of them said he had torn his coat and called
out to shoot the d — d old Kuklux son of a b — h. After a

772 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
while quiet was restored and then Mr. Jones proposed to Kirk ic
carry us up into the court house. The day was very warm and
tho room wo were in Avas small. He assented and took us up
atairs. After a while thoy brought in Mr. Wylie and put him
ih a room with ub.
Q. They brought him in from the country ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. You were detained a prisoner Iioav long ? A. Nearly
five Aveeks. I was arrested the 18th of July and Avas released
here the 20th of August. I stayed at Yanceyville nearly four
Aveeks. On a Saturday they carried me from Yanceyville to
Company Shops, and I remained there until Monday. Then
they carried us doAvn to Graham, and we stayed in Graham
court house until Thursday, I suppose betAveen 11 and 12
o'clock Avhen Ave left and got here at 3 o'clock. We were then
turned over to Colonel Clarke, and we remained in his charge
from Thursday until Saturday about 10 o'clock.
Q. Was any oviJence brought against you ? A. None Bir.
Q. Hoav many prisoners Avero thero then ? A. Thero Avas Mr.
Boavo, Judge Kerr, Mr. Hill, Dr. Yancey, Bazilla GraA'es
Thomas J. Wommack, Yancey Jones, Adolphus G. Mooro>
.lames T. Mitchell, Joseph It. FoavIci* and myself. No, there
was Dr. Roan and Robert Roane.
Q. What became of you Avhen you wero brought before Judge
Brooks, or tho chief juatice ? A. Wo Avero brought before the
chief justice I have got the discharge here.
Q. State Avhether or not your petitions Avere withdrawn? A.
I understood our petitions for a habeas corpus were AvithdraAvn.
Q. Did any ono take out a state's Avarrant against any body
and if bo, avIio made the affidavit ? A. I didn't soe an affidavit,
Q. Who Avoro tho warrants against ? A. I think the Avar-
rants Avoro against —
Q. By Mr. Boyden, Did you see thoin ? A. No, sir.
Q. Was Mr. Wylie in that company ? A. Yea, air.
Q. Waa he bound over for any trea8on or insurrection against
the government ? A. He waa bound to appear at the fall term
of the euperior court of CasAvell,

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 773
Q. What for ? A. For the alleged murder of Stevens as I
understood him.
Q. Waa thero any proceeding or charge against him as an
insurgent or traitor to tho government ? A. I don't knoAV
about the charges against him. I saw no charge agahiBt him.
Q. Did you hear anything said at Caswell at the time ho
AA-as discharged about any bucIi suggestion ? A. Not a word,
I Avas present when Mr. Wylie, Mr. Roan and Mr. Mitchell
were discharged.
Q. Is all that Mr. Brandon described in reference to that
correct ? A. I think so.
Q. Do you know of Kirk making a speech ? A. I could
not hear Avhat be said to the crowd assembled around him. I
AA-as in prison, and he Avas outside of the enclosure of the court
house. I saw him and Yates both, but I could not hear what
they said.
Q. Did you hear anything he said to the prisoners inside of
the house at any time ? A. I did. He came up there, and
said that he Avas threatened Avith an attack outside by tho cl — d
Kuklux, and that if he avbb attacked he -would kill tho prison
ers, destroy the Avomcn and children, and burn up the d — d
toAvn. Ilo mado those declarations.
Q. Did ho not uso any violent language toAvards the prison
ers? A. Yes, air.
Mr. Boyden. That is certainly leading.
Q. State Avhether you hoard any violent language, or saw-
any violent conduct on tho part of Kirk toAvards these prisoners
at any time, if so, describe the scone ? A. On more occasions
than one he would come up and curse them for being Kuklux
and so on — for being d — d Kuklux. On one occasion he cursed
a man of the namo of Weedon, who Avas a prisoner from Ala
mance, terribly, and told him he was the d — dest scoundrel in
there. Weedon had said nothing that I could see. Weedon
was walking across the court house for exercise, with his hands
that way, [indicating] Avhen Kirk commenced cursing him and

774 COUBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
saying that he was the d— dest scoundrel in there, and that he
was making Kuklux signs.
Q. Kirk understood them ? A. I suppose so.
Q. State whether or not on any other occasion there was
any violent language used to any particular prisoner or to the
Avhole of them, and if so, what it was ? A. He Avould fre
quently curse the prisoners. When he seemed to be in a pet
he Avould come up there and take his cursing out on the
prisoners. Q. Do you remember any particular occasion when he ap
prehended an attack ? A. That is Avhat I stated Avhen he
came up, and said he would kill the prisoners, destroy the
women and children, and burn up the damned town in the
event of the attack taking place,
Q. Did ho or not state that ho Avas going to do' this of him.
soil', or that ho had orders? A. That he had orders to do it.
Q. Who Irom? A. I don't knoAV, I don't recollect that ho
Maid from avIioiii tho ordors iaauod.
Q. Did you soe thoso troops from your windoAV? A. I did,
Q. Stato what their behavior avus, whothor it avus orderly
or disorderly? A. Very disorderly I should say.
Q. In Avhat particular ? A. Thoir language avus very pro
fane and obscene
Q. Was their language in such a tone that it Avould reach
tho peoples houses or not ? A. Yes, air, they were all over
tho village. We could see around at a considerable distance,
seo them frequently in peoples gardens. I Avas up there one
day when Kirk's attention Avaa called to the fact that they were
in Dr. Roan's orchard. He called them back and sent a guard
after them. They came back and they emptied something
like half a bushel of apples, and you could see them come in
most any time with fruit and vegetables. He didn't seem to
have any restraint upon them at all.
Q. How was it with respect to the United* States troops ? A.
They behaved themselves very respectfully.
Q. These men ot Kirk's pillaged in gardens. A. I have no

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 775
charge against the United States men, they were very orderly
and well behaved.
Q. State whether or not there was any indecency or ex
posure of their persons about the court house. A. They were
indecent. Q. In what respect ? A. In exposing their persons.
Q. In public places ? A. Yes 6ir, in public view near the
pump, and in view of Mr. Johnson's and Mrs. Neill's dwellings.
Q. These gentlemen had females in their families there ? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. Hoav many magistrates had you in the toAvnship includ
ing Yanceyville ? A. Mr. Stevens' Avas a magistrate and Mr.
John E. Cook was a magistrate, and Mr. Bowe Avas a magis
trate after Mr. Stcvcn'a death. lie Avas appointed his succcesor.
Q. What Avaa tho complexion of the magistrate Cook? A.
Black. Q. Stato Avhoth»r or not be did a good deal of tho busino68 ?
A. Yos, a great portion of tho business.
Q. Do you know of any application being mado to him or to
Mr. Boavc, or to any other justico of tho pcaco for any process
against persons for tho murder of Stevens? A. Noapplica-
lion that I knoAV of.
Q. After tho finding of tho body of Stevens avoi-o you thero ?
A. lAvas.
Q. Stato Avhether or not there avus any inquest ? A. The moi n<
ingrifter SteA-ens vas said to bo found Dr. Yancey, the coroner,
sent for me. A message came to my house an hour by tho
Bun I suppose, and. stated that the doctor had. sent for me,
that Stevens AVtts found dead in the court house that morning.
I got out my horse and Avent to Yanceyville, and found Dr.
Yancey there. Ho Avas summoning a jury, and he then pro
ceeded to the inquest as soon as the juryVas organized.
Q. How long did it continue in session? A. Until about
12 o'clock that Sunday, then they adjourned to raeeti at 3
o'clock to give time to send for some witnesses. Thes£ wit-
nesses came and they met again and remained in session until

776 -COUBT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
near night, and they then adjourned to meet on Monday.
They did meet on Monday, and had other witnesses sent for
and we wero in session pretty much all day on Monday.
We then adjourned to meet on Thursday. We met again on
Thursday, and held a session a good part of the day.
Q. The jury returned a verdict ? A. On Thursday.
Q. Did any one to your knoAvledge make an accusation
against any other person of being the murderer of Stevens?
A. No, sir, none Avhatever.
Q. Do you knoAV of your own knoAvledge of any charge
being preferred against anybody ? A. No, sir.
Q. Did you hear the proceedings described by Mr. Bran
don, at the last term when a Avarrant of commitment, which
had sent Wylie and others Avas before the court was passed
upon ? A. Yes, sir, i Avas in court then.
Q. Do you or not concur Avith Mr. Brandon in tin t state
ment 
Mr. BOYDEN. Wo object to that.
Mr. GRAHAM. Do you Avant me to go through the en
tire statement again with this witness?
Q. [By the Chief Justice.] Was Mr. Brandon's statement
correct ? A. Yes, sir, I think his statement was correct.
Q. Do you knoAV Avhether or not Kirk had anything to do
Avith the election on the 4th or 5th August? A. He seemed
to have a good deal to do Avith it, his men marching all
through the crowd, and he appointed the commissioners to
receive the returns of the election.
Q. Did theso commissioners superintend tho voting — or was.
It to mako tho returns ? A. To mako. the returns.
Q. What commissioners did he appoint ? A. Ho appointed
Mr. Bowe, Dr. Roan and Mr. Jones. I aaw thom when thoy
wqvo counting tho Aytoa, ho scorned te bo engaged about that,
taking an Interest In it.
Q. Kirk Boomed to bo overlooking it ? A. Yos, sir.
¦ Q. Woro there any othor persons attending the election
oxcopt thoso military mon— thoBo persons appointed hy hlui—

TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 777
I mean any civil officers such as could lawfully hold an election ?
A. No, sir, those men that held the polls had been appointed
by tho county commissioners. He just seemed to be superin
tending the counting of the votes after the polls closed.
Q. And he appointed commissioners to make the return ?
A. To receive the returns from tho poll-holders. Dr» Roan, Mr.
Bowe and Mr. Jones are tho county commissioners. They
were in prison at the time of the election. While the voting
was going on, Kirk's men were around the polls pretty much
all the time
Q. How many prisoners were there in confinement who
Avere Caswell voters ? A.I think about 20.
Q. Stato whether or not you voted, or were allowed to vote ?
A. Yes, sir, we went out between a file of soldiers and voted.
Q. You have stated that these magistrates in the township of
Yanceyville were in the habit of issuing warrants and doing
business — state Avhether any persons had been arrested for in
juries to colored peoplo ? A. Yes, there was a warrant issued
by Judge Tourgee against a couple of young men, and a warrant
issued against tliree others, by Mr. SteA'ens*
Q. State whether or not they were arrested? A. They
wore Q. What disposition Avas mado of their cases ? A. The war
rant from Judge Tourgee directed me to havo them before
him at Greensboro' at chambers. I arrested the young men
and earriod thom there
Q. Any resistance ? A. Nono whatever.
Q.sDidyou tako any guard along? A. Nono at all. Ho
bound them over to tho fall term of the superior court, and
sent thom back In my charge, and authorized mo to tako justi
fied ball tor thom. I did so, and returned tho papers to tho
clork. That was tho 18th May
Q, Before Stevens disappeared ? A. Yos, sir, that was on
Friday. Tho warrant wiw placed in my hands on Saturday
boforo tho 18th, and at tho samo tlmo Mr. Stovom lusuod a
warrant nnd placod it in tho hands of my doputy, Mr. Jordan,

778 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS,
a one armed man, for the arrest of these three young men.
He arrested them, and carried them before Mr. Stevens, and
the state's witnesses didn't appear, and counsel moved to dis
charge the prisoners, Mr. Stevens bound them over to ap
pear before him on the Monday following, the 13th May. I
believe Mr. Stevens was at Greensboro' on the 13th May, when
Tourgee bound them over. On Monday they were bound
over by Mr. Stevens.
Q. There Avere two cases ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. One before Judge Tourgee, Avhere you arrested threo
men and carried them without a guard to Greensboro' ? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. And there Judgo Tourgee dealt with them by requiring
thom to enter into recognizances ? A. Yos, sir, $500 justified
security. Q. And authorized you to take the bail ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Thero wore tliree othera brought before Stevens and ho
bound thom over ? A. Thoy wero arrested by my deputy, a
one armed soldier.
Q. Did he havo any trouble in arresting thom ? A. Nono
whatever. Q. State Avhether or not any process was placed in your
handa, or in your deputy'a hands that was not executed ? A.
No, air.
Q. I mean by resistance ? A. That is what I mean by re
sistance There waa none.
Q. If the man was in the county he was arrested ? A. Yes,
Bir. Q. And Avithout force ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. State whether you heard Kirk eay that he woidd have a
military court ? A. On tAvo occasions he sent an omnibus to
get the court. At one time it was to assemble the 8th of
August, and then it was to assemble a short time afterwards.
He 6eemed to be in a fret about it because he had been prom
ised a court and it had not come.
Q, Who promised it? A. The governor I suppose.

TRIAL OF "WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 779
Q. Did ho say he had been promised a court ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did he aay by whom the promise had been made ? A .
I think he did. I think that the governor had promiaed him a
court, and that he waa acting under that promise
Q. He seemed to be a little fretted that the Court had not
come ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And did he actually send twice for the court? A. Yes,
sir, that Avas his declaration.
Q. But tho court did not come up to the time when you
were taken aAvay ? A. No, sir, after this, after the court was
to assomblo Colonel Williamson camo up to see the prisoners
ond Colonol Kirk with him. Colonel Williamson assured us
in tho prcsonco of Kirk that thero would be no military court,
ond Kirk Baid thero Avould bo. *
Q. Colonel George Williamson? A. Yes, sir,. ho assured
us omphuticully, that thero would bo no military court.
Q. Had Colonol Williamson boon to Raleigh? A. I don't
know. Wo learned that ho had boon on tho road travelling
for somo time
Q. Whon Williamson avos permitted to como in ho in
formed tho priaonora that thoro would bo no military court \
A. Colonol Williamson assured us that there would be no
military court.
(By Mr. Smith.) What else ? A. Kirk said there Avould bo
a military court. Colonol Williamson said, " I tell you there
Avill bo no court."
Q. Is that all he said? A. That is all he said that I recol
lect. Q. State while you were in priaon whether you saw a scene
between Kirk and Weedon. A . Yes, sir. I have just described
that. Q. State whether or not you saw any occasion when Weedon
was shot at or otherwise maltreated? A. I didn't see the
man when he shot. I heard tbe report and saw Weedon get
off.

780 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q, Did ho got off slowly or abrubtly ? A. He got off protty
quick— what tho soldiers call douhlo-quiok tlmo.
Q. Was that tho occasion on which Kirk cursed him ? A.
No, before that, I think Kirk oursod him.
Q. State whether or not you BaAV where any ball had taken
effect on the house ? A. I did. There is a projection of stone
around the court house, just undor the veBtibule. I saw where
the ball struck that, just where Weedon was sitting.
Q. You have said that Mr. Wylie was brought into this
prison after you were there ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. State whether or not you saAv any violence used upon
him by any of Kirk's men ? A. I cannot say that I did.
Senator Edwards moved that when this session is concluded
the c*ourt adjourn for the day.
The CHIEF JUSTICE put the question on the motion of
Senator Edwards, and it was decided in the affirmative.
Cross examination.
By Mr. Boyden.
Q. How long have you been sheriff and deputy ? A. Alto
gether about twenty-one 3rears.
Q. Continually one or the other ? Yes, sir.
Q. You say you are well acquainted in Caswell county ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Have a great many colored people left Caswell county
within the last two or three years ? A. Yes, sir, a good many
left in the last two or three years.
Q. State if you don't know that a paper was got up and
signed by the land holders and others not to employ certain
colored people? A. No, Bir, I knoAV nothing of it.
Q. You have no knoAvledge of any such paper being circu
lated in the county of CasAvell and signed by anybody ? A.
No, sir.
Q. Did you not sign such a papor ? A. No, sir, I did not.
Q. You did not sign anything resembling that? No, sir.
Q. You neither saw nor signed sueh a paper ? A. No, sir.
Q. I ask you if there was not a protty gonoral understand-

'TBIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 781
tag at one timo since the war, among landholdors and >otlior
mon -of proporty, that thqy would not emplpy any colored
pooplo avIio wero republicans ? A. No, sir.
Mr. GRAHAM. I think that the examination is going
ibeyond the limit.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer is of the
'opinion that the question comes Avithin the luile admitting
¦testimony as to the relations between the whites and the
iblacks. Q. I understand you to ansAver tlie question that you knew
•of no colored man .being refused employment on account of his
politics ? A. Of a man of that sort being refused on that
ground ?
Q. Do you know of a refusal on any ground ? A. There
.are some who on account of their bad character, find it a
.hard matter to get homes.
Q. The refusal was put on that ground ? A. There were
¦some negroes of notoriously bad character who found it a
.great task to get homes.
Q. A good many of that description ? A. Several of them.
Q. I ask if there were not a good many ? A. I suppose a
half dozen or a dozen.
Q. That is not very many ? A. That is all I know of.
Q. You knew Mr. Stevens ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. I ask if you and Mr. .Stevens did not have a serious diffi
culty about his ordering you to .arrest some one for swearing
and abusing him while he was tiying a case ?
Mr. GRAHAM. I object to the question. I do not know
Avhat this has to do Avith this matter.
Q. There was no difficulty between you and him ? A. We
had a chunk of a fight once.
Q. I mean sinco the war ? A. That was since the Avar.
Q. Did ho not call upon you whilo ho Avas in the exercise of
his authority trying a caso to arrest somebody t A. Yes, sir,
,and I did so and committed the party to jail.
Q. For what offence was that? A. Stealing.
51

732 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q.. You spoke of certain men who were taken before Judgo
Tourgee? A. Yes, air. '' • .; - •'
Q. He bound them over? A. Yea, sir.
Q. Wero there ever any bills found against them? A. I
don't think there Avere.
Q. lie j ust bound them over and that was the end of It ?
A. Thoy were rebound for appearance at the next spring term.
Q. The states' Avitnesses were not there? A. They wero
failed iiiid tailed.
(J. There Avero no witnesses? A. No, Bir.
0, They left the country ? A. I understood one went off
will) K.h'k'a men.
<,>. I ><» yon knoAV Avhether ho Avas hired? A. Joo Woin-
uvm-U A\n.' uno of the avI Incases, nnd tho hist I saw of hitn ho
wm». wiili Ivlrk, the evening that they loft Yaneoyvlllo. I have
I.. i  I.iiu'othat ho wont Avith them. Tho other Avont — I
duii't. I. now whore hula— but ho was at Dauvlllo tho last I hoard
ul' him.
(,>. I 'o.;, ou know Avhothor any ol them Avoro hired to leave
ihe ro, utryto prevent thom froiu being Avltneaaea? A. I do
j, ..I Isiiuw iinythiug about it.
(J. "I ' i : t they have gone off? A. They Avero not thero when
i lie;, \; etc ealled at court.
Q, U i,; understood they have left the country? A. Ono I
iiiului-Uiod was with Kirk's men, and tho last I heard of the
ilhor Im was at Danville-, Virginia.
<v'. There Avero some- other men bound oaxt for the murder
oi Steven-i? A. There Avere.
i,|. J Jut there Avere no Avitnesses in the case?' A. None.
Q. Nothing has been done in the caso? A. These men
were bound over.
Q. Hut there are no Avitnesses? A. No, sir.
(.,>. [iiy Mr. Graham.J The accused parties were re-bound at
the kat term? A. Yes, sir, for appearance at the next term.
(j. J Ioav soon after they were first taked up? A. Do you
mean after the warrant was issued 1

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 783
Q. When did that issue ? A. The Avarrant was issued on
Friday before the 13th ot May, and they were arrested im
mediately. Q. What time does the superior court meet in Caswell ? A.
About the 1st of April and October. ,
Q. There has been but one court since ? A. But ono court
since. Q. You say you saw the body of Mr. Stevens ? A. I did.
Q. What time in the morning did you see him ? A. I sup
pose it Avas about an hour by the sun, a messenger came and I
rode two miles.
Q. One hour by tho sun in the morning. A. Yea, sir, I rodo
tAvo mllca to tho court houso and I saAV hlni very soon after I
got there.
Q. Waa hia body in tho court houso ? A. Yoa, sir.
Q. Wero you thoro tho day boforo? A. I avus.
Q. Was thoro a public mooting thoro ? A. Thero was.
Q. Did you aeo Mr. Stevens? A. I did.
Q. Whero did you sec him? A. I saAV him. in tho court
house. Q. In AA'hat part ot it? A. Ho Avas sitting in the alalo
loading up to AA'here the judges sit.
Q. Do you mean in tho court room ? A. Yos, air.
Q. Did you see anybody talking with him ? A. I don't
know aa I did.
Q. Did you see him Ai'hen he left the court room ? A. I saw
him just as he was leaving the court down the steps.
Q. Did you see him afterwards until you 6aw him dead the
next morning ? A. I never did.
Q. What Avas the condition of the body when you saw him ?
A. He waa sitting or rather inclining with a rope around his
iieck — a stab in each side and a wound in the breast.
Q. Any appearance of blood having spirted out there? A.
Yes sir.
Q. How large was the knot around his neck ? A. It was
just like a loop— the rope was doubled.

?84 court or jmwsaoiimbnts,
Q. Drawn behind or boforo ? A. It neerned to be OAer the
.shoulder. Ono end of the rope wai not farther by his nook
ithan this [indioating ten inches in length], tho other was
Jonger, Q. Was it made fast? A. Yes, sir, tbe rope was nearly
buried. Q. In the flesh ? A. Yes, *ir.
Q. What sort of a man wa-s Stevens for efarength ? A. He
was rather a weakky man.
Q. You were in the court room when speeches were going
on ? A. Yes, sir. All the time.
Q. Was there a good deal of .clapping and shouting during
'the speeches ? A. I don't know that there was.
Mr. GRAHAM. We do not think this is competent evi
dence. There is no proof that there was any mob organized
against the government.
Mr. BOYDEN. The Managers have gone into tho question
of the soldiers going in to break up the meeting.
Mr. GRAHAM. The gentleman is mistaken, that meeting
was two months after.
Mr. BOYDEN. So it Was. I had confounded them for the
moment. Q. In this meeting ot which you have spoken, I ask if there
was not a violent denunciation made against Mr. Stevens by
Mr. Ilodnett ? A. Which meeting do you allude to ?
Q. I moan tho meeting at the time he was murdered? A.
There Avas a meeting on the 21st of May, and Mr. Ilodnett
made a speech on thait day,
Q. Was it not very bitter and denunciatory against Stevens?
A. I did not consider it so,
Q. Tell us some of it ? A. Ho called attention to the acts
of Mr. Stevens and said that he was the representative of the
county and that he had received so many dollars as a spy upon
tho peoplo and he had the report before him.
Q. I ask you if he did not denounce Stevens in very strong
language. A. I don't know as he did,

tWAf OF WltLIAM W. llOLMto f 80
Q. What did ho say besldos tho fact ? A. I don't know as
no said anything besides tho faot. He called attontion to tho
Course ho had takon,
Q. Did he say that to approve or disapprove of him in very
strong language ? A. He disapproved of it as every other
man did ; but I don't know as there' Was any bitter denun
ciation. Q. Don't you know that there was a very excited bitter feel
ing against Mr. Stevens ? A. No, sir, I dbn't know any such
thing. Q. Was there any manifestations of it att the time ? A. I
saw none.
Q. I ask you if you don't know that before dark that even
ing Stevens was missing and they Were hunting for him ?
A. No, sir, I don't.
Q. I ask you it you don't know' that the colored people stood
guard about the house that night ? A. Not of my own-
knowledge. Q. Where were you after the meeting ? A. I was at home:
Q. What time did you leave ? A. About sundown, and' I
went home, two miles.
Q. Do you say you hoard no enquiry about him before sun
down ? A. No, sir, I don't think I heard anything until next
morning about ono hour by tho sun, whon tho coroner sent for
inc. It was tho first I heard of it.
Q. I ask you if his brother was not thero, and you did not
know that he was searching and inquiring for him? A. I
have no knowledge. I have heard he was.
Q. You left about sunset ? A. A little after sunset.
Q. I will ask you the question — what political party do you
co-operate with ? A . The democratic party.
Q. I ask you if you knew of any secret political organiza
tion in the counties of Alamance or Caswell, known under
the general name of "Kuklux Klan," or the "White Brother
hood," " Constitutional Union Guard," or the " Invisible Em
pire?" A,. L know nothing of them. I have heard of tlie.

786 COURT OV IMPEACHMENTS. "
Kuklux, bnt I never heard of the others until Kirk come there
to Yanceyville. There is a league there, and that may be the
Constitutional Union Guard.
Q. You are inclined to think that they are ? A. I would
not be surprised if they were, but I don't know the fact.
Q. Is that a secret organization, or do they parade publicly ?
A. They parade in public and meet in secret — that is, they tell
mo so. I Avas never in their meetings.
Q. But they do not deny they belong to it t A. No, sir.
Q. But Ave are enquiring about organizations to which men
do not admit they belong ? A. I don't know anything about
them. Q. Do you know of any whipping of colored men in the
county of Caswell ? A. Not of my own knowledge. I saw
marks on these men at Greensboro'.
Q. Who wero they? A. Joe Wommaok, Sam Patton and
Smith Pinnix.
Q. Did they look as if they had been pretty severely whip
ped ? A. Thoy were pretty smartly marked.
Q. Do you knoAV of any others? A. Not of my OAvn
knoAvledge. Q. Have you seen marks upon any of them f A. No, sir.
Q. Did you know of Robbin Jacobs? A. No, sir.
Q. You did not see his dead body ? A. No, sir.
Q. Do you know Avhether there was an inquest in that
county over a man by the name of Robbin Jacobs ? A. None
that I knoAV of. It aves several days after that occurred that
I heard of it. It was near the Person line.
Q. You have spoken of the room in which the body of
Stevens Avas found, were you in that room on the day of the
meeting ? A. I was not.
Q. At no time of the day ? A. No, sir.
Q. Were you in there betAveen four and five o'clock — in that
room ? A. No, sir.
Q. You did not go out of that room where the meeting
Avas until four or five o'clock ? A. I did not.

TRIAL 0» WILHAM W. HOLDEN. 787
Q. Did you see a man by the name of Hemphill tlicre ? A .
Yes, sir. f
Q. Did you have a talk with him ? A. I did, •
Q. What was it? A. In regard to a horse that lie had.,
Q. Is that all ? A . Yes, sir, he -had a writ of replevin.
Mr. GRAHAM. This examination is all very interesting,
but it strikes me that the court might be more profitably em
ployed than listening to it.
Q. Did you have any conversation with Hemphill about
Stevens? A. Not at all.
Q. Did you seo Hemphill come out of that room ? A. I d id
not. Q. Did you see any one come out? A. I did not.
Q. Wore you down in the passago there at any timo avIkmi
speaking was going on?. A. No, sir, I was not. 1. wuh in
tho mooting all tho timo.
Q. You did not loavo until tho meeting broke up ? A. No.
sir. I mado tho proclamation of tho meeting and took a seat,
behind tho clerk's desk and remained there from (hat timo
until it avus closed.
Q. Was thoro any clapping or encoring in tli>j mooting?
1. I just told you thero wus not.
Q. There Avas not any ? A. I don't think thero avus.
Q. You say you had one difficulty Avith Steven .-\ when was
that ?
Mr. GRAHAM. We object to that.
A. I have no objection to telling the time.
Mr. GRAHAM. We object to it as irrelevant.
The WITNESS. It was in the fall of 1868 we had a chunk
of a fight. We were both indicted and it was settled in court.
Re-Direct Examination.
By Mr. Graham.
Q. Danville is how many miles from Yanceyville ? A. . It is
called fifteen miles — it is fifteen and a fraction, by tho survey.
Q. It is a protty active trading town / A. Yee, sir.

788 TOTOT OF IMPEACHMENTS!
Q. Colored men resort there to get employment ? A.. Yes,.
sir. Q. You say one of these men who oomplained of being in
jured was in Danville when you last heard ot him, and tho-
other went off Avith Kirk's men ? A. That is what I under*
stood. The last I saw of him he was with Kirk's men.
Q. This league that you speak of is it composed of colored!
©r were there white men with it f A. I never saw a white-
man Avith them, but it was understood that Stevens belonged te
ft. Q. It was generally composed of colored men ? A. Yes..
On motion of Senator Robbins, of Rowan, the court adjournr
ctd. till to-morrow at eleven o'clock, A^M^

TRIAL OF WTLLIltfM W. nOLDEN. 789*
¦ • , . I ,/. ;.'¦,,,
8BVIB9TE2MTH DAT. " '
Senate Chamber, February 15thyt871.
The COURT met at eleven o'clock, A. M., pursuant to ad
journment, Hon. R. M. Pearson, Chief Justice of the Supreme
Court in the chair.
The proceedings were opened by a proclamation made in duo
form by the doorkeeper.
The CLERK proceeded to call the roll of senators, when the
following gentlemen were found to be present :
Messrs. Albright, Allen, Barnett, Battle, Brogden, Brown,
Cook, Council, Cowles, Crowell, Currie, EdAvards, Eppes,
Flemming, Gilmer, Graham, of Alamance, Graham, of Orange,
Hawkins, Hyman, Jones, King, Latham, Ledbetter, Lehman,
Linney, Love, Mauney, McClammy, McCotter, Merrimon,
Morehead, Murphy, Olds, Price, Robbins, of Davidson, Rob
bins, of Rowan, Skinner, Speed, Troy, Waddell, Warren,
Worth— 42.
Senator EDWARDS- offered the following order:
Ordered, That whenever a witness is undergoing examina
tion and the hour of adjournment shall arrive, there shall be
an extension of tho session until such examination upon both
sides is concluded.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE put the question on the adoption of
the order offered ot senator Edwards; and it was decided in_tho
affirmatiAre.
SAMUEL P. HILL, a witness called on behalf of th Man
agers, being duly suorni,. testified as follows :
By Mr. Grahami.
Q. You are a lawyen- by profession and reside at Yancey
ville ? A. Yes, s£b:.
Q. State whether you were the counsel employed by the
friends of Mr. Stewens-i who was assassinated in tha. town of.

TOO OOC*T OF impeachments. %1,
Yanceyville? ' A. Yes, sir, I was his counsel during his llfo
time and at the time of his death.,. I have since been counsel
for the family and was during the investigation before the
coroner. Q. He had suits in courts in which you were his counsel
prior to his death ? , A. Yes, Bir.
Q. When his body was found state whether or not you wero
retained as counsel by his friends to inquire into and ascertain
it possible who had killed him ? A. His wife sent to my room
tho evening before, about an hour after dark, to inquire if I had
Boon him or if he was at my office. I had understood that he
Avas at the court house that day and I suggested to the servant
that thoy had bettor 
Q. They camo to your office ? A. Yes, sir, the next morn
ing about sunrise or a littlo before, Mr. Stevens' brother camo
to my office and said his body had been found, and he retained
me to carry on the inA'estigation before the coroner. I ap
peared. I instructed tho coroner to summons colored men as
Avell as Avhite men for the jury and he did bo, taking the most
intelligent colored people ho could. He selected five colored
men and seven white men, and when the door Avas opened I
went into the room with the jury.
Q. Was that on Sunday ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. How soon after the jury assembled ? A. According to
my beet recollection — I cannot tell exactly — I should think
they Avere impanneled, or summoned at least, by nine or ten
o'clock, and they went forthwith to make an investigation.
Q. Did the examination go on that day ? A. Yes, 6i'r, the
examination went on that day. We examined some witnesses.
We got through with all the witnesses we could get hold and
summoned at the time. There waa a large number of colored
people present and I stated that if any of them knew any
thing in reference to Mr. Stevens' movements no matter hoAv
unimportant it might seem to them, I would have the parties
brought there. I stated that they might not. possibly under
stand Avhat Would be important. The coroner adjourned the

TRIAL OF WH.LIAM W. HOLDEN. 791
inquest until tliree o'clock Sunday ; then, in the meantime, I
had such Avitnesses summoned as were suggested by the friends
of the family and others. I must say that I received assistance
of the citizens all about there, for they Avere eager to find out
who Avere the authors of the crime. At three o'clock the jury-
again assembled and I had witnesses examined until perhaps A'ery
near dark. I then suggested to the coroner, or perhaps it was
suggested by some member of the jury, that the inquest be
adjourned and that the jury meet again the next morning.
Tho suggestion was acceded to and the next morning they
again ronoAved tho investigation and continued it during tho
better part of that day.
Q. Did you havo any asaiatanco in the way of counsel? A.
I did — the last day — Mr. Ball of Greeneborough. Tho friends
of tho family told me they were going to send him and I told
them I would be pleased to have him, and on Thursday ho
</aine doAvn. I had the testimony read to him that had been
taken. lie remarked that he Avas very eager to get hack to
Greensborough and he wont to seo Mrs. StoA'ena, the Avidow
lady, and he told me when he came back that they Avere satis
fied he should leave.
Q. What Avere Mr. Ball's political connections? A. I have
understood him to be a republican, but I have neAer heard him
say so.
Q. You prosecuted that investigation hoAvlong? A. Sun
day, Monday and Thursday. The jury expressed themselves
Avilling to hold on longer if I thought I could get any further
testimony, but in view of the course Mr. Ball and I had determ
ined to pursue, I came to the conclusion that there were no
other Avitnesses Ave could bring to prove any material facts.
We had examined some thirty or forty witnesses — I do not
remember tho exact number.
Q. State whether or hot the names of any witnesses were
siiffffested to be sent for ? A. Every Avitness was sent for who
Avas suggested, and they were all examined except one. I
declined to examine a man named Humpkrey-rl think

' 702 'OOURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
1 about a conversation*. He came to my' office. A gentleman'
had had a conversation with him, it waa a white gentleman,.
Mr. Graves — and I had him summoned.' 'i The boy was very
anxious to leave and go baok. He was stripping tobacco. I
saw his testimony was not important, and I could get along
without it as I had1 other witnesses who could provo the samo
facts. He was the only one suggested whom I did not examine.
Q. State whether the witnesses that were not examined by
you were subsequently brought to Raleigh and examined before
the chief justice and judges of the superior court? A. I do-
not remember but one. I should think every one I examined
were here. There wae a man also by the name of Wommack,.
whom I never beard until I eaw him here as a witness. I
never heard his name even after the inquest.
Q. State whether or not that evidence was published after
the inquest was- given to the public ? A. Yes, sir, shortly after'
the inquest was dissolved a gentleman by the name of Stead-
man, from Stok«8 county, came to me for the purpose of getting
the testimony. I had it all taken in writing by two young
gentlemen of the profession, and he obtained that and also the
paper from ther superior court clerk's office, and he published it
in pamphlet history of the case, the names of the witnesses
and what they were reputed to have sworn to.
Q. How soon did that go out to the public ? A. I do not
remember the exact time, though it was a very short timo
before we were brought down here.
Q. It was before Kirk's coming to Yanceyville? A. Yos,
sir, it was.
Q. State whether you were at home on the day of the arrival
of Kirk at Yanceyville, and if so, describe what took placo. A.
My office is some forty or fifty yards from the court house.
Thoro is a building or two and a lot between the court houso ¦
square and my office. My office is between thirty and forty
yards off the main street. I was ongaged with a cllont that
morning. There wore to be some addressos delivered between.
Son.. Scott and Gen.. Loach tliat day.

TRIAL ©F WILLIAM W. HQILDEN. 793
Q. They were candidates for congress ? A. Yes, sir. I had
mot been on the streets at all, and I was engaged at the time
Avith a client of mine from Georgia. I saw these troops filing
up. I knew they were to be there, and did not go out, but
looked at them go by from my door. A very Bhort
time thereafter, Major Yates came and asked if Mr. Hill
was there. I told him that he was. He aeked mo if I was the
gentleman. I told him I was. He *aid he would like
to see me and I stepped out. It was very warm, I had
no coat or vest on, and my coat and vest Avith my pock
et book and watch were lying on the table. I stepped
out, I threw on a summer coat that I ha<t flying on tho bed, put
on my hat and he remarked, " You are nay prisoner." I told
him " very well." I left my client sitting in the office. About
that time I saw a negro servant of mine and told him to go
and take charge of my watch and papera and things and lock
up the office, which he did. Maj. Yates asked me if I was
unwell, and I told him that I was, and if he would allow me to
return to my office I would report to him wherever he said.
He said he would see. He met Col. Kirk and told him that I
Avas unwell and desired to return to my office and remain.
Q. Did anything occur on the way ? A. He asked me if I
was armed. I told him I was not. There were three men with
pistols in their hands, and one of them walked very close to me,
and Yates was very rude. Yates Baid I am in command here
and he took his position beside me. Anotlier one walked on
the other side. We went to the court house and when we got
to the court house we found that Col. Kirk was standing at the
gate. Yates told him that I was sick and that I would like to
go to my office and bo allowed to report.
Q. That was said to Kirk ? A. Yos, sir, Kirk hesitated for
a tlmo and I thought ho was going to assent, but he told me te
go in tho court houso and I wont in the south room where I
found brother Kerr, Doctor Roan, Dootor Yancey and I think
Sheriff Griffith and James M. Neill. I do not remember any
others in the room atthe time. I stayed in there a little while,

794 . COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
(it turned out tliatthese gentlemen were all prisoners,) when
we heard a great noise and confusion; both around the court
house and up stairs, and in a very few moments. Mr. Bowe Avas
brought in. '
Q. What sort of a noise was this ? A. There Avas stamping
and hallooing. I could merely hear the noise. It was a noise
of great confusion. He Avaa brought in the room and he waa
reaiating. They had hold of him and Yates, who I understood,
Avaa a baptist preacher, waa in very violent expreesions.
Q. Cursing Mr. Bowe ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Givo a speoiman or too ? A. He- said, he Avas a G — d
d— d rascal— I don't know every thing — you could well
imagine. Thero wore some othera In the room Avith mo. I
was afraid that Mr. Boavc Avould make aomo resistance and tliat
avo would bo fired on ; and I supposed that if tlioy did, thoy
would firo Avithout much regard to whom thoy struck. Mr.
Kerr went to Mr. Bowo and requested him to bo still and quiet
and make no resistance. Mr. Bowe did so and, sat down loan
ing against the fireplace— -I do not knoAV tliat he did it design
edly — but it avus whore he could not be seen from the window
or door of the room. In tho meantime, the door was eroAvded
Avith soldiers with bayonets fixed and guns ready, and the win
dows Avere crowded with men d — ning and cursing and crying
out to shoot the gre}'-headed scoundrel — and I expected every
moment he would be fired upon. But I don't think they saAV
him. They had their pistols — Yates did — and then Kirk came
in and shook his pistol over Mr. Boavc I can not tell all he
said, but he finally, in a passion, shoved Yatea and all the rest
out of the room.
Q. Kirk did that ? A. Yea, sir. He shoved them from the
room and told them to keep out.
Q. What Avas done with you next? A. The day being very
warm,, after a little while we were sent up stairs in the prin
cipal room of the court house— the court room. I found tliat
I had to stay there all night and sent word to my servant to
bring me a blanket or two and he brought them and I stayed

TRIAL OF AVILLIAM' W. iflOLDEN. 795
with the gentlemen Avho'Avere under arrest in the jury room
that night, on the floor, and the next day I had my mattrass
and bod clothing brought over to me.
Q. State to tho court Avhether Kirk had any conversation
Avith you about his feats in Avar ? A. He did not to me indi
vidually. I will say that Kirk's conduct towards me I havo no
complaint to mako of— I mean to mo personally — asido from
holding mo in prison. IIo camo up thero ono day very much
excited and remarked that ho had beon on tho federal side
during tho Avar and told ua of some incidents in his career, somo
fighting ho had done, and that if any resistance was mado or
any attempt to reacuo ua hia orders Avoro to fire upon the pris-
unci's, and that tho town would bo burned up and tho Avomon
and children would bo put to death. IIo said thoso woro hia
ordera. Q. That if thoro Avas any resistance the prisoners Avould bo
shot, tho toAvn burned and tho Avomon and ohildren put to
death? A. Yoh, sir. I mado somo reply to him at that time.
Q. First stato what feats ho had accomplished in the Avar
according to his statement ?
Mr. BOYDEN. I don't understand hoAv that-has anything
to do Avith this case.
Mr. GRAHAM. We have a right to the declarations ot this
man Kirk. If it is desired I will state what Ave expect to
prove, though it "would hardly perhaps be strictly proper.
We desire to sIioav that he magnified himself into a tremend
ous man of war, Avith a vieAV of terrifying these people whom
he was threatening.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. It is competent to state what took
place. A. I only remomber one thing and I do not remember it
sufficiently even to give the details, but he said that Avith ten
men he had whipped so many confederate troops — quite a
number. Q. He said that his orders were sneh as you have stated
here? A. Yes, sir.

796 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. Will you state whether et Any time he cursed the pris*
oners, and if so, on what occasion? A. He came in there
again and said that he understoood there were two companies
that had been raised in Danville and who were within two or
-three miles of the village vrith the purpose of rescuing the
-prisoners, I made the remark that if he was the soldier he
had told us he was the other day, it was a little remarkable
he had not sent out scouts to see whether the fact were true,
that I did not believe it, he made a reply and then repeated
this expression. I then replied if he attempted that we would
give him a lively time before he finished him.
Q. He repeated that he would shoot the prisoners and burn
down the village ? A. Yes, Bir, and I said if he attempted
that, we would give him a lively time before he had finished it.
Q. State whether or not on any other occasion he cursed the
prisoners, and if so, state the circumstances ? A. I cannot
state except his cursing Mr. Weeden.
Q. What was that scene ? A.I was walking behind Mr.
Weeden — we were promenading the court room for exercise.
Weeden was walking in front of me. I do not recollect par
ticularly what it was about, but Colonel Kirk made his appear
ance, and cursed him for all the d — d rascals and mean men
and everything he could think of, as violent as he could.
Weeden mado no reply nor did any one else.
Q. State whether or not Mr. Weeden was fired upon by any
body, and it bo, for what ? A. There is a vestibule out of the
court room and threo or four of us, Mr. Weeden among othera,
were Bitting on the railing. There waa a drunken lieutenant be
longing to Kirk's command, flourishing a pistol about. I was
not paying much attention, but my recollection is that Weeden
remarked to him " You had better tako caro or you will shoot
somebody." I was not looking at tho tlmo, as thoro was con*
vorsatlon going on, but as near as I recollect, ho replied that ho
Avould shoot him. I did not see him. I was looking anotlier
Avay, but I heard a pistol fire and the hall struck the pro
jection of stone on tho window silL

TRIAL OF WILLIAM AV. HOLDEN.

767

Q. Was that anywhere near Wooden was standing? A. It
was in range with him. The Avindow goes down to tho floor,
and this projection goes right out from tho floor. Weeden was
standing right over it.
Q. Weeden Avas in tho upper story of the court house and
this man was standing on the ground ? A. On tho ground,
some fifteen feet below,
Q. He fired in the range of Weeden and the ball struck this
projection? A. The projection intervened between Weeden
and the officer.
Q. Was the officer there in command at the time ? A. I do
not know. I did not see much command in any of them.
Q. What was the general conduct as for discipline and order
among the troops — you have been in the service yourself? A.
They had no discipline whatever. For instance, Avhen Ave retired
from tho court room for any purposo wo generally Avent out
under guard. When avo would go down and call tho corporal
of the guard, it maybe Ave Avould find him thero or maybo not.
It was a mere accident whether Ave Avould find him or an officer
of the guard.
Q. State Avhether there were any instances of disorder? A.
They were cursing and abusing one anotlier and every body
else, and seemed to do just as they pleased. There were a
great many of them avIio Avent outAvith me under guard, whom
I supposed to bo over fourteen years old, and some Avere bare
headed and bare footod. I saAV an officor drilling his men bare
headed and bare footod with his boots in hia hand.
Q. State whothor or not thoro Avaa any cursing and singing
of obacono songs In tho presence of tho prisoners? A. Yes,
sir, that Avas going on almoat dally and at night. Thoy wero
continually thoro cursing and singing and indulging in obacono
language Q. You eay that a groat many young boys Avoro In tho forco.
State whether, thoso boys wero sout out to guard you Avhon you
retired ? A. Yes, sir.
52

798 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. What account; did they giAre of the expedition and how
they happened to be in the service ?
Mr. BOYDEN. With what view is that evidence offered ?
Mr; GRAHAM. We have a right, Mr. Chief Justice, to
tho declarations of anybody who Avere under the governor's
orders aa a part of. tho res gesta.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer hardly thinks
that you have a right to provo the declaration of a guard over
api-'sonor. Mr. GRAHAM. I think, sir, that Ave haA'o aa much right
to provo tho declarations of a soldier aa of an officer aa to what
he said in relation to the objects of tho expedition, and how ho
ciimo to bo in it. Tlio wilnc-s was thoro in the hands, as avo
Bay, of an unauthorb:cd multitude of armed men. And Ave
havo a right to ihow that they woro sent thero by this res
pondent, and any thing they aaid, going to provo that is com
petent to bo givoii in cvidenco in thia court. In ordor to show
the nature of tlio expedition, and the mon who composed it,
wo have a right to their statements in regard to it. I respect
fully submit that thoir declarations are Avithin tho rule.
Mr. BOYDEX. Mr. ( "hief Justice, tho reapondent issued
this proclamation declaring theso two counties in a state of in
surrection under a claim of right as governor of the state to
make such proclamation. He did it under authority vested
in him by the constitution and by lhe act of January 27,
1870. He did this as a matter of right and as a matter
of duty. Under this same poAvor and authority, claiming
it as a matter of right, he called for a military force to
take charge of these two counties and hold them by it until
tbe insurrection could be suppressed. I say he did this
as a matter of right, and he supposed a matter of duty. Well,
sir, what is tho objection of these gentlemen ? They claimed
that when the governor, under the constitution and under the
law for that purpose, makes this proclamation and calls for the
military force, and sends that force there to discharge certain
duties, everything that any subaltern or private in the army

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 799
says or does, is evidence to implicate the gOA'ernor and
to sIioav that he is responsible for all misconduct. I say, Mr.
Chief Justice, that if it were a question between individuals
and the respondent as an individual, had sent a man as his agent
to do a certain kind of business, anything that that man does
outside, of what he was authorized to do, is no evidence against
the respondent as the principal. But here, when it is a. high
officer doing this as a matter of right and as a matter of duty,
it is claimed that everything that is done by a subordi
nate, a private outside of his duty, the governor must
bo responsible for. In other words, when President
Lincoln organized tho army of tho United States and Pont
them into the southern country to put doAvn the rebellion,
it would bo gravely contended that ho Avas not only respon
sible for what tlio commanding' general did, but for every ro It-
cry and ovory theft and every species of plunder, and oven
every vile expression used by any ono of tho private soldiora
towards an individual in tho southern country, and was ovidenco
to implicate tho president of tho United States, although it waa
ontaido of tho duty of tho soldier. Such, I say, cannot bo the
law. Such a doctriuo cannot bo maintained. It is utterly
abhorrent to all our notions of authority. No, sir, tho com
manding general is not responsible for any of these vile deeds
that are done Avithout his consent or approbation. These are
my views, and I think it clear that the testimony is wholly in
competent. Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President and Senators, our theory in
this proceeding is different from that of the gentleman on the
other side. We say that if there Avas a discretionary power
to arrest by the military, (which we deny,) this was no insur
rection, and that this was an unauthorized force sent upon an
errand which the governor had no right to send them upon.
The doctrine of agency which the gentlemen refers to covers
the question that I desire to ask, and that is, that the governor
sent forth these men as his agents to do a great wrong to the
peoplo of the country, and that any act of any one of them,

800 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
and any declaration mado by any one ofthem, is a part of tho
res gestae, and we have a right to give it in evidence in order
that the court may see the whole scene as it transpired, and to
see by what agency it was attempted, to put down this rebellion
which we say never existed, except on paper. We have a
right, air, to have the whole matter read before this court as
avo would lay it before a jury who were the triers of the facts.
Mr. SMITH. I Avould be glad to have the question read by
tho reporter.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The counsel will bo good enough
to reduce the question to writing.
Mr. SMITH. I will not Avait for the counsel to do that,
before proceeding Avith what I have to eay. If I understand
tho purpose of the question it is to extract from the declara
tion of these soldiers facts connected with their enlistment,
where they were from and other circumstances attending it.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. It calls for tho purport of the ex
pedition. Mr. SMITH. Now, sir, avo havo mado no captious objec
tion to tho development of any conduct of tho officers and
soldiers in this expedition to theso tAvo counties upon the
idea that they wero charged with being desperate men, and
that the proof might bo admissible with the view of show
ing that they carried out tho natural consequences of their
character. But it ia perfectly Avell settled, on the principle
of respondiat superior, that a man avIio ia the principal, ia
only to bo held reaponaiblo for the acta of tho agent Avhen thoy
are in furtherance of tho agency and that declarations of ante
cedent facta aro nover received. What is aaid and done, aa part
of a transaction, may bo admissible. What ia aaid In regard
to a fact that took place previously la not ovidenco of tho exist
ence of that fact. A man Avho Bonds another upon sonic under
taking does not authorize him to do anything beyond tho pur-
pones of such agency, and thereby mako hia principal rospon-
hi bio. It is only tho acts dono In furtherance of tho agency
andtooffbet its obj cots— of that aro admissible. Declarations

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 801
may bo acts in every sonso of tho Avord, or they may be merely
historical statements. Theso declarations of antecedent pre
existing facts are never admitted in proof of such facts sought
to bo established. We object to any evidence except that
Avhich tends to show tho conduct of the officers and soldiers
in execution of their duty. It Avould be monstrous if they
could be allowed to show that one of these men committed an
act of murder or larceny or some other act entirely outsido
of the purpose of the organization, and then hold the respon
dent responsible for it. It would be extraordinary, if entirely
outside of any connection Avith the purposo of the expedition,
it could be shown that any one of such private acts of wrong
• were done and to charge respondant criminally therefor.
Mr. MERRIMON. There can be no question that anything
said or done by the officers or soldiers in furtherance of tho
object for which they were called into service, is competent.
What they 6tatc, and Avhat they do, is competent for any pur
pose in view of the charges contained in the articles. One of
the charges is, the men enlisted and recruited Avere desperate,
careless and rowdyish and outlandish class of men, and that is
one charge that is a material part in this proceeding.
Mr. BADGER. Are those Avords contained in the charge?
Mr. MERRIMON. The substance is 

Mr. BADGER. That they are "rowdyish" and "out
landish?" Mr. MERRIMON. Not those words, but it states they are
dcHperato mon and it ia. competent for ua to offer any declara
tions, even acta of larconcy aa illustrating tho character of tho
men that tho govornor called into service. It is competent in
that view, not as being In furtherance of tlio common object
merely, but on tho further ground that wo aro entitled to provo
that what thoy did and said to show thoir demeanor and thoir
lawless, desperate character. That is not only bo In principle,
hut It has beon so hold and ruled by tho senate all through this
trial. It Is competent in another view. We allege that this
wholo proceeding on the part of the governor was lawless and

802 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
unauthorized-— (and that is the ground of this prosecution)—
that those soldiers woro a more mob preying upon tho pooplo of
tho state without tho sanction of tho constitution or any law.
Thoro is nothing oloaror than that tho proof is admisslblo in
that view. That was tho decision in the caso of Lord Goorgo
Cordon. What tho pooplo said when they Avoro flocking in a
particular direction — what they said thoy wero going to do —
tlio clamor of tho crowd was allowed to bo given in ovidenco to
show tho Intent and purpoao of that riot. To llluatrato that by a
plain ciiho t Suppose fifty or a hundred men mado au Irruption
lnlo tho state of Now York from Canada to do somo unlawful
ant— and that thoy woro indicted for riot, would It not bo compo-
font to show lliat this riotous crowd, when they cai'iio mirglng over
tlui lino Into tho statu of Now York, wild that thoy wero from Can.
mlii, that their purpom) was to como over thoro and porpotrnto
mn 1 10 particular aot te accomplish their riotous purpouo? I
suppose that would bo competent not only to show that thoy
aaid that they camo from Canada, but to show any act tending
tn llluatrato thoir purpose. And then, If they allege, further
In tho Indictmont, that thoy were a desporato claaa of men, It
would bo competent to put in ovidenco any thing that would
tend to bIioav tho character of tho men. It ia not only compe
tent, I say, as apart of the res gestem, but it is ovidenco which
wo are entitled to to show tho character of these men, to show
Avhere they camo from, in order to sustain the other branch of
tho charge that many of them camo from tho state of Ten
nessee. Mr. GRAHAM. I will read tho question.
Q. Stato whether or not you heard any of the guards in
whose charge you may havo been say anything as to their place
ot residence and Iioav and where they were recruited, and what
they understood to be the objects for which they enlisted and
where they were to serve ?
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer is of the
opinion that the evidence is not admissible. It does not pur
port to be any part of any act of wrong, but a mere narrative

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 803
of some past transactions, and that is excluded by all the casee .
It must be Bomothing which is a part of the act then coming
on or something said iu furtherance of the common result.
The conversation of Mr. Hill had with the guard as to whero
they come from and what they were told to do it seems to
me is a collateral matter.
Mr. GRAHAM. I offer it as a declaration of tho parties
concerned during the time.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. Tho presiding officer understands
the offer. Ho will state further, that ho considers thero iB in
tho law booka a decided difference botAVccn tho relation of co
conspirators after tho organisation is proven, and that of tho
comniandor-ln-chlof of an army mid his nubni'dtniito olllccrs,
and ospcelally his private*. Ono Im conspiracy, mid tho other
la tho relation of principal and agent, lo bu lookod at In a
rather dillbrcmt point of vlow, from the fact that ono being
commandor-Iii-chlof, ho can only bo reapoualblo for ouch orders
as ho glvoo, or such orders as ho approves of and recognized,
or that tho court may supposo ho approved of by hia subac-
quont conduct.
Mr. GRAHAM. That assumes, Mr. Chiof Justico, that
theso persona wero a lawfully organized forco.
Senator EDWARDS. Differing as I do very widely in the
opinion which has beon announced by tho presiding officer, I
desire a decision of the question by tho Senato.
A sufficient number seconding tho call,
The CHIEF JUSTICE put tho question on tho admissi
bility of tho question proposed by Mr. Graham, and it waa
decided in the negative by tho following vote :
Thoso who voted in the affirmative are:
Messrs. Allen, Council, Currie, Edwards, Graham, of Orange,
Ledbotter, Maunoy, Merrimon, Murphy, Robbins, of Davidson,
Skinner, Waddoll, Warren, Worth— 14.
Those who voted in the negative are :
Messrs. Albright, Bar nett, Battle, Bellamy, Brogden, Brown,
Cook, Oowles, Crowell, Flemming, Gilmer, Graham, of Ala-

801 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
manoo, Hawkins, Ilyman, Jones, King, Latham, Lehman,
LInnoy, Lovo, McClammy, McCottor, Morehead, Price, Bobbins,
of RoAvan, Spood, Troy.— 27.
.Tho WITN ESS. I will stato in connootion with one remark
I made that Mr. Stevens had tAvo very important suits in
which brother Kerr and mysolf Avoro associated together for
him. By Me. Graham, [resuming,]
Q. Did anything take placo on tho day of the election of a
remarkable character ? A. Yes, sir, the day of the election the
several prisoners felt very reluctant to go out and vote under
guard but wo finally determined to do bo. Col. Kirk informed
ua that avo conld vote if avo saAV proper, and he called out a
company. I think thoro were fully thirty men with fixed
bayonets and ho marched us out together under that guard — a
line on each side of us. Thero Avere perhaps more than thirty —
I do not know tho exact number. But we Avero earned to the
polls. Kirk Avas at the head of the company. He did not
havo on his SAVord though ho perhaps had his uniform on. He
did not haA-o any pistol — at least I do not suppose he had
any on.
Q. State whether thero were any troops about the streets
during the election ? A. Do you mean Kirk's men ?
Q. Yes sir. A. They were going about through the streets
on the day of the election. I don't recollect of seeing any
going armed exfrpt those who Avent along when the prisoners
Avere going to vote and those who were standing guard.
Q. You Avero carried from Yanceyville where f A. About
a half hour before Ave started — perhaps longer — I received a
note from Mrs. Stevens informing me that she had sent over a
horse and buggy by a servant to carry me over. I had no
means of going and had made no arrangements. The first
night Ave Avent some eight miles from Yanceyville and en
camped. The next day we proceeded to Company Shops and
arrived there about 12 o'clock. It commenced raining and
rained all the way and was raining when we got there. We

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDER. 805
staid out In tho rain until wo could put up our tents ; thoy gavo
us tents and some b!x or seven of ua occupied one tent and tho
rest the aaino Avay. Somo of our friends in the- neighborhood
sent us blankets. I think avo staid two days and tAvo nights
there — I do not remember exactly — and then wero put into
box cars aud sent from Company Shops to Graham depot.
This lane from Graham depot to Graham is a red mud lane,
exceedingly muddy, and we marched through there in the
dark, and it was very disagreeable. Wo were carried into the
court room up stairs and placed there.
Q. Hoav long were you confined there ? A. I think we camo
over on Sunday and we started to go to Graham on Tuesday night
— I do not remember tho exact day — and we stayed there seve
ral days, kept under guard tho same as at Yanceyville, with
sentinels stationed at the door of the court room and with
guards attending us Avhen avo Avent out.
Q. State whether any persons were taken out and committed
to jail? A. I can only say this, that I was talking with Mr.
Turner at the time tho guard camo in and called over tho
names and they wero taken out of tho court room and carried
towards tho jail. I did not take any particular notice, because
I knew what thoy Avoro going to do Avith them. ,
Q. Did they como back into tho court house during your
stay at Graham ? A. No, sir.
Q. Who wero they ? A. Mr. Wylie, Mr. Weedon, Mr. Tur
ner, and, I think, a man by the name of Gray were the four.
Q. Did you see any exhibitions of violence to any one of
the prisoners and if so state them ? A. I only saw one. Ono
day Captain Franklin came to tho jury room". I was standing
by the window. Wo had blankets on the floor and Mr. Moore
and three or four persona were lying on them talking. I was
standing close by the winiow. Captain Franklin came and he
seemed to be excited and he drew his pistol suddenly and
cocked it, and said " You d — d scoundrel you call me a horee
" thief do you ? I will shoot you." I caught him by the hand
and said he ought to be ashamed of himself for using this

800 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
violence to an unarmed prisoner, and I think I prevented him,
with the aid of some otlier gentlemen — I don't remember who
but I believe Mr. Fowler. I used some otlier efibrtsto prevent
his violence when he broke from me and stepped up to Mr.
Moore and struck him across the head with his pistol. That
is the only violence I saw while I was there.
Q. The pistol AA'as pointed at Mr. Mooro who Avas lying on
the blanket ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. With a threat that ho Avas going to shoot him ? A. Yes,
sir. Q. After Mr. Mooro raised up he struck him on the back of
tho head with a pistol ? A. Yes, sir, ho Avas rising at the timo
and Avas not fully up.
Q. Was it a pretty violent Woav ? A. I cannot toll. Under
the excitement I did not notice much about it and I do not
know as I can say.
Q. Were you taken to Salisbury? A. I Avas brought te
Raleigh. It was tho second time I had seen Col. Burgen and
he had a horse and buggy and he wry kindly offered me a
seat in his buggy to the depot from Graham court house.
Q. That is Avhile you were coining here ? A. Yes, sir,
Avhile I Avas coming here.
Q. And Avere yon discharged here ? A. I was discharged
here I presume. I did not go in the court room.
Q. Was any charge made against you ? A. None that I
ever heard of or saw, except Avhat I saw in the paper.
Q. Was any affidavit made containing charges against you ?
A. None that I ever saw.
Q. Have you an extensive acquaintance in the county of
Caswell ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was there a peaceable condition of things between the
blacks and Avhites in that county? A. I think there Avas, as
a general thing.
Q. Among the white and black people ? A. Yes, sir. There
were exceptions, but I think as a general rule the feeling was
good.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. " 807
Q. State whether or not the colored people made contracts
with the whites in the business relation between them ? A. I
drew some contracts betAA'een them and I 6aw them employed
working on the farms and plantations for the whites.
Q. Do you knoAV of any resistance to the law in that county?
A. I never heard of one instance.
Q. You are practising your profession and have occasion to
issuo processes of various kinds. State whetheror not you know
of any resistance to a process in that county ? A. I novor
heard of any and don't Iciioav of any. Perhaps 1 should say
that I did not see parties Avhen arrested.
Q. Were thero magistrates. in tho county? A. Yes, sir,
I had business to execute in every township in tho county
ond I never found any difficulty.
Q. In tho township in Avhich Yanceyville is were there
magistrates there ? A. Yes, sir. Mr. Stevens vas a magis
trate in his lifetime, and then there Avas a Mr. Cook Avho Avas
a colored person. After Mr. Stevens' death, Cook transacted
most of the business. It was some time before Ave bad another
magistrate. The superior court then appointed Mr. Bowe as
a magistrate and he has been acting as a magistrate since
that time as well as Mr. Cook.
Q. Was any resistance made to the execution of a process
issued by Cook ? A. I never heard of any and never saw
any Cr oss-Examination.
By Mr. Boyden.
Q. You say that in your judgment, in the main, there is
good feeling between tbe whites and the black? A. Yes, sir,
as far as I know.
Q. But there Avere exceptions ? A. Yes, sir, I had knowl
edge of some exception.
Q. Do you know whether there was not a public declara
tion often made that if certain colored people were employed
by the white men, they would burn down their houses? A.
I never heard any such declaration.

808 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Mr. GRAHAM. I object to the question. I do not think
it is oompotent evidence ; but as tho answer is in we will not
diBputo tho point now.
Q. Do you knoAV that there was a publio meeting held by
white persons in Avhich they resolved not to give over a certain
price for colored labor? A. I have no knowledge of it. I
attended no such public meeting and I have no knowledge
of any.
Q. Do you know of any paper being numerously signed in
sisting that they should not employ colored people on their
farms ?
Mr. GRAHAM. I object, Mr. Chief Justice, to the evi
dence. It does not prove insurrection if the fact bo true.
Mr. BOYDEN. I offer the proof, Mr. Chief Justice, on
tho subject of good_feeling which they have been endeavoring
to prove themselves. I think if we can show that there was a
paper numerously signed insisting that colored men should not
be employed, it would tend very strongly to show that there was
not a very good feeling between the whites and the blacks.
Mr. GRAHAM. It would show, sir, what we often hear of
in the north, of capitalists endeavoring and combining to keep
down the rates of Avages of their employees ; but it does not
show an insurrection against the government. Manufacturers
may agree that they will give only so much per day ; but that
act does not mako those manufacturers insurgents. And ope
ratives may combine and Bay they will not work for wage's less
than a certain amount, and their combination docs not mako
thom insurgents. It is simply a controversy between the em
ployers and tho employed, to seo which Avill got tho bettor of
tho othor, In tho question of Avngos, ono seeking to have wages
loAvor and tho othor seeking to get them higher. Admitting
tho fact aa allegod, it sheds no light on the question of Avhether
thoro avus an insurrection against tho government, and neither
does it prevent the law from having its force.
Mr. BOYDEN. The gentleman does not seem, Mr. Chief
Justico, to understand the point. Ho scorns to have forgotten

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 809
that he has. boon asking this very Avitness if there was a kind
feeling between tho whites and tho colored people whom they
employed. In view of that fact, ia it not a proper question to
ask the witness if there was a paper prepared and numerously
signed protesting against the employment of colored men, and
insisting that they leave the county ? I don't pretend to
know the exact wording of the paper — but is it not proper to
rebut (he idea which is sought to be enforced that there was a
kindly feeling between the two races ?
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. Chief Justice, the evidence which
has been offered on the part of the managers was designed to
61ioav that there was such a kindly state of feeling between the
two races, that the blacks need be under no fear of violence
from the whites. A combination to get labor as low as possible
is consistent Avith a state of society free from all violence.
When either capitalists or laborers combine in their own in
terest, it does not tend to show, in the slightest degree, that
there is insurrection.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer is of the
opinion the evidence is admissible, not on the ground of show.
ing an insurrection, but to reply to the proof given to show that
there was a kindly feeling existing between the colored people
and the farmers.
By Mr. Boyden, [resuming.]
Q. I aek you if you have ever Boen or known of any papor
signed by numbers of persons 
Mr. GRAHAM. Wo object also on tho ground that tho
paper itself should bo produced.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. You cannot provo tho contents of
a papor in the first instance without the production of tho papor
itself. You can, however, provo tho existenco of a combi
nation. Q. Do you know of any combination existing for the purpose
of fixing the prices which should be paid to colored men em
ployed by the whites? A. I only know this, that there were
some three or four gentlemen who suggested something of that

810 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
kind, but tho movement broko up because it could not bo mado
general. Q. Was it not gonoral among tho landholders ? A. Not in
our county.
Q. Wan thatnn understood thing in tho township which Yan-
coy ville Ih situated? A. No, sir, that was what broke it up.
Thoy could not got men to ngrco to It.
Q. They abandoned It ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Don't you think that effort shoAvcd somo 
Mr. GRAHAM. Wo object to tho opinion of the witness.
Mr. BOYDEN. You havo boon asking all along tor tho
opinions of AvltnoflaoB to know Avhothor thoro was not a kindly
fooling existing between tho whltoB and tho blacks.
Tim CI11KK JUSTICE. Tho presiding officer dooi not think
tho question Is competent. It Is for tho court to draw an infer-
onoo from tho testimony.
Q, You say you Avero In tho court houso on tho day that Sto-
vonBAvas murdered? A. Yob, air, I was in the court room
that clay.
Q. You woro In tho public mooting ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did yon seo Stovons in tho meeting ? A. I did not, I
sat insido of tho bar. It ho Avas in thoro ho was behind mo and
I did not see him. I saAV him in tho morning when ho first
camo from his house.
Q. You did not ooo him in the court room while tho speak
ing was going on ? A. No, sir, and no moro during that day,
oxcopt Avlion ho first camo to tho village
Q. How early— at what tlmo in tho ovonlng did you learn
that ho was nilaalng? A. I think I was in my offlco reading.
I had had iny suppor. It Avns about dark when a servant camo
from his wifo to mo.
Q. I will go back to tho mooting a moment. Did you hoar
Mr. Ilodnott address that meeting? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did he employ in that meeting forms of strong denuncia
tion against StCA-cns ?

TRIAL OF AVILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 811
Mr. BRAGG. We object to the question. The Avitness
should be asked what Mr. Hodnett said.
Mr. BOYDEN. But the gentleman is not our witness, Mr.
Chief Justice, he is the witness produced by the Managers, and
Ave have a right to question in any form we please.
Mr. BRAGG. But you ask him if he employed terms of
" strong denunciation." You must ask what terms he did
employ. Your question calls for tho opinion of tho witness and
not tho words. It ia for tho court to draAV tho inference.
Mr. BOYDEN. I am Avilling that that rule ehall be estab
lished, and I hopo that tho gentlemen themselves will bo con
fined te it.
Q. What language did ho use ? A. IIo Avas speaking of Mr.
Stovena having beon. engaged in a polieo forco or a dotoctivo
forco rather. I do not recollect thoproeiao language, but it was
protty Bovoro I know tho impression it created on iny mind,
Avithout recollecting tho language, but there was no violont or
rudo language.
Q. But it AA'as very severe? A. He commented upon it
as 
Q. Didn't ho say that Mr. Stevens was a hired spy? A. I
do not remember that language; he may havo said so. I
stated that the exact language used at the timo I did not re
member. Q. I ask you if thero was not a very bitter indignation ex
cited against Stevens during that debate? A. I do not know
that it Avas intensified during the debate beyond Avhat it was
before. Q. How was it before ? A. Ho had excited the colored peo
ple about wages, issuing warrants, and had got up a bitter feel
ing in that way ; and he would dismiss warrants issued for mis
conduct ; and I think these things had excited a feeling against
him. Q. You entered the room at the time the coroners inquest
was being held ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Where did you see the body, and what was its condition 1

819 COURT OT niMDAOUMUNTI.
A. The body was lying on some wood that wai out up, and wai
on tho north side of the room. There had been some wood
taken out, and he was lying doubled up in the valley made by
taking out the wood. That was where the body was.
Q. Anything about his neck ? A. Yes, sir, a rope with a
nooso around his nock evidently to strangle him, and there was
a stab on each side of his throat, and his breast had beon
opened, and there was a stab near his heart. My recollection
is, that he had evidently been stabbed where he was from the
appearance, because his hand was in that position, and the
blood had spirted from his heart on the wall.
Q. Jots of blood ? A. Yos, sir. It showed to my mind that
ho had boon stabbod whore ho lay. Thoro was also a knlfo
that had boon usod to stab him by Avlioovor had committed tho
aot, and had boon loft thoro.
Q. Do you know who kept tho key ot that room ? A. No,
sir, I do not. I rarely over wont in there except to soo tho
tho clerk in equity and master, who occupied it.
Q. Who occupied the room noxt to that on the day of this
public meeting ?
Mr. MERRIMON. That was objected to yesterday and
ruled out.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. That class of questions was not
admitted. Mr. BOYDEN. I had forgotten.
Q. [By the Chief Justice.] There were several rooms on
tho floor t A. Yes, sir, they were occupied by different officers
of the couhty.
Q. Was there a large gathering that day f A. Yes, sir, a
pretty large gathering, I have seen larger though.
Q. Several hundred do you think ? A. Yes, sir, some hun
dreds, I do not know how many.
Q. Stato if you know of any other person having been
murdered in that county ? A. I have no knowledge.
Q. Do you know of any one that had been whipped! A. I'

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 818
tmly know from the fact that persons who wero bound over
came to me to defend them.
Q. Did you see any of tho bodies of the persons who had
been Avhipped ? A. No, sir, I never heard any complaint of
any such thing.
Q. Is there any bill found against anybody for the murder
of Stevens ? A. Not to my knowledge. I think it due to
myself to say that I abandoned the case when Kirk came. I
informed the family that I could no longer appear for them in
tho case.
Q. Do you knoAV a man named Robbin Jacobs? A. No.
sir, I havo nover hoard hia naino that I know ot.
Q. lias thoro boon any Indictment against anybody for tho
murder of Robbin Jacobs ? A. Not to my knowledge.
Q. Has there been any indictment for the scourging of
colored men in that county ? A. Nono that I know of.
Q. I do not suppose that you aro a member of any such or
ganization, but I desire to knoAV if you knoAV of any secret
political organization in tho county of CasAvell named eithor
tho " Kuklux Klan," tho " White Brotherhood," the •' Con
stitutional Union Guard " or tho " Invisible Empire ?" A.
I nover heard of any of them oxcopt the Kuklux until I Avas
arrested. I have no knoAvledgo of any of them, and I never
hoard of any and much less know it, except the Kuklux from
Boyd's confession.
Q. You never heard of thom until you were arrested ? A.
Mr. Boyd's confession Avas the first I ever heard except the
Kuklux. Q. You had heard of the Kuklux. A. Oh, yes, I had heard
of them, but not as being in Caswell.
Q. I ask you if they had in Caswell to your knowledge
what were called vigilance committees ? A. No, sir.
Q. You know nothing of them ? A. No, sir.
Q. You know of no attempts under that name to chastise
persons for having committed offences ? A. I know nothing of
the kind. 58

SI4 - COURT OF IMPEAGHMESTS.
Q. What political party do you co-operate with I A. With
the democratic party.
Q. Were there any other violent speeches made there except
Hodnett's, in< which very severe language was used ? A Not
particularly towards the colored race. There was some pretty
strong ones against the republican party, and I think I helped
in that matter myself.
Q. I mean as to Stevens ? A. Nor Bir, I did not hear
Stevens mentioned that I remember by any one elso.
Re-Direct Examination.
By Mr. Graham.
Q. You wore asked about a secret organization. Do you
know of ono known as tho " Union league ? " A. I havo seen
persons parading who told mo thoy belonged to that party.
Q. Composed of colorod men or. were thoro white men
among them ? A. I don't know as I evor saw a white man
among them. I do not remember to haive Been any.
Q. In regard to murders in the county, I ask you whether
or not you have any knowledge of Mr. Stevens' mothor being
murdered and being found dead in his own house with marks
of violence upon her ? A. I haA'e no knowledge myself. I did
not attend during the investigation hy the coroner. He is
here — Dr. Yancey.
Q. You have spoken heve of a feeUng; of indignation against
Stevens ? A. Ye», sir.
Q. State- the nature of it, whether he was considered aa
being instrumental in inflaming the blacks against the whites ?
A. I think that Avas the cause. It was understood that he had
advised the negroes to burn bains. Tliat was generally under
stood all over- the county, and that intensified the feeling
against him.
Q. That was the cause of the indignation ? A. That was
to a great extent the cause of it.
Q. You were inquired of whether you had known any in
dictment against anybody for tho murder of Stevens. State
whether you were in court and heard the solicitor make any

TRIAL OF AVILLIAM W. HOLDEN. ,. 815
remark on the subject? A. I>was not in court when the
prisoners were discharged and I did not hear the solicitors
remarks. JESSE 0. GRIFFITH, a witness on behalf of th Managers,
being recalled, testified :
Cross-Examination. By Mr. Boyden.
Q. It has boon suggested to ask you this question. Whether
you, tho sheriff of tho county, did not threaten that if certain
colored mon woro employed by tho white pooplo, you would
raiso [a company and burn down tho houses ? A. No, sir.
Horo is what I did say 
Mr. BRAGG. To whom and whore.
Mr. BOYDEN. Tho Avitness evidently understood what
the question refers to. Why should he not have an opportu
nity to answer and explain what he did say.
Mr. BRAGG. We understand the rule to be that where a
witness is asked if he made certain statements, the time and
placejmd to whom must be specified.
Mr. SMITH. The counsel may. take hia exception when
we attempt to contradict the statement of the witness. It is
not admissible to make the objection now. When we come
to contradict liim by further testimony, then the question under
the rules of evidence may be raised that we did not call the
witness' attention totthe time and place. But the witness, from
his last remark, evidently knows what we are seeking to call out
and I think the question should be allowed.
The CHIEF JUSTICE- The- witness- says that he never
made any 8uch statements but he proposes- to. tell what he did!
say. I think he has- a right to state so.
Q. Explain what you did say ? A. While I was in- prison
the league assembled and marched around, commanded by the
officers of the league, and in the presence of the prisoners
groaned after we were turned out L and I got home. . I was
indignant at such proceeding, and was at the time, and I was

616 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
opposed to employing these leaders who would treat prisoners
with such contempt, and I said I was one man that would go
in the day time, not as any Kuklux, and tear down the houses
that any man would rent to them.
Q. [By Mr. Merrimon.] It had reference to the men
groaning at you on the occasion of this parade? A. Yes, sir,
and to the officers in command.
By Mr. Graham.
Q. Were Kirk and his men there at the time ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And heard this groaning ? A. Yes, 6ir.
Q. Did they interfere in any way ? A. No, sir.
Q. You did not see any attempt to prevent them ? A. No,
sir. Q. Or attempt to make them go away t A. No, sir.
Q. How long were they groaning about there ? A. They
Avere parading about one or two in the evening, and afterward
they came around the court house and groaned at us.
Q. Under the command of officers? A. Under the com
mand of the league. I considered it a great indignity.
JOHN KERR, a witness called on behalf of the Mana »
gers, being duly sworn, testified as follows :
By Mr. Mkrrimon :
Q. Bo kind enough to state your name, your occupation and
your residence ? A. My name is John Kerr, I reside in the
oounty of Caswell and I am a lawyer by profession.
Q, Stato whothor or not you saw any armed mon during tho
laat year in Caswoll, if so, undor what olroumstancos and
whether thoso armed mon arrested you, if so, for what purposo,
and all you know in roforenoo to your arrest ? A. On the
eighteenth of June last, I saw a numbor of armed mon march
into the town of Yanceyville undor the load of a man whom I
afterward understood was George W. Kirk. Ai they
came into town I was on the publio square having some
tViends with me. I was at home at the moment of their first
arrival. I came to the front and saw them as they marched

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 817
to the court house gate. I saw. but little of them
then. As I walked out I saw them surrounding the court
houso and saw sentinels at the gate and a flag which they
bore floating in the breeze — I had gone out Avith a
view of going to hear the public addresses which Gen
eral Leach and General Scott were about to deliver, but
when I saw this military array about the court house, I returned
and went to my residence and went into my own private
chamber and there stayed for a few moments with my wife.
She came in vrith the two youngest children — no, not the
youngest, but two of our small children. While I was sitting
there this man whom I ascertained afterwards to be Yates came
and enquired if my name was Kerr. I told him it was. He
told me that I was his prisoner, and I must consider myself
under arrest. I asked him by what authority ; he said by
authority of General Grant and Governor Holden. I went out
of my room with him and when I got to the door I found
anotlier man. I did not know who he was, but as I walked
out he rushed into the passage of the house and seemed to be
disposed to evil. At all events, this man Yates checked him,
and took me by the arm and walked with me. I walked out of
the door and went toAvards the court house, and he carried me
into the room which Mr. Hill has described. There I found Dr.
Roan, Mr. Neal and tAvo or threo other persons who had been ar
rested before me. In a few moments they brought in Dr. Yancey,
and then they brought in Mr. Bowe under the circumstanccB
which Mr. Hill haa described here, and during tho course
of the evening they brought in many others. We were about
an hour or an hour and a half in that room. Thoro was a groat
deal of oxcitomont out of doors under tho windows. I stopped
to the window casually without having any purpose, when one
of theso soldiers out of doors raised his gun and told me to get
out of the window or ho would shoot me doAvn. I made no
reply ; I did not go away very promptly, but I did go towards
Mr. Bowe, who was sitting in the position you have heard indi.
cated by Mr. Hill,

818 OOTJBT Of IMPEAOnMENTS.
Q. What sort of ft scene was it? A. Shortly after I got
Into' the room, and after the arrival of Doctor Yancey and
others, we heard a noise inside tho court houso— a reverbera
tion of the building, and I inferred, and I think the others
with mo, that there was a general fight up stairs. It is a large
edifice, and the reverberation was very great. There was a
noiso and confusion, cursing and ripping, and wo thought there
was a gonoral fight, and Borne of us remarked that there was a
general fight. In a fow momonts wo hoard tho voice of Mr.
Mowo. Thoy brought him in. IIo scorned to bo very indignant,
and thoy charged him with having woaponi. IIo told thom ho had
no weapon. Thon thoy cursod him moro. Ho hurled deflanco
at thom. I novor know a man to bohavo with moro spirit.
1 lo defied thorn. Thoy demanded that ho bo searched. IIo
told thom ho had no woapon, and was not a man that carrlod
weapons. Thoy mado a soarch of liim. Ho was defiant and
ropollod thom I thought with A'ory manly, but unhappily ill-
timed, indignation ; and I wont and told him I thought he had
bettor not indulge in that strain.
Q. Who is Mr. Bow? A . As soon as I said that, Mr. BoAve
took my advice and acted accordingly. Mr. Bowe is a gen
tleman I have long known,|he has been a magistrate for many
years. Q. What is his probable age ? A. I think he is about sixty-
three according to my recollection — in fact he has told me so
veiy recently. I have known him nearly forty years. He is
Avell known to us in the county of Caswell. He filled the po
sition of justice of the peace for many years with great ac
ceptance before the war, and during the war — no, I don't
know that he did during the Avar — but after the war the con
federate authorities gave him 
Q. Do you mean the confederate or federal authorities?
A. The federal authorities I mean, gave him an appointment
there and he filled an office in the freedman's bureau, I be
lieve they called it for some time. He has been elected one
of our county commissioners and was a commissioner at the

TRIAL OF AVTLLIAM W. HOLDEN. 81$
time of his arrest and is now. For a time he was chairman of
the county court. I don't suppose that any man in the county
of Caswell has any more respectability of character than he.
Q. Is he a pious man or not ?
Mr. SMITH. We object to that. A. He is ft Very exem
plary man and certainly a member of the church.
Q. Go on Avith your account ? A. Wo Avere taken to the
court room where wo wore confined for four weeks. I don't
know hardly how to proceed, I might consume too much time.
Q. State tho demeanor of the troops as well as you can, to
the prisoners ? A. I can only speak of thoir gonoral demeanor.
It Avas apparent that day to mo that the troops wore under tho
influonca of spirituous liquors — that thoy wero drunk. That
Avas my impression. When I Avas under chargo of this man
Yates I told him that tho troopa Avoro drunk that day, and ho
said it Avas a fact that they wore drunk Avlion thoy got thoro.
Thoy woro acting aa mon usually act Avhen thoy aro undor
influonco ot intoxication. When I Avent up in the room
Avith my felloAV prisoners, I Avaa walking a little out
side of the bar whon ono of the soldiers accosted me very
rudely and required me to go back in tho bar, witli his gun in
hand. I did so. I do not know whether he did that by any
order or not. They wero all on that occasion apparently under
the influence of a high degree of excitement any they acted
with a rude and insulting demeanor, very much eo indeed by
the expressions I heard not only to myself but to others. They
were angry. Their manner Avas of an angry, rude and pro
voking character during that day except this man Yates who, to
me, was civil and polite. He did not offer me the slightest in
dignity and he did rebuke this man at my door. And when
he was carrying me on to the prison, I heard him say in an
authoritive tone, " Behave yourself, sir ! " — " quit that, sir ! " —
" he is under my charge " — " behave yourself I " I don't know
to whom he addressed himself at that time.
Q. What was the discipline of the troops ? A. There was
literally no discipline— none whatever that I could see. Kirk

820 COURT Or IMrEAOHMENTI.
on moro than one occaiion laid in my hearing in tho oourt
houso that he could not control hii troops, that they wore under
no dlaolplliio— that thoy woro not undor his command. So far as
Kirk is concerned, I never saw the man until that day when
ho came into the room at tho timo Mr. Bowo was brought in,
and I did not know who he was. I had occasion to speak to
ono of the officers whom I supposed to be Burgen as I had
understood that Burgen had brought in some prisoners and I
said la this Colonol Burgon, ho said " No, sir, I am Col. Kirk."
That was tho first timo I learned his name. IIo carried
ua up stairs that day. I don't romombor anything that occurred
especially thon, but repeatedly during our confinement ho oomo
to seo us, sometimes behaving himself quietly but frequently,
hoAvovor, ho was in a very high degree ot excitement and
anger. On one occasion he camo up — I suppose it was tho
samo occasion to Avhich brother Hill has alluded — and assembled
us all around him and he eaid he had received creditable im-
formation that an attack would be made upon him by a force
from Danville and he eaid if there was an attack he should
shoot down the prisoners. I don't knoAV how it was, but I was
a sort of spokesman on that occasion and I asked him what
reason he had to suppose there would bo such an attack ; he
said he was credibly informed of it. We told him that we
knew nothing ot it and we did not believe thero was any
thing of the sort in contemplation, that it did not accord with
our wishes for our friends to undertake any such thing for our
release. He hectored and bullied a great deal making use
of a great many expresaions of rudeness and repeating that
if there was any such attack ho would cause every prlsonor to
bo shot down. My recollection is that I said " Really you oan-
" not fool yourself justified in having a parcel of men who aro
" undor your custody shot down whon thoy are in no wise
"chargeable with any attempt at thoir rescue." I don't
know tho exact reply ho mado but I do recall an expres
sion of my brother Hill. I remember he become ft little
indlgnent and he told him that ° if that iq tho case— if yon

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 821
" are going to do that— why then shoot us and take the
" responsibility of shooting us — if that is the way you are
" going to do take the responsibility if you think proper and
" put a parcel of prisoners to death." That seemed to soften
him and he replied to us in this wise ; " If you gentlemen, or
" you prisoners — I don't think he said gentlemen — I think
ho avoided eA'ery such phrase — " if you prisoners will promise
in tho event of an attack you will obey my orders and stand
" where I tell you to stand, and take no part in the
" assault, I promise you protection." I told him we would
do that: — I told him that I for one would do it and that I had
no hesitation in saying we Avould all do it. He said if we
would do that he would give us protection — if we would obey
his orders. That Avas in reference to the assault he seemed
to anticipate from the quartor I have alluded to — Danville.
He came up again on one occasion — I remember it very dis
tinctly — and called us together and told us in a very insulting
and angry tone that he believed — this is his very language —
" that eA-ery d — d one of us kneAV all about and that we were
every one of us concerned in the killing of Stephens " or
kneAV all about it. Of course Ave indignently repelled that.
We told him it was not so. He remarked that if Ave did not
kill him aa'o knew who did and we could disclose. That of
course we repelled as wo felt ourselves called upon to do. IIo
repeatedly reiterated that charge and that kind of insult. He
camo into the room under excitement such as I have already
described and offered this sort of indignity and insult to us.
By tho Chief Justice.
Q. Was ho drunk ? A. No, sir, ho was not drunk. I havo
reason to bollovo that ho is a porfoctly toinporato man. IIo
told mo ho was, and I havo soon Bovoral of our prisoners offer
him drink, and ho refuaed.
Q. Ho is vory paflalonato ? A. Yos, sir, vory passionate. I
don't thiuk ho is a drinking man. I think what ho says ou
that subject is perfectly true. He says he does not, and I
don't believe he does,

822 OOTJETOF IMPEACHMENTS,
By Mr. Graham, [resuming.]
Q. Did he make any threats against the town, and the
women and children, and if so what did he say to you ? A. I
was hesitating as to the time when he made the threat, whether
the timo I allude to when Mr. Hill made that remark or
another occasion ; but my impression is it was at the time Mr.
Hill made that remark that I have just repeated. He said
that if any resistance was made, or rather any attempt at «
rescue was made, he would burn the town and put every pri
soner te death, and with an oath he said he would destroy the
Avomon and children. He used that language, and as I under
stood him, ho aaid that thoso Avero his orders — that ho was
ordered te do it if any attempt at a rescue Avas made.
Q. What became of you after that ? A. I remained there
about threo Aveeks I think in oloso confinement, occasionally
going across to my OAvn residence under the charge of an of
ficer. In the course of ray confinement in the prison, Kirk
came one morning at the head of tho stairs and got in com'er-
sation Avith me. He Avas in good humor and he remarked
that he was in good humor. He said he Avas a passionate
man and subject to excitement, and in the course of this con-
A'ersation Avith him, to Avhich I now refer, he said that he was
disposed to treat me much better than his orders allowed him
to do. He said, " I am alloAving you more privileges and
" treating you with greater indulgence than I am authorized
" by my orders to do." That he repeated to me several
times. Then he took me into a AvindoAv on one occasion
and remarked to me in almost the identical terms that I
have repeated, that he Avas disposed to grant to me in
dulgence or some such phrase '• beyond his orders." He
eaid " I am a married man, sir, I have a wife and three
" children. I have learned your situation. You have a family
" of small children. I am not this savage brute you have heard
" me represented, and I know how to sympathise with a gen-
" tleman in your situation." He made that remark to me and
then repeated that he was showing me an indulgence that his

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 823
orders did not justify, and that he hoped, if I was ever called
upon, I would do him justice in regard to that. I told him
certainly I would do it, that if I had an opportunity, or ever
was called upon, I should do him justice to say he had treated
me with courtesy. And he never did do any discourteous act
to me individually, although I, of course, was included among
all tho other prisoners in the general insults and outbursts of
passion and offensive utterances which he indulged in at times.
But to myself, individually, ho never did offer an insulting ex
pression that I am aware of. He said there Avas no charge
against me — that ho hnd nover heard any charge against mo —
that ho had arrested mo bocauso ho was commanded to do it,
but that ho knoAV no charge against mo in any respoot.
Q. State whothor ho said anything, if so, Avhat, about tho
mannor in which tho prisoners woro to be disposed of? A.
He repeatedly said that thoy Avero to be tried by a court
martial, and ho often told us the day on Avhich thoy wero to
arrive. IIo said frequently that they Avere expected at Yancoy-
villo — I forget noAV tho dates, but ho indicated them.
Q. Who was to arrive? A. Tho court martial. IIo said
that he had sent the ambulance on moro than ono occasion to
meet them at the depot knoAvn as Ruffin's depot, but he was
disappointed. I heard liim express disappointment at their
not coming. He said on more than one occasion he expected
the court — that it had been promised but that he been disap
pointed repeatedly, and he seemed to very impatient about it.
Q. State Avhether you AA'ere taken from that place, and if eo
to where ? A. I was. The week before the prisoners wero
taken, to Alamance I was paroled by Kirk. Doctor Roan, Mr.
Neill, Mr. Jones, Mr. Bowe, myself and perhaps some others —
I don't remember just now — Avere paroled and we were per
mitted to stay at our homes and to report daily. When they left
for Alamance the prisoners Avere carried back. I did not leave
home with the prisoners but I left the next day. They left on
Saturday — I forget the day of the month, but some day in
August, and I left on the next day, Sunday, and came over to Ala-

824 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
manoo by ft private conveyance in company with Another fellow
prisoner who had been paroled like myself. We came to Kirk
and reported to him at the Shops and he continued to let me
go at large on parole. The other prisoners remained at the
Shops a short time and then he required us to report to him at
the town of Graham which we did and we remained there
until it was made known to us that we were to come to Ral
eigh. Then we were all summoned up to the court house on
one occasion and I found this man Burgen there who called
over a list that he had in his hand in which my name
was among others, and any in that list were to come to
Raleigh that day. We Avent to the depot, got into a coach and
came on to Raleigh arriving here about threo o'clock in the
afternoon where wo were transferred by Burgen to the custody
of Judge Clarko.
Q. Colonel Clark ? A. Yes, sir — then acting as colonel —
against the angry protest of colonel Burgen who cursed Clarke
and Holden and the whole concern on the occasion. Colonel
Clarke took us unto the rail road depot and told us be seated.
Wo took our seats all around and he made us a very handsome
speech explaining how painful it waa to hold ua prisoners and
Iioav kindly and courteous he intended to treat us, but he said
if you gentlemen attempt to escape — at that point my friend
Hill interrupted him and said " Escape sir, all you soldiers
could not drive us from here." I told Hill to sit down and
Mr. Hill did sit down, when Clark replaced his right foot in
the holloAV of his left and again said, " If there is any attempt
" to escape" — when Mr. Hill again said " There is no escape
" from here — you cannot drive us away." We then got into
an omnibus and he told us to go with Major Miller who took
us to the Hutchings house and treated us with great civility,
as did all the subordinates. They were specially polite to us, and
Major Miller particularly so, and all the persons connected with
the military here at this place were. I never saw men who
acquitted themselves with more propriety than they did under
the cireumstances. Clarke, Miller and the other officer — I for^

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 825
got his name, but he was equally civil and equally polite, and
bo were all the subordinates, every one of them. I remained
there only a very abort time. By the kindness and hospitality
of Major Jones, of this city, I was taken to his private residence
on Friday or Sa?urday morning, I forget which ; I think we
came on Thursday. I forget what day it was I was discharged,
but my discharge bore tho signature of Judge Dick. I was
carried before his honor, Judge Pearson, and was informed at
the time there was no charge and no evidence against me.
Q. How long were you imprisoned ? A. Five weeks, I
think. Q. 'State whether you remember the day on which it was
alleged John W. Stevens was killed, and if eo, whether thero
Were any strangers about the court house, and whether there
was any one of them you took to be Burgen or the man you
afterwards learned was Burgen ? A. The day on which John
W. Stevene was killed was, I think, on the 4th of May. My
memory has been recently refreshed in regard to that point. It
was a day to be remembered by the fact that it was appointed to
hold a public meeting of the democratic party to nominate their
candidates. That meeting took place at the court house, and
was a meeting that was pretty largely attended by the citizens
of the county. I am not able to say there were strangers in
the town that day or not. I did not see them, I only heard it.
It was told to me that thero was etrangere. I have no recol
lection of eeeing anybody in fhe village except citizeDe of the
county. Q. Stato whether at any time you were present in court
when any person was called upon or bound over te answer for
having killed Stevens, and if bo what was said in that respect ?
A. At our last term of the court, when the term Was pretty
Well along — the judge left pretty early in the term, I think on
a Wednesday of the first week — the attention of the court was
called to the case of the State against Felix Roan, Frank Wylie
and James Mitchell, who had been bound over by his honor,
Judge Pearson, to appear at that term of the superior^ court, to

826 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS*
answer to the charge of the state against them for the- murder
of John W. Stevens. My brethren Watts & Wither* were of
counsel for these gentlemen. In my presence,, in the court, Mr..
Bulla, the solicitor for the state, arose and made a. statement
in substance, as follows : that he had not sent in a bill in this*
case, that he had examined the testimony, and from the exami
nation he had made, he had no hesitation in saying that no.
grand jury would find a bill upon such testimony,, and that he
should not send in a bill upon any testimony that he knew of
or was able to command. That is the substance of. this state
ment in court. Upon that my brother Watts moved that the
defendants be discharged, and they were promptly discharged
by the court. Mr. Bulla's statement was, that he had examined
the evidence, and that he did not think it was sufficient to jus
tify a bill, and that he had not drawn any.
Q. Was there any proposition made to rebind these parties ?
A. Not these parties to my knowledge. There was no propo
sition to rebind them — no motion of that sort.
Q. Were they discharged ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. By whom ? A. By Judge Tourgee.
Q. What is the politics of Judge Tourgee and Mr. Bulla /'
At They are both well known members of the republican party.
Judge Tourgee has taken a prominent part as a politician and
has made speeches repeatedly in that country as well as other
portions of the state,, leaving no ground to doubt as to his
party affinities. Mr. Bulla I know to be a member of that
party from frequent conversations with him.
Q. Had yon a general acquaintance among the> people of
Caswell county in the year 1870 ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And for how long before that ? A. Thirty-nine years
I have lived in the county.
Q. Do you know many colored people ? A. I suppose I
know aa many as anybody else of my age. .
Q. State the relation existing between the colored people
and the wliites in that county during the year 1870 or ¦- any
time before that ? A. It was generally very kindly indeed..

TRIAL. 'OF "WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 827'
Q. Was there any hostile feeling existing between the two
races ? A. No, sir, in general there was no feeltng of that
sort. There are some individuals against whom some charges
of hostility were averred. But in general the feeling between,
the two races was a kindly one. They are employed as heuso
servants and field servants and renters and joint farmers with
the white people in the county
Q. State if you know of any insubordination to legal author
ity in your county/ A. I don't believe there is a more law-
abiding community in the world, and never has been. I have
never in my life known any community more uniformly sub
missive to the constituted authorities. That has always been
my impression and I have no reason to modify that opinion of
late. Q. State whether you know of any outrage in your county
since the killing of Stevens ? A. I know of none.
Q. State whether there were any federal troops at any time
in the county of Caswell ? A. The samo week, or the week
before the arrival of these Kirk forces, we had a federal com
pany there numbering eighty or ninety persons, under the com
mand of Major Rodney and Captain Fields.
Q. Do you knovf whether at any time these troops were
called upon te aid the civil authorities-? A. Never to my
knowledge. Q. Do yoii know what they Avere therefor? A. They were
there, as they informed me, to aid the civil authorities — to
render any aid that might be necessary to the civil authorities.
Q. How long did you say they were there before Kirk ar
rived ? A. I think about eight or ten days. I am not accu
rate; I heard some gentlemen say that they were there about
a week. Q. How long did they stay there ? A.. They remained there
until the first of October, a portion of them- A part of them
left a short time after Kirk's troops left but another company
remained longer. They then, came to.' this- city and arehere-
now..

828 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. State if you know whether any action was taken in
reference to the death of Mr. Stevens and if so how soon after
and what was done ? A. The death of Stevens, as you have
heard described, became knoAvn in the village early Sunday
morning. Shortly after breakfast I walked out across from my
residence to the store house of McKee & Harrison and just in
front I found Doctor Yancey the coronor. It was an early
hour; he said he had come up for the purpose of taking steps to
investigate the death of Mr. Stevens, and according to my
recollection he commenced immediately to summon a jury and
did summons the jury and went into the court house Avith it.
I did not go in with him. He commenced the investigation,
and after they got through with the inquisition upon the body
itself they went into the court room above to hear the testi
mony of witnesses. I went up there myself. I s?aid there for
some time. I heard the examination of the witnesses. I think
that the coronor of the county acted with a promptness becom
ing his official obligation. There was no delay about it.
Q. Did the people of the county take any action ? A. A meet
ing Avas called tho next day — Monday I think — of the citizens
in and about Yanceyville. We got up a pretty good meeting
and it was attended by some of our most respectable citizens.
I remember the late lamented Colonel Brown was present and,
avc adopted resolutions which he advocated as well as myself,
and which were published to the world expressing our abhor-
anco ot such a deed in our community and declared ourselves
utterly opposed to all such violations of law and of all secret
political organizations whether called by ono name or the otlier.
At tho time, wo supposed his death might possibly have
resulted from some of those organizations and we denounced
thom. I did it myself with great sincerity and I think Colonol
Brown did with groat sincerity.
Q. Were the proceedings of that meeting given to the
world ? A. Yes, sir, thoy were published in the Sentinel here
ond giA'en to the world at large, and they were afterwards no*
ticed in the Standard according to my recollection.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. * 7$9
Q. If there is any other matter/ we have not'touched upon
/'you we aro at liberty te state it ? A. I don't remember any
thing specially.
Cross-Exaniincd. By Mr. Smith.
Q. Were you at the political meeting the day before Stevens
AA'as found murdered ? A. Yes, sir, I suppose I was a sort of
'leader in the meeting.
Q. Did 'you see him in that meeting ? A. I did. I eaw him
* sitting in the court room among the audience.
Q. Did you notice Avhen he left ? A. I did not
Q. Do you know whether during the meeting attention was
' called to him by the speeches of any one of the speakers?
A. I remember this : there was an allusion made to liim by
nobody, except Mr. Hodnett, his late colleague iu the legisla
ture. Mr. Hodnett had been re-nominated on this occasion, and
ho made an address to tho people accepting the nomination,
and in tho course of his remarks ho held in his hand a
' report of tho auditor and ho called attention to the fact
1 that Mr. Stevens, his colleague—a representative of the
the people of the county of CasAvell^n addition to the seven
' dollars a day (which he put forth with some emphasis) — had
received — I forget what amount — a- sum out of the public
' treasury; and then, said he, my follow citizens, "What do you
" reckon that money was paid te him for ? " — I am giving tile
substance of hia remarks and I think I can almost ropoat what
ho said — " What do you supposo that money was paid to him
" for ? It was tor acting tho spy upon you, tho man whom you
" havo honored with your confldonco by oloctlng him to tho
"sonate — ho has received this monoy as his reward as a spy
1 " upon you in addition te his pay as your representative."
Q. Was Stevens there at the time ? A. My impression is
' he was. I cannot be mistaken — I think he occupied his posi-
' tion. Q. Was attention directed to him? A. I noticed one or tAfo
, persons turn their eyetf'upon him — yes, more than one or two^-
U

830 . COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS,
just as Mr. Hodnett said that; and I also remember, which I
Bhould not have done had it not been unusual and provoked a
smile, that somebody groaned. That waij the only demonstra
tion I remember. I noticed that the oyes of the audience
turned pretty generally toward him.
Q. Was there any indignation or anger manifested by the
audience ? A. No, sir, none but what I have stated.
Q. Wrs there any indignation or anger manifested by any
thing they said or did? A. The only demonstration was the
turning of the eyes of the assembly generally to hpn and
Homebody groaned.
Q. At what poriod of th© meeting mas that? A. That
muat have beon vory late in tho afternoon. In the first plaoe,
avo mot in'the forenoon and it became necessary to appoint
a committee and thon to havo the action of that committoo
before any thing further was done and we adjourned until af
ter dinner. Then we camo in again and there were threo
speeches made before Mr. Hoduett spoke. We came in about
2 o'clock after dinner and the report of the committee was
read. I made a speech myself and then others spoke. I do
not know what time it was when Mr. Hodnett spoke but it
was pretty late.
Q. Not long before the meeting broke up? A. Not very
long I take it.
Q. You did not see how soon after that Stevens left ? A. I
did not.
Q. Did you see anybody go up to him and speak to him as
he went out ? A. I did not, because I did not see him as he
went out.
Q. Did you seo him any more after that time ? A. I did not.
Q. Do yon know whether he was missing soon after the
meeting broke up? A. Tlie first I heard of his being missing.
was after night.
Q. Were persons searching and enquiring after him in the
neighborhood of the court house ? A. All I know is that about
8 o'clock that night at home  ..

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 831
Q. That would be the month of May. A. Yes, sir.
Q. It would be dark? A. A little after dark. It was after
supper, between eight and nino o'clock.
Q. The aun sets about seven in that month ? A. After dark
I was sitting Avith my wife on the front portico when Doctor
Roan camo to mo and hallooed, accompauiod by a gentleman,
hoav hero, Mr. Stevens' brother 
Q. What was tho firat you had hoard about it? A. That 'was
tho first I hoard of it.
Q. How long after ho waB found tho next morning did you
know of It ? A, I roso early usually at homo unless kopt up
tho night boforo by somo ongiigomont. I bollovo I roso that
morning m usual and ono of my sorvants camo and told uio
that Mr. Htovons waa found dead. That Avas tho first I hoard
of it.
Q. Was there a largo crowd of persons ar.und the court
house tho day ho disappeared and up to tho night of that day ?
A. Thoro Avaa a publio mooting and it was protty late before
the pooplo disperaod.
Q. Were persons passing around all over tho premises while
the meeting was in progress ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And it progressed until nearly night ? A. Until a late
hour in the afternoon.
Q. The court house square is in the centre of the town ? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. There aro houses all around it ? A. Yes, sir, houses sur
rounding it on all sides.
Q. Did you see Stevens' body ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Before it was disturbed ? A. I did not see it until it had
been removed.
Q. The body had been removed from the position in which
it was found ? A. It was in the room. It was found on a pile
of wood. When I saw it it was laid out.
Q. Was the rope around his neck? A. No, sir, there was
no rope wlien I saw it. I did not go into tlie room while the
jury was there.
Q. Did Stevens live in that town ? A. Yes, sir.

' 832 ' COURT OF' IMPEACHMENTS,
Q. How near tlio court house? A. I suppose — I do nbt
i- know — about 850 yards from tlie court house.
Q. [By Mr. Manager Sparrow.] How many squares ? A.
You can't estimate it that way, the place is not laid out in
> squares, but he lived perhaps four or five hundred yards from
the court house.
Q. Was he a candidate at that time for any public office ?
A. I do not know.
Q. It wbb not understood then whether he was or not ? A.
I did not understand it.
> Q. Did he hold a "publio office at that time? A. He was a
' j ustice of the peace.
Q. Waa ho a member of tho legislature ? A. Yob, sir, he
Avaa a senator, he had boon a senator from Caswell county in
tho legislature.
Q. Has any one been punished for the homicide ? A. Yes,
sir, it aeoma to mo that a good many of us have 
Q. No ono has been puniahod for committing the crime ?
A. Thero has boon no trial of any individual. No porson has
boon specifically charged and indicted for the crime that I
know of. *
Q. Do you know of any othercaoee ot homicide in that county
that have not been punished ^withirt the last twelve or eighteen
months ? A. I do not.
Q. You know of no persou who has been scourged or whip-
; ped ? A. I know of no such instances, unless you desire to
1 know what I have heard.
Q. You state that Kirk always treated you peraonally with
\> proper courtesy ? A. He did.
Q. Except as you were included in the general denunciation ?
.'A. Ye8j sir.
Q. What waa hia personal conduct towards the prisoners
;-• generally — I don't spoak of those cases where he was angry?
A. Towards methV was respectful. •
Q. Waa itnot so towards the others? A. I have no obser-
. vation particularly to make. in that regard.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. nOLDEN. 833''
Q. I speak outside of theso cases whon he was in a pa66ion ?
A. So far as my observation went, when ho camo into our .
presonco ho was respectful to thom as well as myself.
Q. You Avero allowed to go on parole?. A.. Yes, sir.
Q. When he stated to you that he avbs giving you privileges
beyond his orders he referred to allowing you to go on parolo ?
A. I did not understand him to mean that exclusively.
Q. Wasn't that what he said, that allowing you to go on
parole Avas in disobedience to his orders? A. He 8aid repeat
edly that ho Avas giving mo privileges in contravertion of his
orders — that he was giving me indulgence that his orders would
not justify.
Q. Was not that what he referred to, alloAving you to go on
parole Avas in disobedience of his order? A. I did not so un
derstand it. I understood him to say that tho granting of
parolo A\-as contrary to orders ; and, as I understood him, his
general courtesy and bearing Avas contrary to orders — not con
trary to orders — hie language was that it " oxeceded his orders."
Q. You do not mean to 6ay that he 6aid that his personally
gentlemanly conduct to you was against his orders? A. As to
his personally gentlemanly conduct to mo, I understood him to
say that these courtesies that avo had received at his hands were
beyond Avhat his orders justified, in other words, the sum and
substance of his remark was that in the strict discharge of his
duty he Avould have been much more rigid than he was. That
is what I understood him- to mean.
Q. Do I understand you to say that when ho spoke about
being attacked and said'-af he Avas attacked ho would burn tho
houses and destroy tho women and. children, he would do that
by the orders of any ona? A. I have revolved that over and. i
over again. I dislike exceedingly to say that unless I am sure.
It is my impression that he said he was acting under orders to
do that. I haAre canvassed that matter a good deal, and my
own impression is the same as that of all the otlier gentlemen.
If I had not have been supported by their recollection I should
doubt my oato jeoncIuBions..-

834 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. Let me call your attention to a circumstance. He predi
cated that statement, you say, upon the idea that an attack was
about to be made. How could he have had any orders te that
effect, when he had but a little while before got notice that there
would be an attempt to rescue you and attack his men? A.
The remark was, if there was any attempt to rescue.
Q. It Avas a general order? A. Yes, sir, that upon any at
tempt to rescue he Avould destroy tho women and children,
burn tho town and put tho prisoners to death,
Q. But ho was not in tho toAvn all the timo, he was in tho
country a portion. Tho orders you speak of woro confined to
his conduct Avhen in town ? A. I am simply giving you what
ho Baid — his language.
Mr. MERRIMON. I insist that the counsel shall not argue
tho matter Avith tho Avitness.
Q. Do you knoAv any combinations in the county of Cas
well to put doAvn Avages ? A. Oh, no, sir. I desire to make
one remark about that declaration of Kirk's. His manner is
perfect in my memory and I will state how he explained him
self as I remember it at the time he spoke of burning the
town. He said Avith considerable anger that " If any attempt
" was made to rescue, his orders " — he put that word in — " were
" to shoot down the prisoners." Then he went on in the same
connection to say " And I will burn the town down and de-
" stroy the Avomen and children."
Q. He did not say this other part was his orders? A. The
utterance Avas all in the same connection.
Q. I understood you to say that he made the declaration, a
moment afterward, that if you would all be quiet you should
bo protected even if you were attacked ? A. Yes, sir, if we
would obey his orders.
Q. Immediately after making this other statement ? A. Yes,
sir, in the aame connection.
Q. You say you know of no combination to put doAvn the
price of labor ? A. Certainly not.
Q. Do you know whether there were any of Stevens' family

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 835
sent before the grand jury by the solicitor at the time he made
the declaration ? A. I don't know whom he sent.
Q. Did he Bend any witness at all ? A. I don't know.
Q. You do not know whether any of the family of Stevens
were before the grand jury or not ? A. I do not.
Q. How many are there in the family of Stevens ? A. He
left a wife and two children.
Q. How old are his children ? A. There is a little girl, I
suppose, of eight years, and the other is an infant at tho breast.
Q. Is thoro any othor member of his family ? A. IIo haa a
brothor Henry there. I don't knoAV whothor ho lives with hia
other brothor or not.
Q. StovoiiB had two brothera ? A. Yea, air.
Q. They live in that town ? A. His brother Thomas lives
next door neighbor to Stevens' family. Henry ia an unmarried
man and I don't know Avhether ho lives with his brother's
widow or Avith Thomas.
Q. You stated in some part of your testimony that it Avas
said you were arrested by the authority of the United States ?
A. This man Yates told me that Avhen he arrested me.
Q. By the authority of tlie president of the United States
and the governor ? A. I asked him by what authority I was
arrested and he eaid " by authority of President Grant and
" Governor Holden."
Q. Were there United States troops there at the time ?
A. Yes, sir, I think eo.
Q. As well as these state soldiers ? A. Yes, sir.
Re-Cross Examination.
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. State if, at any time, John W. Stevens was a client of
yours? A. He was repeatedly, and was at the time of his
death. I was engaged with Mr. Hill as his counsel.
Q. State if you know anything about the death of his mother ?
A. I know nothing except common report.
Mr. SMITH. That certainly is new matter.
Mr. MERRIMON. We propose to show that Stevens,

880 COURT (OF^ IMPEACHMENTS.
mother was found with her>,throat cut in his house only a short"
time before.
The WITNESS. Doctor YftDcey the coroner is here, who ,
can clearly state the facts in reference to that. I know nothing
about that, except mere rumor.
Senator LATHAM offered the following order :
Ordered) That the order that this court adjourn each day at
one and a half o'clock, p. m. to three o'clock, p. m., and remain ,
in session until five o'clock, p. m. be rescinded, and that tho
sitting of the court be as it was before the adoption of said
order. The CHIEF JUSTICE put the question on the adoption of
the ordor of Senator Latham and it was decided in the affirmative.
WILLIAM B. BOWE, a- witness called on behalf of th
Managers, being duly sworn, testified as follows :
By Mr. Merrimon. ,
Q. Stato your name, age, place of residence and business ?
A. My name is William B. Bowe, I live in the county of
Caswell near the county seat. My age Ib 03 last Wednesday,
and my occupation,^' that of a farmer.
Q. Stato whether, at any time during the year 1870, yon
saw any armed men in the county of Caswell, and if so state
undor what circumstances — whether they did anything to you,
and if so, what ?'•.>- A. On the 18th July, the candidates of
tho republican and democratic parties for congress had an
appointment to speak in Yanceyville. The day Avas proclaimed
and there was a largo meeting of tho citizens to hear what tho
candidates had to say. I Avent to that meeting.
Q. Where, did it assembje,.?, A. At the Yanceyville court ,
house. I went .downi there, and went in and took my seat at a
convenient place te hear. I did not know when Kirk's sol
diers entered .the- town, I knew nothing in the world of their r
entry. The,first thing I kneAV of their being there was a little
before! was. arreted,... I did not know they wej;e. arresting..;

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 837
anybody, and I learned afterwards that I was tho last porson
that they did arrest on that occasion.
Q. You mean you were the last person arrested that day ?
A- Yes, sir, they had made the other arrests. Col. Kirk, as I
afterwards learned him to be — I did not know him then — with
two or three officers came right up before me and asked mo
what my name was..
Q. Whero were you then ? A. I was sitting in front of tho
speaker. Q. In tho, court house ? A. Yes, sir, as if the speaker was
here, and I Avas sitting there, [inlicating.J IIo camo up
betAveen mo and tho speakers, and I thought in a very abrupt .
manner, and asked me iny name.
Q. Was speaking going on then ? A. Yea, sir. I told him
my name. IIo said, " You aro my prisoner ; got up and folloAv
me," and he spoko very abruptly. I asked him. by what
authority ho arrested me, and he pointed around, I suppose to
his soldiers. I eaid I Avould like to seo his warrant, and would
liko to knoAV by Avhat authority I was arrested. Then ho.
commanded hia soldiers to carry me oft'. There seemed to be
just as many hold of me as could get hold, some pulling ono
Avay and some the otlier, and I had to throw them off to get
relief, and they became very much enraged. I was surrounded
by soldiers and officers, altogether somo eight or ten of them
Avith muskets and bayonets right at me. I heard tho bursting
of a cap or tAvo, and several pistols wero presented at me, somo
one way and some another.
Q. What was said ? A. I don't know Avhat was eaid, but
they were cursing and swearing at the top of their voice, and
it seemed to me that eA'ery one in the houso was swearing and
6ome were crying out, " Shoot the " d — d old Kuklux." In a
very short time— a minute or half minute — they started with
me doAvn stairs. I told them to let me go, that I was not going
to offer any resistance. Before we started they eaid I must
give up my weapon. I told them that I had none, and then
they searched me to find it. They started down stairs, and just

838 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
as many as could get around, holding me. Before I had started,
in throwing some of them off, I had torn the coat of one half
off, and that put him into fighting me on that account. He eaid
I had torn off his coat and ho fought me all the way doAvn stairs.
I told the offlcor either to let mo go, and give me a chanco at him,
or olso to keep him off; they would not do that, and thoy kept
on with mo until wo got to a room in which they had the othor
prisoners. Thoy thruat mo into that room at the point of half
a dozen muskets. They SAVoro they would kill me any how.
Somo eaid " Kill him, shoot him." Thero Avero Avindows around,
and thoro woro a parcel pointing their guna, and they Avere
cursing at the vory top of their voice. It seemed to me as if
every man on tho ground Avas hallooing. Thoy commanded
mo to sit down. I sat down, and after I had taken my chair
there Avas eonio half a dozen at tho door sAvcaring thoy would
shoot mo, and they got thoro with their guna pointing from that
direction cocked. I just sat there. Somo of my friends
advised me to move around where I Avould be out of their
eight, and I did so. I eat there in that room till towards night
Avhen on application made by some of the prisoners, we were
removed from the basement of the court house up into the
court room, Avhich Avas a very large room, as large as the house
of representatives, I suppose. From that time, for tliree weeks
there Avas a little coolness betAveen me and Colonel Kirk, and
the balance of them [laughter] I said nothing to them, and
they said nothing to me. At the end ot about threo weeks,
Colonel Kirk summoned the county commiesionera together to
transact somo littlo business. I Avas one of the number. It
happened on Saturday evening. After we got through with
tho business, Colonel Kirk remarked to Dr. Roan, who AA'as one
of the commissioners, and to Mr. Jones, who was anotlier, that
they might havo a parole to go home that evening.
Q. They Avere prisoners also ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. They were county commissioners with yourself? A.
Yos, sir. After Ave got through doing the business he remarked
to thom that they might have the privilege of going home that

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 830
ovening. Ho then said to me, " You havo asked no favors — it
"seems to mo you don't- want any." I replied to him that I
didn't feel myself under any obligations, that I hadn't offended
against the laws, that I had done nothing to be arrested for, and I
Avas not dependent upon him for my rations, or anything else, that
I drew them from homo, and I was under no obligations Avhat-
ovor, and should ask of him no favors. He stopped a moment and
said, " You may go home, and stay until to-morroAv evening."
I asked him whether I could go homo Avithout being guarded
by soldiers, as I had been accustomed to bco from one to 'three
soldiers sent out with every person paroled and suffered to go
home. I asked him if I could bo permitted to go Avithout thoso
guards, and said that I would never go homo at tho point of tho
bayonet. IIo told me I might go homo, and from that tlmo
Colonel Kirk treated mo very respectfully. IIo never denied
mo anything — I didn't ask him for much it is true — but I
never asked him anything but what he granted. That was tho
3rd. I stayed there nearly anotlier week, and ho paroled mo
tAvo or three times to go home. I lived about a mile from the
court house. We stayed there until Ave were ordered to tho
Shops. We Avere ordered there one Saturday evening. They
Avero all preparing to go, prisoners, soldiers, and all. I Avent
to Colonel Kirk, and asked him tho privilege of going to tho
Shops in my own Avay, and in my own time, and I Avould report
myself there at any hour on Monday morning. On tho next
morning, tho Sabbath, I, with somo othor prisoners, prepared
and Avent over to tho Shops and reported to him on Monday
morning. Wo stayed thero at the Shops until Tuesday I think
some timo in the day when avo wero ordered doAvn to Graham.
IIo still paroled me, and several of us, Dr. Roan, Judge Kerr,
Mr. Neill and two or three others, and permitted us to stay at
tho hotel and report to him once a day at a given hour. Wo
stayed thero until wo were ordered down hero.
Q. What was dono with you when you woro brought to
Ralolgh? A. Soon after we got horo to the Ilutchin'g
houso 

840 court:- of impeaowmhnts;
Q. State what was dctoe to you by *the judge or any person
who claimed to have authority over you ? A. When we got
to tho depot down here \ce were met by an officer.
Q. What I want to know is wero you taken before the judge
and discharged?
Q. [By the Chief Justice.] After you came? A. They
never brought me before a judgo at all.
Q. Woro you disohargod ? A. I was discharged, and I havo
tho dlachargo at homo.
Q. Was thero any charge mado againat you ? A. I was
charged with being accoBsory to tho death of Stevens after tho
fact. I do not know how.
Q. Was there any prooff brought against you ? A. No, sir,
they discharged me, there being no evidence against mo.
Q. Do you know whether any persons was arrested hero
afterwards, and if so, Avho these persons were? A. I don't
remember just now.
Q. Do you knoAV whether Mr. Wylie, Mr. Roan and Mr„
Mitchell were arrested? A. Yes, sir, they Avero arrested —
those three.
Q. Who madO. tho affidavit, do you Ichoav? A. I do not
know. Q. Wo avUI now go back to Yanooyvlllo. Dosorlbo those
armed mon, what they did, thoir dlaclpllno, or anything you
know about their demeanor? A. Whon thoy firat arrlvod thoy
oanio liiBldo tho Inelosuro of tho court houao. Tho yard is In-
eloaod by an Iron railing. , Thoy camo Inaldo of tho inoloauro
aud pitched thoir tents thoro, aud continued for some two
weeks, and they alao ooouplod tho baaomont of tho oourt houao.
Q. What Avaa tho demeanor of tho offieors? A. Tho do-
moauor of tho ofllcors avus exceedingly rude. I am not much
acquainted Avith military llfo.
Q. Toll ub Avhat thoy did ? A. Thoy wore cureing and
swearing and threatening to arrest ovorybody, it soems te me..
Q. Did thoy curse tho prisoners, if so, whon ? A. They,
ouraed tho prisoner's all the time...

' TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. nOLDttN. 84:1
'Q. And tho officers? A. The officers and'Ttten, and fro-
* quently the soldiers, would accompany the officers whenever
'they came about us.
^Q. Give us a specimen of their language? A. We wero
charged with being a " Set of d--d Kuklux cut-throats and
" midnight assassins," that was tho language, and that " We
" didn't deserve any consideration."
Q. What was the appearance of the troops, their discipline
¦ &c. ? A. Their appearance to me was that ot a parcel of
boys — mere boys for the most part. Thero were a few aged
persons among them. They seemed to bo mere boys raised in
tho gorges of the mountains, who had never before 6een any
body or anything much until they came out here. They
^ seemed to admire our court house above everything. They
were on the top of it, and all through it, and they thopght it
was the finest court house they had ever seen.
Q. What was tbe tone of their conversation— theiri demeanor
in the court house, and through the town as you observed? A.
It was low, vulgar and obscene in their intercourse with one
anothor, and it was always worse when they » came' in contact
with the citizens. They never addressed tho»'citizens without
curses and obscenity. Thoy frequently charged that everybody
in tho county Avas implicated in tho murder of Stevens, and
that wo woro responsible, and ought to bo held for it.
Q. Stato whothor you saw any impropor ?behavior about tho
pump, or anywhere clao on tho publio square ? A. Thoy would
frequently go out on tho publio square where tho pump was,
and undroBS thomsolvos and waBh.
Q. Did you boo that ? A. I saw it on «somo occasions ; and
then thoy would othorwiao oxposo thomaolvus with a great deal
of indecency.
Q. Were persons passing about the strefet ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Ladies? A. The ladies didn't Come1 but much during
that time.
Q. In the presence of the troops? ^ A. No, sirj«hey didn't
i. go out any where.

842 COURT OF IMPEACU^^io.
Q. How far was this oonduct from the houses occupied by
people ? A. There woro some houses within fifty yards.
Q. Which were inhabited by ladies? A. Yes, sir, there
were between 50 and 150 yards of a good many houses. The
second day after they got there at night, they seemed to have
imagined that the whole county 
Mr. SMITH. You need not speak of their imagination.
The Witness. I will stato what thoy did. On the seoond
night after thoy got thoro, about 10 o'clock at night— I didn't
sloop aB much as soino othors — I was walking about the court
houao a good doal. Tlio dogs began te bark on one side of tho
town, and booh thoy commenced barking noarer tlio town.
ProBontly thoro camo a pared of poraons whom I took to bo
sontlnols, and thoy reported to Kirk that thoy would be attacked
in a few minutee. Colonel Kirk camo up in tho court houso
very much excited, and called tho attention of all the prison
ers that he had been credibly informed that he was to be at
tacked by a body of men in a very few minutes, and he said,
" In case I am I Bhall shoot the last one of you, and burn the
" town, and destroy the women and children."
Q. That was in the night? A. That was in the night.
There was another occasion which brought him out very much
in the 6ame sort of Avay, when he said that he had been intormed
that they were coming from Danville. He made very much the
same remark then.
Q. Did he say anything about his orders ?
Mr. BOYDEN : That question is leading.
Q. [By the Chief Justice.] State what he said ? A. I dis
tinctly recollect on one occasion that he said he had orders, in
case he was resisted in any Avay, to kill the prisoners.
Q. State anything that transpired on the day of the elec
tion ? A. On the day of the election the troops he had around
over the public square, going to and fro.
Q. [By tlie Chief Juetice.] In little squads, or just one or
two ? A. Sometimes in squads, and sometimes they seemed
to be promiscuously mixed up.

TRIAL OF AVILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 843
Q. Armed? A. All armed. Most of them going about
with pistols, and showing them. At 11 or 12 o'clock, we wero
informed by Colonel Kirk that if we wanted to he would
march us to the polls and we could vote; and he did so.
Q. Did any guard attend you ? A. Yes, sir, I suppose about
25 or 30 soldiers and officers guarded us filed on each side.
Q. State whether he gave you any order about tho election,
and if so, what ? A. He gave no order that I knew of that
day in regard to anything about tho election.
Q. I moan about tho votes ? A. Nothing that I recollect.
Q. I moan about a certificate of the persons who wero elected ?
A. Nothing on that day.
Q. Did ho any othor day? A. On a subsequent day ho
called the county commissioners together to make out a certifi
cate of the persona elected, as it was our duty to do under the
law. I told him we didn't feel that wo had any right to do any
official act under the circumstances.
Q. How long waa that after the election ? A. That was a
few daye. I don't recollect, but probably three or four days.
Q. The day prescribed by law to prepare the votes ? A. We
took some action on that day but did not finish, and he called
upon us on a subsequent day to finish it. As we told him Ave
had no right to act, he constituted us into a military commis
sion to do it, and so stated.
Q. He appointed you ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. By hiB military authority to do what? A. To revise the
vote and count it and make out the returns.
Q. Did you do it ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you grant any certificates ? A. No, sir, we just
made a count and handed it to him.
Q. State whether you have a general acquaintance in the
county of Caswell ? A. Yes, I have lived in the county 40
years. Q. I ask you whether you know that Colonel Kirk made any
peech there? A. Oh yes, sir.
,, Q. Under what circumstances — what did he say ? A On

844 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Saturday previous to the election they had a very large meet
ing of colored men, and there was some three, or four addresses
made. Q. By whom ? A. There were two or three black persons —
I only know one or two of them — a man by the name of
George Bowe, who used to belong to myself.
Q. Were there any made by the soldiers and officers ? A.
After they had made their speeches Major Yates got up and
made a long harangue, in which he used the most inflamma
tory language I ever heard. He told the black people that
they had como here to aee they had justice done them, and
that they hadn't had justice done them heretofore, and they
had come here to see justice done, and they intended to stay
here until they had accomplished that purpose ; that every
man had all the rights and immunities of every otlier man, arid
they had not been dealt fairly with, &c. Then Kirk got up
and told them that they had been oppressed and borne down,
and that he had boon sent here to relieve them, and he inten
ded to stay until tho youngest child became grey but what he
would accomplish that object; that he would stay there and
stack tho bones of the Kuklux as high as the court house but
Avhat he would do it. The negroes seemed as if they would
run wild. I never saw anything like it, and the effect was
visible in tlieir conduct for months afterwards.
Q. How long was this before the election ? A. It was on
Saturday, and the election was on the following Thursday.
The Saturday before the election the league held a meeting,
and ono ofthem who lives with me stated 
Mr. BOYDEN. We object to his statement.
Q. State what they did ? A. They had a meeting.
Q. [By Mr. Smith.] Were you at that meeting ? A. No,
sir. Q. State anything you saw then ? A. I saw them on parade.
Q. Where ? A. They were parading up and down the street
nearly all tho time, some times in front of the court house, and
then they would bo gone again. Late in the evening I saw

TRIAL OF WIXLIAM W. HOLDEN. , 845
them accompanied by a large number of these soldiers and
officers and they marched up to near the court house to a grog
ehop where they Avere treated every one of them. It seemed
to me that there were several hundred who were furnished
with drinks. I saw them go in two at the time.
Q. Were any of these soldiers and officers with them ? A.
Yes, sir, when they came out of the court house some of the
officers, I don't know which one, proposed that they file into
line and give somo one, I didn't understand the name of the
individual, three cheers and then they would march in front of
the court house and 'give the prisoners throe groans. Juet as
the negroes got up to the court house I turned off.
Q. Did they give the groans — did you hear them ? A. Yes,
air, I heard them groan as I turned off.
Q. Were these soldiers and officers along with them ? A.
Yes, 6ir, some of them.
Cross-Examination .
By Mr. Smith.
Q. Were you present at a meeting on the day of the night
on which it was supposed Stevens Avas murdered ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. In the court house up stairs ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was Stevens present ? A. I don't think I eaAV him.
Q. Did you hear the speech of Mr. Hodnett ? A. I did.
Q. Do you recollect of his calling attention to Mr. Stevens ?
A. Yes, sir, I recollect ho had a pamphlet or some document.
I do not knoAV Avhat it AA'as.
Q. Was not the attention of the wholo crowd directed to
Stevens by that ? A. I think it was, from the fact that when
Hodnett called attention to tlio paper the people looked round
towards the door,
Q. Did you yourself at that time see Stevens? A. I did
not. Q. Was there any manifestation of anger or excitement
against him by that crowd when that language was used ? A.
No, sir, I cannot say that there was any angry exhibitions.
55

846* i ru/ court of impeachments:.
;Q, I don't mean words ? A. No, air, nor any gesture. TJbere'
wero no signs or, demonstrations of, anger. . ., t ,, . ,, ,,
Q. Was it not received with some indignfttfon-rHodnett's
statement? A., I don't remember to have heard any hissing,
or groaning.. ^ .,
Q. Could you not see from the manifestations, the counted
nances and demeanor and manner of the audience? A. I
know that the audience* was indignant at him by reason of
Avhat was charged upon him, but there was no demonstration of
violence in any way.
Q. When did you see Stevens next afterr that meeting ? A..
I did not see him any more until I wbb summoned to hold tho-
inquest. Q. That Avas the next day ? A. Yos sir, Sunday morning.
Q, Was there a crowd there on the ground during the rest
of the day ? A. Yes,, sir, over most of the ground on the east
aide of , the court house-fronting the room on which Stevens-
waa murdered, thero are some persons living, some black people.
<& Where were you the next morning ? A. I was home-
when I was summoned on the juiy.
Q, Ilad the body, beon disturbed, when you saw it ? A.
They said it had not*. It. was lying in a position, in which ho:
Boomed to haA'e been mnrderod.
Q. With a rope around his neck ? A. Yes, air.
Q. Could you tell from tho appearance of the rope how it
was tied — whether in front or behind ? A. There was a noose'
in. the rope, and it seemed to have been thrown over his head.
and jerked violently.
Q. From behind ? A. From behind ever the shoulders.
It seemed it was never loosened from the time it was drawn.
Q. Did you see any stabs about the body ? a.. Yes, sir,, he
was stabbed in two places in the throat, and there was -one
stab near his heart.
Q. Do you know of any attempted arrangement among the
people there— the landowners to fix a higher rate of wages ?
A, I knoAV.of no combination. I can teil of a little occurrence*

IfM&t oF aveSllam w; holden. 84?
Ihat did tak<r placer «t one" time. An1 agent sent down there"
in behalf of a railroad1 company to hire hands was paying higher"
wages than the farmers thought they could pay, and there
was a proposition that the farmers should hold a meeting to*
ascertain whether they could bid -with this agent, and deter--
mine what they would dbi
Q. Did they have such a meeting £ A» I don't think they'
did. Q. Were you present at any such meeting ? A. I was not.
Q. Was there any complaint maide to fou by any peteon
Who claimed to have' been injured by the sheriff— to you' tSsr
magistrate, sheriff or commissioners-?' A. No, sir.
Q. I mean injured by the sheriff T A. Yes, sir, I under
stand. Q. Has there been airy complaint made by colored persons'
asking your interposition as a magistrate against the sheriff?"
A. No, sir, there never has been.
Q. Have they ever complained of his treatment? to them f-
A. I may havo heard one or two — ¦-*-
Mr. GRAHAM. Wo object to conversations of this'kind.
Mr. SMI TH. It has been1 attempted by the managers to
provo a perfect state of good1' feeling in the relations between
the whites and blacks.
Mr. MERRIMON. Our effort hafc been1 to prove there was
a> general state of good feeling bet'Weefi! the two races.
Mr. SMITH. But the general facts consist of details.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. That is only a matter of hearsay.
The presiding officer thinks it is not competent.-
Q. You 'have said that they Avero rude boys' who consti
tuted this military force ? A- Yes.
Q. Were there not some old' mert too t A. There were a
few men Avho looked as- if they might be 60 years old.
Q. There were ¦ young men who looked as if they hadn't
seen much' of the world? A. I speak with regard to the'
Whole crowd.
%. They came from the mountain country. A. Yes, shv

848 COURT of impeachments.
Q. Where Judge Merriinon used to live? ' !A. I think they
did. ";"", ''' '" ' " ""¦; ' •'•;i ; "•'
Q. From the gorges of the mountains ? A. I said they had
the appearance of persons who resided in the gorges of the
mountains. Q. They were searching everywhere about the court house
as a curiosity ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. You say also that yon were allowed to go with others
between a file of soldiers and vote ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were you allowed to vote as you pleased ? A. Yes, sir,
Q. Everybody voted as they pleased ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. There was no attempt to restrain the right of voting by
Kirk or anybody else ? A. No, sir.
Mr. GRAHAM. The witness does not knoAV that.
Q. I mean ot your knowledge ? A. I saw nothing of it at
the polls.
Q. You went with the others to vote ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. You said that Kirk directed you to prepare returns, arid
ascertain the vote of the county, and that you declined to do so,
being under duress, and that he constituted you a military com
mission to perform civil duties ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. You did thon as I understand count tho votes ? A. Yes,
air. Q. And ascertained tho stato of tho vote in the oounty ?
A. Yos, sir.
Q. Did ho attempt at all to induco you to mako wrong re
turns ? A. No, sir.
Q. You acted with as much freedom as if you had not been
in prison ? A. Yes, sir, he gave us the papers to make them
out. Q. How old a man is Col. Kirk ? A. I should judge about
30, it may be a little less and it may be a little more.
Q. He said that he would stay there until the youngest child
became grey but what he would accomplish what he was sent
for 1 A- Yes, 6ir,
Q. Was he excited when he said that ? A. Yes, sir, I reckon

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. f49
he was. He was on the rostrum addressing a very excited
crowd, and I suppose he waa excited himself.
. Q. His expression was that he would see justice done?, A.
Yes, sir, that he would see they.had justice done them.
Q. He was in a condition of angry passion when he said that ?
A. I suppose he was excited but not angry. There was nothing
to provoke his anger. • , . ; 1 1
Q. Nothing that you know of? A. He merely got up and
addressed this croAvd of black people. < ,
Q. When he was not in a state of passion what was his
general conduct towards the prisoners ? A. When he was, free
from passion he behaved himself.
Q. With the exception of your arrest he treated you well
enough ? A. We had nothing to do with each other after, the
first day for the three Aveeks.
Q. He treated you respectfully ? A. Yes, sir. , .
Q. Do you know of any porson being scourged or whipped
in tho county of your own knoAvledge ? A. I do not.
Q. . You nover saw any colored persons whose backs bore
marks of whipping ? A. No, sir. I havo heard of a few cases,
but I have never seen but one man that was said to have beon
whipped, and he denied it, I think.
Mr. SMITH. I suppose his denial would not be competent,
being hearsay. [Laughter.].
Q. Do you know of any secret political organization in the
county of Caswell ? A. No, I do not. I suppose they thought
I was too old to go into such things if there is any.
Q. Do you know of peoplo going about disguised. A. I
nover have seen a man in any sort ot disguise.
Q. You speak of [soldiers conducting themselves about
there. Did you see anything more than this rude conduct,
swearing, cursing and walking about*— did they commit any
violations of law? A. I don't know d» tbey did, but I have
heard that 
Q. That is not proper. At the time* J£irk made the remark
that he would shoot tho prisoners, you heard there was a mes*-

£S# 100X1X9 OF IMPEACHMENTS, , ,v: .
sage broipght to him by some of his aeidiers fhat there was $
force coming to attack him t A. Yes, 4r, C' F. ?
Q. It was on (the spur of the moment that he made that
remark! A. It was soon after.
Q. He never (Undertook to execute any such threat! A.
No, sir.
Q, Did he <»v*r«offe? any violence or indignity to the women and
children of tho .town or citizens ! A* I don't know that he did/
Q, Do you fenow anything about itlie death ,of a man named
Robin Jacobs! A. I do not. I never knew him.
Q. Did you know a man by that name in the oounty ? A.
I did not.
Q. With what political party do f£» .co-operate ! A. I hold
that I belong to the old Henry Clay whig party. I am
co-operating now with what is called the democratic party.
On motion of Senator Robbins, of Rowan, tho fiosai
adjourjwd ;to meet to-morrow at 11 o'clock.

'.' »c
¦. . j i

I ¦ ¦ ¦- - .,::.¦',./' ;¦'. ' , :

..»¦. , , ¦¦¦;•>•. V-:- ,: ) •*,.,.
'I . : •'::."¦••;«¦' ;> 'ry..r<

1 '. .. .

TRIAL OF WTLLIAM W; HOLDEN. '85lt"
¦ . in
Senate Chamber, February 16th, 1871.
./,. , .i'jU .',•¦
The Oourt mot at eleven o'clock, pnrsuant to adjournment,
Hon. R. M. Pearson, Chief Justice of due Supreme Court, in
the chair.
Tho proooodings wero opened by proclamation made ih duo
form by tho doorkoepor. • .
The CLERK proceeded te call the roll*of senators, and tho
following gentlemen were foumwl to be presont : ¦ • "•
Messrs. Adams, Albright, Allen, Battle, Bellamy, Brogderi,
Bitonm, Cook, Coraaeil, Cowlea, Currie, Dargan, Edwards,
Flemming, Gilmer, Graham, of Alamance, Graham, of Orange,
Hawkins, Jooes, King, Latham, Ledbetter, Linney, Love,
Mauney, McClammy, McCotter, Merrimon, Moore, Morehead,
Murphy, Norment, Olds, Price, Robbins, of Davidson, Rob
bins, of Rowan, Skinner, Speed, Troy, Wadflell, Warren,
Whiteside and Worth— 43.
Senator TROY moved that the reading of the journal ot
proceedings of yesterday be dispensed with.
The CHIEF JUSTICE put the question on the motion of
Senator Troy and iit was decided in the affirmative.
ALBERT G. YANCY/a witness called on behalf of <t/h
Managers, being duly sworn, testified as follows :
By Mr. Graham.
Q. State your name, residence aad official position if you
hold any* A. My name 3s A. G. Yancey. I reside in Cas
weU county near the county seat. My occupation is that of
physician and aaa coroner of the county*
Q. State whether you held an inquest over the body of John
W. Stevens in Caswell county? A. I did.
Q. How long did the inquest sit ? A. The jury sat for two

852 court of tmpeaohmenTOj
days in succession— Sunday and Monday, and then adjourned
over to Thursday. 'They sat three days' altogether.
Q. Do you remember the number of Avitnesses examined ?
A. I think thirty-five altogether.
Q. State whether or not counsel appeared for the family of
Stevens to prosecute the investigation ? A. Yes, sir, Mr. Hill
acted as counsel on the first two days. Mr. Ball from Greens
boro' appeared with him on the third day.
Q. You prosecuted the investigation until Thursday, same
time when the jury rendered a verdict. A. Yes, 6ir, pretty
much all day. We investigated the matter on Thursday until
late in the afternoon, when the jury rendered their verdict
and we were discharged.
Q. State whether any witnesses were suggested who were
not examined? A. No one that I know of. There was one
¦witness that was summoned by Mr. Hill. He took him to his
office, and he said subsequently he was unimportant and ho
sent him home. He said he had examined him in his office,
and the man was anxious to go home, and he discharged him
and let him go. He was the only witness that was not ex
amined. Q. How was the jury constituted — of men of different
complexion ? A. Yob, sir, there was seven white men and five
colored mem
Q. Who were the colored men — name them ? A. This man
John E. Cook, ¦**— .
Q. The magistrate ? A. Yes, sir, he was one, then there
was David Johnaon, a man by the name of Stephen Lawson,
another one by the name of George Bowe, and another, I
think, was Morris Hooper, though I am not positive about tho
fifth. Q. State whether or not they were intelligent men ! A.
I considered thom the most intelligent persons I could find.1 I
¦oleofod them with that view. ¦ • » >: > . > i •
Q. This investigation woe gone through find ft verdict ren*
dorod ? Ai Yei, sir,

TRIAL OT WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 853
Q. You did not discover who the perpetrators were of tho
Crime? A. No, sir, the jury returned a verdict that Mr,
Stevens came to his death from certain wounds inflicted on
him and by strangulation by a rope — and -that the murder was
committed by 6ome persons unknoAvn to the jury. That was
about the verdict I think. There was no evidence sufficient
to bind over anybody. I told the jury — especially the colored
portion of them — that although the jury was dismissed and
the court adjourned, yet, if at any time they could find any
thing that would implicate any man to let me or the sheriff
know of it and we would forthwith have the matter examined
into, that at any time, months after if they chose to hold the
court in session, I would hold it. They said, and the counsel
who was there said, that they Avere satified that there was no
use to investigate further. But I said if they could find any
suspicion against any body to let me or the sheriff know and
We would have him arrested and brought before the magistrate ;
that although the court of inquest was adjourned the matter
would not stop there but we would still go on, and that if they
could find any man against whom there was suspicion we would
have an investigation.
Q. Were you present at the public meeting of the people?
A. No, sir, I was not present. I was not in the village that
day. Q. State whether or not you were present when Kirk camo
there and you were arrested ? A. Yes, sir, the day of the po
litical meeting there, I was at home, and I got my dinner and
went down street to go to the court house. I heard a very1
great noise up the street and I halted, and in a few minutes-
these troops came in sight.
Q. What noise was tliis ? A. There was a general hallooing.
Q. On the part of whom? A. These soldiers. I presume?
they had got in sight when I first heard 'them.1 I halted untiB
they came in sight and I saw who they ''were. We had been-
expecting thom. I went down to the «ourt house ftnd went
Btraight into the court room about the time. I got there a littl*

6 54 O0CST OF IMPEACHMENTS.
After one o'clock", the meeting was orgaifeed and speechet wew
commenced. Mr. Soott I think was speaking,' or if he was not
he oommenoed shortly attar. I sat pretty elose to the speaker's
•stand. Those men about tho oourt house mode a ,great deal of
noise. I suppose they wero ooming on to the lot, bnt Md not
isoo thom. I heard tho ndso as I was In tho oourt wwtn, but I
did not got up.
Q. Stato whether or rwt you woro wwjctod, and if to, under
what oiroumstanoes, A. I was sitting listening to tho ipooohoi
when this man Burgen coaie in at first. Tho first man I saw
liim arrest was Dootor Roan and ho lod him out. In a short
time he came and touched me on the shoulder and asked me
iny name. I told him my name. He said I want you to go
with me. I said to him in a jocular way I wished he would
let mo hear the speeches out. He said I could, that I might
jgo baok to my seat were I was and report to him. I went
back to my seat and while I was sitting there a young man
by the name of Henderson came and asked me to' go down.
Ho said that his father had been arrested, and he wanted me
to interest myself to get his release, that they had arrested
him through a mistake, supposing he was bis son, James Hen»
dersbn who was on the jury. I went doAvn and got him off,
and then I remained there with the rest of the prisoners. I
took my seat in the room where the prisoners were who had
been arrested. They were Dr. Roan, Yanoy Jones, James
Neill, Mr. Kerr, and some others probably, As I went in I
remarked they had pretty long faces and I said gentlemen
" I have got in good company," and I took my seat and staid
there. Q. You say they had made a mistake in arresting Mr. Hen-r
derson on the supposition that he was one of the jurors on the
inquest of Stevens? A. Yes, sir, that is, the old gentleman.
It waa James Henderson. ,
Q. Did they arrest all the white men on the jury ? A. Yes, air.
Q. And arrested you, the coroner ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And all the white men on the jury ? A, Yes, air*

TRIAL OF OTLUAM W. HOLDEN. 755
«Q. Did they arrest any of the colored oneB? A. No, sir.
Q. You went into the room where these gentlemen were
prisoners. State what occurred next? A. I sat doAvn thero.
'Then afterwards we heard a great deal of noise and confusion
up in the court room above— we could not tell what. Some
one of the prisoners remarked that ho believed there was a
general fight going on, and in a little time they came in pulling
in Mr. Bowe, and cursing, ripping and swearing that they would
kill the " d — d old Kuklux #— n of a b— h", and I don't know
what all — everything you could think of. I thought thoy would
kill him, and I fully expected to see them shoot him. Some-
"body spoke to Mr. Bowe — probably Judge Kerr — and told him
to keep quiet and he quieted down. Then I spoke to the offi
cers and said, Mr. Bowe ia quiet and if you will let him alone
this thing ¦will pass over. We remained there till sometime
that evening, when some one of the prisoners petitioned the
colonel to let us go in the court room. The court room is a
large room and much cooler and not so much confined as the
2>lace we were in. He consented and we went up into tlie court
jroom And remained there.
Q. What seemed to be the dfecipline and order among the
-troops ? A. I looked upon them as a mob, without any discip
line at all. f
Q. No discipline ? A. None in the world — they were a per
fect mob ; they roamed at pleasure all over the town, bare-footed,
hare-headed, cursing and 6wearing, and were card playing on
.the sabbath. They paid no more attention to the sabbath than
Any other day, and the only marks of oirilization I saw
Among them were swearing and card playing all the time.
Q. Was there any obscenity among them? A. All sorts or*
obscene language and vulgarity, ' ' • ; • ' • '• '- ' ' '
Q. In conversation or gongs J A. In conversation and
songs — conversation with themselves and with the prisoners.
Q. They seemed' to roam at pleasure? '< Ai< YeB, sir, they
were prowling about and pilfering. We could "aee them from
the window in men'* orchard*, garden* antfnegito house* and

660 * OOTTBT OF IMPEACHMENTS*
cabins—in fact, wherever they pleased, They did not seem te
have any control over them.  , , , i . , .,/ ',
Q. Did Kirk give you any reason why you were arrested; or
under what authority? A. Ho never did. At ono timo, after
he became a little more civilized by associating with civilized
pooplo, I had a conversation with him. He had paroled mo ;
and I will say that ho nover maltreated me personally. I said
to him, " Colonel, I wish you Avould discharge me; thero is a
" good doal of sickness in the neighborhood." I had been pa
roled and had attended some patients, but I wished him to
discharge me altogether, I said to him : " I havo no doubt
" you have no charge against me, for I don't think there is a
" man in the county will bring a charge." " Well," he said,
" you are one of the prisoners who were arrested by Governor
" Holden's orders and I cannot release you. There are somo
" who have been arrested without the orders of Governor Hol-
" den, on my OAvn responsibility, and them I have the power to
" discharge, but you are one of the number who were arrested
" by Governor Holden's orders and I cannot discharge you."
" Well," said I, " that is all right, obey your superiors."
Q. He said you wero one ot those Avhom tho governor dc
slgnatod to be arrested, and he could not discharge you ? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. State whether at any other time there were occasions'
when Kirk indulged in very abusivo language to the prisoners,
and if so, state what it was ? A. On several occasions ho camo
up in the room and seemed to be in a bad spirit, and he cursed
the prisoners in a mass as " d— d Kuklux and assassins."
Q. Assassins? A. "Midnight assassins, murderers," and all
that at one time.
Q. Did ho apply that language to oil of them ? A. Yes, tho
whole mass of them. On one occasion he came up and said
that he had reliable information that he was going to be
attacked, and if he was he would shoot down every prisoner,
and would burn the town- and kill or murder — I don't remem
ber the exact language — but the substance was that he would

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 857
murder every woman and child. Some person, I think it was
Judge Kerr, made some remark to him that we were in his
caro as prisoners of war, and that as prisoners of Avar he thought
he ought to protect ns. He then remarked t "Well, if you
" will all obey my orders and stand where I tell you, if I am
" attacked, I will protect you as far as I can. But theso moun
taineers, there ia no telling what they will do." He meant, I
suppose, that these soldiers could not bo controlled.
Q. Was there any more than one scene of that kind ? A.
On several occasions. I do not remember that he threatened
to burn the town and murder the women and children except
on that occasion. He camo in once in an excited manner and
made a personal attack on Mr. Weeden and cursed him as
the " D— deat ecoundrel in the crowd," and shook his fist at
him. Weeden told him that he had dono nothing, ho said,
" D — n you, you have been making Kuklux signs and you
are tho d — dest scoundrel in the crowd." Weedon did not
mako any reply that I heard, and finally he walked off and
loft him.
Q. Do you knoAV anything of Wooden being shot at? A.
Yos, sir, I was on parolo thon. I Avas not In tho court houso
but I was on tho public square sitting on tho porch ot Col.
Williamson's store, I think, looking at tho soldiers and pris
oners up in tho vostibulo of tho court houso. Thoro was a
man who sat doAvn on tho steps. What was said I could not
hoar for It Avas too far, but ho doliboratoly got up and fired his
pistol and I saw Woodon jump back aftor ho had fired,- Then
tho soldier walked off into tho passage of tho court houso, and I
did not 690* any more of him.
Q. State whothor or not Kirk said anything to you about
trying the prisoners by court martial ? A. Yes, sir, frequently,
on several occasions. He told us at one time the oourt martial
proposed was te be assembled boforo the election. After a
while he- told us that it had been postponed until after the
election on the 4th. The election was on the 8th, and on the
8th he said it would be certainly held.- On two occasions, I

858 ' '*'¦ COURT OF XMtWSCHMENTSV
think, he sent his ambulance after the offlcen of the court and?
they came back ; I asked* him whore his court wal, he said ho
could not tell— they had not comev
Q. Where did he send the ambolance ? A. To the depot I
suppose. Q. He went in the direction of ftufflns depot ! A. Yes, sir/
he went in that direction and came from that direction, but he
said he was disappointed in getting his court, he did not know
why. Then he would make another remark on a certain day
that they would be there and he did that on various occasions,
I do not know how often but two or three times. At one time
he said thero certainly will be a court martial. I said, " I don't
" care, I would just as leave be tried by # court martial so that
" I get out of prison as by anybody elke; provided they were
" gentlemen on it and they will give me a fair trial." He Baid-
that we should have a fair trial. I said that is all I can ask.
Q. State whether or not you were present when Mr. Frank
Wylie was brought to Yancey ville ? A. Yes, sir, I was then •
up in the vestibule in the court house myself.
Q. What day was that ? A. That was the same evening.
It was either the 18th or the next- day — the day ot the political'
meeting — I think. Late in the evening we were standing there
when they came in with him.
Q. Who? A. An officer and a squad of soldiers- who
brought in Mr. Wylie. They brought him to the • door. He
seemed to be exhausted* and he sat down on the stone steps of
the court house. He eat there a very short time — not more
than two or three minutes— when thia man Burgen roae up
behind him with a hickory switch — a short one between a
stick and a switch— and told him to get up that no d — d scoun
drel Bhould Bit in his presence, and he made him get up and
stand. They staid there a while and Mr. Wylie remained. I
do not know why they kept him there ; and then they carried
him into the passage. I saw nothing more of him until tliat
night. Q.. Describe how Wylie was dressed at the time ? A. He

TRIAL OF WIL&LAM W. HOLDEN. 859*
lad nothing on but his pantaloons and shist He was in his*
shirt sleeves.
Q. How far did he live from Yancey villo % A. Tho nearest
way was about ten miles and I think the way usually travelled
in a vehicle was about twelve. • ,
Q. State whether or not the party who arrested him camo1
from tho direction of his house or somo other direction? A..
Yes, sir, thoy came up tlie street from tliat direction,. when I
first discovered them. I did not discover Hhem until they got
near, the court house.
Q, . They Avere approaching apparently from the direction
of WylieJs home ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. [By the Chief Justice.] You say that he was dressed* in
shirt and pantaloons ; had he a hat and shoes on ? A. Yea,.
sir, he had a hat and shoes but no vest.
Q. Was he on horse back or foot ? A. He. was on foot— -i
don't think he was on horseback.
Q. Did he have anything on in the way of. clothing except:
pantaloons and shirt ? A. No, sir.
Q. Was Burgen the party who brought him ? • A. Yes, shy
I think he was.
Q. He brought him there, and then with a switch struck-
him, and said, that no« such d — d rascal should sit in his
presence ? A. That was -the remark.
Q. Mr. Wylie was taken in you say, and then you did not
see him until tlie next morning ? A. Isaw him that night, it
may have been eight o'clock, or it may; have been after. Some
officer and soldiers — I don't know who the officer was, came.
up after me to go down and see Mrc Wylie. They said that'
he was complaining, and wanted me .to go and see him. . I did
so. I went down in the room and' I found him a groat, deal
exhausted, and with a very feoble and irregular pulse. . IIo
told ine how he had boon brought, and I supposed that was"
what had caused it. I told him to take a stimulant and go to
bed and the next morning he would feel better. He did so-
Q, What stimulant?. A. I told him to' take a toddy.

860 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. Did you see any marks of whipping or other violence !
A. No, sir, I did not examine in regard to that.
Q. Had he or not, up to this time, put on clothes other th'an
those that he came in? A. I think not. My impression is
that he was in the same garb that he was in when he arrived,
but I am not very positive about that now.
Q. State whether or not you were summoned before the
grand jury of Caswell county at the term succeeding the death
of Stevens and examined as a witness ? A. Yes, sir, the next
term. That was the fall term and the only one we have held
since. Q. What questions were put to you and what answers did
you make on that occasion ? A. I don't remember the particu
lar Avords or questions they put to me, but they examined ine
in regard to the murder of Stevens, how he was found, what
position he was in, what evidence we had before the jury of
inquest and various otlier questions. I do not remember par
ticularly now about it, I told them all I knew.
Q. State whether you were asked if he had discovered any
Bubsequent testimony?
Mr. SMITH. I do not think the question is in proper form.
Tho witness should bo asked what was said and what was dono
and any suggestions as te tho topics as to what Is dosirod to
exunilno him about may bo Included.
Mr. GRAHAM. I do not doslro to go through the wholo
matter. I simply doslro to call tho witness' attention to a par
ticular point,
Q, I ask whothor anything was said to you about tho dis
covery of ovldoneo subsoquont to tho inquest ? A, Subsequent
to tho inquest ?
Q. Do you know whether tho grand jury asked you as to
whothor thoro had boon any evidence discovered since the
inquest ? I don't remember particularly about that ; thoy may
or may not.
Q. They went through an examination of your connection

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 861
with it and you told all you have discovered as having taken
place on the inquest^on the body of Stevens ? A. Yes, air.
Q. How many murders have occurred in Caswell within a
year before the time when Kirk came there with his troops ?
A. About one year before the murder of Stevens, his mother
was found dead in his house and was supposed to have been
murdered. Q. Did you hold an inquest ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. How did you find the body ? A. I came on the street
and I heard that the old lady had been found dead and I
askedhoAv she came to her death. Somebody 
Q. State what you saAv ? A. I went down and saw her.
I found her lying on the floor Avith a cut on her neck about
three inches long. 1 put my finger in and found the bone. I
made up my mind that she had been murdered, and I went
and told the family that they must have an inquest. They
made no objection. I summoned a jury and wo went down
and held an inquest and tho verdict of the jury avhs, that sho
came to her death by this wound inflicted on her neck, in
what way, they did not know.
Q. State. Avhether or not there was an inquest Avhich you
held over another party some tAvelve months before ? A. Yea,
¦sir, ono other, there avos an old lady iu tho county by tho
name of BlacltAvell, avIio Avas murdered one night and found
the next morning.
Q. Was alio a white person ? A . Ygb, sir. I was sent for
and I took tho sheriff and Avent up. W© summoned a jury
and held an inquest. I found her skull broken iu several
places and bruises about her person, showing that sho had
been killed by a olub or some instrument of that kind. Wo
oould get no evidence. There were t >,'0 little oolored children
only on the premises. They lived vrith her. She was an old
Avoman who lived alone by herself and was supposed to have
money. She Avas a raiser and it was generally supposed that
ehe had money. These little children were the only person*
who lived with her.
£6

802 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. Were there any evidences of robbery or not? A. Ye«,
sir, her pooket book was found on the floor rifled of its con
tents. The neighbors did not know anything about how muoh
money she had, but there was nothing in the pooket book.
Q. There was no evidence ? A. None, exoept that of the
tAvo little children, Avho we did not consider oompetent to be
examined. The older one of the children 
Q. [By tho Chief Justice] How old ? A. I don't think
moro than six years old,
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. It is not pioper to state what
sho said.
Q. What else did you find ? A. We saAv some evidenoes
from the coals of fire about the place that there had been some
person about with a torch.
Q. Tho house was smoked ? A. Yea, sir, and they knocked
tho coals off on tho floor. They seemed to have been running
about the house.
Q. Was there any discovery ever made from that day to this
as to who killed tho old lady ? A. No, sir.
Q. Stato whether or not you had any talk with Kirk about
pillaging and stealing by his people ? A. I had a talk once
about thom entering people's houses and insulting the females.
I said "If they enter my house what shall I do? I have
" nobody to protect my family but a little 6on." He remarked,
" tell him to shoot them down." I said that Avas what I had told
him to do. He said " That is right " and he said also, " If
" any ono of my men insults a female I will have him shot."
Q. Hoav in relation to pillaging and trespassing upon the
people. I ask you whether you had any conversation with him
on that e.ubject ? A. When I spoke about his men insulting
females lie said " Thoso are not my men." I told him I had seen
idiom, lie said "They are United States soldiers." I said,
44 No, sir, thoy are not ; they have been here for a long time and
" they have never insulted a lady that I have ever heard of, and
" besides your men are known from the United States soldiers
" by thoir uniforms being different, and they are not tho United

TRIAL OF AVILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 863
w Slates troops." He said that they wanted to get up a fusa
and had done all this and laid it on his men. I told him I did
not think so;
Q; That the" United States soldliers have got up this fuss ?
A. Yes, sir, and laid it on his men.
Q. You spoke of the enclosure to the court house: state if
there was any damage done to the oourt house and the enclo
sure after theso men arrived / A. Yes, sir, they damaged tho
enclosure a good deal — to what amount I am unable to say. I
have hoard it variously estimated. I can tell what I havo heard
estimated. Mr. BOYDEN. That is not proper.
Q. Make your own estimate if you can ? A. I suppose that
it would cost eight hundred or a thousand dollars to put tho
building in the same condition it was before they came.
Q. What was the nature of the damage ? A. I waa going
to state ; they took out the pailings and had pathways all
through them. Finally they broke up a good many of the
pailings and took axes and cut them up to fasten their tents.
The court house was greased up and one of the stone sills in
the room where Stevens was murdered, was broken up. I
suppose they wanted to take a piece of rock as a memento
and each one would break off a piece. They greased up the
room very much and made drawings on the wall. They had
their commissary store there.
Cross- Examination.
By Mr. Boyden.
Q. You say you saw the body of Stephens? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Tell us tho condition in which you found it and what
your opinion was as to his having been killed or not? A. Tho
next morning after Stevens was murdered I was sent for by
his brother to "my houae. I had not got up. The servant
man came and waked me up and told me Mr. Stevens had sent
for me, stating that his brother was found in the court house
with a rope around his neck. I immediately got up and dressed
myself and went down stairs, walked around, looked in the

864 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
window and saw the body lying on some wood. I put a
sentinel at the window and told him to allow no one to hoist
the window and get in until I summoned a jury. I went off
next and sent for the sheriff and by the time I got a jury sum
moned the sheriff arrived. We then put a man in the window
and he took the catch off from the lock of the door and opened
the door and the sheriff, the jury and myself and the physician,
Dr. Roan, went in. The body was lying on this wood. The
wood was piled up at the north end of the room. It had been
used out of the middle and made a sort of valley, and Stevens'
foot and body were in tliis valley except the shoulders and
head, which wero higher up on tho wood. There was a rope
around his neck. He was in a rather inclined position, neither
sitting nor lying.
Q. What did you find around his nook ? A. We found a
ropo round his nock with tho ends behind him as if ho had
been held backwards ; In fact his head was drawn backwards,
and the rope was drawn very tightly round his nock, so much
ao that it wae almost buried in the muscles of the neck. There
Avore three staba on hie body — one on each side of the throat or
larynx here, [indicating,] and one in the region of the heart.
Q. State whether you eaw what appeared to be jets oi blood
spurted out? A. Yes, sir, there was some blood Bpurted out
on the wood and probably some little on the wall.
Q. As if coming from an artery ? A. I suppose it was the
last pulsation of the heart that threw it out.
Q. What was your opinion as to whether ho was killed there
or not ? A. I think he was killed there — that is my opinion.
Q. You say you heard of the death of Mrs. Stevens ? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. And you went and held an inquest on her body ? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. You told us something about the verdict of the jury. I
<isk you if you formed any opinion then on the examination of
the wound and the circumstances as to how that cut in her neck
was .produced-? A. Yes, sir, I did.

TRIAL OF WTLLIAM W. HOLDEN. 865
Q. What was it? A. My opinion was that she was mur
dered by a small ax or hatchet.
Q. That was your opinion ? A. Yes, sir, I examined the
wound and took out the bone of the neck. I found tho wound
extended to the bone. I took out the bone and cleansed it and
found a crink of the instrument on the bone in the neck. It
was the opinion of another physician, howeA'er, that the wound
might have been caused by her falling on an earthen vessel in
the room.
Q. Who was he ? A. Doctor Roan.
Q. By falling on an earthen vessel ? A. Yes, air, by falling.
She fell from the bed — that ia not as the family alleged.
Q. Do you know that she was pubject to epiloptio fits ? A.
I do not know it, but I have heard so.
Q. Dr. Roan's opinion waa that it was caused by falling on
an earthen vessol ? A. It Avas his opinion that it could possibly
be made by falling on an earthen vessel from the bed. My
opinion was that it was impossible.
Q. Was there a broken vessel there in the room ? A. Not
in the room but they told me 
Q. Did you aee one ? A. There waa some pieces brought
in. When I called for tho vessel some pieces wero brought in
but they were broken into atoms and I could not toll anything.
about it.
Q. In that conversation and upon that examination, was it
proved that she was subject to epileptic fits ? A. I think it
was proved. I know it was said —
Q. How old was she ? A. She was an old lady, I suppose
about seventy. . ., ,
Q. You have spoken ot another oase of murder where yoiu
held an inquest. When did that take place ? A. I think it
was in 1869.
Q. Did you hear of another murder in the county, of a man
by the name of Jacobs — a colored man ? A. I heard a rumor.
Q. You did not hold an inquest?' A. No, sir, I wa*., never.
called. upon. to- hold an inquest Qv.eF.him..,

866 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. When you hear of a murder do yon wait 'till called upon
before holding an inquest ? A. No, sir, if the statement comes
from a reliable source I do not wait. I heard nothing about
this case till a week after it was done, then I heard it as a
rumor. I took pains to enquire. I heaid at ono time it was
at one place and another time another. I got no reliable infor
mation about it until about a month afterwards, when I saw
Mr. Brock Holden, in whose neighborhood it occurred, and ho
?old me it Avas so.
Q. You did not think proper to go to that neighborhood
lifter you had heard of it? A. I heard it was in two or three
neighborhoods. Q. Nothing was ever done about it ? A. I do not know
what the grand jury may have done.
Q. I mean nothing about it by the coroner — nobody was ex
amined ? A. No, sir.
Q. Has there been any investigation by a jury ? A. Not
that I know of, I cannot say what the grand jury may have
done. Q. What was his color said to be? A. He was rumored to
be a colored man.
Q. You did not know the man ? A. I never saw him.
Q. Were you at a public meeting on the day when Stevens
Avas murdered ? A. I was.
Q. Were you up in the court room ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were you any part of the time or late in the evening in
the passage or in any of the rooms? A. No, sir, I was not in
the passage or any of the rooms during the day.
Q. I did not know but what you had been in to see this tax
gathering ? A. No, sir, I had not during that day.
Q. You heard die speeches ? A. Yes, sir. .
Q. Did not Mr. Hodnett speak, of Mr, Stevens in very bitter
terms— in very denunciatory terms? A. No, sir, I think not.
Q. Tell what language he used ? A. He called the atten
tion of the people in the speech to some money that had bOen
paid to Stevens as a spy, I think he called it. He said some-

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 867
thing like this: "Fellow citizens, hero is what becomes of
"your money. Hero is a man who has beon paid bo much
" money " — telling the amount — " as a spy upon your conduct —
" to report you," and he tnrnei around, probably, to where
Stevens was sitting. I was sitting near the chairman's seat.
I had not seen Stevens during the day. I raised up and saw
him sitting over in the audience. I think that was about the
remark. Q. You did not consider that hareh ! A. No, sir, I did not
think it was liarsh.
Q. But it attracted the attention of the peoplo to him ?% A.
Yes, sir, when ho apoko of Stevens as being a spy and who
had received money for auch service a good many of the
audience looked at him.
Q. Ho eaid that ho had beon rccoiving seven dollars a day as
a member of the legislature and had been receiving this other
sum to act as a spy upon tho people, and they looked round at
him ? A. Yes, 6ir, that Avas about the substance of it.
Q. Did not Hodnett denounce such conduct as that in pretty
strong terms ? A. I don't remember that he did. He just
repeated that language and let the people draw their own con
clusions. s
Q. He did not draAV any himself? A. I don't know what
he did.
Q. Ho did announce his conclusion ? A, I don't think he
did. Q. If he did you have no recollection ? A. No, sir, I have
no recollection.
Q. What time did Stevens leave the court room? A. I
never saw him leave and I did not see him enter.
Q. About what time to your best recollection was it that the
attention of the people was directed to him by this speech of
Hodnett's ? A. I don't remember but I reckon it was in, the
neighborhood of four o'clock. ,. . i •
Q. How much time did. the meeting consume After Hodnett

668 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
had finished ? A. I am not positive as to that, but I think the
meeting lasted until about five o'clock.
Q. It continued until about five o'clock ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. You staid until the meeting closed? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Where did you go then ? A. I went immediately out of
the court room, walked over to the opposite side to the store
and took a seat, talked awhile and then went home.
Q. When did you first hear that Stevens was misaing? A.
I heard it that night.
Q. What time ? A. I suppose about eight o'clock, perhaps
a litfcle after I had eaten supper. As I usually do, I walked down
to the store and as I got to the store I met Mr. McKee, a mer
chant, and he remarked that Mr. Stevens was missing. I asked
him what he meant. He said he could not be found, that his
family were looking for him ; I said he must be attending some
league meeting. He said no, he is not there, and that they
were very uneasy about him. He stated that Stevens had
promised to be at home a certain hour.
Mr, GRAHAM. All this is hearsay, Mr. Chief Justice.
The Witness. Yes, it ia what I have heard ; I went down
to the atore and I conversed about it with Judge Kerr and Mr.
Neill. At that time there were men about the court house ; I
could see lights passing about tho rooms.
Q. What time was that ? A. That was, I suppose, between
eight and nine o'clock, and these things continued I don't know
how long. I afterwards left and went home.
Q. Do you know, of the people keeping guard about that
night ? A. I heard bo.
Q. Do you know of any person white and black who has
been whipped in that county? A. I do not.
Q, Did you see anyone who had been chastised?. A. No,
sir. , ,
Q. I mean have you examined these persons ? A. No, sir.
Q. What was the state of feeling in the county towards
Stevens — was it not very bitter?. A. I think. peojple generally
disliked him — the white people at least

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. nOLDEN. 869
Q. I ask if there M'aa not a very bitter feeling against him
among the conservative party ? A. I think they disliked him
about aa bad as they could.
Q. Do you know anything about there being any secret
political society there known as " The Kuklux Klan," " The
Constitutional Union Guard" and " The Invisible Empire?"
A. I do not know, sir.
Q. Did you ever see anybody riding about in disguise either
in the day or night ? A. I never did ; I ride as much as any
body, day and night, in the county, the sheriff not excepted!,
and I never saw anything of the sort.
Q. I understand you to say, in speaking of these troops that
were there under Kirk, that you saw but one evidence of civili
zation among them, one was cursing and the other was card
playing ? A. I said that they seemed to me to have a remark
able propensity to swear.
Q. But I understand you to say that their swearing and
card playing were the ouly marks of civilization that you dis
covered ? A. I did say that.
Q. Were they badly clad ? A. Yes, sir, they were.
Q. Some ofthem during the warm weather went barefooted
and bareheaded and some of them were without shirts, and yon
complained about their going to houses and inaulting people,
and you say you asked Kirk if they came into your house what
should you do t A. Yes, sir.
Q. And he told you to shoot them down ? A. Yes, sir. I
asked him what I should do, I had only a little son ten years
old to protect my family if one ot his men should go in, he
told me to tell him to shoot them down, I aaid that is what
I have instructed him to do ; he said also that "it one of my
men insults a lady I will have him shot," or "I will shoot
him," I don't remember which.
Q. According to his account to you he was endeavoring to
make them obey orders.? A. I don't know about their obey
ing orders. . < /
Mr. GEAHAM. That is calling for an opinion.

870 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS. ,
Mr. BOYDEN. The gentlemen have been calling, for opin
ions all the time in his examination of the witness.
Mr. GRAHAM. No, sir, I only called for a statement of
what thoir conduct was.
Mr. BOYDEN. Ho had been asked by the gentlemen if
those men appeared civilised.
Mr. I3BA00. Tho question has been decided, therefore
these remarks are out of place.
Q, To which political organisation do you operate with !
I operate with the demoeratlo or conservative party.
Re*Direet Examination.
By Mr, Graham,
Q, This old Avoman, Mrs. Stevens, you say, was found dead.
What was the holghtli of the bedstead in the room where she
Avaa found from the floor? A, I think it lacked a few inches
of two feet. I measured it as well as I could with my hand,
Q. The heighth of tho bedstead from the floor you think
Avas a little under two feet / A. Yes, sir, about that.
Q. Was the room up stairs or below? A. It was up stairs
in the house.
Q. There was a public passage way up stairs — a staircase?
A. Yes, sir, a staircase.
Q. I ask you as a physician and an expert whether such a
wound as was on this old lady's neck could have been made by
the falling into an earthern vessel on the floor ? A. I should
think not. I can give my reasons for thinking so, if you deaire
me. Q. The wound which you saw on tho neck was cut down to
the bone, and you supposed it to have been made by a hatchet ?
A. Yes, sir. It was a straight transverse incision across the
neck. There was no 6emi-circle as would be if it had been cut
on a round vessel, and there was no ragged or jagged appear
ance to the wound, but it was a perfectly clean, i straight
incision, three inches long, transversely across the neck.
Q. In relation to thia public discussion, do you know whether
the auditor's report contained the statement Mr. Hodnett read

TRIAL OF AVILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 871
that Stevens had received money as a detective in addition to
his pay as a senator ? A. I know it contained the report that
ho had received money, but how much I don't remember.
Q. As a detective? A. Yes, sir, aa one of tho detective
force. Q. You have efte i heard political discussions. Were these
remarks any more severe than were usual on sueh eaeaslons ?
A. Not a bit more than I have heard gentlemen ©f different
parties Indulge In,
Q. You have stated that the people ©f the eounty=tlie con
servative portlon=dlsliked Stevens very much, What Avas
the cause of that dislike ? A, It was his general course of con-
duot. Ho incited the negroes 
Mr. BOYDEN. How can the wltnosa know that ? I object,
The Witness. There Avas a general impression that he not
only excited the negroes to do mischief, but to burn bams.
They believed that he Avaa an instigator of the burning of
barns of the county. That is what they believed and that was
the cause of the bad feeling towards him.
Q. [By Mr. Chief Justice.] That he was the ring leader
of the negroeB ? A. That was the general impression that he
was the ring leader of the barn-burners.
YANCEY JONES, a witness called on behalf of the
Managers, being duly sworn, testified as follows :
By Mr. Graham.
Q. State your place of residence and occupation ? A. I reside
at Yanceyville, and am by occupation a farmer at present.
Q. What is your age ? A. 50 years old.
Q. Were you one of the persons arrested by Kirk ? A. Yes,
sir, I was arrested on the 18th July. . , '
Q. In the court house as has been described ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. While the public discussion was going on ? Aj Yes,
eir. ¦ • •  • '- ¦'¦'•<¦ ''¦ • '
Q. How long were yon detained? -A.-- I was released here
on the 20th August. -¦ ••<•' . ; .: . I J k. . ,. , . '

872 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. Before Judge Brooks ? A. Before Judge Brooks.
Q. You Avere imprisoned from the 18th July, to when ? A.
To the 20th August.
Q. State whether or not you saAV this firing at Weeden ? A.
Yos, sir, I was in front of the court house, and I heard Mr.
Weeden remark to a man down below : " You man there,
" AA'hat are yon doing with that pistol ? If you do not mind
" you will shoot somebody." The man down below said, " Yes,
" d — n you, I will shoot you," and he fired away.
Q. The range of the pistol seemed to be in the direction of
Weeden ? A. Yes, sir, he fired at him, I think. I was stand
ing Avhere I could see him.
Q. State if you Avere present at any of the scenes when
Kirk made threats against the prisoners ? A. At one time
they brought in a company of men, and placed them in front
of us. This took place, as has been described before, and he
said that he would kill the prisoners and burn the town, and
kill the Avomen and children. He brought in a company of
men in front of us.
Q. In front of* the prisoners ? A: Yes, sir. A good many
of us stepped back. I Avent back to the jury room I recollect.
Q. Kirk said that if there was an attack upon him he Avould
burn the town and murder the women and children ? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know who the prisoners in confinement were at
Caswell ? A. Yes, sir, I have a list of them with me whioh
I took down at the time we were in prison.
Q. Will you produce the papor if you please ! (Witness
produces the papor.)
Q. Road it. A. (Reading,) John Kerr, S. P. Hill, Dr. M.
M. Roan, J. C. Griffith, James M. Neill, Thos. J. Wommaok,
Barzillai Graves, A. A. Mitchell, Jamos T. Mitchell, Dr. A. G,
Yancey, William B. Bowe, Robert L. Roan, Z. Hooper, Yancey
Jones, F. A. Wylie, James 0. Williamson, Joseph R. Fowler,
Peter H. Williamson, D. Rainey, L. H. Gunn, Felix Roan, W.
G. Chandler, John B. Blackwell. These were confined in tho.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 873
court house. There were about a dozen other men arrested,
and were under parole, or were kept in the lower room, and
had to report daily at different times.
Q. You were carried from there to Company Shops ? A.
There were about a dozen otlier men arrested under parole.
Q. Were you carried from there to Company Shops ? A.
No, sir, I was paroled on the 10th August. I have my parole
here. Q. Read it ? A. I have two paroles.
The witness read the two paroles in the words following.
Headquarters 2d N. C. S. T.
Camp Holden,
Yanceyville, Aug. 10th, l.'(70.
Yancy Jones is hereby paroled to visit his home, subject to
my orders. Geo. W. Kirk,
Col. Com' ding Post,
Headquarters 2nd N. C. S. T.,
Camp Holden,
Yanceyville, N. O, Aug. 13th, 1870.
Mr. Yancy Jones is hereby paroled, and will report at my
headquarters at Company Shops at eight o'clock a. nr. 15th
this inst, fail not.
By order of G. W. Kirk,
Col. Com'ding Post.
Q. Were you confined at the court house at Graham at all ?
A. No, sir, I was on parole until I came here.
Q. You were there while the troops were there? A. Yes, sir,
I went to Company Shops and from there I went to Graham,
and was brought on here on Saturday, the 20th August, when
I was released.
Q. Were you in close confinement there at Graham ? A.
No, sir.

874 . COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. Were you one of the coroner's jury on the inquest on
Stevens? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Dr. Yancey states that all of the white jurors wore
arrested by Kirk? A. I think he is mistaken as to Mr.
Crowder. IIo was not arrested as I know of. Mr. James A.
Henderson was not under arrest whilst there, but he was
brought hero.
Q. But with the single exception of Mr. Crowder the whole
of tho jury that served with you were takon prisoners by
Kirk? A. Yes, sir.
Q. State whether or not at the last term ot the court you
were called before the grand jury and examined? A. I was
called before the grand jury and was asked to tell anything I
knew or had heard since in reference to the murdor of Stevens.
Q. They inquired particularly of all the circumstances to as
certain in regard te the murder of Stevens, whether you had
heard any evidence since ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And you testified under those circumstances before the
grand jury ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. When you obtained your discharge was any charge
brought against you — any evidence? A. Hero is the dis
charge, (producing the paper.) There was no evidence.
Q. Did you ascertain, in the course of the investigation,
Avhether any crime was imputed to you? A. I noticed that
there Avas a kind of a charge against me here, but they dind't
make out a case against me.
Q. Let me see your discharge. (The witness produces the
paper, and hands it to the counsel.)
Q. You may read it. (The Avitnesa read the paper in the
Avorda folloAving :)

State

State of North Carolina,
At Chambera, Auguat 20th, 1870.

Yancey Jones. )
The said Yancey Jones being brought before me, and there

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 875
being no evidence adduced against him, It is adjudged by me
that ho be discharged from custody.
(Signed) R. P. Dick,
Justice of Supreme Court,
A truo copy.
Tosto W. II. Baoley, Clerk.
Mr. SMITH. I find on examination tliat tho papor which
has boon produced as a diaehargc, is not an original, but a copy.
Tho WITNESS. It is a dlschargo that was given to me by
Mr. Bagloy, tho clork, It was signod by Judgo Dick.
Mr. MERRIMON. I suppose there is no quostion about tho
discharge havo taken place.
Mr. SMITH. It is simply attested as a true copy by the
clerk of the court.
Mr. GRAHAM. Do you require further evidence of the
authenticity of it.
Mr. SMITH. It is evident that the witness has been dis
charged, and that is all that is material.
Cross-Examination. By Mr. Boyden.
Q. You have said there was some charge made against you ?
Mr. GRAHAM. I object to anything that is published in
the newspapera.
Q. You don't know of any charge against you ? A. No, sir.
Q. Do you know of there having been any warrant ? A.
No, sir, there was no warrant.
You were brought here under a writ of habeas corpus in
arrest by Colonel Kirk ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And thero was no charge against you that you know of?
A. No, sir.
Q. Were you in the public meeting on the day Stevens was
killed? A. I was.
Mr. GRAHAM. Will the counsel allow me to ask the
witness a question which I omitted.
Mr. BOYDEN. Certainly.

876 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
By Mr. Graham.
Q. Do you know of the affidavits in the case of Wylie, Roan
and Mitchell ? A. I do not knoAV of my OAvn knowledge.
By Mr. Boyden (resuming.)
Q. You wore in tho meeting ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you see Mr. Stevens ? A. I sa rt him in the oourt
house. I saw him on tho publio square before the meeting.
Q. You saw him in the meeting ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. How long did you continue about the meeting ? A.
Until it broke up.
Q. Did you hear Mr. Hodnett's speech. A. I did hear it.
Q. I ask you if Mr. Hodnett's language was not very bitter
and denunciatory ot Mr. Stevens ? A. He made use of this
remark which has been stated here. I don't knoAV that he was
bitter. When politicians are making speocheB and referring
to one another thoy are apt to be very harsh.
Q. His language Avas very personal ? A. He was very per
sonal when he spoke of Stevens as a spy.
Q. I ask you if it waa not very bitter ? A. It was the
language which you have heard heretofore described.
Q. Can you say that that was all the language he used ? A.
I do not think I know of any other.
Q. You think thoy have giA'en all the language ? A. I think
thoy have.
Q. I ask you if there was not a very bitter feeling among
the conservative party againat Mr. Stevens ? A. Not so bitter
as I have heard represented. That is my opinion. I Avas
Avell acquainted with Mr. Stevens, and used to talk to him
frequently. Q. I aak if the general feeling was not as Dr. Yancey repre
sented it — aa bitter as it could be. A. I don't think it was as
bitter as the doctor represented it.
Q. Do you think it was bitter ? A. 1 think there was bitternesa.
Q. Do you know what time Mr. Stevens left the court
house ? A. I do not. I did not see him.
Q. What time was this that Mr. Hodnett directed attention

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 877
to Mr. Stevens ? A. I cannot say, but I suppose about 4
•o'clock. Q. Hoav much longer did he continue? A. There were
three or four speeches made after that.
Q. What time do you think it was ? A. I think they ad
journed about 5 or half past 5 o'clock.
Q. You didn't leave until thoy adjourned? A. No, sir.
Q. Were you there about the court yard ? A. I was for a
short time.
Q. Did you seo anything of Mr. Stevens ? A. I did not.
Q. When did you first hear that he Avas missing? A. On
•Sunday morning.
Q. You did not hear it that night? A. No, sir, I did not.
Q. Do you live in town ? A. Yes, sir, but I Avent up home
about an hour by the sun, and I did not go back.
Q. Hoav long do you think you stayed boforo you Avent
homo ? A. About an hour.
Q. Then you left about G o'clock, A. It Avas. I left somo
time before sun doAvn.
Q. Hoav booh tho next morning did you hear of his death ?
A. It avus about sun up I heard of it.
Q. Do you know of any fcocrot political organization In tho
county of Caswell knoAvn aa tho Kuklux Klan, tho White
Brotherhood, tho Constitutional Union Guard or tho Invisiblo
Empire ? A. I do not
Q. I ask you if you over saAV any men riding about in tho
day or night disguised ? A. I Avould like to explain in making
my ansAver. Wo had a circus at our place and aomo persons
came out in the ring dieguiaed who were called " Kuklux."
That ia all that I ever saw.
Q. I am not inquiring about that ? A. Thoee are all the
persons I have ever seen disguised.
Q. With what political party do you co-operate ? A. The
democratic party.
Q. Have you heard of any other murders in the county
except those named I A. I have not.
5.7

878 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. Did you know thia man Robin Jacobs,? A. I did not.
I never saw him.
Q. Has there boon any proceedings taken in the county of
Caswell touching tho death of Mr. Stevens.?. A. Yes, sir, I
waa on the jury. The matter has been described by Dr.
Yancoy. I Avas one of the jury summoned in the case of
Stevens. Q. I mean any indictment preferred. I am not speaking
about the jury ot inquest? A. I do not know. I was called
boforo the grand jury, but I do not know whether they brought
any true bill or not of my own knowledge.
Q. Do you knoAV Avhether there has boon anything done-
about the death of Robin Jacobs ? A. I do not.
Q. Hoav about this old lady that waa killed ? A. I only
knoAV of that by report.
Q. Do you know of any person being whipped? A. I da
not. I have seen some said to liave been whipped.
Q. Have you seen any marka on them ? A. I have not.
Re-Direct Examination.
By Mr. Graham.
Q. I ask you whether you were l>efore tho grand jury
summoned at the last term to inquire in reference to the death
of Stevens ? A. Yes, sir, at our last term of the court. We
have had but one term of the court since his death, and I waa
called on to tell Avhat I knew with reference to it.
By Mr. Boyden.
Q. How long did the term last ? A. I thiuk it lasted only
the first week. I think the judge left before the grand jury
could make their return.
Q. Did he leave on Wednesday? A. No, sir, I think it was
later. I cannot say now, but I think it was the latter part of
the week.
Q. You were asked whether Stevens was not very much dis
liked by the people. What was the cause of that dislike?.
A. Shall I tell you Avhat I have heard there?
Q. No, I want you to state what was the general impression

TRIAL OF AVTLLIAM W. HOLDEN. 879
of the people in regard to him ? A. He was reported to have
boon guilty of stealing chickens 
Q. I don't want any particulars in relation to the odium in
which ho Avas held. Tho inquiry was whothor ho Avas vory much
dialikod by tho coneervativo party. State whothor thoro was
imputed to him any particular crime? A. Yob, air, it was tho
iinpreaaion that ho was tho loador, or tho eauao of this barn
burning in our county, and also tho causo of burning aomo of
tho buildings in tho town. Wo had two buildings burnt in our
town. Q. Tho impression prevailed that he had encouraged this to
be done ? A. That was the general impression.
Mr. BOYDEN. I ask whether the rule which has been laid
down in reference to taking it for granted that things were done
in asking questions, does not apply to this case ?
Mr. GRAHAM. I have no objection to put the question
which was suggested by the presiding officer when Dr. Yancey
was examined.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. Whether he was considered th©
ringleader of the negroes.
Tho AVITNESS. I think ho AA'as considered the ringleader
of the republican party.
Q. Of the colored population ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And that he had incited them to commit crimes of that
nature ? A. Yes, sir.
GEORGE WILLIAMSON, a witncsscalledonlehalfofthe
Managers, being duly sworn, testified as follows ;
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. State your place of residence, occupation and age ? A. I
reside in Caswell county, am by occupation a fanner and my
age is forty.six.
Q. You were not arrested by Kirk ? A. No, sir.
Q. State whether or not you went there upon any occasion
to serve writs of habeas corpus, and had an interview with
him. A. I did. I carried some eighteen or nineteen writs.

880 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. Issued by the chief justice of the state? A. Yes, sir.
Q, And you went with them to Yanceyville. A. Yea, sir.
Q. Describe what took place there ? A. My affidavit is on
file. What I have stated in that is true.
Q. That is not evidence here. You will please state wliat
occurred. A. I rode up to Yanceyville in company Avith a
friend from Virginia. There was a great deal of terror in that
Avhole country there and I supposed I might be arrested and if
by any possibility I was, I took up this friend with me trom
Virginia that ho might tell the story of my arrest. We pro
ceeded to Yanceyville. I got off my horse and marched up to
the gate in company with this friend. I met a sentinel Avho
dreAV his musket doAvn in front and asked me Avhat I wanted.
I told him I Avanted to 6ee Col. Kirk. We wero detained
there a few minutes AA'hen a man came out who was said to be
his adjutant. He stated that he AA'as the adjutant and he
asked mo AA'hat I wished. I told him a had a communication
for Col. Kirk. He asked me AA'hat that communication was.
I told him I preferred to state that to Col. Kirk himself. He
aaid ho Avould go and aco Col. Kirk and report. Wo Avaited
there In the hot sun for quite a Avhile, boiiio five or ten minutes,
porhupa u little longer, when a man camo out to tho gate and
atood on the Inalde— I aftorwarda learned him to bo Major
Vnh's— and asked mo the nature of tho communication I hud
for Col, Kirk, I told him that thoy wero writs of habeas
tvrpus IhmiumI by Chief •! list Ico 1'onraon andl took thom out
and held them in my hand, Ho aaid Colonol Kirk Im busy
" und can not sue you iioav." I said " Vory well, I shall ro-
" main hore until I seo tho colonel," Ho thon remarked " I
" Avill see Col. Kirk, ho is busy now but he may seo you in
•' half an hour." 1 said " Very well." I then retired in oom-
pany with my friend and Avent over to Harrison & McKees'
store diagonally across the square some fifty or seventy-five
yards and I took my seat there. I had not remained there
vory long before this Major Yates came and attempted to
.raise a discussion Avith me as te some lies which he said " Had

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 881
" been told on him, started by that miserable scoundrel Jo.
" Turner." I told him that I did not desire to get into any
discussion with him, and I went off and left him. Before I
I left him after I made use of this remark, that I did not Avant
to haAre any discussion Avith him at all, he said ,: If you are
are for fighting Ave are ready." I said it was the last thing
that I thought of, that I Avas on an errand of peace and I
would have no further discussion with him, aDd I turned and
left him. I then retired to Mr. Norfleet's store and Bat
there a Avhile. I then saAV Maj. Yates at the court house gate.
He came out. I immediately went with thisfriend to the gate
and said, " Will Col. Kirk see me ?" He said, " Col. Kirk refuses
" to have an intercourse with any midnight assassin." I
observed to him, " I am no midnight assassin, I am a peaceable
''citizen in the performance of a duty." I then retired to a
tree some fifty yards in front of Mr. Henderson's store. First,
I went to Mr. Norfleet's store and sat down there. I saw that
there A\'as a good deal of nervousness about some of our citizens
and said to this friend of mine, " I may inA'olve somo friend,
"let ua go under that tree and stay by ourselves," and still
holding theso writs in my hand I went out and eat thero a
while. Before I left Mr. Norfleet's I aaAV a man at the upper
window. Mr. Norrloot aaid " That la Col. Kirk." Thero was
a man atandliig Avith him In his shirt slooves whom I aftonvarda
learned to bo Mr. Scoot. I started across with tho- writs in my
hnnd toAvards tho court houao. This man that I aftoi'Avardu
learned to bo Kirk stopped back. I spoko to tliis gentleman
avIio Avaa with him and aaid, "Whero is Col. Kirk." IIo
stepped back from the AA'JndoAv. Iu a Ioav moments I saAV tho
Bamo man in tho veatibule in the court liouao and ho seemed to
bo giving instructions to mon outside. Tho drums Avoro beaten.
I wont up to the gate and failing to see Kink I Avent back to
the tree. Tho drums Avero beaten and a oouipany called out
and they seemed to be going through', the loading of their
muskets and then they marched out of. the square across about
half way to whore. I was sitting. They then filed to the left.

882 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
and halted and remained there a few minutes, and then a com
pany of seven men marched right squarely up to where myself
and my friend were sitting, under the command of this Maj.
Yates. He said to me, " If you have got homeB go to them."
Q. Who said t'-iat ? A. Maj. Yates. " If you have homes
" go to thom — I am going to break up this caucusing about
" hero." My frlond who wns Avith mo said 5 " If avo will sopa-
" rato can't wo stay hero— thoro will then bo no caucusing ?"
Ho aaid i " I havo orders If you do not loavo to fire into you,"
I observed to him s " I am protected by thoso writs from tho
"chief justico, and if you chooso to firc,,; fire." My friend
then suggested that wo had dono all that waa poeslblo to do, mid
wo then retired in good ordor. [Laughter.]
Q. That was tho result of your mission ? A. Yob, sir.
Q. To Avhat placo did you retire ? A, I retired to Danville,
Virginia. Q. Your mission was ineffective for tho purposo for which
you woro sent ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. State to the court whether you had any correspondence
with Govornor Holden on tho aubject of a military court to
try these gentlemen in prison at Yanceyville.
Mr. McCORKLE. Wo object te it unless tho writing is
produced. Mr. MERRIMON. We have the papers.
Q. Take these papers and see if you had such a correspon
dence? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Read the correspondence to the court ? A. Shall I read
a copy of a letter I sent to Gov. Holden ?
Q. [By Mr. Boyden.] Is it the copy or the original ? A.
I sent the copy to Gov. Holden.
Q. [By Mr. Smith.] Do you know that he received it — did
he reply to it ? A. It was answered by Col. Clarke.
Mr. SMITH. We object to the letter of the witness being
read in evidence. No matter which was written first, the letter
sent to the governor is the original and the one he retained is'
the copy.

TRIAL OF AVILL1AM W. HOLDEN. 88S
Tlie CHIEF JUSTICE. The witness having stated that
the two papers are identical, the copy that ho retained may be
read. The WITNESS read his letter in the words following :
National Hotel, *
Corner of Halifax and Edenton Streets,
Immediately North of tho Capitol.
Ralkkw, N. 0., July SOtli, 1870,
Ilia Excellency, W. W. IIoldkn,
Governor ot North Carolina: J
Sir: Though a citizen of Caswell and, styled an insurgent,
ns an humble citizen I presume to address you, hoping that you
may and will answer any respectful enquiry. It is stated pub
licly that a military court will assemble in Yanceyville, on the
8th August, to try the prisoners held by Col. Kirk.
If this bo so tho object of thia ia respectfully te ask, if con
sistent with your excellency's idea of right and propriety, to
bo inform me, bo that the prisoners may employ such counsel
as they wish enough in advance te bo available.
Trusting your excellency AA'ill receive this in the aame spirit
in which it ia written, I am, respectfully, Geo. Williamson.
Hia Excellency W. W. Holden, "Governor of North Carolina.
P. S. If honored Avith answer, direct to Danville, Ya.
Q. [By Mr. Smthi.] How do you know that the origiiialof that
was rcceiA-ed by the governor ? A, I gave it to Col. Clarke.
Q. That is all you know about iti A. Col. Clarke told me
afterwards-—- -
Mr. GRAHAM. You need not state what was told you.
Q. Do you know that it reached Gov. Holden otherwise
than that which was said te you by Col. Clarke ? A. I cannot
say that I do.
Q. IBy the Chief Justice..] h there any reference to the

884 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
receipt of it by the governor in the reply ? A. Yes, sir, ft
states that it reached him.
Mr. SMITH. I submit, Mr. Chief Justice, tliat this is simply
a declaration of Clarke's.
Mr. MERRIMON. Wo have proven already that Col.
Clarko was a military officer holding a commission under the
governor and that he was one of his agents who communicated
Avith the prisoners and got written confessions from them,
nnd avo insist that a letter delivered to Col. Clarke directed to
tho governor, and a reply from him speaking as having been
• authorized. by the governor to reply, ia competent.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer is of tho
opinion that tho paper is admiaeible.
Tho witness read the paper in the Avoids following :
Raleigh, July 31st, 1870.
Col. Geo. Williamson:
Dear Sir. — I handed your letter to the governor, and he
received it most courteously.
He requests me to say to yon that the commission will meet
on the 8th day of August, and that counsel will be permitted
to appear for persons accused.
Very respectfully yours, Wm. J. Clarke.
Q. State whether you had occasion to visit Yanceyville very
frequently during the time the troops were there ? A. Yes,
sir, my recollection as to dates however is very poor, but I was
there frequently.
Q. State whether you were admitted into the presence of
the officers ? A. I was there between the time I wrote this
letter to the governor and the time of the reception of tho
ansAver, Avhich I received on the 8th day of August. En
dorsed on the envelope are the Avords " This letter sent by a
" gentleman going to Yanceyville who failed to dehver it." It
was brought back here and then sent. I received, it on the 8th

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 885
•day of August, the day for which the military commission was
appointed ; that accounts for its reception so ' long after it was
dated. Q. Your letter Avas dated the 30th July, and Iris answer was
dated 31st? A. Yea, sir.
Q. With this superscription accounting for its delay? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. Stato what took placo after you went to Yanceyville ?
A. I Avent to Yanceyville in the meantime between thoso tAvo
dates. I Avrote, I think, on the 5th day ol August, asking
Col. Kirk permission to see tho prisoners. He allowed me to
do so after Avriting ono or tAvo letters. I Avent into his offico
and ho asked mo Avhat I Avanted to seo thom for? I told him
my object. IIo got up, buckled on his pistol, and said "Avalk
up." Q. [Hy tho Chief Justice.] State what you said? A. I
told. him my object Avas to aco tho prisoners. I stated that in
tho letter, a copy of which I have Avith me.
Q. [By Mr. Manager Sparrow.] What Avas tho purposo?
A. To prepare them for thoir approaching trial, it it should
take place.
Q. You AA'ent in with Kirk and AA'hat did you say. A. I
told him I had Avritten a letter to him asking permission to seo
the prisoners. He had replied to me in a letter that I could
see them at one o'clock. At that hour I called at his office-
and told him he kneAV Avhat I came for, but I repeated that I
had come to see the prisoners in relation to their trial which
was to be had. He carried me up stairs and in walking up ho
made this remark. " Yon can stay up here about fivo or ten
minutes, I am in a hurry." We had got half way up the'
Btairs then. I said, " Well, if I cannot stay longer than that to
" do the business I have to do I shall not go." I turned around
and walked a few steps down stairs and he said, " I will give
you half an hour." I said that is as long as I wish. We went
np stairs to the court room. The prisoners thronged around
me. I told them that I had been to Raleigh, that I had had inter-

886 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
views with some of the legal gentlemen, Mr. Merrimon, Gov.
Bragg and Mr. Battle, and that those gentlemen thought they
would not be able to attend the trial but that I had telegraphed
to Gov. Wells of Virginia to know if ho would appear as
counsel in the trial before tho commission, at the same time I
assured them that in my opinion no military commission would
bo hold. At this stage Kirk said tho military commission will
bo hold on tho 8th. Doctor Roan stepped up and said, " Col.
Kirk will the military commission be held ?" He said " It
will be held." Then he said " Will we be alloAved counsel and a
fair trial." He said " You will." After a little conversation
Avith the prisoners I retired.
Q. Did you have occasion to go back there about the time
the prisoners left Yanceyville ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. What took place then ? A. I avhs at Yanceyville on tht>
occasion of Mr. Brock Holden's coming up there in company
Avith several prominent farmers in ^the neighborhood at Pros
pect Hill. He came to me and said, "I Avant you to go with
" this committee of citizens to see Col. Kirk."
Mr. McCORKLE. We object, Mr. Chief Justice, to proof
of this conA'ersation.
Q. Go on and state what transpired Avith Col. Kirk ? A. I
Avent in compauy Avith the citizens and Avhen Ave got into Col.
Kirk's quarters he treated us courteously. The object of our
interview Avas explained by Col. Robert Watt. We had had a
little meeting and agreed upon certain things we would say to
Col. Kirk.
Q. Mr. Watt is a prominent lawyer in Yanceyville ? A.
Yes, sir, he made a statement to Col. Kirk. I do not knoAV as
it is proper to state it.
Q. You can do so. A. He said we had come to see him to
make a fair exhibit to him of matters there in our county and
to assure him not only for ouraeh'es, but that we thought we
could pledge the citizens of the county, that if there were any
arrests to be mado tho civil authorities could do it and we would
pledge ourselves tliat it could be done. He very abruptly said,

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 887
" I understand it ; we have got you down now and you
" have come to beg." I eaid " Not a bit of it, sir. We
"have come to make a plain statement of the condition
"of affairs in the county." He said, "Look here, sir,
"you have insulted me two or three time6. I have got
" proof enough to arrest you now." I said " You have no
proof against me nor can you have anything against me except
AA'hat Squire Sam Harrison told you oh yesterday." He said
" I want you to keep out of my camp." I said " Very well,
" if you will designate Avhere your hounds are I Avill not in-
" fringe upon your camp." He said " I haA'e a letter from
" Governor Holden giving me control of tho public buildings
" and grounds." I said " Very Avell, I will keep away from
" them." Every Jay after that— I will 6ay that his conduct
had got my Indian up a little and I felt a little vixenish about
it— I would ride up by the edge of the court house and stop
by the Presbyterian minister's and leave my horse and go
around and take a seat on Johnson's porch and sit there. One
day my brother James C. Williamson, who was a prisoner, sent
Avord to me that he wished me to get him some money to come
down to Raleigh or to the Shops, that he had none. I sent
Avord to Colonel Kirk by one ol the officers that I had been
forbidden to go on the square and I had 6ome business of im
portance to me that I would like to attend to. The officer
went off and in a few minutes I saw Major Yates and Lieuten
ant Banner approach me. They came up to me — I was sitting
alone against the post. As they came 'to me he said " You
" have got some business to attend to ?" I eaid " Yes." He
6aid " Colonel Kirk says you can go and attend to any business
" you wish to attend to, but you have not got to have thirty
or forty men talking." I said " Very well. When I go out if
" any of my friends come around I shall certainly talk to them."
His reply was " Shut your mouth, you G— d d— d Kuklux."
I said "I am no Kuklux, and I expect to talk while I have
a tongue." Banner made some little effort as if to draw his
pistol, but Yates touched him on his shoulder and said " Let

888 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS'.
" the d — d rascal alone," and they started off. They got off some
ten or fifteen paces Avhen Banner turned around and said "Shut
vour G — d d — d mouth," and he rushed back to me — both ot
them did, and commenced aa if they were drawing their
pistols. I said " You can shoot me if you want, I am unarmed..
" I do not make any resistance." He then cursed me and they
Avent off. I was under the impression then and I am now,
that if I had moved my hand iAvonld have been shot doAvn.
Mr. SMITH. That is not proper to state.
Q. Did you finally get the money to your brother? A.
Yes, sir, I carried it and delivered it to him at the court house.
I sent for him and he came doAvn and I delivered it.
Q. What was the condition of the people in the county in
respect to terror by reason ot this milrti ry occupation ? A.
There Avas a perfect state of terrorism.
Q. Hoav Avas it exhibited? A. I was traveling frequently
between Danville and Yanceyville and I eaw divers Avagons
loaded Avith tobacco, nnd Avagons returning from market and
they invariably avoided Yanceyville. I askod these men 
Mr. BOYDEN. You need not tell Avhat they stated to you.
Q Is Danville the great tobacco market ot that county?"
A. That is the only one except Richmond. Those who
proHsod tho tobacco sont it to Richmond.
Q. Is Yancey villo on the ordinary rond to that market town —
I mean do a largo number of the roads going through the
county to Danvillo pass through Yanceyville ? A. The larger
portion of tho produco south of Yaneoyvillo Avould naturally
go through that place.
Q. You say that tho Avagoners avoided going through there
during the military occupation? A. They would take other
roads instead of paseing through that plaee.
Q. Hoav were the women and children in the country and
neighborhood of Yanceyville in respect to fear ? A. I cannot
state that of* my own knowledge as to what the feeling was.
Thoso I saAv were very much alarmed— most of them. But I
did not see a great many. ^

TRIAL OF AVTLLIAM AV. HOLDEN. 883
Q. You know what the general report was, and the general
impression ? A. The general report was that they were all
frightened. Mr. BOYDEN. We object to that testimony.
Mr. GRAHAM. We submit, Mr. Chief Justice, that the
proof of the general report is proper.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer is of the
opinion that proof of the general report is competent.
Q. You say that the general report was that there was a
¦state of fright among the women and children ? A. Perfect
terror, sir.
Q. How many men in that county were confined and sepa
rated from their families ? A. It will be hard for me to name
them oArer but I haA'e a list here.
Q. [By the Chief Justice.] It is not necessary to name them
but give tlieir number ? A. I should think fully tAA'enty.
Q. Were they generally very prominent citizens or other
wise ? A. Many of them Avere our moat prominent citizens.
Q. Do you know Avhother the meeting of tho association of
tho Baptist church Avaa held during the time of the military
occupation ? A. It Avaa not.
Q. Waa it appointed to bo held and if so do you know the
reason Avhy it Avas not?
Mr. BOYDEN. You will spoak of your own knowledge.
A. I cannot spoak of my own knowledge. I know what I siiav
in tho papers and what I hoard sundry mombors of tho church
say. Cross-Examination. By Mr. Boyden. •
Q. You have spoken about a letter you wrote to Gov. Holden.
Did you have a peraonal interview with him ? A. Not upon
that occasion.
Mr. MERRIMON. Will you fix the time.
Q. After the arrest of these persons did you come down with
a delegation to see Gov. Holden ? A. No, sir, - — Do yon
mean coming from my tevm here.

890 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. I don't know where they came from, but did you come
to Governor Holden to have an interview with a number of
persons ?
Mr. GRAHAM. I object to the question unless it refers to
interviews and occasions that have boon heretofore spoken of.
Mr. McCORKLE. Wo offer tho evidence in this point of
vIcav. Evldonco has boon adduced on the part of tho mana*
gcrs that great barbarity has been practiced upon thoso
prisoners, and that Gov. Iloldon sanctioned it. We proposo
now to prove that during tho confinement of these gentlemen
the witness now present and others came down to see Gov.
Holden, and that Gov. Holden repudiated all acts of cruolty
and evory act of barbarity that had beon practiced. We pro
pose forther to prove what reasons he assigned for the arrest of
these parties for the purpose of rebutting Avhat the counsel on
tho other side have introduced to sIioav that he sanctioned all
tho movements of Kirk in the cruelties thoy had perpetrated.
It strikes us that the proof is entirely pertinent and competent.
Mr. GRAHAM. Let us see when the interview is said to
havo taken place.
Mr. BOYDEN. I expect that Mr. Williamson can fix the
date. Q. [By the Chief Juatice.] W as it before or after the cor
respondence ?
Mr. MERRIMON. I submit that it is not competent in any
point of view. If the reapondent gave any order it can be
introduced ; but any conversation A\-hich he- had with out-.
Biders, and especially after the proceedings which took place oa
the habeas 'corpus, is inadmissible.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. You had bettor in the first place,
fix tho time and place of the intervieAv.
Tho WITNESS. It was on the 26th of August.
Mr. GRAHAM. That was after these men had been dis
charged on the writs of habeas corpus and ho thanks to this re
spondent that they were discharged.
Q. [By the Chief Justice.] Was this after the prijsonera

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 891
had been discharged ? A. After the prisoners had been dis
charged. Mr. BOYDEN. We wore misinformed, avo supposed that
it Avas before.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. Tho question is clearly incompe
tent. Q. Woro you at the publio mooting on the day boforo tho
body of Stovons Avaa found ? A. No, air.
Q. You woro not thero that day ? A. No, sir.
Q. How far do you livofrom Yanceyville? A. About throe
and a half miles.
Q. Whoro Avoro you on that day? A. I scarcely remember.
I Avas with my family just returning from a trip from Texas.
I think I Avas in Greensboro', or on the road from Greens
boro' to Danville, looking up my baggage.
Q. Were you in town tho morning the body was found ?
A. No, sir, I started from Danville for home, and knew nothing
of the matter. When I got to Yanceyville in the evening
the jury was sitting on lhe body.
Q. I wish to ask you if there was not a very bitter feeling
among the conservative party in the county of Caswell against
Mr. Stevens ? A. There Avas up to the time I left the county ;,
I left on the 28th of February. What the feeling was after
wards I do not knoAV.
Q. What year? A. 1SG9.
Q. You have not resided there since ? A.. I returned the
22d of May, and I have been there ever since.,
Q. [By Mr. Bragg.] What year did you return? A. 1870..
Q. So. that you were gone a year or more t A,. I was not
gone a year. I left in February.
Q. |By Mr. Merrimon.] Are you not mistaken in, the year
you left, you said you left in 1869.. Did you mean 1870?. A..
Yes,, sir, I was only gone a few monAhs. I made a naistake as,
to the year.
Q. You have been there most of the timo except a few months
since the war ? A. Yes, sir.

892 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. Do you know anything about any secret political organ
izations in your county under the name of the "Kuklux Klan,"
tho " Constitutional Union Guard," the " White Brotherhood"
or the '! Invisible Empire ?" A. I do not know.
Q. Have you ever seen any persons disguised in publio such
as Ave insist there have been ?
Q. Have you soon any colored persons who have been
Avhipped in the county and seen any marks of whipping upon
them ? A. I have not.
Q. Do you know this colored person Robin Jacobs ? A.
I never hoard of him until I saAV the papers.
Q. Were you there at the last term of the court ? A. I was.
Q. What day did it open ? A. I don't remember. I had
no business in the court.
Q. Do you know how long it continued ? A. I do not.
Q. Have you any knowledge Avhether there has been any
bills found against any persons for the murder of Stevens or
Mrs. Stevens or of Mrs. Blackwell or Robin Jacobs? A. I
have no knoAvledge.
Q; Have any stops boen takon to investigate the causes of
their death or any bills of indictment beon found? A. Not
to my knoAvledge.
JOSIAH TURNER, Junior, a witness called on behalf of
the Managers, being duly sworn, testified as follows :
By Mr. Micrwmon,
Q. Stato to tho court your name, ago, place of residence, and
your business? A. My nam o is Josiah Turner, junior, my
profession for near thirty years was tho laAV, but more recently
I have boon an editor. I spend most of my time in Raleigh,
but my family reside in Hillsboro', where I was born and
raised. Q. Stato to tho court whether at any time in the year 1870,
you saw any armed men in the county of Orange and if so
whether they did anything to you and if so what ? A. On
the day after the election, the 5th day of August I believe it

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 803
waa, a number of armed men came from Company Shops to
Ilillaboro'— among them a couple of ncgroos. Thoro Avoro
somo eight or ton white men — ton perhaps, I had been in
formed — —
Mr. BOYDEN. Wo object to any hearsay testimony.
Q. State what you did? A. I AA'ent to tho depot for tho
purpose of meeting them. I kneAV they would be there at
Ilillaboro'. I sent a young man to the train to inform mo
by raising his hat if these armed men Avero on the train. Tho
train stopped some two hundred yards 'from the depot. It AA'as
a freight train with a passenger car on it. I Avas on my horse.
When ho went to tho door he raised hia hat which Avaa the
signal agreed upon and I waited until tho men came out of the
eara and then Avalked my horae off from tho depot towards the
town. When I had got two or throe hundred yards theso men
came running up with guna cocked. When thoy woro about
one hundred and fifty yards they commanded metohaltor
they Avould ahont me. Nearly all of thom. had their guna pre
sented at me. I. turned my horae and rode to them and Avhen
they came, lieutenant ilunnicutt informed mo that I Avas their
prisoner. I called for his authority to arrest mo and ho aaid it
avus by order of Gov. iloldon. Thoy thou took my arms —
I had a pocket pistol — and scut two or throe men to my house
to search for arms there. My houao Avaa about a milo off.
Theso men came back after uavIiIIo Avith three or four guna —
tAvo pistols and two guns— I think which they had got from my
house. I remained from about cloven o'clock until bctAvcon
two and threo as their priaoncr at tho depot. In tho meantime
the number Avas added to by Captain Hancock who Avas in
camp there with a company ot soldiers and had been for
two or three months or several weeks, lie came down
Avith his men and paraded thein before the depot. They
telegraphed for a special car — at least I heard the order
made for one. But the captain said Ave must wait until the
freight car Avent up. I remained there a prisoner under these
men from about eleven o'clock until near tliree and was then
58

894 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
carried to the Shops and at nine o'clock that night a negro and
white mau carried me to Yanceyville, stopping on the way
about midnight at Doctor Anderson's.
Q. Thoy took you in tho night? A. Yos, sir. We traveled
until about midnight. Tho negro complained that ho was
aloopy and ho Avantod to Ho doAvn under a troo. I protested
against that and stated that, avo would atop at some friend*'
houso. Wo did bo and remained that night at Doctor Andor-
son'a. Tho next day I avus carried to Yancoy ville and arrived
thero amid tho ahouta of Kirk's men and the negroea, quite a
number of whom Avoro- assembled. I remained thoro until
about tho 13th. I Avaa carried to Yancoy villu on tho Oth and I
remained a prisoner in tho court houao until Saturday tho
13th. Q. Was anything done to yon pending that time? A.
The first two or three days I was a prisoner in the room where
they said Stevens had been murdered.
Q. Who was with you? A. No one. On Monday night
some ono caino in with a bucket of Avater and threw it upon
1113' bed. It Avas a good long room, nearly half tho length of
this senate chamber. I ran the fellow to tho door and I
enquired of the man at the door who it was and he said he
did not knoAV that he had been asleep. Directly some man
came up and cursed the sentinel and told him itAvasa shame to
tie it a prisoner in that Avay. He said " You had better hold
" your tongue about it, it Avas one of the officers avIio did it."
Tbe next night the same thing Avas ropsated, though a less
quantity of Avater Avas throAvn. All the Avindows Av;ere put
doAvn and as it Avas hot weather I asked if the windoAvs could
not be raised. lie said the orders were to keep them doAvn,
and they were kept doAvn close. The next night, Avhen the
Avater Avas thrown, I ran for the felloAV who threw the Avater,
when Kirk came up.
Q. Was that water thrown on you ov on tlie bed ? A. On
me and on the bed. He came up and ho ordered seven men
under Captain Franklin into the room. Before that the room

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 895
had been guarded by a sentinel at the door and at tho AvindoAvs
outside. They kept seven men in tho room. Franklin said
that, his orders wori that I Avaa not to epoak unless to ask for
aomething to cat and drink. IIo put a man In each AvindoAV
and ho aaid I avub not to go te tho windows and that I must
confine mysolf to the back part of tho room and I was not to
apeak to any ono without permission. Thoso mon remained on
the room with mo until avo Avero marched from thoro on the
13th. I frequently saAV these mon drunk Avhilo thoy woro on
their posts as aontinela. I aaAV one with a rock raised at Mr.
Hill and I remember somo ono cursed him and told him to put
it down and that it Avas a coAvardly act to throAV rocka at a
prisoner. I saw other sentinels staggering Avith guns in thoir
hands and I stated on one or tAvo occasions that thoy ought to
put sober men on guard that these men Avoro two drunk. I
saAv them frequently pointing their guns, raising rocks, making
threats and cursing tho prisoners. It Avas an everyday oc
currence. Q. State whether Kirk said anything and if so AA'hat in your
presence? A. I had but very little to say or do Avith Kirk.
When I Avent into the room ho came to shake hands Avitii mc
but I put iny hands behind mc. He wanted to know what I
was arrested for. I eaid I had como to find out, that I supposed
that I Avould learn from him. He said that lie had not heard
of it until now and he did' not k iioav anything of it — that that
Avas the first of it — my appearance there. Kirk came in occasion
ally once or twice into the room and I had a little conversation
with him.
Q. You wero not with the other prisoners? I was below in
tho court house and the other prisoners were aboA'e. He came
in twice that I remember. After giving me orders that I Avas
not to talk to anybody, he came in with Marshal Carrow and
when he spoke to me I told him that I must get permission
from the captain of the guard before I could talk with him.
Kirk told me that I had already permission. I told him that
that was the orders, that I could not talk to anybody unless I

896 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
had pennission, and I insisted that Carrow ehould get permis
sion, and he got it.
How long did you remain there ? A? Till Saturday the
13th Avhen we were marched up stairs. There were several
hundred soldiers and they designated me as 1 went up stairs
the king of the Kuklux Klan. Thero was a guard of seven
inarched with me on my way from Yanceyville. They Avere
all guarded but I Avas honored with a guard ot seven.
Q. Was that a special guard? A. Yes, sir. When we
got at Slade springs we stopped and encamped that night .
Q. How did you go along ? A. I Avalked and I rode some
in a Avagon Avith Mr. Graves, Avhich Dr. Williamson furnished
us with, and I rode a part of the Avay and Avalked a part of the
way. When Ave got to this camp one of iny guard said ho
Avould speak to Kirk and see if I could not be alloAved to sleep
in the Avagon that Dr. Williamaon furnished. IIo camo back
and eaid I could not, aa Kirk hod fixed up a tent for mo. I
isaid if I could not occupy tho Avagon I didn't caro to sleep
under one of Iloldcn'a tents and I declined to occupy it. As
avo journeyed from Yanceyville I did not see any miabohavior
ou Kirk'a part but I did on tho part of hia men. I bhw a
lieutenant draw a aword three or four times on a doctor from
Alamance— 1 forget hia name.
(}. Dr. Clondonnon ? A. Yea, air, Dr. Clondennen. I biiav
him draw hia sword and draw his piatol and threaten him.
lie aviib riding Avith me and Kirk's men crowded into tho
Avagon eo much that it became unpleasant and he ordered them
out. Thoy Avould not go and thia folloAV dreAV hie sword and
hia pistol and threatened to shoot him. Then tho Doctor
appealed to Kirk, and he ordered the men to get out of tho
Avagon, and they all got out except one or two, but they soon
came back again, and for an hour or two thie quarrelling and
cursing continued on tbe part of the men and Clendennen,
avIio cursed them in return. They drew their swords and pis
tols on him repeatedly. We got to Graham on Sunday.
Q. State the condition of the weather? A. There was a

TRIAL OF AVILLIAM AV. HOLDEN. 897
terrible rain for hours before we got to Graham. The pris
oners stood out for three or four hours. Just about dark they
got some tents and they Avere crowding into the tents from 10
to 14 in each one. I Avent around and counted and there was
as many as 16 in one of them. I having declined to occupy
a tent when it AA-as good weather I could not consent to occupy
one in rainy weather, and I remained outside. We stayed out
that night. Kirk Avas applied to by the citizens to permit the
prisoners to go to the hotel. That Avas refused. Then he was
asked to let us occupy the church, and that was also refused.
Monday Avas still an unpleasant day. It was muddy and wet,
but about dark on Monday night orders were given to march
to Graham court house. We got thero after dark. We went
that night in the court house, and a company of Kirk's regi
ment camped in there with us. We stayed thero till Thnrsday.
In the mean time, on Tuesday I think it M'aa, about twelve or
one o'clock, Captain Franklin Avith a squad of men came up to
the court houso and called for Turner, Gray, Weedon and
Wylie, and marched ua off to jail. Wylie and myself woro
put into a dungeon that had been occupied by a crazy man for
sovcral months.
By Mit. Smith.
Q. Do you know that fact? A. No, sir, I do not. I did
not see him in thero, but it waa Avarm in the room and ho hod
juat got out. Aa I got in I could fool that ho had beon there,
and could smell that ho had been there.
Q. Stato what you did boo or amoll if anything? I was in
formed that he was in there, and I inferred as much. Wo woro
put into thia dungeon.
By Mr. Merrimon, [resuming.]
Q. Who ? A. Wylie and myself. Weeden and Gray wero
put into a different cage or dungeon. I heard them, although I
didn't see it, ironing Weeden. I heard the clanking of the
chains. Q. What was said? A. I could not hear distinctly what was
said. I could orly hear the riveting of the chains, but I could

808 COURT OF IMPBAonMENTS.
not hoar what was said. They were not in a position where I
could hoar plainly. I wrote a noto to Mr. Scott, a merchant,
asking him to sond moacoiiplo of chairs, a tablo and pitohor
and tow ok
Mr. SMITH. Wo objoot to tho statement ?
Q. Htato Avhat was Bald.
Mr, GRAHAM. Wo doslro to show that that request avas
refused by this otlleor as a part of the atrocity of this conduct,
and that tho wltnoaa waa not alloAved tho docont comforts of llfo
which ho offered to pay for himself.
Mr. SMITH. If tho application Avere mado in person it
would bo competent, but the Avitness states that he AA'rote a note.
Tho AVITNESS. I made the application to the officer.
Mr. SMITH. We object, to any proof of that kind.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. If this note was handed to tho
ofilccr for tho puipoee of being sent to Scott, the presiding
officer is of tho opinion that tho fact may be proved.
Mr. SMITH. We object to it unless the note is here.
The WITNESS. I had divers conversations Avith the officer
not only to haA'e the note takon to him, but I told him where to
go. When the articles did not come the next day I had a further
conversation and asked the officer why the pitcher and chairs
Avero not brought. He said it was against orders and he Avould
not let them come. I remained there in this cell until Wed
nesday. In the meantime we had got a box of matches from a
sergeant or coiporal, and wo bought some candles, but theso
matches and candles that wo got through tho sergeant tho
officer came and took aAvay ; but I happened to havo a few of
tho matches loft which I found to bo of sorvico in burning a
plno brush in tho dungoon by way of purifying tho air.
Q. Was that a loathsome place or otherwise ? A. Exceed
ingly so. They gave us but two articles of furniture, two bine
buckets, one filled with stale water. I wanted these buckets
taken out and offered to buy two neAv ones, but thoy said theso
would do. They would not give Wylie and myself any water
in place of that stale water that was in one of them, and thero

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 899
was not oven a tin cup, and wo had to drink from tho bucket,
and thoro was nothing in tho room but thoso two bluo buckets.
On Wednesday morning tho soldiers camo in and ordered mc to
got ready to move to my now quartora, and they carried mo
out and put mo in an iron cngo ten steps from tho ono I was
occupying, and kept me there with a negro who had boon sen
tenced to bo hung tho next day.
By Mr. Smith.
Q. Do you knoAV that ? A. Yea, sir.
Q. Wero you present Avhen the judgment waa pronounced?
A. I was not prosent.
Q. Do you know it except by heareay? A. I heard the
negro stato so myself.
Mr. SMITH. Wc object to tho testimony.
By Mr. Graham. [Resuming.]
Q. What was his name ? A. I don't remember his name.
By Mr. Merrimon. [Resuming.]
Q. Was it Tarpley ? A. Yes, sir, that Avas it. He used to
belong to Tarpley.
Q. He put you into a cell Avith a condemned negro ? A,
Yes, sir, and I there remained until the next day, Thursday.
They would not give me a chair nor a stool to sit on, and they
fastened the windows. There Avas one sash to it Avith a glass,
and the officer took special pains to push that to every time he
passed, and he did so repeatedly. I appealed to him to keep it
open aa the negro was reading his bible, and I told him he
ought not to be refused the privilege of reading the bible when
lie was about to bo hung. Ilia reply was that he would soon
De — using a blasphemous oath — in a place not to be mentioned,
and then close the window again.
Q. What Avas the condition of that cell ? A. It was loathe-
some and lousy.
Q. How Avere you accommodated with food while imprisoned
in' that jail ? A. My friends sent me every thing that was
good ; it was conveyed in general in a plate but it was thrown
into a pile to me so that it was not as nice as it would have

900 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS;
been. My friends furuished me overy thing I wanted in the
Avay of something to eat.
Q. Hoav long. did you remain there? A. I remained there
until tAvo or three o'clook of Thursday the 18th, when we
Avere carrried before Judge Brooks at Salisbury.
Q. What Avas done with you there — Avas any charge pre
ferred against you? A. I have forgotten whether Kirk
charged mo with attempting to subvert the state government,
but I believe Mr. Boyden stated that it Avas due to me to say
Avhen I Avas discharged, that there was not a particle of evi
dence against me.
Q. Do you remember any other fact of misconduct, if so,
state ? A. There Avere a number of little instances of out
rages, and as Ave Avent from the Shops over to the court houso
ut Graham tho men Avere cursed and threatened and bayonetn
put at them.
Q. Did you see many troops ? A. Yes, sir, I soav them all,
though at a distance.
Q. Stato anything In regard to their discipline or demeanor i
A. Thoro Avas nono among thom. I judgo that vory fow could
read or write. I know that I Avroto a number of lottora tor
thom during the Urat tAvo or throo days, amusing myself in
that Avay until Kirk forbado it. Thoy wore boys, mostly. I
romombor oaklng ono from Buncombo how old ho was and ho
aaid ho was fourteen last May or Juno, and I biiav a numbor
avIio could not havo boon over slxtoon. I supposo thoro must
havo boon sovonty or eighty who woro undor tho muster ago.
I Avroto many lottora and even gave thom money also, always
Avith permission of the officer of tho day. They had no monoy
at the timo. Thoy wanted money to buy postage stamps. It
Avas in that way that I learned thoir ages and ignorance.
Q. What Avasthe state of discipline there? A. I do not supposo
it waa much better than it Avouldbe among Camanche Indians
and not as good if they were expecting a fight. There were
some of them who behaved with some decency, but it was
generally blackguarding and cursing. I remember of Captain

TRIAL OF AVILLIAM W. nOLDEN. 901
Franklin avIio was my special guard, this circumstance : some
body had stolen a cake of soap and a barlow knife that I used
for peeling peaches. I missed the cake of soap: They made
very common Avith my soap and knives and pen and ink, not
having any of tlieir own, and Avhen I finished my meals I gen
erally gave them Avhat Avas left. When I asked for my soap
after it Avas stolen, one of the men said that he believed a
man — calling his name Avhich I havo forgot, but the sergeant
of the regiment— had it. He said he saw him last night play
ing with it in his hands, and he did not see it after that.
Captain Franklin swore that he should not have it. I told
him not to trouble himself about the matter but to send a boy
and get another one, that I did not AA^ant to have the man
humiliated if ho had taken it. lie ran into tho next room and
came back Avith the cake of soap. lie said that he knew that
foUoAV had taken it.
. Q. State Avhether you were informed by what authority yon
Avoro arrested ? A.I enquired at tho timo that I Avas arrested
of Hunniciitt by AA'hat authority I avus arrested and ho aaid it
Avaa by order of Governor Holden. As I traveled that night,
tho man under avIiobo charge I avub, aaid he Avaa very glad I
did not reaiat, that thoy had orders If I did reaiat or thoro avob
any attempt to reacuo me, every man avub to firo at mo.
Q. | By Mr. Smith.] Who said that? A. Ho Avas a sergeant
avIio had mo in charge.
Q. Stato Avhothor you havo road tho anBAVor of the occusod to
tho article charging him with your arrest ? A. Yea, sir, I read
It av iti i some caro.
Q. Ia it truo or false ?
Mr. SMITH. We object.
A. It ia aa falao aa malice could make it.
Mr. SMITH. Wo objoct to tho question and the aiisiver as
improper. M r. MERRIMON. We propose te ask the witness whether
this answer which he has read ia true or falaer to put the ques
tion in that shape.

902 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Mr. SMITH. We object to tha1.. Yon might as well put a
man on trial and ask If nil the averments in the answer aro
true. Tho question is loading In its form, it is equivalent to
asking tho Avitness In detail In roforenoo to ovory averment,
" Tan't this truo ?" and " Isn't this ?" and so on, in each caso
putting tho words into tho Avitnoas' mouth. I insist that tho
proper Avoy of eliciting tho proof is to interrogate the witness
about tho facta, and then it ia the province of tho court to judge
Avhother hie statements are conaiatont with tho allegations in tho
answer or in conflict with thom.
Mr, MERRIMON. My friend concedes, as I understand
him, that avo may ask tho Avitness paragraph by paragraph
Avhether tho statements are true, but he says we cannot ask
him ono question embracing the Avhole. I cannot see the forco
of any such logic.
Mr. SMITH. The gentleman misunderstood me. I did
not concede anything of the kind.
Mr. MERRIMON. I insist that Ave have a right to put the
general question, " Is this true or false ?" and on cross-exami
nation the respondent has a right to question the witness with
a view of shaking tho force of his general statements. I think
this question is as competent as it Avould bo to put fifty ques
tions to the witness.
Mr. SMITH. I take it for granted, Mr. Chief Justice, that
the counsel would have no right to analyze this question, and
ask of their OAvn witness Avhether each particulat part was true.
It Avould be manifestly leading. If then to put that question in
reference to tho constituent parts is inadmissible, itis still more
inadmissible to put the general question embracing all thoso
parts. It is their duty to go on and prove the facts as he knows
them to be, and let the court determine whether the facts
alleged in the answer are true or false.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding office is of the
opinion that tho question cannot be put on the ground that it
is too general and embraces in it some negative and some
affirmative matter and also matter suggestive of motive. lie

TRIAL OF WILLIAM AV. HOLDEN. 903
has nover known an instance whore a question has boon allowed
to bo put iu that way.
Q. Stato whether at any timo you mado any speech or wrote
any articlea for your papor in tho interest of any organization
known aa " Tho Kuklux Klan," " Tho White Brotherhood "
or any other Bocrot organization? A. I never did, on tho
contrary I always doiiounced thom, both tho Leaguoa and tho
Kuklux Klan, in my speeches and in my paper.
Q. State Avhether at any time you eaid anything to tho pooplo
of tho county of CaaAvell or tho peoplo ot tho county of Ala
manco for tho purpose of exciting them in insurrection or for
the purpose of committing crime ?
Mr. SMITH. Wo object to that question, we have a right
to know the language that Avas used and then let the court
judge of the tendency of the language.
Mr. MERRIMON. I have put the question in the very
terms of the averment made in the ansAver. IIow can I put
tho question in less general tonus than aro contained in tho
answer. Mr. McCORKLE. The effect of tho question is to ask tho
Avitness' conclusion on a point of laAV as avcII as a statement of
fact. The Avitness should bo asked what he eaid in hia speeches.
I think ar.oh a question as is propounded tho Avitness Avas never
seriously insisted upon until to-day. It is competent to ask tho
Avitness Avhat he said and did, but it is not competent to ask
him a question which is necessarily a question of law and fact
both. Mr. GRAHAM. Then the witness cannot speak at all unless
he repeat the speech he made, which might possibly occupy an
hour in length. He is charged with speaking and Avritiug arti
cles having a certain tendency, and the question is Avhether he
made such speeches or Avrote any such article. I submit that
the question is competent.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. Tho question as far as the pre
siding officer nndoretanda it, calls for a reply to something
which has not yet been proved ; and he would suggest to the

904 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
counsel the better way would be to wait until proof is given
that the Avitness had made certain speeches, and then when that
proof is made it will be competent to ask the witness whether
he did make such Bpeeches.
Mr. MERRIMON. We Avill adopt the course suggested by
the Chief Justice.
Q. State whether you saAV any fire arms of your own in
possession of these men avIio arrested you ? A. Yes, sir.
0 Describe them ? A. Two guns.
Q. What sort of guns? A. Carbines.
Mr. McCORKLE. In Avhat county do you mean ?
Mr. MERRIMON. Orango county, or I don't care where.
The WITNESS. They returned one of my pistols after I
had offered a reward of $10 for it.
Q. Where are those guns now ? A. I do not know. They
are in possession of Kirk, one pistol and two guns.
Q. They have never been returned? A. They have never
been returned.
By Mr. Smith.
Q. Yon do not know that they are in the possession of Kirk ?
A. I do.
Q. You mean they Avere in his possession the last you kneAV
ofthem? A. I have never got them.
By Mr. Merrimon [resuming].
Q. State Avhere 3'ouleft these guns ? A. They were in my
house. I saAv them afterwards at the depot at Hillsboro'.
Q. State Avhere they were in your house ? A. They Avere
up stairs in iny house in a room Avhere I slept a part of the
time. When it was charged in the Standard tliat I Avas one
of the Kuklux, and that I was guilty of the assassination of
Stevens, some of which articles I thought had been writ
ten 
Mr. McCORKLE. We object to anything stated in the
Standard in this connection.
Q. State whether these guns were in your house before you

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 905
saw them in possession. of these men at the depot? A, They
were. Q. What Avere these arms used for ? A. I had bought them
moro especially for iny protection from the leagues 
Q. Had your house been fired into ? A. Not when I was
present, but it Avas fired into.
Q. Did you see any marks of where it had been fired into?
A. Yea, sir.
Q. Pistol shots? A. Gunshots.
Q. Where ? A. In tho pantry. They had shot through tho
Avindow Avhoro my Avife was standing closo by.
Q. [By Mr. Smith.] You do not know that — do you? A.
No, sir, I only saw the marks of the gun shot in the house.
Q. Could you infer the direction from which tho balls came
from anything you saw there ? A. Yes, from a broken window
on the west side of the house, and from the marks of the ball I
could see that the pistol had been fired through the Avest Avindow.
Q. From the outside ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. State whether at any other place or any time any violence
Avas attempted upon you, and if so, under what circum
stances ?
Mr. SMITH. What do you refer to ?
Mr. MERRIMON. I refer to tho time that he was fired at
in his office, and desire to show that he kept arms by reason of
these acts of violence.
Mr. SMITH. There is no question but what a man has a
right to keep arms.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. How long before was this ?
Mr. GRAHAM. A short time before, I cannot state exactly.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. I think the question is admissible.
The WITNESS. I had these arms because armed negroes
had been lying around my premises.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. You must only speak of what you
know. Q. [By Mr. Smith.] Do you know that yourself? A. I
did not see them. The deputy sheriff pursued them 

906 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS. '
Mr. SMITH. We objeot unless the witness knows. We
submit that it being shoAvn that he had these arras in conse
quence of information he had received for protection to his
family that i3 reason enough.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. He can state that he purchased
them in consequence of apprehensions be was under from
Avhat he had heard.
The WI CNESS. I was told by the deputy sheriff and
others that 
Mr. SMITH. You must not state what you were told.
Q, | By the Chief Justice.] In consequence of Avhat you
heard did you think it Avas necessary to have these arms for
your protection ? A. Yes, sir. I did think it necessary.
Q. Then I understand you to say that in consequence of
what you had heard you deemed it necessary to have these
arms for the defence of your family ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were you at any time fired upon, and if so, Avhere? A
Yes, sir, in the city of Raleigh at my office.
Q. AVhat time and under Avhat circumstances? A. After
midnight through the AvindoAV of my office.
Q What Avere you doing? A. I Avas Avriting at the table,
and a ball Avae shot through the Avindow and struck the bed
before it got to me. It Avas fired Avithin ten steps of me.
Q. Whpn avus that? A. I don't remember the day, but it
has been 12 months or more.
Q. Before you Avere arrested ? A. Before 1 Avas arrested.
Q. What Avns tho condition of the AvindoAV when the shot
Avas fired? A. It AA-as closed.
Q. HoaV closed? A. It is a lattice AvindoAV, and the Avin-
doAV Avas doAvn and the blind closed.
Q. This ball passed through that? A. Yes, sir, through
the glass and through the shutter.
Cross-Examination. By Mr. Smith.
Q. What are your personal feelings towards the accused—
are they friendly ? A. I suppose as good aa they ever were.

TRIAL OF AVILLIAM AV. HOLDEN. 907
Q. That is not exactly ansAA'ering my question — what aro they
now? A. They are are just as they ought to be betAveen a
good and a bad man.
The RESPONDENT. Mr. Chief Justice, I will not submit
to this 'language. I am not going to be insulted here.
Senator EDWARDS. Mr. Chief Justice, I rise to a question
of order, the respondent can only be beard through his counsel.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The witness is informed by the
presiding officer that he can answer the questions directly, but
not in the Avayin which he did.
Q. My inquiry is as to your personal feelings toAvards the
accused now and aleo AA'hat- they- haA'e been for a good while?
The CHIEF JUSTICE. Are you on good or bad terms with
him? A. There are no terms betAveen us. I have never passed
a dozen Avoids with him in my life. I never had any social
relations Avith him. I never passed a dozen words with him
in my life — hardly a good morning.
Q. What I desire to know is, Avhether you haA'e kind or un
kind feelings toAvards him — not Avhether you haA'e grounds for
your feelings, but AA'hat in tact are your feelings? A. I have
stated my feelings, my feelings are just those which a good man
Avould have for a bad man.
The RESPONDENT here rose.
Senator EDWARDS. I rise to a question of order. Tho
respondent must be made to behave himself in this court.
The RESPONDENT. I suppose I may be permitted to
retire from the court ; I do not mean to stay to be insulted.
Senator EDWARDS. Certainly.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The witness will answer tho
questions directly as to his state of feeling.
The WITNESS. What is the question ?
Q. My question is what are your personal feelings towards
the accused — whether friendly or unfriendly? A. I never had
any friendly feeling or unfriendly feelings with reference to
him in my life. I never had any association or intercourse with
him. I have scarcely ever spoken to him.
Mr. SMITH. That is not an answer.

008 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS. \
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The counsel will reduce his question
to writing.
Mr. SMITH. I will read tlie question
Q. What are you personal feelings towards the accused, are
they kind or unkind? A. I do not know, Mr. Chief Jnatice,
that I can better explain my feelinga than to state what has
occurred between us.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. We don't want any explanation,
but you Avill answer the question.
The WITNESS. There never was any social feeling be
tAveen us. There Avae that feeling which exists between tAA*o
peraons avI^o havo carried oil a bitter political contest.
Senator JONES. Mr. Chief Justico I submit that it is
hardly fair in questioning the Avitness to force him to use cer
tain Avords in answering tho question. IIo may not bo ablo to
Btoto Avhether hia feeling are kind or unkind.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. Tho witness may uso any equiva
lent Avorda friendly or unfriendly. Tho question has not been
directly answered.
Tho WITNESS. Tho fooling that has exiatod between ua
ia juat exactly that which exists betAveen men who havo been
engaged In personal and political abuse of each othor.
Q/(By tho Chiof Justice.) Then tho feeling is not kind? A.
I should not supposo it was. ( Laughter.)
Q. Then I understand you to say your feelinga are not kind ?
A. I think about as well of him as I do of any men In hia po
litical party, there is very little difference between them.
( Laughter.) Q. Then your feelinga have been very bitter against him ?
A. Well, yes.
Q. And they haA'e been so for several years ? A. Yes, for
tAventy years I reckon.
Q. Are you editor ot the Sentiael? A.. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you not denounce the respondent in your paper from
timo to time in very strong personal language? A. I have,
eir, and very justly, and in reply to his denunciations of me.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. nOLDEN. 909
Q. I am not asking about who was right and who was
wrong. I would like to call your attention to this article.
Was it written and published by you ? (producing a copy of
the Sentinel of August 3 to the witness.) A. Yee, sir, I sent
this article from Hillsboro' after my family had been fired
upon by a number of armed negroes about my premises. I
should like to state further in regard to it that the editorial
which appeared in the Standard 
Mr. McCORKLE. We object.
The WITNESS. Written by the governor, threatening to
hang me in the jail yard. .
Mr. GR A HAM. I submit, Mr. Chief Justice, that the testi
mony is proper as going to show the motive or motives of the
Avitness in writing the article.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. You can prove that in conse
quence of an article he Avrote the one which his attention has
been called to here. *
The WITNESS. I wrote this article from Hillsboro'. An
article had appeared in tho Standard charging me with being
ono of tho Kuklux, and threatening to havo me hanged in tho
jail yard bore.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. Tho witness will bo In order.
Tho WITNESS. I do not propose to bo out of order.
Tho CHIEF JESTIOE. You cannot givo the contents of
tho artlclo published in tho Standard, because that Is attempt
ing to provo facts by what laAvyers call secondary evidence.
You may state that it was in consequence of an article in tho
Standard that you wrote this article, if that is a fact. Then
you can produce the article which was publiahed in the
Standard if you desire.
The WITNESS. Well it was in consequence of an article
written in the Standard and in consequence of a telegram that
the governor sent to me at Hillsboro'.
Q. Do you know anything about his having sent you a tele
gram ? A. I received it and answered it.
Q. A telegram from tbe governor? A. The governor's
59

OtO' court or impeachments;
secretary. This was in reply to a telegram sent by the gov
ernor's icorefary to me.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. Have you got that telegraam ?'
A. I suppose It is at my house — I don't know whether I de
stroyed it or not.
Mr. BOYDEN. Wo object to any proof ot the telegram.,
Q. That Avas what caused you to writ© thie article ? A. No,,
sir, that ia not all.
Mr. MERRIMON. Wo Insist, Mr. Chief Justice, that when
they are trying to show a prejudice on tho part of tho witness
against tho reapondent, it is his right to state the motive or
motives Avhich induced him to write tho articles. I would liko
to. know what is the object of producing the articles. I cannot
seo that they are germane to any matter before the court.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. I understand they are offered to,
prove a bad state of feeling on the part of the witness.
Mr. MERRIMON. But the witness acknowledges that.
The CHIEF JUSTICE'. The respondent is not bound to
take tlie witness's admission but they can prove the fact if they
desire. Mr. GRAHAM. I desire to know if the existence of this.
state of feeling has any tendency to show a justification for the*
arrest of tho witness. I understand that the articles to which
tile attention of tho Avitness has been called are censorious and
charged the respondent with many things, but it does not:
justify a military arrest and the incarceration of the witness in
jail. I cannot see that they are relevant.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer cannot toll*
AA^licther they, are or not until they are read..
Q. Look at the pieces marked in these papers produced and
state Avhetheri they are»editorials written by you ?
The WITNESS. I insist, Mr. Chief Juatice, that I ought to bo .
alloAved to state what they were — that they were replies to.
declarations on.; the. par.tofltlia governor, and editoriala written*
by him.,

TRIAL. OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 911
Tlio CHIEF JUSTICE. Tho only way is to introduce
each of tho editorials to which thoy reply.
Q. Look at this papor (producing papor of July 23d, 1870.).
A. All theso papers aro copies of tho Sentinel, and tho artioles
written woro written by myself or my associates— except
tho matter that is noted. Thoy woro written by msolf or my
aaaoolatos — somo ono connected with tlio olfioo, — but I endorse
tlioni and mako thom mine.
Q. And thoy Avoro publlalicd by.you? A. Yob sir.
Mr. GRAHAM. Unices It appoars from tho ovidonco that
tho matter sought to bo introduced Ib relevant, I do not think
tho timo ot tho court should be consumed in introducing it.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. That question will not ariso until
the papers are offered in evidence. They have a right to iden
tify the articles, and it gives the managers an opportunity uoav.
to know exactly what proof is intended to be brought in..
Mr. GRAHAM. I do not care about wading through these
neAvspaper files.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer decides that
ft is competent to identity the papers.
Mr. GRAHAM. Tho point I raiso is as to the relevancy of
the papers to the issue when they are identified.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. That question cannot be determ
ined until the papers are offered in evidence.
The Avitness identified the copies of the Sentinel, of July 21,.
23, 27, August 2 and 3, 1570.
Q. Do you know whether Kirk waa in Raleigh at the time.
you were arreated ? A. I do not think he waa. I have no*
meane of knowing it.
Q. When did you first see him.? A. At Yanceyville.
Q. You don't know whethen ha got- there before or after
you did ?.' A. I do not know anything about it.
Q, When were; you released/ A. AJbout the 19th August
I think. Q. Did ICirk give any directions about turning you. out of"
ttfrat room, whero they first put you ? A. Not that I know ot.

912 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. Were you kept in that room all the time you were at
Yanceyville ? A. I was kept in only one room* I was ih the
room up stairs three or four minutes. Then I was carried from
there to that room where there were twenty prisoners from
Alamance. I stayed there only a few minutes.
Q. I am requested to ask you whether you ever advised or
counseled in any of your public speeches resistance to the
military authority in the counties of Caswell and Alamance — a
forcible resistance ? A. I never did.
Q. You never did advise any forcible resistance at all ? A.
I never did. I did myself repeatedly in conversation say that
they ought to be shot and hung up like dogs in the woods, but
I never in any public speech said anything of the kind. I was
only talking Avith my friends. I never made a speech in
Caswell. Q. You were not in the section where these military opera
tions were going on. A. I Avas not, except as a prisoner.
Q. Did you use this language before you were a prisoner ?
A. Before I was arrested I frequently spoke of it.
Q. Did you use this language to any friends in the county of
Alamance ? A. No, sir, I was not in Alamanco or Caswell
except aa a prisoner, and whilst I was a prisoner I did not have
any opportunity of using it.
Q. IIow near is Hillsboro' from Alamance ? A. It is
about t\9 onty-one or two miles from Graham.
Q. But from the county ? A. I reckon the county line is
about half Avay between the two places, nine, ten or twelve
miles. Q. Do you know anything about any secret organization —
of a political character I mean ? A. Nothing in the world. I
never belonged to any of them of any kind or description and
always denounced them.
Q. You have no knowledge of them ? A. None in tlie
Avorld, nor of any man who belongs to them except by hearsay.
Q. I am requested to ask you whether a man did not come
into your office representing himself as the south commander?

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 913
A. Never in the world. That was stated I know in tho
Standard. Three or four gentlemen came into the office to see
me about some advertisements or subscription for the paper
and one of them said, " This is the king of the Kuklux." Tho
other said, " Is it ?" I do not remember which one said so, I
told him that that was what Holden said. Well, said he, " I
reckon you can take such a one," speaking of one of the gentle
men, for south commander. It was all said jocularly. I never
saw the man before that I know of. But they addressed mo
as " King of the Kuklux " or something of that kind and that
is tho way tho thing camo about.
Q. This was all said in a friendly, joking manner? A.
Yes, sir, there were a half a dozen in tho office.
Q. Did Col. Kirk ever treat you with any indignities ? A.
None at all.
Q. On the contrary did he not treat you courteously? A.
Yes, sir, he did. He came in and offered to shake hands with
me, but I put my hands behind me.
Q. Do you know whether it was brought to his attention,
this mistreatment of which you spoke — the throwing of water
on your bed ? A. When I ran this fellow to tho door Kirk
camo and directed this guard of seven men to be put in there.
Q. To protect you against such things ? A. Porhaps so.
Q. Did ho denounce the men for this misconduct ? A. No,
sir. There was no denunciation about it ; he just sent out and
ordered seven men to come into the room.
Q. To stay in tho room? A. Yes, sir, they remained in tho
room. Q. Did he say it was te protect you from such indignities ?
A. No, sir, it was for tho purpose of punishment rather, I
think. Q. What were the men put there for ? A. I do not know.
Q. But they were put there immediately after these indigni
ties ?. A. That was after the water had been thrown upon me.,
Q.. The. first or thft second timo ? A. The socond time..

914 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
I don't know but what he may have been tho man who
threw the water on me. I know it was one of the officers.
Q. You did not seo him ? A. No, sir, but I heard of it.
Q. There was nothing in his conduct towards you while you
wore a prisoner that leai you to suppose that he would throw
tho water ? A. No, sir.
Q Did he say or not you were arrested by his order or di
rection ? A. No, sir. He asked me what I was arrested for.
I told him I did not know and had oome to find out. Ho said
he didn't know.
Q. Did he say that he did not know that you had been
arrested until after it took place, and he did not know that
you Avere to be arrested 1 A. That is what took place between
tis. The question Avas " What Avas you arrested for ?" I told
him that I did not know, that I had come to find out, and he
¦said he didn't know.
>Q. He, did not know what the charges were ? A. No, sir.
Q. Did he say he had given any orders to arrest you ? A.
He did not say, he asked me what I was arrested for. I told
him I had come to find out and he said he did not know.
Q. [By the Chief Justice.] You 6ay that, he said he did
not know you were arrested until you Avere brought there ?
A. That may have been said. I do not remember the terms,
the question was "What have you been arrested for?" I
v Jd him I did not know, that I had come to find out and be
said that he did not know. That is the impression made on
my mind.
Q. Was the import of what he said this, that he didn't know
you wero to be arreated, and didn't know you were arreeted
until it was all over.? A. That he knew nothing about it.
That ia the impression he made upon my mind. I have given
you his words as near as I. can remember.
Q. I am requested to ask you whether you have ever known
of any attempt to .assassinate the Governor, and havo inter
posed to provont it 2 A. I never heard until now that any waa
over made.

TRIAL OF AVILLIAM W. HOXDEN. 9l5
Re-Direct Examination.
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. Were any rocks thrown in at the place where you Avero
¦confined ? A. Yea, air, while I was in jail, about midnight
the first or second night I believe it Avas whon wo woro in jail,
rocks wore throAvn into the jail ; but we were in a position
whore thoy could not hurt or injure us. We were not in any
clanger from the rocks.
Q. You stated in answer to a question propounded by the
•other side that you had on many occaeionB denounced the
accused. I aek whether at any time he had denounced you ?
A. Yes, sir, repeatedly, vilely and clandestinely.
Q. On many occasions ? A. For years.
By Mr. Smith.
Q. Do you know the fact that he has denounced you^-how
do you get that information ? A. I got it through neAvspapers.
Mr. SMITH. I object to the evidence as hearsay.
Senator JOHN W. GRAHAM, a witness called on behalf
of the Managers, being duly sworn, testified as follows :
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. State whether you were present at any time Avhen Josiah
Turner, jr., was arrested by armed men, and if 60 what was
said to you, if anything, by the parties arresting him, about it.
A. The day after the election, on the 5th of August, when I
Avas in the room with the county commissioners Avho Avere
counting up the votes, I was informed that Mr. Turner had
been arrested and I went then to the depot on horseback.
Mr. SMITH. I submit whether it is competent for the
Avitness to proAre declarations after the arrest. It seems to mo
that it cannotbe regarded as a part of the res gestee. Anything
said at the timo of executing the order of arrest is admissible,
but subsequent declarations I 6ubmit are not.
Mr. MERRIMON. We propose to show that Avhile this
man Hunnicutt with his armed squad had Turner in custody

910 court or impeachments.
nt Hillsboro', he told tho witness that he had arrested Mr.
Turner try order of the accused.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer thinks the
testimony is competent as part of the continuing act.
A. As I said I went to the depot accompanied by Dr. Strud-
wick, I believe on the way we were joined by Mr. Isaac Stray-
horn, Mr. Turner's partner. I went to the depot, and when we
got there I found Mr. Turner sitting on the outside of the
depot on the platform in company with these armed men. I
knew the officer in command of the company at Hillsboro', Capt.
Hancock. There was another body of men there, a smaller
body sitting on the side of the depot towards the track. Some
were Avalking backwards and forwards before the window of
the depot. There was one negro in the crowd — a yellow man
whom I understood to be Aleck Ruffin. I did not know him
myself. When I got there the first thing I heard was a remark
from Mr. Turner, "D — d if we have not got peace now." Then
the lieutenant came up to me and asked who I waa and what I
wanted. I told him my name, and atated that I wanted to aeo
Mr, Turner and have some conversation with him, and Inquire
whether ho Avanted anything done or wanted any money. Do
told mo I might boo him. After a while tho other gentleman
Avent and saw him, and I took this lieutenant out to havo a talk
with him. I will try and recollect his very Avords, because it
it is permitted I will state the object I had in going there,
and the reason why I wished to impress his word upon my recol
lection accurately was because I knew that Judge Brooks
would issue a writ of habeas corpus, and I supposed that other
affidavits might be necessary by reason of the facts that occurred
there on the application of Mr. Turner for his release. I
therefore asked the lieutenant if he had no objection to state
Avhat authority he had for Mr. Turner's arrest. He eaid that
he was arrested by the order of Governor Holden, and he said
further " If you have come here about any writs of habeas
" corpus^ I have an order to arrest you." I asked him if he
was afraid of any writs of habeas corpus after Colonel Kirk had

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 917
Baid the judiciary of the state was played out, he said " Not
much, but these are my orders." I asked him then if any
name was mentioned in the orders, he said "No." Ho
said that the general order was that if anybody came with writs
of habeas corpus to arrest them, as that was the order of Gov.
Holden. I asked him how he knew that- — if the orders camo
directly to him. He said no, but they were to Col. Burgen,
and he said " I knoAV that he has got an order for I have seen it."
I had a good deal of conversation with him about where he was
from, what service he had been in, but nothing concerning tho
arrest. My object in going there to see him was to get from
him exactly what his orders were.
Cross-Examination. By Mr. Smith.
Q. Who was this officer ? A. Lieutenant Hunnicutt he told
mo hie bamo was. IIo told me that he was detailed by Colonel
Burgen I think ho aaid to take 10 men and come to Hillsboro'
and arrest Mr. Turner.
Q. I understand you to say that ho said ho had soon an ordor ?
A. That is what ho said.
. Q. To Burgon ? A. Yoa, sir, from Governor Iloldon, that
ho had dotailod him to tako thoso mon.
Q. Lot mo call your attention to this. Did ho say whether
it waa an ordor to arrest Mr. Tumor in tho county of Ala
manco? A. Nothing Avas said about where ho Avas to bo
arrested. Q. But that ho had an order to make the arreat in general
terms'? A. Yo8, since you called my attention to it I will
givo his words. He said " I waa told by Colonel Burgen that
" I was detailed to go to Hillsboro' and arrest Mr. Turner,"
and- he said " Col. Burgen had ordere from Governor Holden
" to do that, and I have seen the order." I will state what
conversation I had with this other officer, Captain Hancock, if
it is particularly material.
The hour of half past 2 having arrived the Court adjourned
until to-morrow at 11 a. m.

1918 OOURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.

NINETEENTH BAY,
Senate Chamber, February 17th, 1871*
Tho jOOUiRT mot pursuant to adjournment, Hon. Richmond
M. Pearson, Chief Justice of tho Supremo Court in tho chair.
Tho proceedings were opened by proclamation made in due
form by the doorkeeper.
The CLERK proceeded to call tho roll of senators when tho
folloAvlng gentlemen were found to be present.
Messrs. Adams, Albright, Allen, Barnett, Battle Bellamy,
Brogden, Brown, Cook, Council, Cowles, Currie. Edwards,
Flemming, Gilmer, Graham, of Alamanco, Graham, of Orange,
IlaAvkins, Ilyman, Jones, King, Latham, Ledbetter, Linney,
Love, Mauney, McClammy, McCotter, Merrimon, Moore, More-
head, Murphy, Norment, Olds, Price, Robbins, of Davidson,
Robbins, of Rowan, Skinner, Speed, Troy, Waddell, Warren,
Whiteside, Worth— 44;
Senator GRAIIAM, of Orange, moved that the reading of
the journal of tho proceedings of yesterday bo dispensed with.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE put tho question on tho motion ot
Senator Graham and it Avas decided in the affirmative.
Senator GRAIIAM of Orango. Mr. Chief Justice, I desire
to call attention to an error in my testimony as reported on
page 507. I am printed as Baying " I don't recollect that any
k' thing was asked of him whether he Avas brought before a
" magistrate or not." The word " brought " should bo
<" .sworn." JOHN W. GORMAN, a witness called on behalf of the
Managers, being duly sworn, testified as follows :
By Mr. Bragg,
Q. State whether you hod.. any conversation with Governor
Holden prior to the arrest of Josiah Turner, about Mr. Turner's
Arrest and if so when and whore it was and what was said ?

TRIAL OF -WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 919
A. On tho morning of the last election in August, I left my
•offlco and wont to the court houso te vote. There was a largo
crowd about tho front door and as I had but a very little timo
to dovoto to that purpose I wont to tho back door for tho pur
poao of gottlng In and flanking tho crowd. I wont into tho
paaaiigo and I mot Govornor Iloldon talking to a man by tho
namo of Spoonor. Ho spoko to mo as I passed. As I could
not Aroto just then,- 1 stopped and as tho matter ho was speak
ing of to Spoonor was about a subject of aome interest, I
liatenod. In the conversation I heard him say he either would,
as soon as ho loft there or he had already ordered the arrest of
Mr. Turner — I am not sure which, I have tried since I was
summoned, to find out from my recollection so as to stato
the matter correctly Avhether he said he had then already done
,so or that he would when he left. It is my impression he said
ho would when he lett.
Q. Tho remark then was either one or the other ? A. Yes,
sir. Q. That he either had done it or would do it as soon as ho
left the court house ? A. Yes, sir, I can't get the consent of
my mind to fix upon, either one. I am uncertain.
Q. But you are confident that it AA'as one or the otlier? A.
Yea, 6ir.
Q. What did you say to him, if anything? A. I told him
it Avas not my put in, but I did so — that I thought it was a
very Dad policy, that Mr. Turner had beeu itching I thought
te be arrested and he would only be making a martyr of him.
Q. What did ho say to that? A. He replied to it that ho
believed Mr. Turner Avas at the bottom of all these troubles,
that ho had that morning published him as a white livered
scoundrel — or something of that kind — I think it was that
morning aB well as I can recollect. I had nothing to do with
tho subject, but being a peaco man I put that in.
Q. (By Senator Jonos.) I wish to ask you whether Governor
Holden said that Turner had published liim as a white llvored
scoundrel or that he had published Turner? A. One of tho

920 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
reasons why he was going to arrest him was that he believed
Turner waa at the bottom of this and that Turner had pub
lished him that morning.
Q. (The Chief Justice.) You understand him to say that
Turner had published him ? A. Yes sir.
Cross examination waived.
Mr. Manager SPARROW. A matter has been suggested,
Mr. Chief Justice, in reference to the record to which the
Stenographer desires the attention of the court called. It
will be remembered yesterday that when it was asked Mr.
Turner by the counsel for the respondent whether the state
ment in the answers were true or false, the witness eaid that
they were as false as malice could make them. An objection
was then raised that the answer was not admissible, and it was
sustained. The stenographer desires to know whether the
answer, having been ruled out shall appear on the record.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer is of tho
opinion that the answer in all caeea should appear on tho
journal with the fact stated that It was ruled out.
ROBERT TERRELL, a witness called on behalf qfth
Managers, being duly sworn, testified as follows :
By Mr. Meuuimon.
Q. :Stato your name, ago, residence and business ? A. My
name is Robert Terrell. I am telegraph operator at Company
iShops and tAveuty-one years old next October.
Q. State whether you have been summoned to produce all
the telegrams sent to Company Shops? A. I was.
Q. Havo you them with you ? A. No, sir.
Q. Why have you not brought them ? A. I sent them off
before I was subpoenaed. I had an order to send them off.
Q. [By the Chief Justice.] Where to ? A. To Richmond.
Q. When did you get the order ? A. Do you mean the
order to send them to Richmond ?
Q. Yes, sir, to send them off? A. I got the order between
seven and eight o'clock in the evening.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 921
Q. What time was the subpoena served upon you? A.
Botweon eleven and twelve o'clock at night.
Q. [By the Chief Justice.] What day ? A. Monday, the
30th of January last, I think.
Q. Where were the telegrams when this subpoena waa served
on you ? A. I don't know. I thought they had left on the
train going to Green aboro'. I asked the express agent the next
morning if he had sent them on that train and he said no, he
had sent them by Raleigh. I supposed when the subpoena
came that they had gone by Greensboro.
Q. They were in the express office of Company Shops when
the subpoena was served upon you ? A. Yea, sir.
Q. Did you know that at the time ? A. No, sir.
Q. [By the Chief Justice.] How long after you had re
ceived this order Avas it when the the subpoena was received ?
A. I received the order at half past seven in the evening, and
I received the subpoena about eleven o'clock that night.
Q. Havo you made any efforts to get the tolegrama back ?
A. Yea, sir, I did that morning.
Q. Do you have any control over thom now ? A. No, sir.
Q. Who hap ? A. I don't know as anybody has oxcopt the
superintendent of tho telegraph company.
Q. What is his naino? A. His name is J. R. Dowoll.
Q, Whoro does ho llvo ? A. Richmond, Va.
Q. Stato Avhothor any person had requested you to send them
off boforo you sent them.
Mr. SMITH. It Booms to mo, sir, that this is an Indirect
way the counsol are taking to impeach their own witness.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. Tho presiding officer is of opinion
that what a strangor requested is not evidence unless he can be
eonnoctod with the respondent as the person from whom ho
got his orders.
Q. State whether thero were any regular times for sending
off these telegrams from that office ? A. None that I know of.
Q. When were they sent off before ? A. This was the first
time they havo been sent off since I have been an operator.

022 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. How long havo you been an operator ? A. About flVtr
years. Q. Did you send them' all off? A. I sent every message I
had in my office up to that timo.
Q. For five years ? A. I do not know as many as that. I
have not been there five years, but I sent all I had.
Q. Do you mean to say all the messages in the office at the'
time you received the order to send them — all that had accumi-
lated there ? A. All there were in there.
Q. For how many years had they accumulated when yon
sent them off? A. I do not knoAV, I am unable to say, I had
not been there over a half a year.
Q. Was the number small or large — were there a great many
messages ? A. There was a large number, a good sized box
full. Q. How large a box full ? A. I suppose it was a foot wide
and about the same length.
Q. [By the Chief Justice.] Would it hold a bushel ? A.
Yes, sir, I guess it would.
Q. Have you got the order-with you that you received ? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. Will you produce it ? A. Yes, sir, [produces the order.]'
Q. Was that the order that you received ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. You sent off the messages in pursuance of that order ? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. How soon after? A. In fifteen minutes afterwards I"
suppose. Q. Read that order ? (Reading,) " Richmond, January 80-
M Shops, N. C. Pack up aud send to me in Richmond the
* entire files of your office. Do this at once. J..R* Dowell,,
Superintendent." Cross-Exa/minatnon. By Mr. Boyden.
Q. This was last month ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. What day ? A. Monday. i
Q. The- 80th! A. Yes, sir.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 923
Q. Are telegraph operators sworn not to disclose the con
tents of telegrams ? A. I have not been sworn.
Q. You don't know whether that is the practice or not ? A.
That is the general practice I think.
Q. How did it happen you were not sworn? A. I do not
know ; thero aro a good many that are not.
Q. You have no right to disclose what is in a telegram ? A. —
Mr. MERRIMON. I object, Mr. Chief Justice, that is a
question of law.
Q. I mean by the rules of tho company ? A. 
Q. [The Chief Justice.] Yon can state whether by the rules;
you have a right to disclose tho contents of telegrams ? A.
According to the rules oi the telegraph company we have not.
Q. What is the rule ? A. Not to show any message to any
one. Q. Or disclose it ? A. Yes, sir.
Re-direct Examination..
By Mr. Merrimon..
Q. You did write to the Suporintendant to send these papers-
back ? A. No, sir, I telegraphed to him.
Q. Did you get any reply ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you tell him they were Avanted in court ? A. Yes,.
sir. Q. What reply did he make ?
Mr. SMITH. Does tlie- chief justice think the question is
competent. It is an outside issue and there is no attempt to*
connect it with this accused.
Mr. GRAHAM. It is a matter, Mr. Chief Justice, that per
tains to the witness. He was summoned by a subpoena duces
tecum to bring these papers. It happened that he had sent'
them off a few hours before, he was served with a subpoena.
He then informs the person to whom he had sent them that a.
court of justice wishes tlio papers and we wish to show what
his reply was to aoquit tha witness ox. ifi necessary to mom
for an attachment.. .

924 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Mr. SMITH. But the difficulty Mr. Chief Justice is, that
they bring out this matter as evidence to affect the accused and
not the witness. They cannot offer it to affect the credit of
the witness because they have endorsed him by bringing him
here ; and they have not moved for a rule against him.
Mr. MERRIMON. Mr. Chief Justice we offer this to show
that there has been due diligence on the part of the witness
and on the part of the managers to get these papers.
Mr BOYDEN. But what connection has it with this trial ?
That is a matter that I do not understand.
Mr. MERRIMON. It will be seen to be important.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer is of the
opinion that the evidence cannot be received now without some
motion made in reference to this man Dowell.
Mr. GRAHAM. But the difficulty Mr. Chief Justice is,
that Dowell is not of the jurisdiction of this court. We desire
to show that we have used due diligence.
Mr. MERRIMON. We Avant to show diligence on our
part. There may be an argument founded upon the absence
of thoso documents. The gentleman may say " Why did not the
" managers procure those telegrams ?" Wo proposo to show that
avo Instructed the witness to mako an application to Dowell for tho
papors, and that having done so we wish to show what the
reply was.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding [officer thinks you
are at liberty to show that the witness made the application.
Re- Direct Examination resumed.
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. Did you telegraph to Mr. Dowell for the papers ? A. I
did. Q. What was the result of the application— were they
returned ? A. They were not.
Q. Did he decline to return them ? A. Yes, sir.
Mr. GRAHAM. I respectfully submit that we ought to be
allowed to show the terms on which the request was denied.

TRIAL OF AVTLLIAM W. HOLDEN. 925
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer thinks that
is outside.
JOSEPH G. COOLEY, a witness called on behalf of the
Managers, being duly sworn, testified as follows :
By Mr. Merrimon. *
Q. State your name, age, residence and occupation ? A.
My name iB Joseph G. Cooley, age 24, residence Hillsboro',
occupation a telegraph operator.
Q. Have you been summoned to produce certain telegrams
before this court, if so when and what? A. I was subpoenaed
on the morning of* the 30th January to appear here with all the
telegrams sent and received by me in regard to troops at
Company Shops — state troops at Company Shops.
Q. Or Hillsboro'? A. At the Shops, messages received
from or sent to the Shops.
Q. Have you got those telegrams? A. I have, but I re
ceived an order from the superintendent to answer no' ques
tions in regard to the messages.
Q; You decline to ansAver in obedience to that order ? A.
Yes, sir, on the ground that they are strictly confidential.
Q. You decline to produce them ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were you then here? A. Yes, sir.
Mr. MERRIMON. The question arises Avhetherthe Avit
ness is bound to produce tho messages. We insist that he is.
The Avitness I understand simply desires to do his duty about
the matter. This is a question of law, and if he is bound to
I presume he will not refuse to produce the telegrams. We
insist that he should do so, and that we shall have an oppor
tunity to examine them.
Q. (By the Cliief Justice.) Did they administer an oath to
you ? A. No, sir.
Mr. BOYDEN. We insist that there is no evidence show
ing the messages are material to this ease, or anything before
the court, and that the witness is not bound to produce any tele
graphic dispatches that he has reseived unless it is made to
appear that they are important in thia trial. If they are impor-
60

920 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
tant we have no hesitation in saying that he is bound to pro
duce them, i , i ¦. ,
Mr. MERRIMON. How can we tell whether they aro
important until we have had an opportunity to examine them I
I beg leave to cite the oourt to the investigation that took place
Borne 18 months ago before a committee of the house of rep
resentatives in AA'hich the telegraph officers were compelled not
only to bring in the telegrams in reference to a particular mat
ter, but to bring all telegrams public and private to the end
that tho committee might examine them, and select such as
they desired to use. So we contend here that it is the duty of
this witness to produce these telegrams to the managers that
they may examine them, and determine which ones are mate
rial to be produced and which not. It will not be denied that
Ave have a right to examine a witness at chambers before he is
put upon the stand and see Avhat ho knows, and Bee whether
it is prudent to introduce him as a witness. If that is a right,
can it be pretended that we havo not a right to inspect these
papers to see Avhether they are important or not so that we
may select what Ave doom material.
Mr. GRAHAM. It will bo remembered that It is only one
species of telegrams that we call for, those which relate to these
military operations. We do not claim to look at tho private
telegrams. The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer is of opinion
that yon have a right to look at those Avhich relate to mili-
itary operations.
Mr. McCORKLE). I suggest this point, Mr. Chief Justice,
whether the telegram is not to be regarded in the light of a
copy, and whether it is not inoumbent upon them to produce
in the first place the original as eA'idence to show that they
have made due efforts to get it and have tailed. i
Mr. GRAIIAM. I tako it Mr. Chief Juatice, that the place,
where t)io message 1» written down by eloctric force is where
tho. original is. The other is nothing but a copy. . |lllh ,
Mr. MERRIMON, We cannot produce the originals. , We.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN.

92{

propose to show that the original messages from which tha
telegrams were sent, were sent from Company Shops to Rich--
mond and from Raleigh to New York.
Mr. SMITH. If that be bo we desire to raise tho point that
the translation of the telegrams transmitted is but a mode of
copying, and wo submit that a party is not to be held responsi
ble except for what he has written. It is true that in a document
a foreign language offered in eA'idence, a party is sworn to
translate, but the original is produced in court as evidence. It
is only to make it intelligible that the presence of a translator
is required. We submit that the original letter written in the
English language as contra, distinguished from these telegraphic
signs, is the original and must be produced.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer is of the
opinion that the original is the paper sent to the office for trans?
mission, and that the other is a copy. You have not yet
accounted for not producing the original, If thai is accounted
for this copy can be received in evidence.
JOHN BRAGG, a witness being called on behalf of the
Managers, testified as follows :
By Mr. Merrimoit.
Q. State whether you have any connection with the telegraph
office in this city ? A, Yes, 6ir, I am assistant telegraph
operator in thia office.
Q. State whether or not any telegrams have been sent away
very recently, and if bo by whose order and when? A. I
think last month by order of the district superintendent, J. R,
Dowell, ot Richmond — all messages of last year were boxed
up and sent tea man by the name of Hunter, the supply agent
at No. 145, Broadway, New York.
Q. That is all the messages that wero received during the
year 1870? A. Yes, sir.
Q. They were sent away to New York ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. What was done with the originals ? 'A, AH originals
.; .,.; ,.., ., ,•:,/, ,; ' . :«i i,*. _.,.| »»,, f ,r V'..'1.,*. ¦ f >^,'i, , ,•.'..,,

928 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
and all copies of the messages were sent by his. order. It was
in anticipation ot this — - ¦ <* "
The CHIEF JUSTICE; -Yon need not state that.
Q. Yon Bent them off? A I did not do iWit was the
manager of the office, Mr. Starke. ,,,,..
Q. You know it was done ? A. Yes, sir.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. That is sufficient to admit of
secondary proof.
Mr. MERRIMON. I understand, Mr. Chief Justice, that
we have a right to examine such telegrams as the witness has
pertaining to military matters.
Mr. BO YD EN. We conceive that it ia necessary first for
them to show that they have made application to get the origi
nals and have failed to do it.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer is of the
opinion that the rule has been complied with by showing an
attompt to got thom from the place where thoy had a right to
supposo they woro.
Mr. MERRIMON. Will your Honor direct that the tele
grams bo filed with the clerk with the ond that counsel on
either sido may examine thorn.
Mr. SMITH. I understood tho decision of the chiof justico
to bo that tho original Avritings which were deposited in tho
ofiioo, woro to bo regarded as tho originals and that tliose which
Avoro taken in telegraphic ciphers woro the copios.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. Yes, sir.
Mr. SMITH. We insist that tho existence of the paper
outside of the jurisdiction of the court does not authorize tho
admission of secondary evidonce. As I understand tho rule
they must be destroyed or lost. There is no difference between
a state case and a civil suit in regard to the rule requiring the
production of the original papers and not allowing the intro
duction of a copy. In both cases, if it is merely proved to be
out of the state, its production' is not dispensed' with. This
rule I am aware does not apply to the case of an attesting wit
ness te a deed or other paper, as if it is shown that he is out of

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 929
the state, it is sufficient to prove his handwriting. If it becomes
material to show a deed in evidence in this state you are not
permitted to show a. copy merely because the original is in
anotlier state and beyond the jurisdiction of, the court. The
managers knoAV where these papers are, they are advised of the
place and the papers are, not lost but are in existence, and there
has been no effort made to get them from that place, and [we
submit that they being out of the stato does not dispenso wjith
the necessity of producing them. •
By the CHIEF JUSTICE.
Q. What day did you send the dispatches off? A. I do not
know, Mr. Starke sont them oft" last month sometime. I think
ours were sent off two weeks before anything was sent from
Company Shops or Hillsboro'.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. I should like to see the authorities
in regard to proof of paper beyond the jurisdiction of the court.
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. Chief Justice, papers of this kind aro
of such a modern invention that I doubt Avhether there could
bo found any authority referring especially to thom in our note.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. I do not moan in reference to
telegrams especially but in roforenoo to deeds and other papers.
Mr. BRAGG. I auppoae, Mr. Chief Justloo, thoro can bo
no doubt that tho general principle ia laid doAvn by tho counsel
who last addroBBod tho court, [Mr. Smith] In roforonco to
ovidonco Ib truo. But as has boon stated by my associate [Mr.
Graham] this matter of tho Introduction of telegrams Is a
now question in our state and I do not bollovo— at least I havo
no recollection of It, that the question has ovor beon raised and
boon tho subject of a judicial determination. <I havo an im
pression howovor, that it has, boon ruled on in some of tho
northern 6tatos whore tho telegraph ia much more uBod and
resorted to than it is here,, and that it has beon decided that a
telegram received at one end of the; line is a duplicate of the
original filed in the office at the. other end* , I cannot under
take to say with positive confidence -that it has been ,so ruled,

930 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
but I think a case of that kind is to be found somewhere in
the New York reports. .
Mr. BOYDEN. As I understand it, Mr. Chief Justice, they
are not offered now but aie only handed in for counsel to ex
amine. '
Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE. The impression of the presiding
officer is, from the reason of the thing, is that the copy received
at the place of destination is not to be regarded as a dupli-
oate on the ground that there is an intervening agenoy through
Avhioh the message is oonveyed and whioh writes it down
Und that that agenoy may not correctly perform its office.
It further suggests itself to the mind of the presiding offloer
on the reabon of the thing, before the oopy can be introduced
it must be shown that efforts have been made to get the orig*
inal where it is beyond the reach of the court. But as the
counsel for the respondent suggests the paper can be filed
with the olerk and examined by counsel and offered to-mor
row. The witness is direoted to file the telegrams with the
olerk. Mr. BOYDEN. It is understood that they are to be open
for examination by eaoh side.
Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE. Yes, sir.
JOHN B. NEATHERY, a witness called on behalf of the
Managers, being duly sworn, testified as follows :
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. I believe you stated on a former occasion that you were
the private secretary of the governor ? A. Yes, sir,
Q. State whether or not you had the custody of any books
by virtue of your office? A. Yes, sir, the letter book more
particularly was under my charge.
Q% Look at this book now produoed and aee if that is the
letter book ? A. It is the official letter book ot Governor
Holden, Q. What time does it embrace? A. From July 1st to
November 17th, 1870.

trial of William w. noLDEN. 931
Q. Btate whether you have been instructed to examine that
book for any correspondence between Governor Holden and
George W. Kirk and B. G. Burgen, and if SO, whether you
have made such an examination ? A. I was instructed by
the Managers to examine the book particularly on that point.
Q. See Iioav many letters and telegrams you find from Gov
ernor Holden te either of them, or from them to him? A. I
find ono telegram to Colonel. Kirk, and one letter te Colonel
Kirk directed to him at Company Shops, and I think one
directed to him at Yanceyville.
Q. How many does that make ? A. It makes two letters
and one telegram.
Q. Is that all the correspondence you find there between
these parties ? A. That is all I find.
Q. Did you hear the letters read here the other day which
Avere eworn to have been found at the court house at Graham ?
A. I did not.
Q. Do you remember of my handing the letters to you te
prove his handwriting? A. I remember certifying to a num
ber of letters as correct.
Mr. MERRIMON. I was mistaken. It was Mr. Jenkins
who I asked to identify them.
Q. Look at these letters [producing letters which had been
previously produced by the witness McLean, and which will be
found printed on pages 232, 233 and 236] are those letters in
the handwriting of Gov. Holden ? A. They are,
Q. State whether you find copies of them in this letter book ?
A. I do not.
Q. Give the dates of all the letters which have just been
shown you for identification ? A. July 1, 1870, July 28, 1870,
July 30, 1870.
Q. You don't find those letters in that letter book ? A. No,
sir. : '''"'"
Q. State whether at any time Governor Holden appointed
you to be a paymaster for any troops,' and ii so when and under
what circumstances ?

932 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Mr. SMITH. I would stato that the appointment was by a
commission, which has been offered and given in evidence.
Mr. MERRIMON. I am aware of that fact, but I want to
sIioav what he did.
Q, Stato the time and circumstances under which you were
appointed, and how you came to be appointed ? A. I do not
knovv as I can ansvvor that question.
Q. Can you state what Governor Holden eaid to you ? A.
Governor Holden sent for me to come to his office. I was
then private secretary. He invited me into hie room, the
oxecutive office, and said to me that it was necessary these
troops should be paid, and he asked me if I could suggest some
suitable peraon to pay them. I told him I would think the
matter over and report to him. I afterwards suggested a name
to him, but I didn't hear anything more of the matter for some
days. Q. What name did you suggest ? A. I suggested the name
of the deputy sheriff of this county, Mr. Nowell. He said he
would be a very proper man, and inquired about his ability to
givo tho necessary bond, and ho asked mo to ascertain if ho
could do so. I inquired of ono or tAvo gentlemen if they would
be sureties on the bond. I didn't hear anything more of it for
somo days afterwards when the governor sent for mo a second
time, and said that he had thought it best that I should bo ap
pointed paymaster to pay tho troops myself. This was on the
3rd day of September, I think.
Q. What day of the week ? A. I think it was on Saturday.
I received a commiaaion aa inspector I think of the 10th brig
ade of militia with an order from the adjutant general to report
to himas paymaster. I reported. I was very busy that day,
and I heardnothing more of the matter until I was sent for
the next night.
Q. What night was that ? A. It was on a Sunday night
that a messenger came and said that I was wanted at the treasu
ry department, and I went there,

linim w' WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 933
Q. What time ? A. I think about 9 o'clock. : I found Mr.
Jenkins there, the teller.
Q. That is the young man. A. Yes, sir. He said he had
received orders to pay me the moneys in his hands as pay
master. Q. Who was there ? A. Mr. Moffman the clerk tin the
treasury department.
Q. Any body else ? A. I don't think there was any body
else. Q. Young Mr. Jenkins and Mr. Hoffman ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. What was done? A. I will state I sent for Mr.
Wethcrell. Q. Who waa he ? A. He was a citizen of this place. I sent
for him to assist me in counting tho money to see if it was
right. Q. Did you get any money ? A. It was paid over to me.
Q. By Avhom ? A. By Mr. Jenkins the paymaster.
Q. IIo was the former paymaster ? A. Yes, sir, as I under
stood it.
Q. What did ho turn over to you ? A. Something more
than $40,000 — 40,400 and odd dollars. I am not positive as
to tho amount.
Q. What did you do with it ? A. I paid $10,000 to Major
Berry. Q. Who was ho ? A. IIo was the quartermaster and pay
master. Q. Of Avhat ? A. Of the 1st regiment I suppose. I never
saAV his commiasion.
Q. He was an acting military officer ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. By what authority did you pay that — did you have any
orders ? A. I think I had nothing more than a verbal order.
Q. From whom ? A. I think I had probably both from tho
Governor and from the adjutant general who Avas paymaster
general. t , . . \/ . ;/
Q. To pay $10,000 to Mr, Berry ? A. Yes, sir. _ , '

034 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. For what purpose I A. To pay the 1st regiment at this
place— Colonel Clarke's.
Q. What did you do with the balance ? A. I proceeded to
Graham—— Q. Let me first ask you if you know what Berry did with
that money? A. I do not. I proceeded to Graham and found
thero Colonel Kirk's regiment, and after preparing the pay
rolls I paid it to the officers and men thero.
Q. To Kirk's officers and mon ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. IIow much ? A. I do not remember the exact amount.
I went thero a second time.
Q. How much did you pay to these troops altogether? A. I
paid to the troops there, and for military expenses here at
the city something more than $05,000.
Q. What sort of money did you receive? A. Federal currency.
Q. How much did you pay to tho troops yourself ? A. some
thing more than $05,000 according to my recollection.
Q. Does that include the $10,000 you got for Berry ? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. Where did you get the balance ? A. From the sales of
military property.
Q. Did you give any bond ? A. I did not.
Q. You gave no bond you say ? A. No, sir.
Q. What was the reason assigned te you for your appoint*
ment at that time t A. He assigned no reason.
Q. Did he tell you anything about the removal of Jenkins !
A. No, Bir.
Q. You didn't learn from the governor that Jenkins had
been removed ? A. No, sir.
Q. Had you heard anything about the injunction to restrain
Jenkins from paying the money ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did the governor say anything to you about that ? A. I
do Hot remember that he did.
Mr. McCORKLE. Mr. Chief Justice, we object to the tes
timony on the ground that neither the article nor the evidence

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 935
charges- the Governor with any knowledge of the existence of
this injunction.
Mr. MERRIMON. I should rather think it did.
Mr. SMITH. No, sir, it does not.
Mr. GRAHAM. It is not a matter of tho least importance.
The article charges tho existence of a publio proceeding in a
court of justico and a process served upon tho governor's pay
master enjoining him not to payout the monoy, tho removal of
that paymaster from office, and then turning over tho monoy to
another paymaster. It is not necessary to aver that tho re
Bpondent did this willingly and knowingly in a proceeding liko
this. It is sufficient to satisfy the court that the~ governor did
know of it, and thia ia the way we propose to show he did
know of it.
Mr. MERRIMON. It ia not necessary to charge, Mr. Chief
Justice, in articles ot impeachment in the nicety of language
that is necessary in a bill of indictment that the respondent
had knowledge. It charges that this process from the court
was issued, and was regularly served, and that the governor
persuaded and procured and ordered the paymaster upon
whom the process was served to disobey and evado it.
Mr. McCORKLE. Mr. Chief Justice, if we consider but for a
moment the effect of testimony, whether responsible to tho
allegations or not, we can see at a glance it is improper, and
why ? Before tho reapondent can be convicted of crime in
paying OA'er publio moneys Avhere tho treaaurer of the State is
enjoined from the payment of the sum it muat be averred that he
had knowlodge of the faot, baeauso if it is not so averred, then
there was no crime at all. It is for that reason we object here
that the article does not pretend to aver that the reapondent
had knowledge of the existence of this injunction at the time
he appointed the witness a paymaster. What would better
effect this testimony if it were let in ? It would be simply to
hold him responsible, and make him amenable for an offence
with which he is not charged in the 8th article, and for that .
reason we think it is improper.

980 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS,
The CHIEF JUSTICE. Will you be good enough, to read
the article. ,
Mr. McCORKLE. It reads as follows :
" That tho said William W. Holden, governor of tho said
"state, unmindful of the high duties of his said office, and tho
" obligations of his solemn oath of office, and contriving and
"intending, and with a view and for the purpose of supporting
" and maintaining an armed military force in said state, which
" he had then and there recruited, organized and formed for
" illegal purposes, without the sanction of the conatitution and
" laAva of said state, but in contraA'ontion of tho same, did from
" time to time in the months of Juno, July and August, in tho
" year of our Xord ono thousand eight hundred and soventy,
" undor color of his said offlco in said etato, Avithout tho
" sanction of the constitution and laws of said state and in
" violation of tho same, mako his warrants as Biich governor
" upon the treasury of the aaid atate for largo Bums of money,
" to Avit : For tho sum of eighty thoiiBand ($80,000) dollars
" and more, to bo used for the unlawful purposea aforesaid ;
" that the said William W. Holden, govornor as aforesaid,
" under color of hia eaid office, then and there persuaded, com-
" manded, incited and procured David A. Jonkiii8, treasurer
" ot said state, to recognize such and said unlawful warrants on
" tho treasury of said state, and to deliver Such and said sums
"of monoy to such agents of. tho said William W. Hol-
"deu, govornor as aforesaid, os ho, tho said William
" W, Holden, governor as aforesaid, might from time
" to time desiguate and appoint ; that in pursuance of
" such warrants and orders of the said Wiliain W. Holden,
governor as aforesaid, the said David A. Jenkins, treas
urer as aforesaid, delivered to one A. D. Jenkins, called
" the paymaster, appointed by the said William W. Holden,
•' governor as aforesaid, for such purpose, large sums of money
" from said treasury, to wit: the sum of forty thousand dollars
"or more; that thereafter, t to wit : in the month of August,, in
" the year of our lord one thousand eight hundred and seventy,

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 937
" ono Richard M. Allison, a citizen of the county of Iredell, in
" said state, brought his suit in the superior court of the last
" named county, in his own behalf, and in the behalf of all the
" tax payers of said state, praying that a writ of injunction
" might then and thero be granted and issued according to law,
" restraining the Baid David A. Jenkins, treasurer as aforesaid,
" from delivering any sum or sums of money to the said Wil-
"liam W. Holden, governor as aforesaid, or any other persons,
" in obedience to such orders and for such purposes, and also
" restraining the said A. D. Jenkins, as such paymaster, in any
" other respect or capacity from disbursing or disposing of said
" sum of money bo in his hands, or any part thereof, for the
"purposes thereof. That tho honorable Anderson Mitchell.
"judgo of aaid superior court, thon and thoro granted tho
"writ' of injunction bo prayed for, onjolnlng and forbid-
" ding tho said David A. Jonkins, treasurer as aforesaid,
" from delivering any money from said treasury, in obedience
" to any such warrant or order so made by the said William
" W. Iloldon, govornor as aforesaid, and enjoining and forbid-
"ding tho said A. D. Jonkins, as- such paymaster or ngent,
" from using or disbursing the said monoy or any part of it so
" In his hands to or for tho use of said armod body of men for
" any of tho purposes aforesaid ; that the said David A. Jen-
"kins, treasurer, and tho said A. D. Jonkins, were each duly
" Borvcd with said writ of injunction, but nevertheless, the said
" William W. Iloldon, governor as aforesaid, wiokedly intend-
" ing to suspend and subvort tho laws of said state, and te defy
" and disregard the lawful authority of said court, did after-
" wards, te wit : after the month last aforesaid, persuade, incite,
" order, procure and command the said A. D. Jenkins to defy
" and disregard the said writ of injunction, and to deliver the
" said money so in his custody to another agent of the said
" William W. Holden, governor as aforesaid, to be used for
"the unlawful purposes aforesaid; that the said A. D. Jen-
' kins, in obedience to such last mentioned order, command
" and procurement of the said William W. Holden, governor

988 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS,
"as aforesaid, and in disregard of suoh writ of injunction
"and the lawful authority of said judge, did deliver the
"said money so in his hands to another agent ot the said
"William W. Holden, Governor as aforesaid, to-wit: To
" one Richard T. Berry, to be used for the unlawful purpose
"aforesaid, and the said William W. Holden, governor as
" asorosaid did then and there in the way and manner, and by
" tho means and for tho purposo aforesaid,, procure, order and
"command the said A. D. Jenkins bo to disregard and disobey
" the said writ of injunction and the lawful authority of said
"judge, and did then and there, and in the way and manner
" and by the means and for the unlaAvful purpose aforesaid,
"defy, disregard, ignore, contravene, suspend and defeat the
" lawful purpose and effect of the writ of injunction — so granted
"and issued by the said judgo; and thereupon and thereafter
" the said William W. Holden, govornor as aforesaid, the eaid
" sum of public money thus transfeiTed as aforesaid to the
"hands of the said Richard T. Berry, did order and cause to be
" paid out and disbursed by him, the said Richard T. Berry, to,
"|for|and]about the illegal purpose aforesaid, to-wi t: The payment
"of the expenses in keeping on foot, sustaining and maintain-
" ing the said illegal military force as aforesaid ; whereby the
" said William W. Holden, governor as aforesaid, was then and
" there guilty of a high misdemeanor in his said office in viola-
" tion of his oath ot office, and in subversion of the laws of said
"state, and the peace, interests and dignify thereof.
Your Honor will perceive that it does not appear upon tho
face of it tliat the governor had any knowledge whatever of
the existence of this writ of injunction. The off'er on the part
of the managers is ot what ? Of evidence charging him with
a crime whioh is not embraced in the article. It may be said
by the counsel on the other side that wO may draw an infer
ence that he had' auch knowledge of it. We insist that in'a
proceeding like this 'it unnst appear! in the article that the re
spondent had knowledge of this injunction beford he can be.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 989
held criminally responsible, and that he must bo charged with
such knowledge.
Mr. BRAGG. It does seem to me, Mr. Chief Justice, that
it is hardly necessary to say te the court about that matter that
it is too plain to leave any doubt as to the chargo of guilty
knowledge on tho part of the accused. The objection is that
the article does not state in so many words that the accused had
formal noticp of this injunction.
Mr. McCORKLE. It docs not state that he had any notice.
Mr. BRAGG. That it does not appear that he had any
notice at all, either in words or in fact. Now let us see. The
article charges that after this injunction had been issued against
the paying out of this money i nd its service, the respondent
did " persuade, incite, order, procure and demand the said A.
" D. Jenkins te defy and disregard the said writ of injunction
" and to deliver the said money so in his custody to another
" agent of the said William W. Holden, governor as aforesaid,
" to be used for the unlawful purposes aforesaid, that the aajid
" A. D. Jenkins in obedience to such last mentioned order,
" command and procurement of the said William W. Holden
" as aforesaid, and in disregard of such writ of injunction
" and the lawful authority of Baid judge did de-
" liver the said money so in his hands to another
" agent of the said William W. Holden, governor as
" aforesaid, to-wit : To one Richard T. Berry, to be used for the
" unlawful purpose aforesaid, and the eaid William W. Holden,
" governor as aforesaid did then and there in the way and
" manner, and by tho means and for the purpose aforesaid pro-
" cure order and command the said A. D. Jenkins so to disre-
" gard and disobey the said writ of injunction and the lawful
" authority of said judge, and did then and there and in the way
" and by the means and for the unlawful purpose aforesaid, defy,
" disregard, ignore, contravene, suspend and defeat the lawful
"purpose of the writ of injunction so granted and issued by
"the aaid judge*" n Vi , ¦ y, ¦¦ ¦ -n. /,-.-. ¦¦¦¦ >< '.¦;>¦• ¦•.¦¦
If that does not charge a knowledge and a guilty knowledge

940 COURT OF IMPEA0HMENT8.
and a wilful disregard of the law there, Mr. Chief Justice, I do
not know what the force of language is. I think there need
nothing more be said on that point.
Mr. BOYDEN. Mr. Chief Justice, it is not a question
whether the respondent actually had knowledge. We do not
raise that point at all. The point we make is that the article
does not charge that he had knowledge and^we say they should
have charged, in order to sustain the specification, that he had
knowledge of this injunction being issued and that having such
knowledge, in violation of hisdutj he ordered this money to be
paid over. In their articles they allege that the whole thing
was illegal, the raising of the military force, the issuing of com
missions and the payment of the money — that everything was
without warrant of law, and we 6ay that no man can be con
victed upon an indictment in a court unless it is alleged that
these acts were done with knowledge, for that is the very gist
ol the question in this case. We eay that it is not alleged he
had the notice and that having such notice he disregarded the
injunction. The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer is of the
opinion that although this artiole is expressed in general
terms, yet in articles of impeachment it is not necessary to
observe the same strictness in regard to circumstances as in a
bill of indictment, that where it is alleged he wiokedly per
suaded and commanded Jenkins to pay over this money and
to defy the injunction of the court, it implies necessarily that
he knew of the injunction. The question can be asked.
By Mr. Merrimon [resuming.]
Q. State whether he said anything to you about any injunc
tion ? . A. I don't think he mentioned any injunction at all.
Q. What reason did he assign for appointing you? A, I
do not think he assigned any.
Q. You knew about the injunction ? A. I had heard of it.
Q. He said nothing to you why you were appointed or the
necessity for it ? A. Nothing except the necessity that the
troops should be paid.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 941
Q. Why could not Mr. Jenkins pay them ?
Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chief Justice, we object to this colloquy
between the counsel and the witness.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer thinks that
where the private secretary of the governor is called under
these circumstances more latitude should be given than in
the c xamination of an ordinary witness.
Q. State any reason why Mr. Jenkins could not go ?
The CHIEF JUSTICE. Did he give you any ? A. He
gave me none.
Q. Had you heard any imputation of corruption or inca
pacity against Jenkins ? A. I do not think I ever heard him
mention Mr. Jenkins' aa paymaster at all.
The CHIEF JUSTICE.' You mean Mr. A. D. Jenkins ?
A. Yes, sir, the young man.
Q. Who gave you the order to go to Mr. Jenkins and get
the money ? A. I had none.
Q. How did you happen to go ? A. Mr. Jenkins sent for me.
Q. You received your orders from him ? I received but one
ordor and that was to report to the adjutant general for duty
as paymaster.
Q. Did you report to him ? A. Yos, sir.
Q. What did ho say to you ? A. He eaid that — I do not
romomber now what ho said to mo. I said I was very busy.
Q. Why is it that you cannot remember ? A. I went to
his table — he was temporarily occupying the same room that I
occupied below and he laid this order on my table. I was very
busy that day.
Mr. McCORKLE. We object to this evidence unless it was
in presence of the governor.
Mr. MERRIMON. Certainly, Mr. Chief Justice, it is ad
missible. The adjutant general is the right hand man of the
governor — hia head military officer.
By the Chief Justice.
Q. Who gave you your commission as paymaster ? A. The
adjutant general. 61

W21 OOURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. What word' did you receive about getting the money ?
A. I received word from Mr. Jenkins and I went to the
treasury, Q. Tho former paymaster ? A. Yos, sir.
Mr, MERRIMON. Tho witnoss says that ho was ordered
to report to tho adjutant gonoral, and I ask him what tho
adjutant gonoral said ho Avon ted him to do.
Mr. GRAIIAM. Tho adjutant general, Mr. Chief Justice,
ia aa much tho right hand man of the govornor as the socretary
of war Is of the Prosldont of the United States,
The CHIEF JUSTICE. You can ask the witness what
orders the adjutant general gave him.
Q. What did ho say to you Avhen yon reported to liim in an
official Avay about the mattera you were to be charged with ? A.
He said that Mr. Jenkine either had been or would be directed
to turn over certain moneys to inc.
Q. Were there any reasons given for that ? A. No, sir.
Q. Hoav did it happen that you did not give any bond ? A.
I do not knoAV. Nothing Avas ever said to me about giving a
bond. I was appointed on Saturday morning. A friend of
mine had a child killed on that day on the railroad and I was
with his family apart of tho time during that afternoon and I
attended the funeral the next day which Avas on Sunday. A
messenger came to me on Sunday night that Mr. Jenkins
Avished to see me. I Avent to the treasury department.
Q. And received the money ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. What caused you to go and receiA-e the money on
. Sunday — Avhat was the occasion of such an extraordinary
movement? A. Mr. Jenkins sent a messenger — he sent no,
written order or letter — I went.
Q. What was the occasion of such haste ? A. I do not know
tliat I can assign any reason.
Q. Then .you did not know why- the money was given to.
you on Sunday evening, and have no means of knowing. I
ask you this (if I am permitted to. put the question under the
rule) Avhothor you do not know that, the troops were clamorous

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 943
for their pay, and that the governor was anxious to pay thom
off and disband" them, but thoy could not do it on account of
tho injunction.
Mr. SMITH. That I submit, Mr. Chiof Justico, is a legal
question. It Is asking tho hearsay of tho Avitnoss, and Avhat-
evor tho witness may havo heard ought not to affoot tho
accused. Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. You may ask the witnesa as to
his OAvn knowlodgo.
Q. Hoav was that ? A. I have no knoAvledge of the troops
being clamorous.
Q. Did you see any troops in the capitol ? A. I occasionally
saw officers there.
Q; Yon saAv no troops here at all? A. I eaw some men in
uniform, but I had no conversation with any of the officers or
troops to my recollection.
Q. Was there no complaint made about delays when you
went up there to pay them ?
Mr. SMITH. We object to that question.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer thinks that
the question is not competent.
Q. I ask you Avhether or not you know that the governor
hurried up the payment in order to disband the troops ?
Mr. SMITH. From anything you heard him say.
A. I had nothing to do with disbanding the troops.
Q. That is not the question I asked. I asked you whether
you heard the governor say, or did you see him do anything
that indicated a purpose to have these troops paid off, to the
end that they might be disbanded ? A. No, sir.
Q. [By the Chief Justice.] What was the date on which
they were paid up there ? A. It waa during the week com
mencing tho 6th of September. Tho pay rolls had to be made
out after I reached there.
Q. Was it customary to do businoss of that sort in the offices
on Sunday ? A. I do not know that it was customary, I occa*

944 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
slonally did business in the office— in the private secretary's
office. Q. You occasionally transacted regular business on Sunday?
A. that is, so far as writing a letter or something of that kind.
Q. Do I understand you to say that you wrote official letters
on Sunday — was that the course of business in the executive
office ? A. Since then I have done it. I don't know as I did
before. I had only been in the office a week then.
Q. Ib Sunday included in the business hours at the capitol ?
A. Sunday is not ordinarily.
Q. State whothor you are accustomed to do business on Sun
day except in cases of emergency ? A. No, sir.
Q. What was the emergency which occasioned you getting
this money on this Sunday night ?
The CHIEF JUSTICE. Do you know ?
A. I knew of no emergency.
Q. You did not know there was any ? A. No, sir, except in
connection with Avhat the governor said to me that it was neces
sary that the troops should bo paid. That might have been
ihe reason.
Q. State whether at any time the governor sent you to
;ho county of Yadkin for the chief justice, and if so, what
nstruction he gavo you ?
Mr. McCORKLE. That question refers to what allegation ?
Mr. MERRIMON. We allege that the surrender of the
iriaoncrs by the chiof justice of the stato was not voluntary, aa
ho responpent alleges in his letter to the chief justice. We
ay that that statement was false and hypocritical, and that he
vaa forced to surrender the prisoners by reason of the act of
I" udge Brooks. We offer to show a wicked and corrupt pur-
»ose, and the evidence has been admitted with that view.
Lnd we desire to show that the chief justice was sent for and
nder what circumstances.
Mr. BOYDEN. Mr. Chief Justice, wo wish to be under-
tood as objecting to the question. We do not see its com-
etency at all. I do not know how it can be alleged that

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 945
because the governor returned certain prisoners at the command
of the chief justice and brought them forth after having received
them, it is material to show that Judge Brooka had issued
writs commanding the respondent to bring these prisoners
before him and that that was the reason why the respondent
obeyed the other writ. How does that follow ? How can it
have any effect. It seems to me that it is not admissible as
evidence at all.
Mr. GRAHAM. We allege, Mr. Chief Justice, that tho
respondent produced theso prisoners under compulsion. The
dates of the Avrits of Judge Brooks were not later than the 6th
or 7th of August. A telegraphic correspondence takes place
between the governor of the state and the president which is
referred to tho attorney general through the secretary of war
and through tho secretary of Avar an answer is telegraphed to
tho gOA'ernor about the 7th or 8th of August. In the telegram
to tho president, tho governor expresses his determination to
hold the prisoners unlesa tho United States soldiers are brought
to bear upon him. Mr. Akerman replies advising that the au
thorities of tho state submit to the jurisdiction of the federal
judgo, and then for the first time we hear the govornor offering
to giA'o up the prisoners and assigning as a reason the peaceful
condition of the stato and the fact that they can be safely de
livered. We say that instead of its being the true reason ho
Avas pressed by the process of the United States to comply with
the writ of the chief justice. He found himself denied by the
executive of tho United States and with federal authority pres
sing upon hiin he made an inglorious retreat, and in his efforts
to conceal the fact that it was inglorious he writes to the chief
justice that the country now being in that pacific condition,
tho authority of the stato can be administered in North Car
olina and honce he gives up the prisoners.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. Read the allegation in the article
which alleges that he disobeyed the writ of habeas corpus.
Mr. MERRIMON. It reads as follows: "That such re-
" fusal of the said George W, Kirk to obey the said writ, was

946 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
" made duly to appear before the said chief justice, whereupon
" the said chief justice made enquiry of the said William W.
" Holden, governor as aforesaid, if ho had so ordered the said
" George W. Kirk to seize, detain and [imprison the said
"Adolphus G. Moore, that the said William W. Holden,
" governor as aforesaid, made answer in substance, and to the
"effect, to said enquiry of said chief justice, that he had there-
" tofore ordered and commanded the said Georgo W. Kirk to
" bo seize, detain and imprision and deprive of his liberty the
" said Adolphus G. Mooro, that such seizure and detention
" Avas mado by his order and command, Avhcreupon the said
"chief justice upon due consideration, solemnly adjudged in
" substance and effect that according to the constitution and
" laAvs of said state, the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus
" was not suspeuded, and that the said George W. Kirk and
" the said William W. Holden, governor as aforesaid, unmind-
" ful of his most solemn oath of office, and his high duties as
;' tho executive of said state, and contriving, and then and there
;' intending to deprive the said Adolphus G. Moore of his
•' liberty as a free citizen of said state, and to defy and
;' subvert the constitution and laAvs of said state, declared
"that he had so ordered, and did still eo order and com-
' manded the said George W. Kirk not to obey the 6aid
;' writ 60 issued by the said chief j ustice, and then and there
' declared to the said chief justice, that he the said William W.
;' Holden, governor as aforesaid, would not obey the aaid writ,
' or the command of the said chief justiee in that behalf, and
' that he would not allow the said George W. Kirk to obey
'the same and produce the body of the said Adolphus G.
:' Moore, before the said chief justice, according to the exigency
'of said writ, until such time as in his discretion he might think
' proper so to do ; that while the said William W. Holden,
' governor as aforeaaid, ao eeized, held, detained, imprisoned
' and deprived of his liberty, said Adolphue G. Moore, and so
' refused to obey the said Avrit, and to command the aaid George
' W. Kirk bo to do, and so resisted the laws and tho lawful

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. $47
" authority of the said chief justice, he was by his own procure-
"ment, order and command, supported in that behalf by the
"means and use of said aimed men, s> commanded and con
trolled aa aforesaid, and so the said William W. Holden, gov
ernor as aforesaid, did in the way and manner, and by the
"means aforesaid, procure, order and command tho said
" George W. Kirk, so charged by said writ cf habeas corpus, to
"refuse te make due return of or to the same and
" produce the body of the said Adolphus G. Moore, before
"the said chief justice, according to the exigency of
"6aid writ, and to resist the same and the lawful au-
" thority of the said chief justice, and did himself then and
" there in the way and manner and by the means aforesaid
" resist the due execution of the said writ, and the lawful author-
"" ity of the said chief justice, and did then and there in the
" way and manner and by the means and armed force aforesaid
" suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, and did
" unlawfully and violently seize, detain, hold, imprison and
" deprive of his liberty, tho said Adolphus G. Moore, and for
" a long time, to-wit : for the space of ono calendar month,
"after the said chief justice had adjudged such detention illegal
" did continue to hold and detain and caused to be held and
" detained said Adolphus G. Mooro, and did in tlio way and
" mannor and by the means aforesaid, mako the military super-
" sede and prevail over the laAvful civil power of the state, all
" of which, acts, matters and things, tho said William W.
" Holden, governor as aforesaid, did as aforesaid, in violation
" of his solemn oath of office, and whereby he the said William
" W. Holden, governor as aforesaid, did then and there com'
"mit high crimes and misdemeanors in office, against tho con
stitution and laws of said state, and the peace, dignity and
" interests thereof."
Your Honor will observe that it is here alleged that the
defendant declared to the chief justice that he would not sur
render these men until in his discretion he should think proper
to do so. Before offering this, we liavo offered evidence, which

948 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Avas admitted, to show a wilful and corrupt purpose on his part
and tending to show not the voluntary Burrender of these men,
but that he was forced to do so. We contend that taking his
correspondence with the president, his actions here before the
chief justice and all the facts in connection Avith the transaction,
it is apparent that his action was coerced and on the same
point we wish to show that the reapondent sent, in a precip
itate manner, for the chief justice, and at the very time when
the action of Judge Brooks Avaa imminent.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer is of the
opinion that the evidence can be offered to show a corrupt
intent. IIow far it will tend to show it is a matter for the
court to determine.
Q. State the instructions you received in reference to going
after the chief justiee? A. I do not remember tho day, but I
think it Avas during the month of August.
Q. Cannot you fix the day ? A. No, air.
Q. Have you any means of fixing it ? A. No, sir, I have
not. Q. Did you boar a letter to the chief justice ? A. I did.
Q. Was it the date the letter was written ? A. It was. I
was sent for to go to Governor Holden's house at night.
Q. What timo? A. About eight o'clock I should think.
He said to me that ho wished me to take a letter to Chief Jus
tice Pearson at his home in Yadkin county and I left.
Q. When did he want you to leave? A. On the next
train. Q. When did you go ? A. About one o'clock that night, or
the next morning ratlier.
Q. State whether he furnished you with any money to pay
your expenses ? A. Yes, sir, he furnished me money.
Q. What instructions did he givo you ? A. Simply to dehver
the letter to the chief justice.
Q. How soon — tell all you know about it ? A. He wanted
me to start on the next train and deliver the letter to tho chief
juatice.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 949
Q. Did he give you any particular instructions whether to
do it in a hurry or to take your time ? A. I don't know that ho
gave me any instructions. The presumption was that I should
go at once.
Q. Tell all he said ? A. I do not remember positively — I
did not charge my recollection with it.
Q. State your best impression ? A. My best impression is
that I should proceed at once with the letter to the chief
justice. Q. IIow did you go ? A. I went to High Point by way of
the North Carolina railroad, thence by stage to Salem and then
by private conveyance from Salem 
Mr. SMITH. Has this testimony anything to do with this
case, Mr. Chief Justico ?
Mr. MERRIMON. I think the importance of it will bo ap
parent very soon.
Q. What did ho say to you about a conA-oyanco from Salem ?
A. I don't think ho gavo mo any instructions about it.
Q. IIo mado no suggestion about that ? A. I think not.
Q. State what you did— did you go for tho Chief Justico ?
A. Yea, sir.
Q. IIow long Avero you getting thoro f A. I left here at ono
o'clock in tho morning. I reached High Point about seven and
reached Salem about one and I reached — I took the Avrong
road and remained nearly all night on what I call a mountain,
just this side of the chief justice's residence in Yadkin county.
Q. How late did you travel that night ? A. I traveled I
suppose till about ten o'clock — nine or ten. I stopped at a farm
house and found I was on the wrong road. I remained there
until morning.
Q. Then what did you do? A. I obtained a guide there
and then proceeded to the chief justice's house and delivered
the letter.
Q. How long did yon stay at the chief justite's house? A.
I suppose I was there two hours.

960 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. Did you bring the chief justice back with you ? A. He
returned with me in the same conveyance.
Q. Were you instructed by the governor to bring him in
the conveyance ? A.I think he said he would come with
me. Q. State Avhether the governor said to you anything about
tho taking of a conveyance to bring the chief justice in ?
A. No, sir. the governor did not.
Q. Who did?
Mr. SMITH. We object to the question unless the respon
dent is connected Avith it.
Q. Did anybody in the presence of the governor ? A. There
Avas a gentleman in the presence of the governor.
Q. Why did you not tell that? A. I was not asked to tell
that, you asked me if the governor told me.
Q. Who was it that was present? A. Mr. Ball.
Q. Who was Mr. Ball ? A. He is a lawyer I think from
Greensboro'. He pointed out to me the road I should go.
Q. Was the governor present then ? A. He was present in
the houao ? He told me the best road to go and stated that I
had better procure a coivcyanco at Salem which would bring
mo and tho chief justice back.
Q. How como Mr. Ball to bo thoro with you and tho
govornor? Mr. SMITH. I object te tho quoation as calling for matter
totally outaldo of this wholo controversy. Mr. Ball has not
been brought Into this matter until iioav.
Q. Stato whether Mr. Ball told tho govornor at tho tlmo you
wero present that ho had boon to bco tho chief justico and that
the chief justico would como down ? A. IIo did.
Q. In yonr presence ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. What did tho governor thon say ? A. I do not remem-
bor any conversation.
Q, Stato whether you understood from Mr. Ball in the
prcBonco of tho govornor, that tlio govornor had lont hlin to
100 tho chief justico? A, I do not understand your question,

TRIAL OF "WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 951
Q. Did you understand that Mr. Ball had been to see tho
chief justice ? A. I understood hohad but I do not know how,
or any thing about it. *
Q. He did tell tho governor that ho had seen the chief
justico and that tho chief justice Avould come down? A. jl
understood him to say so — that is my recollection.
Q. Then ho gavo you instructions about tho road and that
Avas in tho presence of the governor ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And told you to bring the chief justico in the conveyance
you should take from Salem ? A. IIo eaid he would bo very
likely to como if I took a conveyance that would bring him
down. Q. You and the chief justice left within two hours after your
arrival at his house? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Where did you go to that night ? A. We took dinner
at Salem that day ; AAre took suppbr at High Point and reached
here the next morning.
Q. What time did you arrive here ? A. I supposo about
seven or eight o'clock in the morning.
Q. Hoav near did yon get to the chief justice's house the
night before you arrived there? A. About three miles.
Q. What time did you reach his house ? A. About sun up.
Q. And you staid about two hours ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And he left hia homo in the vehicle you took and you
reached Salem in timo for dinner ? A. Yea, sir.
Q. Aro you not mistaken about that — reflect a moment?
A. Wo got bore on schedule time I know.
Hoav far Avas that? A. I do not knoAV the distance.
Q. Havo you not any idea ? A. No, sir, I cannot say that I
have. Q. You got to High Point and took suppor and then camo
hero aud took tho cars and arrivod here tho next morning?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. About what hour ? A. About six or half-past six o'clock.
We got hero on schedulo time the noxt morning.
Q. Did you not arrive hore a little after twelve that night—

962 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
didn't the trains pass here ? A. I do not know about the trains
passing. We arrived here on schedule time and I think about
the time I stated.
Q Was it midnight or tho next morning? A. Come to
think I believe it waa about one o'clock in the morning, as you
suggest. I have made a number of trips.
Q. Then you were gone how long ? A. Two days and two
nights — part of two uighta.
Q. Did you mako kasto ? A. Yes, sir, I did.
Q. Do you remember the morning you arrived with the
chief justice here? A. I don't remember.
Q. I mean the day of the month ? A. I do not.
Q. I ask you if you havo any knowledge whether it was the
day tho writs were to bo returned to Judge Brooks ? A. I
haA'e not.
Q. Do you know Avhether tho chief justice eat that day in
court ? ; A. I think he did.
Q. What time in tho day after he arriA'ed ? A. I cannotsay.
Q. Do you know that ho sat ? A. Only from hearsay.
Q. You did soo him on tho bench? A. No, sir,
Q, Did you not soo anybody boforo him ?' A. No, sir
Q. Do you fyioAV whothor thoro is a paper publlihod in
this town called tho Sentinel f A, Yos, sir.
Q. How long has it boon published to your knowledge— was
it published during tho year 1870? A. Yos, sir.
Q. Did that papor come to the executive office dally t A.
I have seen it there. I cannot say it came daily.
Q. After you went to the office did you seo it there every
morning ? A. I cannot say I saw it every morning.
Q. Do yon know whether the governor read it ? A. I think
he did occasionally.
Q. Do you know whether ho read it daily ? A. I do not. '
Q. Have you seen him read it? A. I have.
Q. Often? A. Yes, sir.
Cross-Examination. By Mr. Smith.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 953
Q. Was the letter which you carried to the chief justice
afterwards published ? A. I took a sealed letter to the chief
justice — I think it was.
Q. It was tho one that was published after in the proceed
ings? A. Yes, sir.
Re-Direct Examination.
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. How do you know that that is the letter? A. It is only
an impression.
Q. Is it dated about the time you carried the letter to
Judge Pearson ? A. I think it is.
Q. Waa it put on the letter book ? A Yes, sir.
Q. It was copied in it ? A' Yes, sir.
Q. That was the letter you carried to Judge Pearson ? A.
I think it was.
Q. The one that has been read in evidence on this trial ? A.
Yob, sir.
AARON D. JENKINS, a witness re-called on behalf of
the Managers, being duly sworn, testified as follows :
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. State whether as paymaster of tho state troops you
received any money and if so under what circumstance and
the amount you received ? A. I received $66,000 in all.
Q. When did you receive the first ? A. I have taken a
memorandum of the vouchers. I received July 11, 1870,
$1,000, July 14 $5,000, July 22d $60,000.
Q. What did you do with the first $1,000 ? A. I paid it
out while it lasted for commissaries mostly I think.
Q. For state troops ? A. For state troops.
Q. State whether at any time you paid George W- Kirk any
money and if so how much ? A. [After examining memo
randa.] I paid George W. Kirk a sum of money while I was
teller, while I waa in the treasury department.
Q. How much? A. $1000. That was before I was
appointed paymaster.

964 COURT OF IMPEAOHMENTS.
Q. Whon f A. I have not tho date here but it was before I
was appointed.
Q. Can you ascertain tho date ? A. I can by the books of
the treasury.
Q. Was it in June or July ? A. It was about the 21st or
22nd of June.
Q. By whoso ordor did you pay him tho $1000 ? A. It waa
on a warrant 
Mr. SMITH. Was it a written order ?
Q. Did you not have that warrant in here? A. No, sir; I
did not have it.
Mr. MERRIMON. We would like to have you supply
that order.
Q. You say you paid Kirk about $1,000 about the 21st or 22d.
June ? A. Yes, sir, I think it was about that time.
Q. You paid that on whose order ? A. It was on a warrant
issued by the governor's office, and countersigned by tho
auditor of the state. I think that was the form of the warrant
— I am pretty certain.
Q. That was before you were paymaster ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. After you became paymaster did you include the $1,000
in the amount of money you stated you received ? A. No, sir.
Q. You didn't count that in the calculation of money you
received at all ? A. No, sir.
Q. You got the $5,000, when ? A. About the 16th July,.
1870. Q. Did you disburse that on the state troops ? A. A part^.
and part was used for advance payment to officers.
Q. What do you mean by advance payments ? A. Tho offi
cers of the state troops would come to the governor or adju
tant and get an order on the paymaster to let them have so
much money, and that was deducted when the pay rolls were.
made out.
Q. That was to pay money before it was due them ?. A-
No,, sin.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 955
Q. IIow thon was it advance paymmentsfl A. It was in
advanco of tho making out of tho pay roll.
Q. You paid it to tho officers and soldiers ? A. To tho offi
cers. I don't think I paid any ono more than was duo to
him. I tried to koop on my guard and not let any ono over
draw. Q. You say you disbursed $5,000 in that way ? A. Somo I
paid for commissaries.
Q. But it went for tho purpose of that military movement ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. When do you say you received money next ? A. On the
22d July $60,000.
Q. IIow did you happen to receive $60,000 a. once ? A. On
the morning of tho 22d Governor Holden sent for me to the
treasury department — a messenger I think told me that tho
the governor wanted to see .me at his office. I wont in thero
and ho told mo that Mr. Horner, his clerk, would make out a
warrant for. $60,000 in my favor as paymaster. I went to Mr.
Horner, ho mado it out, and either myself or Mr. Horner went
to the governor and had him sign it, and I then took it to the1
auditor. Tlie auditor was not here himself, but his clerk coun
tersigned it, and I carried it to the treasurer and drew the
monoy. Q. $60,000 ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. What was tho object of drawing $60,000 at that partic
ular time?' A. I don't know what tho object was.
Q. State whether you heard anything about an injunction
rcstrainingthe treasurer from paying? A. I heard it talked
of that thero would be an injunction, or that there might bo-
an injunction— not that there would be.
Q. You received a warrant that day for $00,000 ? A. Yes>,
sir, Q. What did you do with the money ? A. I disbursed it in
the same way I have doscribed except $40,000, or a little-
over— $40,480.12.
Q. What became of that? A. That I paid to Mr. Neathery.

956 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. State if you turned it over to him after the injunction
was served upon you, and if bo, under what circumstances ?
A. Some time in the latter part of August I received notice of
the injunction.
Q. What was it— restraining you from paying that money ?
A. Restraining me from disbursing any of the fnnds as well as
I recollect. Q. Did you refuse to pay out any more money ? A. I did
until I received an order removing me as paymaster.
Q. How long after the injunction was served before you re
ceived the order ? A. I have been trying to recollect when I
received the order — I cannot tell, but it. was some four, five or
six days.
Q. Tho injunction was served four, five or six days before
you received the order from the governor removing you ? A.
Yea, sir.
Q. Did ho ask you to pay money out to these troops after
that ? A. He did not.
Q. He did not ask you to pay before receiving the order ?
A. I have no recollection.
Q. What time did you receive the order? A. I received
the order on Saturday morning, September 3d.
Q. What time in the day ? A. It was in the morning — I
don't recollect what time, but some time before noon.
Q. What did you do when you received the order ? A. I
think the first person I showed the order to — I may have
shown it to some person in the office — was 
Mr. SMITH. We object, Mr. Chief Justice, unless it is con
nected with the accused.
Q. What did you do that day ? A. I showed the order
pretty soon after I received it to Mr. Bailey.
Q. Who is he ? A. A lawyer, living in Salisbury I believe.
Q. State whether he was the counsel of the governor at that
time? A. I think he was.
Q. [By Mr. Smith.] Do you know anything except from
hearsay? A. No, sir.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 957
Mr. SMITH. We submit, Mr. Chief Justice, that the testi
mony is not competent.
Mr. MERRIMON. I will connect the governor with him
in a moment.
Q. State whether you saw him appear in behalf of the gov
ernor at tho time the habeas corpus ernes were tried? A. I
think I saAV him.
Q. Did you pay the money that day to Mr. Neathery in
abedience to the governor's order? A. No, sir.
Q. Did you refuse to pay it ? A. I did not.
Q. But you did not do it ? A. No, sir.
Q. Why did you not ? A. I Avanted to consult counsel.
Q. Why did you Avant to consult counsel ? A. I wanted to
be certain Avhether I ought to.
Q, Why did you think you ought not? A. There was an
injunction, and I wanted to know if the injunction prohibited
me from turning it over to my successor after I was removed,
Q. Did you at any time after that day seo the governor, and
if so where and Avhat did ho say to you — I mean Saturday ?
A. I saAV the governor. I don't recollect that he spoke to me
that day at all upon the subject.
Q. When did you aee him 1 A. I 6aw him the next morn
ing, Sunday, about nine o'clock. I met Governor Holden
on the front of the National hotel, and he spoke to me in re
gard to the order. I don't recollect exactly what he said.
Q. State the substance? A. The substance Avas when I
would turn over the funds to Mr. Neathery as I recollect.
Q. What did you say to him? A. I did not give him a
direct answer at all. I told him I would think about it and
see him again.
Q. Did he want you to pay tliem over — did he say it was
your duty ? A. I don't recollect what he said particularly.
Q. You can state whether he wanted you to pay it ? A. I
think he said it was important to pay it over.
Q. You declined to do it then, but said you would see him
€2

958 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
again? A. Yes, sir. I was just starting for okurch— or
Sunday school rather.
Q. State Avhothor you saw him afterwards, and if so whoro
and Avhat Avna dono ? A. In the afternoon of the samo day.
Q. Sunday ? A. Yos, sir, Avhile at tho National hotel about
3 o'clock a messenger from the governor informed me 
Q. Go on and state Avhat you did In pursuance of tho infor
mation you got from the messenger ? A. I went to the gov
ernor's office in the capitol. lie Avas there.
Q. What time iu the evening Avas that? A. It was 3 or 8£
o'clock. Q. Did you meet him there % A. The governor was there.
Q. Did he aay anything to you of having aent a messenger ?
A. I don't think he did.
Q. State Avhether the messenger a\'1io came Avas the mes
senger who belonged to the executive office? A. I dont think
he was. I think he Avas a colored boy. I don't recollect avIio
he Avas.
Q. Did the messenger go Avith you to tlie executive office ?
A. No, air, he returned at once.
Q. In obedience to the suggestion yon Avent to the executive
office. Who did you aee there ? A. I saw the governor and
Mr. Bailey, I think.
Q. William II. Bailey? A. Yes, air.
Q. A lawyer ? A. Yes, sir, and I think Mr. Badger.
Q. Mr. Richard Badger ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. What was aaid to you there ? A. The governor asked
me if it Avould be convenient to turn over the funds to Mr.
Neathery that afternoon. I told him if I could see Mr.
Neathery, and if I could get the funds out of the bank, I
would turn them over.
Q. Did you hesitate about it ? A. I hesitated very little
afier going to the offlco. I don't recollect anything that I said
in hesitation.
Q. Why did yon hesitate at all ? A. I did not know Avhether

TRIAL OF AVILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 950
or not the Injunction prohibited mo from turning over tho
funds after I avus removed.
Q. Did you turn It over until you woro advised that It did
not ? A.I avub advised by Mr. Bulloy, or at least ho told mo
I would havo to obey tho ordor.
Q. Was ho your counsel? A. No, Bir.
Q. Was he there us counsel for the governor ?
Mr. SMITH. Only atate AA'hat you knoAV. v-
A. IIo Avas there with tho goA'eruor. I only know from
hearsay that he Avas his counsel.
Q. He Avas there at the time ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did he state to you your duty in the presence of tho gov
ernor ? A. I do not recollect that he did.
Q. What was said Avhen you went in there by any of these
gentlemen ? A. Really, I don't recollect the words that any
of them used.
Q. Give the substance. A. The most that was said waa
about getting the money out of the bank.
Q. Was anything said to you about the inj unction ? A. I
don't think there was.
Q. You say that you had had a talk with Mr. Bailey before ?
A. Yes, sir, I showed the order to Mr. Bailey.
Q. Did Mr. Badger eay anything to you about it ? A.I
don't recollect that he did,
Q. I understood you that when you Avent to the governor's
office he asked you if it was convenient to pay over the money
to Mr. Neathery, and you told him forthwith that if you could
you Avould / A. I may have hesitated at first. I do not recol
lect it.
Q. Do you know whether the governor said you ought to do
it ? A. I think he said it was important I should.
Q. Why Avas it important ? A. I don't recollect that he
assigned any reason. Some one during the conversation thero
said there might be some danger of the bank being enjoined,
so that I could not got the money out of tlie hank.
Mi1. SMITH. Who aaid that ?

960 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Mr. MERRIMON. Some one there present with the Gov
ernor. Q. [By Mr. Smith,] was the Governor present ? A. Yes,
sir. Q. You were paymaster, state whether there was any desire
to disband these troops before they were disbanded ?
Mr. SMITH. I object unlesa tho Avitness states what he
knows. *
Q. Do you know whether there was any purpose to disband
them which was delayed by reason of the injunction ?
Mr. SMITH. Stato what you know ? A. Yes, sir. I know
there was some desire to have theirt disbanded.
Q. How many days before ? A. I do not recollect how many
days. Q. Stato whether it was about the timo the injunction was
served on you ? A. Tho pay rolb wore being mado out about
tho tlmo the injunction Avas served, and my understanding was
that at leaat a portion of thom would bo disbanded aa Boon as
they Avoro paid off.
Q. Did tho governor know that tho injunction was served
upon you ? A. Ho did.
Q. Did you toll him? A. I did.
Q. You don't know Avhether you stated it would compol you
not to obey his order ? A. No, sir, I don't recollect saying that.
Q. Did you tell tho governor that you could not pay any
moro money by reason of that injunction? A. I don't rccol
leet. I told him that my understanding was that it prohibited
mo — I aimed to convey to him the idea that I intended to cease
paying while that injunction Avas existing.
Q. Did you pay out a dollar except when you paid it under
the governor's orders ? A. No, eir, I did not.
Q. Did tho governor know yon had not paid out any ? A. I
think he did — I don't know that he did.
Q. Did you tell him ? A. I did not tell him.
. Q. You told him that you would not pay any more money

TRIAL OF AVILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 961
after the service of the injunction ? A. I don't recollect that
I told him directly that I would not pay.
Q. I ask whether you and your father at one time did not
say you would not pay any more money pending this injunc
tion ? A. I don't recollect.
Q. Was there an injunction served on your father also as
treasurer? A. Yes, sir, there was,
Q. Do you knoAV whether ycur father was reluctant to pay
out any money under these warrants ?
Mr. McCORKLE. We object to the question. It cannot
be pretended that the witness knows whether there 'was a
reluctance or not.
A. I do not know that ho was reluctant for he waa adviaed
that it Avas his duty to do it. j
Q. Who advised him ? A. Ho consulted with tho attorney
g -ieral and other counsel also I think.
Q. Aa to whether ho ought to do it ? A. Yos, sir.
Q. Why did ho do it ? A . Do yon mean why did ho consult
tho attornoy general ?
Q. Upon Avhat grounds did ho pay it ?
Mr. SMITH. I do not seo tho relevancy of this ovidonee.
Tho treasurer ia not an agont of tho governor.
Mr. MERRIMON. Wo say that tho governor is charged
in tho articles of impoachment with ordering and procuring
tho treasurer to pay this monoy and that tho treasurer doubting
his authority to pay it, had to consult counsol before ho would
do bo and that then he paid upon tho impression that was mado
upon his mind that ho could look beyond the warrant, and
that there was no personal liability upon him but that it lay
beyond the warrant.
Mr. SMITH. We don't object, Mr. Chief Justice, to the
secondary evidence of the acts of the governor, but we do
object to showing the state of mind of the treasurer. The man
agers have a right to show what was done by the accused,
but they have.no right to go outside of that.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer does not

002 COURT OF fMPEA0HMENT8\
think it oompotont to show whothor the treasurer was in doubt
In rofuronoo to what his duty wan,
Q, How did you got that monoy that ovonlng? A, I first
wont to Raleigh Matloiial Bank. Mr, WIloy wns not thoro,
Homo ono told mo ho had gono to a funeral, I wont to too
Mr, WIloy and told Irliu that I wanted to got the fowls In his
bank that I had doposltod ob paymaster, lie told me ho did
not knoiv what funds ho had on hand but he said he Avould see.
Mr. SMITH. I avUI enquire respectfully what this testi
mony has to do with this proceeding.
Mr. MERRIMON. I desire to sho*, Mr. Chief Justice, that
the respondent was in a hurry to get the monoy out of this bank
for fear of another injunction.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. You have a right to show that
Q. IIow did you get the money ? A. Mr. Wiley told mo
that as aoon as ho returned to the bank he would see what
funds he had and he appointed the timo for me to come down.
Q. What time ? A. I think he said about eight o'clock.
Q. Was that in September ? A. That Avas on the 4th.
Q. At eight o'clock at night ? A. Yes, sir. He went on
to the funeral and I returned. As he stated he was not certain
Avhat funds he had on hand, I thought I would go to Williams'
bank and see if he would cash my draft on the other bank. I
went to 6ee him and he said if he could see Colonel Anderson
he Avould.
Mr. SMITH. Is this testimony material ?
Mr. MERRIMON. We think it is.
Q. Go on — tell all that occurred ? A. Mr. Wiley and I 
Q. I don't care about tho conversation, state Avhat occurred ?
A. Mr. Wiley sent over and got a buggy and said he would go
and look for Col. Anderson. But he lied gone to the funeral
also. Wo rode out to the cemotery and did not meet him and
thon we Avent to his house. We got there sometime between
sundown and dark. Colonol Anderson said he would cash my
draft for $15,000 or $20,000 and said he would meet me at tho

TRIAL OF WILLIAM AV. HOLDEN. 90 '1
hank about tlio eanio tlmo I think I had appointed to moot Mr.
Wiloy at his bank.
Q. Did you luwo any funds at Wllllaina' bank ? A. No, air.
Q. Go on and foil what you did? A. I Avont to Mr. Wiley's
bank at the appointed time and ho paid mo I think $15,000 In
caah, and gave me a draft on Now York for $10,000, 1 think.
Q. What did you tako the draft on Ncav York for ? A. Be
cause I wanted to turn over the funds to Mr. Neathery and I
thought a draft on New York Avould suit him as well.
Q. Did you got any money, from Williams'? A. Yes, sir.
IIo gavo me $15,000, 1 think. I am not exactly certain as to
theso amounts.
Q. Did he lend you that money or how did you got it? A.
I gavo him my draft certified at the other bank.
Q. He honored that draft ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Why did you not get all currency where your money was
on deposit — why did you take a draft for a part ? A. I am
not 6ure, but I think Mr. Wiley stated that he could not pay it
all in cash without paying out some of his legal tenders or
something to that effect. I recollect that it was not com'eni-
ent for him to pay all cash.
Q. What time Avas it, that you got the money at the bank ?
A. It was about nine o'clock.
Q. Why Avere you in such a hurry to get it that evening ?
A. I don't know except that I heard in the executive office
that the funds were to be turned over that evening.
Q. Why waa the governor in such a hurry ? A. He never
assigned any reason to me.
Q. You got through at the bank about nine o'clock ? A.
Yes, sir, on Sunday night.
Q. What did you do with the money ? A. I carried it to
the treasurer's office.
Q. What did you do Avith it theu ? I had in the meantime
sont for Mr. Neathery — no I am too fast. I went for Mr.
Neathery after I had seen the bank officers but he had not
returnei. Ho had gone to the funeral also. I sont tho watch-

964 " COURT OF TMPEA0HMENT8.
man at the capitol after him, I do not recollect what time, but
sometime during the evening.
Q. State whether he met you and if bo at what hour ? A.
He came to the office.
Q. About what hour? A. I cannot tell — but about half
past nine or ten o'clock.
Q. What did you do there ? A. I told Mr. Neathery that I
had been ordered to turn over these funds that I had on hand
as paymaster to him.
Q. What did you do? A. I drew up a receipt and ho
signod it, and I counted out the money.
Q. You turned tho money over ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. What timo did you get through ? A. We got through
about twelve o'clock at night.
Q. Sunday night ? A. Yes sir,
Q. Can you assign any reason why you were in such a hurry
tliat night ?
Mr. SMITH. I submit, Mr. Chief Justice, that the ques
tion is not proper. Thoy must show what was done.
Mr. GRAIIAM. Tho presiding officer has stated that moro
latitude can bo allowed in examining a witness in such a pro.
coeding. Q. Did you give any bond as paymaster ? A. I did not.
Q. Why did you not ? A. One reason why I did not give
it was, that when I was appointed my father, the treasurer,
was not in the city. I expected him to go on the bond, but I
kept putting it off, and I never did give it all.
Q. Have you got the warrant Avhich Avas given for the
$1,000 which was paid to Kirk ? A. Yes, sir, I have received
it since I went on the stand [producing it. |
Q. Do you recognize that paper as genuine ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. What does it purport to be ? A. The warrant of the
governor on the treasurer for $1,000 in favor of George W.
Kirk. The Clerk read the warrant in evidence in the words
following :

TRIAL OF WILLIAM AV. HOLDEN. 965
(Original.)
$1,000. No. 271.
State of North Carolina.
The Public Treasurer :
Pay to the order of G. W. Kirk the sum
of One Thousand Dollars under " an act to secure the better
protection of life and property."
Given under my hand and seal of office, this 21st day of
June, A. D. 1870. W. W. Holden, Governor.
Countersigned II. Adams, Auditor.
Per Jas. II. Adams, Clerk.
Endorsed on the back G. W. Kirk.
Cross-Ev,iv 'ned.
By Mr Smith.
Q. I understand you to say that when this injunction was
first served on you you consulted Mr. Bailey with tho view of
honestly knoAving what avus required of you undor tho in
junction, and Avhat your duties Avero ' A. Yos, sir.
Q. In ovdor that you might comply with tho laws of tho
state and tho ordor of the judgo too? A. Yes, sir.
Q, That was your object in consulting counsel ? A. Yes,
sir. Q. And tho advico avub that it was your duty to pay over
tho money to yjur successor ? A, I having takon an oath
Avhen I was appointed paymaster to obey the orders of tho
governor and thon having been enjoined, it placed me as I
thought in an awkward position and it required somebody
who knew more about law than I did, to determine what I
ought to do.
Q. Were you appointed paymaster or were you detailed ?
A. I was detailed.
Q. For that particular service ? A. Yes, sir, I was appointed
an aid-de-camp of the governor on the 22d.

900 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. And then afterwards the governor revoked that detail ?
A. Yea, sir. >
Q. When you spoko of acting as paymaster, you had refe!-*
cnce to acting under the order detailing you for tliat service ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Having these funds in your hands you were advised as to
Avhether you could pay them laAvfully over to your successor,
or Avhether you must retain them under that injunction ?
A. Yea, sir.
Q. And yon acted in strict conformity with the advice given
to you as to what your duty wae ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Waa that advice to tho effect that aa soon as your detail
Avaa revoked you had no right to hold thom but should pay the
funds over te somo other officer? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And Avhen tho application Avas made to you by Neathery
you gave him tho funds in the Avay you have described ? A.
Yes, 6ir.
Q. Where did you keep the state account — in which bank?
A . Do you mean the state treasurer's account ?
Q. Yes sir ? A. There are in different banks.
Q. You used both banks ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. You ha\'e made a deposit of the funds entrusted to you
in one of the banks to 3'our credit ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Sufficient to cover the sum 3'ou took away ? A. Yes,
sir. I had some funds in the treasury — in the office perhaps
four or five hundred dollars.
Q. On your application to the Raleigh National bank they
did not have the funds ? A. That was my understanding, that
it waa not convenient to pay it all.
Q. And the arrangement Avaa made to get the balance from
Mr. Williama ? A. It was a mutual agreement all around.
Q. It was made to you on account ot the deposit in the
Raleigh National bank ? A. I think Mr. Blake, the teller of
Raleigh National bank, told Mr. Williams or Colonel Anderson
that I had funds there.
Q. Wasn't the advice given you by Mr. Bailey that as long

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. nOLDEN. 967
as this detail was in force you could not pay over the funds,
but as soon as it Avas revoked it was your duty to hand over
tho funds to your successor? A. Yes, sir, I recolleet that Mr.
Bailey argued that all the way.
Q. It Avas the opinion he gave you? A. Yes, sir, his
opinion, both then and afterAvards.
Re-Direct Examination.
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. Was Mr. Bailey your counsel at that time ? A. He
was not.
Q. Whose counsel was he ? A. As I stated before, I under
stood he Avas counsel 
Mr. SMITH. We object.
Q. You saw him with the governor ? A. Yes, sir.
JOHN B. NEATHERY, a witness in behalf of the Mana
gers, being re-called at his own request, testified as folloios :
The WITNESS. I stated in an answer to a question put to
me by Judge Merrimon that I received these funds in United
States currency. I wish to say that I received a draft on NeAV
York for $10,000 for a part of it — I had forgotten the fact.
The rest was in greenbacks or national currency.
ABIEL AY. FISHER, a witness on behalf of the Managers,
being r-ccalled, testified as follows:
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. I bclieA-e you wero examined before ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. State whether there is in your office as adjutant general
any telegrams or letters to or from George W. Kirk and B. G.
, Burgen ? A. I think I have one letter signed by G. W. Kirk,
addressed to the gOA'ernor, not te me.
Q. Is that all? A. That is all I remember. I think thero
are no others.
Q. No correspondence there ? A. Nono at all.
Q. Have you that letter in your possession ? A. No, air.
Q. I ask whether it is customary for tho military correspond*

968 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
cnce to go through the adjutant general's office ? A. All
orders would. I do not know necessarily that all correspond
ence would.
Q. [By Mr. Smith.] Is your order book here ? A. No, sir,
I do not know that it is. I turned it OA'er to tho managers, and
I have not seen it since.
Q I ask whether all orders about the movements of troops,
and letters in the nature of orders, pass through the adjutant
general's office as a matter of business ? A. I should think that
all orders necessarily, and all letters in the nature of orders,
Avould. That Avould be my impression.
Cross-Examination. By Mr. Smith.
Q. AVaa thoro any order issued through your offlco for tho
arrest of Mr. Turner? A. No, air,
Q. Nono whatever ? A. No, air.
Q. Was there any auch order mado by Govornor Iloldon to
your knoAvledgo ? A. Not to my knowledge.
Q. Do you knoAV Avhat directions woro given by GoA'ornor
Holden or communicated through you to theso oflicors as to
Avhat thoy should do In making arrests in respect te tho treat
ment of priaoncrs?
Mr. MERRIMON. We object to tho question.
Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chief Juatice, if tho respondent gave any
positive directions as to the proper treatment of tho prisoners
I ask if that is to bo ruled out? When tho managers under
take to hold the accused reaponaible for the ill-treatment of
those held by him by saying that ho authorized it, can wo not
show Avhat instructions Avere actually given before tlieir arrest
and during their confinement ? Would gentlemen rule that
out ? Tho treatment of prisoners is ono of the subjects under
investigation, and it is seriously claimed that avo cannot extract
from tho witness the fact that instructions were given by the
governor that the priaonera ehould be humanely treated.
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. Chief Justice, the rule is that where
a military order is claimed as a protection it must be in writing.

TRIAL OF AV1LLIAM W. HOLDEN. 969
In 1814, during the last war with Great Britain, that question
arose. The officer in command of fort Washington, nearly
opposite Mount Vernon on the Potomac river, retired on the
approach of the British troops, and blew up the fort. He said
that he had a verbal order from General Armstrong to tako
that course. General Armstrong • denied it. The officer was
court martialed and sentenced to be shot by the court the judg
ment resulting from his inability to produce a written order.
IIo Avas aftcrAvards, hoAvever, pardoned by the president. Any
military officer under the command of the governor who claims
protection for hia acts by reason of the orders of his comman
der-in-chief must produce a written order. The business is not
to bo conducted in a slovenly manner by Bonding verbal orders.
if it is, then thoso chargeablo with this loasoness in tho details of
managing public affairs must tako tho conaoquoncos. It is no
avail what tho governor may havo said in hia conversations
Avith the adjutant general, Avords thus spoken cannot bo ad
mitted hero to protect him. IIo must produco his written
ordors. Mr. SMITH. Suppose, Mr. Chief Justico, that whon Colonel
Kirk Avent to Alamanco the governor had written to him
expressly to act without any indignity to anybody, and to pre
vent his troops from committing any outrage upon any citizen,
Avill the gontlemon 6ay Ave cannot sIioav that in his defence, and
that he is to be held responsible by the iron rule that what his
ai-ont said in tho progress of tho expedition is conclusive and
binding upon him ? Tho instructions of the respondent to his
agent are facts going to make the sum total of his conduct ;
and when he undertakes to show, if he can 6how, that all this
barbarity and wrong (for which there is no apology) was not
the result of any act of Governor Holden, and was not author
ized or approved by him in any way, Burely it ought to be
received to rebut the presumption that he authorized it, because
it is the declaration of a party while the expedition was being
carried out.
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. Chief Justice, there is another case

070 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
which is referred to in the argument of counsel in the caso of
ex parte Milligan in 4 Wallace An offioor on board ship was
ordered to arrest a brothor officer and he demanded from his
superior officer a written order which was refused. In the ab
sence of such written order tho junior officer refused to mako
tho arrest. For this he Avas arrested and tried by a court mar
tial and sentenced to fine and imprisonment. Subsequently he
brought an action in a civil court againet the president of the
court martial and recovered damages for hia illegal detention
and sentence, and he was informed by the judge that he might
also bring his action against any other of the members of the
court martial which tried him. Two of the members of tho
court, Avhen f he damages were awarded, were sitting in a naval
court martial and the officer commenced his action against
them also and they Avere arrested by a writ from the court just
as the court martial adjourned for the day. The members of
the court at once passed resolutions declaring it to be a great
insult to the dignity of a naval officer to have him called to tn
account in a civil court for any of his official acts. Lord Chief
Justice Willis immediately ordered the arrest of all the mem-
bora of tho court Avho signed tho resolutions find they Avere
taken into custody.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. What was the decision in that
case. Mr. GRAIIAM. Even tho king was indignant at tho arrest'
of tho members of tho court martial, but in the end all the
officers signed a humble aud submlaelve agology, begging leave
to AvithdraAV their resolutions.
Mr. McCORKLE. Mr. Chief Justico avo propose to ask the
wltnoBs tho following question: "What woro tho gonoral
" orders you rocolvod from tho govornor in reforonco to tho
•' treat tnont of prisoners to bo convoyed to Goorgo W. Kirk ?
Wo think think that question is competent for this reason.
Tho witnoss is tho adjutant general of tho state and ho is suppos
ed to carry out tho orders of tho commander-in-chief. Supposo
that tho Avitness had neglected to make an ordor required by

TRIAL OF WILLIAM AV. HOLDEN. 071
«
his superior oiileor, certainly It would bo oompotont to sIioav
tho fact that ho was requested to mako It.
The CHIEF J USTIOE. Tho presiding officer decides that
tho question la admiaaiblo and that tho ovidenco is relevant,
provided it oatabliahes tho fact. He is not conversant Avith
military rules but he thinks the goA'ernor has tho right to provo
that he instructed the Avitness either in writing or verbally to
givo certain orders. The case referred to by tho counsel for the
managers [Mr. Graham] in which General Armstrong Avas
involved Avaa where a subordinate officer AA'as unfortunate in
having only a verbal and not a written order, if he had any at
all, and the question Avas one of veracity between the tAvo
officers. It an officer chooses to act upon a verbal order, there
is no rule of laAV that I knoAV of which requires that he shall
not act in conformity with it. It may very well be, that if he
demands a written order he should have it. The question may
be asked. By Mr. Smith, [resuming.]
Q. What were the general orders you receiA'ed from the
governor in reference to the treatment of prisoners to be con
veyed to George W. Kirk ? A. The governor's orders as I
understood them 
Mr. Manager SPARROW. Do not state Avhat you under-
Btand but what you know.
Q. Gi\'e your knowledge ? A. To the best of my know
ledge and belief 
Mr. Manager SPARROW. We do not want your belief.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The witness must state what the
governor eaid.
Mr. GRAHAM. Wo submit, Mr. Chief Justice, that while
it ia competent to prove tho directions directly giA-en te Kirk
tho verbal instructions givon second handed through tlie ad
jutant general are not admlssibible.
By tho Chief Justice.
Q. What orders were given you ? A. I reinomber a clause

972 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
in one, that he should take special care that the prisoners were
not maltreated or abused.
Q. What do you mean by the clause ? A. I mean a clause
in one of tho orders.
Q. An order that you wrote out ? A. Yes, sir.
Mr. MERRIMON. Where is that order ?
Tho WITNESS. It is in the order book.
Mr. GRAHAM. Then parole evidence of it cannot be
given. Q. Tho governor gave you a verbal order and you commu
nicated It by a written order t A. Yes, sir.
The ordor book was here produced and the witnoss read
heading of the ordor referred to in the words following :
" State of North Carolina, Adjutant General's office, Raleigh
August 7th, 1870" 
Mr. GRAIIAM. That, Mr. Chief Justice, is cortainly not
competent. It was issued after thoso arrests had been made
and tho outrages had been perpetrated.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. I understand thero were some
eaBCB of abuse after the date of the order. Did not the troops
go from Caswell to Alamance about the latter part of the month.
Mr. Graham. About the 12th [of August. Tho prisoners
Avero taken to Salisbury on the 18th.
Mr. MERRIMON. Mr. Chief Justice, we desire to bo heard
upon this question. Theso outrages that have been testified to
Avere all perpetrated before the date of that order except the
imprisonment of Turner. The order comes in post litem
motem. The accused allows them to go on until he is com
pelled by both the state and federal judiciary intervening, and
finding himself denied support by the President of the Uuited
States he then issues the order. We insist upon the plainest
principles of evidence the order is not admissible.
Mr. SMITH. The point, Mr. Chief Justice, is this : it is a
part of the demeanor of the accused towards these prisoners
while in his custody. One of the enquiries here is a3 to out
rages inflicted upon the prisoners while in the custody of these

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. IIOLDRN.' 973
troops. Theso instructions of tho executive are acts. What
their effect shall bo is a matter of argument.
Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer thinks that
the evidence is competent. It may weaken its forco that the
order was mado during the latter part of the imprisonment of
tho parties arrested ; but if it was mado during the imprison
ment it is competent. What is the date of the order?
Tho WITNESS. August 7.
Mr MERRIMON. Will tho chief justico allow mo to stato
one additional vi'oav ?
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. Yes, air.
Mr. MERRIMON. A party ia indicted for murder. Ho
offers te sIioav what took placo tho day after the murder Avaa
perpetrated by Avay of exculpating himself. It seems to mo
that the ovidenco offered here is analogous to a case of that
kind. When tho man has inflicted tho fatal 6troke, nothing
that transpired afterwards can be admitted in evidence to show
justification or excuse. These outrages were perpetrated days
and days before this order waa isaued.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer is not able to
aeo tho application of tho case suggested by tho counsel for tho
luanagors, [Mr. Merrimon.] IIo is aAvaro that a good many of tho
acta charged occurred before tho 7th of August, but there wero
certainly some that transpired after, among them compelling
tho prisoners to stay out in the rain all night. Tho treatment
of Mr. Turner is another instance. Tho presiding officer thinke
tho ovidenco is competent although its force may be weakened
hy tho fact of its coming in so late during the period of tho
imprisonment ot the parties. The witness will read the order
to which he refers.
The Witness read the order in tho words following :
State op North Carolina,
Adjutant General's Office,
Raleigh, August 7, 1870.
Special Orders, No. 14.
Coh G. W. Kirk, commanding 2nd Regiment N. 0. S. T.
63

974 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
will parole all his prisoners in whose honor he can confide to
report to him at Compauy Shops, at 10 o'clock a. m., on that
or the next day. He will also take the necessary steps to
secure the attendance of all the Avitnesses at this time.
Col. Kirk will leave one hundred picked men under com
petent officers at Yanceyville, and leave the rest of his men
Avith baggage, at Company Shops, taking speoial care that
his prisoners are not maltreated or abused,
By command of Gov. Holden. A. W. Fisher, Adjt. Genl.
By Mr. Smith [resuming].
Q. Is there any other order sent to Kirk? A. Yes, sir, I
find another ordor under date July 18, being speoial order
No. 11.
Q. You may read it ?
The Witness read the order in the words following :
State of North Carolina,
Adjutant GeneraVs Office,
Raleigh, July 13th, 1870.
Special Orders. No. 11.
Col. G. W. Kirk, commanding 2nd regiment North Caro
lina state troops, will at once procure necessary transportation
for his camp equipage and proceed to Yanceyville and assume
command of Alamrnce and Caswell counties.
He will take the necessary steps to preserve order, and to
give the fullest protection to life and property.
He will take charge of the public buildings, and arrest and
held for examination persons accused of felonies, especially
those charged with, or being accessary to the murder of J. W.
Stevens and Wyatt Outlaw.
By command of Governor Holden, commander-in-chief.
A. W. Fisher, Adft Gen'l
Mr. GRAHAM. That is an order we put in several days ago.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 975
Mr. BOYDEN. We are much obliged to the managers for
having done so. But it does no harm to have had it read again.
Q. Do you find any other order ? A. I do not find any
other bearing especially on the treatment of prisoners.
Q. State Avhether you heard any verbal instructions given to
Kirk or to any of his other officers before they went out or
while thoso things wero going on, as to how ho should act
towards the people.
Mr. MERRIMON. You will speak from your OAvn know
ledge. Q. I mean what you have heard the governor say ? A. I
do not remember of hearing any conversation on that subject.
Q. Did you hear anything of the kind I have indicated to
you when Kirk was present? A. No, sir.
Q. When you issued orders yourself had you any directions
from Governor Holden as to what should be the nature of the
orders ? A. I had.
Mr. GRAHAM I submit that only the orders sent to the
troops are admissible.
Mr. SMITH. What I am inquiring for are the instructions
giA'en the accused to this officer.
Mr. GRAHAM. It is not competent to prove instructions
given by him which are not pro A'en to haA-e reached the military.
' The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer thinks it is
competent upon the ground that the court is enquiring into tho
animus. It certainly shows his intent as to the ordera.
Mr. BRAGG. I would like to ask the witness a preliminary
question. By Mr. Bragg.
Q. Did you send all the orders that were given you ? A.
All tliat were sent to me te forward.
Q. Did you record them in that book ? A, Yes, sir.
By Mr. Smith [resuming].
Q. What were the general directions as to the form in
which orders  j
Mr. BRAGG. I object.

976 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. Are verbal orders ever given to you and you put them
in form ? A. That is frequently the case. Sometimes verbal
orderB are given and sometimes written, and I Avrite them out
and 6iibmit them.
Q. Did the governor give you any instructions or directions
in reference to issuing orders how the prisoners were to bo
treated Avhich you did not send ?
Mr. BRAGG. We object to that. The witness has stated
that he sent all orders which were given to him.
Q. Did the governor gi\ro you any general instructions or
directions as to what should be the nature of your orders trans
mitted to the military out there?
Mr. BRAGG. We submit, Mr. Chief Justice, that the
question is not admissible. Tho adjutant general is the man
through Avhom tho commander-in-chief issues his orders. In
reply to a question put by me whether ho had 6ent all the
orders the governor had issued or directed him to issue, he said
" yes." Now the gentlemen desire to provo some loose con
versation between tho respondent and the witness as to what
his purposes were. I submit that it is too indefinite.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The counsel forgets that the gen
tleman is cross-examining a witness called on behalf of the
managers on the very point to Avhich the counsel's question was
directed. He is seeking, if possible, to get him to reverse his
statement. Q. I desire to know whether any directions or instructions
Avere given to you by Governor Holden which were not put in
shape and aent out in relation to the treatment of prisoners —
not specific orders but general orders ?
Mr. BRAGG. There it is, Mr. Chief Justice, the counsel
is seeking to inquire about something expressive of the wishes
of the govei'noi— not that those wishes were put into the
shape of orders. We object to that kind of testimony.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. Will the counsel repeat the
question ?
Q. My inquiry is whether any general instructions were given

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 977
you by the Governor as to the orders to be issued which wero
not put in shape or form of orders and transmitted, if bo, what
Avere they ?
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The witness can answer the
question. A. I hardly know how to answer that. Of course I had
frequent conversations with tho governor as to the treatment of
prisoners. I supposo his idea to be included in tho orders
issued, Avas that tho prisoners were to bo treated humanely and
kindly. Q. That was tho scopo ot hia directions and instructions to
you ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. I desiro to ask you another question. When it was com
municated to Governor Iloldon that the prisoners had been
ma? treated Avhat hia directions to tho officers Avore, and whether
he sanctioned that treatment.
Mr. GRAIIAM. Mr. Chief Justico, I think we had first
better know Avhether there Avero any directions, and if so, if
they AA'ere put in Avriting.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. Tho presiding officer thinks that
on cross-examination the counsel has a right to assume certain
things, and to put his question upon such supposition.
Mr. GRAHAM. I had supposed, Mr. Chief Justice, that in
a matter so important as the hanging of men to extort confes
sions coming to the knowledge of tho commander-in-chief he
would give some peremptory instructions, and not leave his
wishes to be expressed in loose conversations.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. That is a matter of argument
hereafter. Mr. BRAGG. I beg to have the question put in writing. The
gentleman talked about the " general scope." What he means
by the general scope is not apparent.
Mr. BOYDEN. The question has been already answered.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. It is the right of the counsel to
have the question reduced to writing.
Mr. SMITH. This is my question as I have -written it dom

078 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
State what were the genoral directions given to yon by tho
govornor as to the treatment of prisoners and the conduct of
troops to be observed in all orders sent through your office ?
Mr. BRAGG. That varies the question. It is not the one
tho counsel asked the witness before.
Mr. SMITH. It is the one that I ask now.
Mr. BRAGG. Do I understand the counsel to withdraw
tho otlier question.
Mr. GRAIIAM. I submit, Mr. Chief Justice, that this
question just read is indefinite.
Mr. SMITH. I think, Mr. Chief Justice, that we have a
right to ask this question.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. The question is admissible.
The Clerk read the question as follows :
Q. State what were the general directions given by the gov
ernor to you as to the treatment of prisoners, and the conduct
of troops to be observed in all orders eeut through your office ?
A. It Avas that the prisoners should be kindly and humanely
treated. Q. Do you now know Avhether when he heard of any in
dignity to these prisoners ho expressed any approbation or
disapprobation — I moan during the timo tho prisoners were
iu custody ?
Mr. GRAHAM. I object te any conversation which tho
govornor may have had with the witness.
Senator GILMER. I would inquire, Mr. Chief Justico, if
the admissibility of questions of this character and was not
docldod tho other day ?
Mr. SMITH. On Avhat occasion I would enquire.
Senator GILMER. On the proposition as to what the
respondent stated as to tho treatment of prisoners.
Mr. SMITH. There has been no decision that what the
respondent said during the time tho prisoners were in custody
Avas not admissible.
Mr. GRAIIAM. Mr. Chief Justice, the proposition is to
give in ovidenco the remarks mado by tho respondent in

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 979
reference to tho treatment of prisoners. The question should
bo Avhat instructions did ho give to prevent the recurrence of
the maltreatment ?
Senator JONES. I think, Mr. Chief Justice, that thia ex
amination has gone to an improper length, I move that tho
question be disallowed.
Mr. SMITH. I Avould like to put the question in writing
before it is to be determined upon.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer would sug
gest that the question be directed to some particular time.
Mr. SMITH. I will reduce the question to writing and will
hand it to the clerk.
The Clerk read the question in the worde following :
Q. Do you know Avhen at any time during the period ot the
imprisonment of the persons arrested, the information of the
maltreatment of them \»as communicated to the accused,
Avhat he then said aud did?
Mr. MERRIMON. We object to the question. If that can
be admitted it will permit every man avIio has been in the gov
ernor's office or has met him in the streets to come in and state
loose conversations that may have transpired between himself
and the governor.
Mr. SMITI I. The gravamen ot this charge is that tho gov
ernor sanctioned and approved tho series of outrages and is
responsible to tho country on this impeachment for the acts of
his suliordinatea. Under that charge it ia claimed Ave cannot
show that during the very interval he repudiated and disavoAved
thoso acts and that he cannot bo permitted to prove that he
instructed the adjutant general to direct the prisoners to be
treated with humanity? What the governor said and did
during that period is the enquiry here ; surely the declarations
of the respondents aro acts ; and his conduct must be seen and
known by this court in order to ascertain whether the charge
of the managers that the governor acted from a corrupt and
wilful purpose, is true.
Mr. MERRIMON. What I say, Mr. Chief Justice, is that

980 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
the loose conversations of the governor with the adjutant gen-
oral or with anybody else are not to bo admitted in evidenco,
because they are indefinite and unsatisfactory and because, ac
cording to law and according to military ethics, and according
to all propriety when each acts aa these were brought to tho
attention of the respondent, it being his duty ( not only as gov
ernor but as a civilized man having authority to do bo,) to issue
peremptory orders to prohibit those acts and to arrest and try
by court martial tho officers and men who had perpetrated the
outrages, such orders aro tho proof that ho should offer. Thero
ia no rule of reason or of justico that will allow tho rcspondont
to provo hero any looao conversations ho had in roferonco to
tho hanging of Patton.
Senator ROBBINS, of RoAvan. Thoro Is ono point, Mr.
Chief Justico, in this connection that I would liko to hear
tho counsel upon. Suppoao tho remark -were mado to such
pei'Bon that Ita effect would bo to operate as a rebuke and thus
tend to atop further acte of oppression on tho part of tho gov
ernor's agents, would not auch remark addroasod to such agent
be competent Avhen remarks if made to an indifferent person
Avould not bo admissible as ovivonco?
Tho CHIEF JUSTIOK. Tho presiding officer is of tho
opinion that tho question cannot bo put. It falls undor tho
rule of evidence, that tho stato cannot oftbr anything that a
prieonor has said, and a prlsonor cannot manufacture testimony
for himself. If it ia proA'od that Gov. Holden heard of thoso
outrages, then thoy Avould bo at liberty to prove what he said ;
but unless you see proper to carry the knoAvledge to him, his
mouth is shut upon the rule that no man can manufacture testi
mony for himself.
Q. Were you present when any conversation took plaee be
tAveen Gov. Holden and Kirk or Burgen, or any of these offi
cers, in relation to the treatment of theeo 'prisoners during the
time that thoy Avere in custody? A, I do not remember any
such occasion.
Q. Do you know whether or not an order waa issued by

TRIAL OF AVILLIAM W. IIOLDEtf. 981
Gov. Holden for the arrest of Burgen ? A. There was.
Q. [By Mr. Graham.] Where ia it? A. It ia in the book.
Q. [By Mr. Graham.] What is the date of it 1 A. Au
gust 22d, 1870.
Mr. GRAHAM. At that time these men Avere out of cus
tody. The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer is of the
opinion that it ia competent' to show that Burgon Avaa arrested
afterwards. Mr. GRAHAM. I respectfully submit that anything that
took place in reforcnco to tho arrest of Burgon after these men
had beon delivered frcm prison, ia a matter of no consoquonco
in this investigation at all. That was a matter between him
self and Burgon. It avbs an act dono long after any act per
taining to tho controversy hoav pending. If proof can bo
alloAved of hia arrest on tho 22d day of August, it is equally
admieeiblo to admit proof of hie arrest in December. I sub
mit it la simply alloAviug tho respondent to manufacture evi
dence In hia own behalf.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. Tho prodding officer la of tho
opinion that tlio (juration doea not fall under tho rule of ovi
donee manulaoturod by tlio defendant lu his own bohalf. Tlio
roapondont haa a right to bIioav, that after tho tranaactlon, ho
took tho proper measures to havo tho party guilty of thoao
wrongs arrested and punished ; for non constat ho Avas not
informod of theso outrages until after thoy occurred and after
tho priaoncra Avero released.
Senator GILMER. I cannot, Mr. Chief Justice, see how tho
testimony off'ered differs from that which Avas excluded tho
other day by the court. With great respect to the opinion of
the presiding officer I feel it my duty to call for a decision of
the question by the senate.
A sufficient number seconded the call.
Mr. SMITH. Before taking the vote I would like to have
the senate understand our view. The preeiding officer has
admitted a question on this ground, that thero being no evi-

982 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
dence that the governor had heard of this maltreatment until
after the prisoners were discharged it Is competent.
Mr. MERRIMON. Mr. Chief Justice, I do not understand
you as saying that thore was any evidence of that fact. I under
stand the case to be thia : theae parties had been arrested by
Burgen and Kirk under tho order oi the executive ; they had
been deliA'ered to the United States and the state courts and
had been discharged. Then tho governor ordered Burgen to be
arrested for these offences. The point noAV to be decided is
Avhether that fact may be proved.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. In the absence of proof bringing
home to the respondent at an earlier a day a knowledge of the
fact — that is the manner in which the question is qualified.
Mr. BRAGG. We say there is proof here that the respon
dent had knoAvledge. There is proof by a man Avho was here
and examined by officers of tlio governor at his instance who
had been hanged, and Avho stated that he had fainted under
vhe operation. Boyd Avas here, and he had been examined
also upon the same point, although it has not yet appeared
Avhat he said. The respondent has introduced a paper here,
Avhich AA'as drawn up by Colonel Clarke and signed by Patten
in Avhich he told the whole matter in the office of the gov
ernor. I say, therefore, these facts must have been known to
the governor.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. Tho presiding officers thinks the
counsel is mistaken. The paper Avhich Patten signed did not
make any statement in reference to his having been hung.
It had reference to his joining tho secret organization. If
there is any doubt about it the paper can be produced.
Mr. BRAGG. Perhaps I am Avrong. But, sir, it is a matter
ot public history Avhich a court, such as this, will tako notice
of aa evidence that the defendant must haA'e been aAvare of the
fact that theae men Avere hung about the 80th or 81st July.
Tho Avhole country AA'as flooded AA'ith statements of the fact, and
it Avaa a matter af public notoriety. The fact of theao outrages
were contained in the affidavits upon which tho writs of habeas

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 988
coipus were based, and the respondent had counsol to appear
in his behalf in thoso proceedings. It does seem tome, there
fore, thoro can bo no claim that the respondent did not have
full and ample notice.
Mr. McCORKLE. It is apparent that this question tends
to bIioav, not what occurred after the arrest, but the outrages
that wero committed before; and it would bo competent in
thia point of vioAV as a circumatanco shoAving Avhether tho
gOA'crnor had any knoAVledgo of theso acts up to the timo of
their commission and that ho arreatcd theso men aa soon as ho.
heard of the facta. It would bo a circumstance to Aveight with
tho court Avhether or not he had knoAvledge. The gentleman
on the other 6ido says that the governor must haA'e had knowl
edge and that it Avas a matter ot public history and knoAvn to
everybody. We haA'e had no evidence yet that it was a matter
of history and certainly not to such an extent as to raise tho
presumption that the governor was informed.
Senator GILMER. Perhaps I have misunderstood the
vieAV on which the evidence is offered. If it is offered as the
last gentleman Bays, to contradict tho allegation of the scienter,
on the part of the reapondent, if the court thinks it is com
petent, for that purpose I withdraAv my motion.
Mr. GRAIIAM. Mr. Chief Justice, while I do not profess to
have much skill or knoAA'ledge in criminal trials, I think lean
satisfy any juror that the scienter existed. The commander-in.
chief Avas Avithin a feAV hours' travel of his army, AVhere occurren
ces took place of a character to attract the notice and awaken feel
ings of abhorrence among tho people during the first days of
Auguat ; and tAveiity-two daye thereafter intervened before the
respondent ordered the arrest of Burgen ; and nearly twenty
daye paaaed before tho priaonora were discharged. Will it be
claimed that tho fact of these outrages had not como to the gov*
ornar's knowludgo long before the 22d day of Auguat ? In tho
meantime Patten had been here and other witnessed had boon
here from tho camp of tho commander-in-chief; and if ho exer
cised the poAvcr of a commander-in-chief the fact must have

984 COURT OP IMPEA0HMENT8.
been known to him. Tho knowledge of these facts is a pre-
sumption arising out of tho nature of military operations.
Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chiof Justice, I think my friond has
conceded tho wholo point Avhon ho thinks ho can convince tho
jury of tho existence of a previous knowlodgo by tho rospon-
dent. What we claim is that that ia ono of the questions
AA'hich is to bo paa8ed upon by this court, and thus far nothing
oxcept indirect evidence has been given. On the question of
the existence of a previous knoAVledgo avo avIII moot him at
Phillip!; but avo do not doslro to cut off ono proofs and do*
prlvo us of tho right of going to tho jury upon It.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. Tho senator having withdrawn
hia motion for a decision of tho question of the admissibility
of tho proof by tho senato tho question may bo asked.
Senator JONES. Mr. Chief Justice, I move that the ques
tion bo disallowed. Tho facts sought to be proved being
equally consistent with the knoAvledge or Avant of knoAVledgo
by the respondent, it cannot bear upon the question of scienter
at all.
Senator EDWARDS. Mr. Chief Justice, as I understand
the question it is this : shall the governor be alloAved to givo
in evidence an order to his subordinates made after the libera
tion of the prisoners to sIioav AA'hat Avero his instructions before
they were put in prison.
Re-Direct Examination.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The question has reference to ad
mitting proof of the arrest of Burgen.
Senator EDWARDS. That is, after tho prisoners have been
discharged from custody shall he be allowed togiA'e evidence of
hia orders to his subordinates as affecting bis instructions to
those subordinates before the liberation.
Senator MOORE. Mr. Chief Justice, I rise to a question of
order. The motion is not debateable except by consent of tho
6enate. Senator EDWARDS. I an not debating — I am making an
inquiry to see if I understand the question.

TRIAL OF AVILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 985
Senator MOORE. Mr. Chief Justice, I insist upon my point
of order. I think the senator is discussing the question. I
think the senate understands the question well enough.
Senator EDWARDS. The senate may understand the
question but the senator does not.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. Thero is a difference betAveen
making an inquiry and arguing a question. It seems to me
that the senator from Granville is arguing it.
Senator EDWARDS. With all respect to the presiding
officer, I am not arguing tho question. I say that if I under
stand the question it is this : shall the respondent be alloAved
to givo in ovidenco an order 'after the liberation of the prison-
era to sIioav his purposo before they were liberated?
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. Tho clork will read the order
off'ered in ovidenco for the information of the senate.
The Clerl proceeded to read tho order of the governor
for Burgen to be placed under arrest from the order book of
tho adjutant general.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The question before the court is
whether that order shall be read in evidence. The presiding
officer decided that it could be read in evidence, on the ground
that no legal_evidence has yet been offered that fixes on tho
governor a knowledge of the transactions which have been
stated. The fact that they Avere a matter of notoriety ia not
evidence, while they may have been notorioue to everybody else
still the gOA'crnor may not have been informed, and it is incum
bent ou the managers to show the existence of that knoAvledge.
Mr. CONIGLAND. I hope, Mr. Chief Justice, I will be
excused if I make a remark at this stage of the discus sion. I
have not fully caught the question which is pending before the
court, but as I understand it, it is this : we ask to be allowed
to shoAv that this respondent ordered the arrest of Burgen.
That is objected to. It occurs to me that the principle of
hatural justice which should warm every man's bosom would
prompt the admission of this evidence. I am surprised that it
should be objected to. What has been the course of evidence

986 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
on the other Bide ? The respondent is held up as a monster of
iniquity and the statement has been mado that he has connived
at the most atrocious acts and all sorts of evidence has been
given to sustain that view. The very moment we propose
to meet the allegations by proof which tends to show that
ho kneAV nothing ot those acts, our proof is objected to. Sir,
this is not a jury, it is a body composed of intelligent men
many of Avhom are lawyers and who cannot be affected or
influenced by incompetent testimony one way or the other.
Sir, I am surprised that the objection should be interposed.
Senator JONES. Mr. Chief Justice, I insist upon my
motion. The Clerk proceeded to call the roll of senators on the
admission of the question propounded by the counsel for the
respondent and it was decided in the negative by the following
vote. Those who voted in the affirmative were :
Messre. Allen, Barnett, Bellamy, Brogden, Cowles, Flemming,
Gilmer, Hawkins, Hyman, King, Ledbetter, Love, McCotter,
Moore, Murphy, Olds, Price, Robbins, of Rowan, Speed — 19
Those avIio voted in tho negative were :
Mes8rs. Adams, Albright, Battle, Brown, Cook, Currie,
Dargan, Edwards, Graham, of Alamanco, Graham, of Orange,
Jones, Latham, Linney, Mauney, McClammy, Merrimon, More-
head, Norment, Robbins, of Davidson, Skinner, Troy, Waddell,
Warren, Whiteside and Worth — 25.
Mr. SMITH. We suppose. Mr. Chief Justice, that that
ruling of the court includes proof of the order of arrest.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The same principle will apply.
Re-Direct Examination.
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. Did I understand you to say that you reduced to writing
all the orders the governor gave you? A. All Bpecial orders.
Q. All orders which he directed you to communicate to the
troops you reduced to writing, and put them in that book ? A.
Yes, sir, If I understand your question.

TRIAL OF AVILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 987
Q. I ask you if you reduced to writing all orders that the
governor gaA'e you as adjutant general to communicate to the
troops and entered them on this order book • A. All apecial
orders I did. A question has been asked me about general
instructions. Of course general inBtructions are not put in tho
book. Q. Did he give you any order or mesaage to 8end to tho
army that you did not put in that book ? A. I think not.
The hour of 2:45 having arrived the court adjourned to meet
to-morrow at 11 o'clock a. m.

988 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.

TWENTIETH DAY.
Senate Chamber, February 18, 1871»
Tho OOURT met at eleven o'clock, pursuant to adjournment,
Hon. R. M. Pearson, Chief Justice of tho Supremo Oourt, in tho
chair. The proceedings were opened by proclamation made in due
form by the doorkeeper.
Tho CLERK proceeded to call the roll of senators when the
following gentlemen wero found to be present.
MoBsrs. Adama, Albright, Barnott, Battlo Bellamy, Brogden,
Brown, Cook, Council, Oowles, Currie. EdAvarda, Flemming,
Gilmer, Graham, of Alamanco, Ilyman, Jones, King, Latham,
Llnnoy, Love, Maunoy, McClammy, McCottor, Merrimon
Mooro, Murphy, Norment, Olds, Price, Robbins, of Davidson,
Robbins, of Rowan, Sklnnor, Spood, Troy, Waddoll, Warron
Whltosldo, Worth— 14.
Senator GRAHAM, of Alamanco, moved to dlMpouao with
tho rending of tho journal of tho proooudlngs of yesterday.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE put tho question on tho motion of
Senator Graham, of Alamance, and it was decided lu tho affirm
ative THEODORE N. RAMSEY, a witness on behalf of th
Managers, being duly sworn, testified as follows :
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. Stato to the court your name, age, place of business and
business ? A. Theodore N. Ramsey, born in the oity of Raleigh.
My business is that of clerk at tho Sentinel office.
Q. Look upon the book noAV produced and state what it is
[a bound newspaper file handed to the witnees] ? A. This
is the Raleigh Sentinel for the year 1879, from January 1st to
July 1st.
Q. What is this [producing an unbound newspaper file to

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 989
the witness]. A. This is the Raleigh Sentinel from July 1st
1870, to January 1st 1871.
Q. Where is that paper published? A. In the oity of
Baleigh. Q. How often is it published ? A. Daily.
Q. Does that paper circulate in this city? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know Avhether it \tent to tbe executive office
during the year 1870? A. I do not know. It went to the
clerk of the executive office, Mr. Horner. It was sent to him.
Q. Is he the private secretary of the governor? A. He is
the principal clerk in the executive office.
Cross-Examination. By Mr. McCorkle.
Q. Does^this paper circulate extensively in CasAvell and
Alamanco counties ? A. Yos, Bi'r, very cxtciiHiA'ely.
Mr. MElfrtlMON. Mr. Chiof Justico avo offer to put in
ovidenco the proceedings of a mooting held in tho county of
Alaniuneo on tlio 8th day of January nnd publiahod in the
Sentinel of tho 1 2th day of January. Boforo proceeding to read
from tho book I offer in evidence tho original of tho Hhoflhor
bill as then certified by tho clerk.
Mr. SMITH. I do not boo, Mr. Chiof Justice, Avhat tho inte
rior proceedings of the tAvo branches of tho general assembly
have to do Avith tho questions in trial,
Mr. MERRIMON. Wo offer to show tho groundwork or tho
principal causo of the opposition to Ml\ Shoffner in tho county
of Alamance. The effort on tho part of the respondent has
been to show that Mr. Shoffner was assailed and driven from
the county because of hia political associations and his opposi*-
tion to tho Kuklux. We offer to sIioav aa the ground work of
the opposition to him the original draft of the bill, not as it
passed, but as it AA'as introduced, and to bIiow that the pro
visions contained in it were of such a character as to be especially
offensiA'e to the people, and that the introduction of the bill
gave rise to a meeiing of the citizens of Alamance county, the
proceedings of which we propose to put in evidence.
64

990 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Mr. McCORKLE. Mr. Chief Justice, I do not see in what
point of vlow tho document offorod Is oompotont evidence.
Tho sonate and houso keop regular journals of their proceed
ings. Wlionovor a bill is offorod by any ono thore is a record
showing who offorod it, and no other ovidonee is oompotont
upon that point. Tho proposition, as I take it, is to show that ,
Mr, Shofnier Avas the author of tho bill, and being so, he was
personally offensive to the cltlzons of Alamance oounty. The
highest evidence of his being the author of the bill Avould be
the records of the senate.
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. Chief Justice, this ia the record of tho
senate which wo now offer. A bill is introduced, the clerk
endorses upon it the day of its introduction, by Avhom intro
duced, Avhether it passes its first, second or third^ readings.
This is that paper with the endorsement of the clerk upon it,
showing that it was introduced on the 16th of December, and
that it passed its first, second and third readings that day.
The bill then Avent to the other house, and was finally passed
sometime in January. We wish to bIioav that while it Avaa
pending a meeting took place in the county of Alamance, not
only expressing opinions on these subjects, but expressing op
position to unlaAvful violence, and declaring that military bills
Avero unnessary because tho civil officers Avere able to perform
tlieir duties.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The paper may be read.
The CLERK proceeded to read the bill in the words fol
lowing: An act to secure the better protection of life and property.
The general assembly of North Carolina do enact :
Seo. 1. That the governor is hereby authorized and empow
ered, Avhenever in his judgment the civil authorities in any
county are unablo to protect its citizens in the enjoyment of life*
and property, to declare such county to be in a state of insur
rection and to call into active service the militia of the state to
such an extent as may become necessary to suppress such
insurrection.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 991
Sico, 2, That tho govornor is hereby authorised and ompow
orod to request tho president of tho United States to nispond
tlio Avrit of habeas corpus in any oounty or oouutlos doolarod
undor authority of this act to bo In a state of insurrection and
to afford buoIi aaalatanco as in his judguiont may bo nocosaary
to enforce obodionco to law.
Seo. 8. That upon motion of the solicitor of a district, it
shall be the duty of the judge thereof to removo the trial of
any person indicted in any county in the state for murder, con
spiracy or violation of an act entitled an " Act making the act
of going masked, disguised or painted, a felony," ratified the
twelfth day of April, A. D. .1869, from the county in which
such offence may have been committed to such other county as
the solicitor may designate.
Sec. 4. That the expenses attending the calling of tho militia
into active service as herein provided shall be paid by the
treasurer of the state upon the warrant of the governor, and it
shall be the duty of the commissioners of the county declared to
be in a state of insurrection and in which such service was
rendered, to reimburse within one year the treasury of the
state the expenses thus paid : provided, that whenever a person
or persons shall be convicted of a violation of the act mentioned
in section three of thia act, said expenses of the militia shall be
taxed in the bill of costs against the person or persons convicted,
and when collected the same shall be paid into the treasury of
such county.
(i i Sec. 5. That all lawa or claueea of laws in conflict with this
act are hereby repealed.
Sec. 6. That this act shall be in force on and after its ratifica
tion. Recoived, read and passed 1st reading Dec. 16th, 1869.
T. A. Byrnes, Secretary,
Passed 2d and 3rd readings, Dec. 16th, 1869.
T. A. Byrnes, Secretary Senate.
Mr. MERRIMON. We now offer to read the proceeding

992 COURT OP IMPEACHMENTS. ¦
of the meeting in the county of Alamance as published in the
Sentinel. • * '.
Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chief Justice, I submit that is not the
Avay to prove what transpired at the meeting. It is a simple
declaration not under oath as to what the proceedings were.
Mr. MERRIMON. One averment contained in the answer
of the respondent is that tho people of the county took no
notice and mado no effort to frown down the alleged outrages,
and avo offer this report as evidence to rebut what ia averred
in tho answer in that respect. This is a public announcement
and wo aro prepared to show that a largo number of the pooplo
of Alamance woro there and that theso resolutions wore passed
Avithout a dissenting voice.
Mr. SMITH. That is not our objection. Wo haA'e not
objected to the fact, but say that the paper is not evidenco of
the. fact. , '
Mr. MERRIMON. Wo will supply tho proof.
ALEXANDER C. McALLISTER, a witness on behalf of
the Managers, being re-called, testified as follows :
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. State Avhether there was any public meeting held in the
county of Alamance during the month of January, 1870, and if
so Avium it was ? A. There waa a public meeting I think in
the early part of January during tho Christmas recess of the
session of 1869-70. It was largely attended. The court house
Avas pretty well filled, the room being somewhat larger than this.
Q. Who presided ? A. Jesse Gant as, I recollect.
Q. Do you know who were secretaries ? A. I do not.
Q. If you were to hear the proceedings read would you be •
able to state what transpired ? A. 1 read them as they were
reported in the Sentinel shortly after the meeting and my im
pression at the time was that the proceedings were correctly
reported. Cross-Examination. By Mr". Smith. u ¦>

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 993
Q. Can you recollect what resolutions were passed ? A. No,
sir, I cannot, but I recollect that my impression was that tho
report as published in the Sentinel very soon after the meeting
was held, was correct.
Q. You heard the resolutions read Avhen they were passed by
the meeting ? A. Yos, sir.
Q. And you saAv thom aftcrwarda in tho Sentinel, and your
rocolloction is that thoy avgi'q tho same ? A. Yes, sir, I could
not say tho exact Avoids, but that Avas my impression, that tho
proceedings of the meeting Avoro correctly reported.
Tho CLERK proceeded to road the proceedings of tho moot
ing in tho words following : For tho Sentinel.
MEETING IN ALAMANCE.
A meeting of tho citizens of Alamance county waa held at
the court house in Graham, on the 8th of January, 1870, to
express their views in regard to tho stato of the country.
The meeting Avas organized by calling to the chair, Jessco
Gant, Esq., and requesting Messrs. J. A. Long and J. L. Scott
to act as secretaries.
The chairman explained the object oi the meeting and ap
pointed the folloAving committee to draft resolutions expressive
of the object of the convention, viz., Messrs. J. E. Boyd, J. A,
Graham, Joseph B. McMurray, Alvis King, Thomas Foust,
Freeman Louth, Alfred Gleg, John Ireland and Bennett
Ilaizcll. While the committco Avero out, Dr. J. A. Moore, our worthy
representative in tho Legislature, being loudly called for, en
tertained the meeting in his usual oloquent etylo, showing by
facts and figures our liabilities as a state, and also the bad re
sults incident to, and groAving out of the " Shoffner bill "
should it become a law.
The committee then made the following report which, on
motion, was unanimously adopted :
Resolved, 1. That the masses of the people are the sovereigns
of this land, and that they have the right to meet together and

994 OOURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
consult as to such measures as they may deem of interest to the
common country.
2. That the time seems to have arrived when it becomes all
good citizens of North Carolina to unite to save the state from
bankruptcy and ruin and bring about that state of harmony,
prosperity and peace, which the country bo much needs.
3. That the representatives in the legislature of the country
are the servants and not tho masters of the people, and should
Avork for the good of the people and not to enrich themselves
by corrupting the government and oppressing the peoplo.
4. That in our opinion the terms of the present members of
the legislature of this state cease on the 1st Thursday in
August, 1870, and that the people voted for them for that
period ; and that any resolution or act of theirs by which they
determine to hold over for four years will be a plain usurpation
of power Avhich was not granted to them by the people, and in
utter disregard of their trusts as public officers,
5. That Ave are the friends of peace and good order and
the enemies of lawlessness and violence, and that we wish to
see every man secured in the unmolested enjoyment of all hia
his civil and political rights.
6. That the officers of the^ law have not been disturbed in
the execution of their duties ; that peace and good order has
generally prevailed and we believe the courts of justice and
the peace officers to be fully competent to maintain the laAvs of
the country.
7. That wo look upon the military bill lately introduced
into our legislature as a measure which perpetrates a greater
wrong than the ono it is intended to prevent ; that because of
the misbehavior of a few it is no reason that the lives and
property of all should be hazarded, that a military despotism
should be inaugurated, the great writ of habeas corpus sus
pended, and the liberty of the peoplo destroyed. That the
introdustion and entertainment of auch a bill shows an ignorance
of the first principles of free government and a malignant
desire to promote controversy by exciting strife among the
people and to shed the blood of, war in time of peace.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. i 995
\
8. What we demand that the alleged frauds in the manage
ment of our State bonds, railroad affairs, &c, should be rigidly
investigated, and if such frauds have been committed, the guilty
parties brought speedily to such punishment as they deserve.
9. What we are in favor of and demand that the taxes
levied and collected for tlie purposes of education in the stato
be applied for that purpose and no other, and that we are bit
terly opposed to depriving the poor children of this state of
education in order to pay legislators $7 per day to ruin the
people. 10. That universal suffrage is a dead issue, and that the
colored man is secure in all the privileges which he now enjoys
is a fact settled beyond all controversy, and we demand as a
matter of justice and right, that the political disabilities which
have been imposed, be removed from every man in the country
and we respectfully ask congress to pass a law to Ibis offect.
11th. That these resolutions be 6ent to the Sentinel for pub
lication, and that tlie Hillsboro' Recorder, Greensboro' Patriot.
and other papers in the state interested in its Avelfare requested
to copy.
After tho adoption of the above resolutions Messrs. J. E.
Boyd and J. A. Graham addressed the audience at length in
able and patriotic speeches.
Col. W. A. Albright and G. A. Freeland, Esq, being called
excused themselves by making a feAv remarks.
J. E. Boyd, Esq., offered the following resolution which was
adopted :
Resolved, Tliat the thanks of this meeting is due, and is
hereby tendered to the chairman and secretaries for the man
ner in which they have discharged their duties.
On motion of J.E. Boyd, Esq., the meeting adjourned.
Jesse Gant, Chairman.
J. A. Long,
J. L. Scott, „
Secretaries.

996 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS'.
ALEXANDER 0. McALLISTER, a witness called on be
half of tlie Managers, being re-called testified as follows :
Re-Direct Examination.
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. Stato to the court whether it was proposed at any tlmo
to hold another meeting in Alamance county, and if so, whether
it Avas held or not, and if not, stato why it was not held if you
know ? A. Very soon after the death of Outlaw it was pre
posed to hold a public meeting condemning the act. I Avas
absent Avhon tho papor making the call was brought to my
place. Mr. SMITH. You need not stato anything that occurred
during your absence
Tho Witnksb. It was understood that a mooting was called
for that purpoao.
Q. Was It a notorious fact there? A. Yos, sir.
Q, Was the day and week of tho mooting flxod upon? A.
It avub to moot on Saturday after tho occuri-onco of tho hanging
of Outlaw. On Thursday tho federal troopa arrived at Graham.
I did not attend tho meeting on account ot tho troops being
thero. Q. Do you know Avhether tho mooting was hold ? A. I un
derstand not
Q. Do you know of any reason why it was not held ? A. It
was pretty well attended 
Q. Only state Avhat you know and not what you heard ? A.
I knoAV nothing, as I did not attend. I did not go t& Graham
on that day myself.
Q. Why didn't you go ? A, On account of tho troops being
brought there. Any action taken in tho matter I wanted to
appear to bo freo and voluntary, and not as taking place at tho
point of tho bayonet.
Q. Was that tho general impression throughout the country
there? A. I understand it was, from general report.
Q, That is exactly Avhat wo want ? A. It was understood
that tho pooplo assembled in protty large numbers,

trial of avilliam w. holden. 997
Q. [By Mr. Smith.] Were you present. A. No, sir.
Mr. SMITH. Then you should not state that.
Q. Did you talk to many peoplo who were there? A. Yes,
sir. Q. What Avas tho common understanding ? A. That after
going to Graham and finding a military force there, they de
clined going into tho meeting.
Re-Cross Examination.
By Mr. Smith.
Q. Is it not a matter of public notoriety that a great many
outrages haA'e been committed in that county ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. You havo heard of numbers of them, not only murders,
but Avhippings? A. Not as many known in tho county as
have been published.
Q. But thero aro a great many which aro known and under
stood to havo occurred. A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was thero ever any public meeting to discountenance
and discourage thoso outrages previous to the mceeting occa
sioned by the Shoffner bill? A. No, sir.
Q. You know of no resolution being passed except thoso at
the meeting called in reference to the Shoffner bill ? A. No,
6ir. Q. After the murder of OntlaAV there was a motion in that
direction, and you say you heard it said that the meeting was
not held beet use tho military was there? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you mean the United States troops ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. You do not mean the military of the State ? A. No sir.
Q. Waa it not the purpose of those Avho called the meeting
to prevent the troops from coming there, and did not their
arrival frustrate the object ot the meeting? A. I think that
was not the object, although I heard one of the parties interested
in getting up the meeting, state that the troops would not be
brought. Q. Provided the meeting was held ? A. Probably.
Q. Then the demonstration was made under the supposition
that the troops would not be sent, and the troops having arrived

098 OOUBT OF IMI'BACnMKNTf.
tho mooting was not held. You do not mean to iny that the
troops ititorforod with tho hoi ding of the mooting in any way f
A. No sir. I don't think tho objoot of the mooting was to
prevent tho coming of tho troops, I think tho purpoio was to
got up a mooting for tho purposo of discussing the matter and
it was understood that if thoro wai such a demonstration the
troops would not bo brought.
Q. Was not tho purpose of the meeting to remove tho
necessity or pretext of sending troops there by showing a pop
uhir Bontlmont in opposition to these outrages ? A. I think
not, tho murder was a shock to tho community generally.
Q. Tho mooting Avas to condemn that deed ? A. Yes, sir,
and try to control lawless acts by publio sentiment.
Q. Was any attempt mado by tho military to provont tho
meeting? A. No, sir.
Q. Why was It not hold Avhon tho military camo to assist
tho civil authorities — what prevented the meeting from being
held? A. I cannot say,
Q. You say theso was federal troops ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And thoy never interfered with the civil authorities at
all ? A. No, air.
Q. Nor anybody/ A. No, sir, they behaved themselves
well. Q. Why did not tho peoplo co-operate with the federal
authorities by taking some steps to ascertain who were the
authors of this crime and bring them to punishment? A. I
Avaa not at Graham and can only speak of my own feelings. I
did not attend tho mooting on account ot the troops being there.
Q. Woro thoso outrages not a matter of public notoriety for
twelve months previous to that first meeting which was held in
January in reference to the Shoffner bill? A. I do not
know. I cannot recollect the dates when it was reported that
tho first Avhlpplng took place.
Q. Did not these outrages spread over an inteivalof years
preceding the meeting in reference to the Shoffner bill ? A.
I think that some time before there had been some reports of

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN, 999
whippings but I cannot recollect the timo. Tho first ono in
our neighborhood was that of Harvoy, but I do not recollect
the dato,
Q. Was tho killing of Outlaw before or after the passage of
these resolutions which have been read ? A. After it.
Q. Has there beon within your knowledge any punishment
inflicted for any of these secret outrages in your county by
the courts? A. None except in the case of these colored
men. Q. What colored men? A. Those Avho are now confined
in the penitentiary.
Q. That is the only instance you have known ? A. I havo
heard of trials but no case of conviction.
Q. No body has been punished for any of these excesses
there, except these tliree colored men ? A. No body.
Q. They were all tried for committing one act? A. Yes,
sir. Q. Hoav many cases of whipping have been bruited about
the county of Alamance ? A. I do not know as I could state
tho number. I don't think there is a dozen.
Q. Were thero as many as a dozen which occurred, as a
matter of general report?
Mr. GRAIIAM. Confine your ansAver to before this meeting.
A. I could not say, I think I could namo a dozen from gen
eral report, probably most of them occurring before that
meeting. Q. Have thero not been comparatively few since the pas
sage of tho Shoffner bill ? A. Yes, sir, very few.
Q. Thero has beon no punishment in any of the dozen in
stances of which you havo been notified by public rumor,
except the threo men who were charged with whipping ono
person ? A. None that I have heard.
Q. What class of people were in that meeting called in refer
ence to the Shoffner bill? A. My recollection is that the
meeting was called of citizens without regard to party. Mr.
William A. Albright who was considered the leader of the

1000 OOURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
republican party there, made a few remarks exousing himself
from making a regular speech. He was called upon and he
made a few remarks.
Q. (By Mr. Graham). He was clerk of tho court ? A. Yes,
sir. Q. Anybody else you know? A. I do not recollect. I
think there were tliree republicans in the meeting.
Q. Do you not recollect that the resolutions Avere strong
party resolutions ? Do you mean to say that the opposite party
participated in the passage of these resolutions ? A. No, sir,
I did not notice tho A'ote at the time. I don't suppose that
some of the resolutions expressed the sentiment of the opposite
party. Q. Were not a great bulk of those attending the meeting and
especially those avIio dreAv the resolutions members of the con
servative party ? A. They were.
Q. They gave tone and character to Avhat Avas done ? A.
Yes sir, I think they did.
Q. Do you know whether among the persons attending this
meeting there Avero a feAV or many who were known to bo
members of these secret organizations ? A. When tho Kirk
movement Avas commenced I did hot know a man in tho county
AA'ho belonged to tho organization.
Q. When you did find out who were tho members of tho
Kuklux organization,^ did you not discover that many ofthem
had been in that meeting and had participated in its proceed
ings ? A. Yea, air, some.
Q. You moan at tho timo of tho meeting you did not know
that there was a person in the meeting who avhb a member of
the kuklux, but that since you have learned that some of tho
persons who participated in that meeting were said to be mem
bers of the kuklux ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. IIow many of that class ? A. I could not say, I don't
recollect any persons who attended the meeting except those
who were prominent in it.
Q. Waa Mr. Long an officer of the meeting1 — Jacob Long ?

TRIAL OF "WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 1001
A. I don't recollect seeing him and I don't recollect of him
being secretary, but I eee from the proceedings that he was.
Q. These published proceedings are a correct account of tho
meeting ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. After hearing these proceedings read is it not your recol
lection that he Avas secretary ? A. When I read the account
in the Sentinel my impression was that it was correctly re
ported. Q. You have tho samo recollection about that as you have
about other matters ? A. Yee, air.
Q, Was Doctor Mooro present and did he participate in tho
meeting? A. Yes, sir, ho addressed tho meeting and also
James E. Boyd.
Q. James E. Boyd Avas present and participated ? A. Yes,
Bir. Q. Were those members of the Kuklux organization ? A.
It so appears from the proceedings on the bench warrant cases.
Mr. GR AH AM. It seems to me, Mr. Chief Justice, tho
statement is inadmissible, the witness does not know anything
in reference to that except what he has heard.
Q There wero some present at that meeting whose names
havo since been published as membors of that secret organiza
tion ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And whoso testimony was taken hero in tho bench war
rant cases. A. Yes, sir.
Re-Direct Examination.
By Mr. Graham.
Q. You say at tho first meeting you saw William A.
Albright? A. Yes, sir.
Q. You said that ho Avas the recognized leader of the repub
lican party in that neighborhood? A. He is one of the most
prominent members of the party.
Q. Ho approved the resolutions that were offered, or made
no opposition to them ? A. He made no opposition in the
few remarks he made.
Q. You speak of party resolutions. Is there any resolution

1002 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
in that whole series which it is understood the republican
party 'as a party Jisapprove of, for example, the matter of
ferreting out frauds— is it understood that tho republican
party sanctioned frauds ? A. Some of these resolutions I con
sider a criticism on the action of the then existing legislature,
and I do not suppose the other party would have taken part in
them, Q. Mr. Albright was there and made no opposition to the
proposition to inquire how much public money had been stolen ?
A. No, sir, my recollection is that he made no opposition to
any resolution.
Q. Did he make any opposition to declaring that the as
sembly ought not to hold over more than two years ? A. No,
sir. Q. He agreed that they ought not to hold over ? A. I do
not know that he referred to the resolutions particularly, but
he made no opposition himself.
Q. He expressed no opposition to any one resolution in the
series ? A. Not that I recollect.
Q. And excused himself for not making a speech at length,
bnt answered when his name was called in the meeting ? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. You have been aaked in regard to men who have since
been discovered to belong to the Kuklux organization. Was
it known to you or to the meeting that any of thoso men
belonged to such an organization at that time ? A. It was not
known to me, and I suppose it was not known to the meeting.
Q. Was it known to yon that either of them belonged to the
Kuklux at that time. A. No, sir.
Q. You had no suspicion of either of them ? A. No, sir.
Mr. Boyd and Senator Graham in their speeches, I think, con
demned lawlessness.
Q. So far as you knew at that time there was no men
present who belonged to any secret organization of any kind ?
A. None.
Q. Was or not the meeting held for the purpose of express*

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 1003
ing, publio sentiment on tho subjects embraced in tho resolu
tions? A. Yes, sir, I think so.
Q. In relation to this othor meeting you say that tho death
of Outlaw caused a shock in tho community, and a mooting
was called to assemble on the next Saturday. Do you knoAV
whether information waa sent all through fhe county, with a
view of having all sections present? A. It was advortiaod
that the meeting was called.
Q. In the meantime the federal troops arrived, and you and
others declined to go to the meeting because of the troops hav
ing been sent there ; you didn't choose to go to a public meet
ing to express the sentiments of tho community where bayo
nets were very near the door of the court house ? A. That was
my feeling in regard to it, and I understood that those Avho
assembled declined to hold the meeting on that account.
Q. You have stated in reply to one of the questions put to
you that there were a great many whippings, perhaps as many
as a dozen had taken place in the county. Did you hear of
any one whipping that proceeded from a political cause ? A.
I did not.
Q. Did some of these men who are alleged to have been
whipped vote the conservative ticket ?
Mr. SMITH. You will state from your own knowledge.
Mr. GRAHAM. The counsel have drawn out tlie fact of a
rumor that a certain number of individuals had been Avhipped,
I Aviah to knoAV if among them there wero pereons who were
reputed to be conservative men ? A. I think I heard that the
superintendent of the Carolina mills was a conservative, but I
am not positive.
Q. What is his name ? A. I could givo hia namo if I had
timo to reflect.
Q. You have heard of no political cause assigned for the
whipping of these people ? A. No, sir.
Q. What were the whippings said to be for ? A. Insults to
white women.
Q. Anything else ? A. Thieving.
Q. What else) A. In the case of the superintendent of tho

1004 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Carolina mills it was said tbe reason was because he had de-
sorted his wife and taken up with the wife of another man.
Q. [By Mr. Smith.] That was one casO of whipping ? A.
So reported.
Q. Others you say were for thieving or insulting white
Avomon ? A. And one case of the maltreatment of a family.
Q. Do you know of any other offenses imputed ? A. The case
of Rippey was the case of a man caught away from home in bed
Avith a colored woman.
Q. Do you know of any other instances of a man being
Avhipped anterior to this meeting, where the report was accom
panied by a statement that tho Avhipping was for some vlco,
crime or Insult ? A. I don't rocolloct whothor thoso particular
cases Avoro before or after tho mooting.
Q. What Avas tho namo of tho conservative who was Avhlppod ?
A. I Btiitod that my impression is that ho was a conservative.
Q. You don't know his namo ? A, I know his namo but
cannot think of it. My iinpreaaion is that I havo hoard ho
avub a conservative '
Q. £ByMr. Morrlmon.] Was noi tho namo of th{s white man,
thotBnpoi'intondont of tho factory Avho was whipped, Siddlo ?
A. Yos, Bir. It Avaa aaid that ho had a Avlfo in tho Avestern
part of tho stato. I am not sure whether ho was charged with
doBcrtion, but ho waa abaont from hie wlfo and I understand
ho avub whipped for taking up with the wife of another man,
Mr. Manogor SPARROW. Wo now offer in ovidenco
tho telegrams Avhich woro produced yestorday by tho telegraph
operator from UillsboroV and first that of July 10th, 1870,
Mr. SMITH. Thoso telegrams woro objected to yesterday
but wo withdraw our objection.
Mr. Manager SPARROW read the telegrams in the words
following : Hillsboro, July 10, 1870.
To Gov. Holden, Raleigh, N. C. :
I am on my Avay by freight — great importance to state and
gen'l gov't.
Bergen.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 1003

Hillsboro, Aug. 5th, 1870.
To L't Col. Burgen, Co. Shops, N, C. :
I will be back to see you in a few days but cannot tell you
without disobeying orders, come and see me.
Rob't Hancock, Jr.
Cap't Co. " A." 1st reg't N. 0. S. T.
HillsBer 5th, 1870.
To Col. Burqen, Co. Shops, N. C.
I hav arreted Mr. Turner and hav him bfor the Bayont
send an extera train afor me. J. W- HcNYcuTT, L't. Com.
Snors 5.
M. N. IIunycutt:
Como upon freight. If any ono attempts to release Turner
shoot him on tho 6pot. ' Burgenj
Mr. McCORKLE; The counsol had perhaps better read tuio
othera hoav, as they put thom all in ovidenco.
Mr. GRAIIAM. The counsel ia mistaken. Tho telegrams
Avere filed Avith the clerk iu order that tho counsel might ex
amine them, and then introduce them if they saAv proper.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. It Avas understood that the tele
grams might be offered if the counsel desired.
Mr. SMITH. Then we Avill read them now.
Senator GRAHAM. Mr. Chief Justice, I dislike to criti
cise the course of proceeding, but it seems to mo it is irregular.
I should prefer that the telegrams come in when the respondent
has opened his case. It seems to me that course would be
more regular.
Mr. SMITH. I will suggest to the Senator that the intro
duction of the telegrams by us now ia really a part of the cross-
examination of the witness who produced the dispatches.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer cannot con-
65

1004 COURT Or IMPEACHMENT!.
trol tho oourie of counsol on the trial with rcspoot to the man
nor of introducing thoir proof,
Mr. GRAHAM. I would suggest further, Mr. Ohief Jui-
tico, that the telegrams have no relevancy to the cross exami
nation. We produced the witness who brought the telegrams,
and if the gentleman proposes to offer them, the proper way
would be to do so after they havo opened their case. If they
proposo to offor thom now, I would like to know what they
mippoio tho telegrams aro competent to provo,
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE, Tho court can only judgo of thoir
admissibility by hearing tho telegrams road.
Mr. GRAIIAM. But wo aro entitled to havo tho counsol
stato tlio ground upon which thoy offer thom to soo whothor
thoy aro proper to bo road.
Mr. SMITH. I really thought that tho counsol offered thom
all !n ovidenco. Thoy woro brought hero by their witness yes
terday, and tho only point mado was whothor thoy being copies
woro oompotont, or whether tho originals must be produced.
I never supposed thoy wore to select a few, and attempt to
oxeludo the other telegrams between those military officers and
tho governor and others.
Mr. Manager SPARROW. Our understanding of tho
matter Avas this ; wo put upon tho stand the telegraph
operator from Illllaboro, who had in his possesion cortaln tele
grams. Objection was mado te thoir introduction, but tho
presiding officer said they could bo loft with the clork, and that
cither sldo could look at thom and Introduce such as thoy
thought proper. Wo avail ourselves of tho privilogo, and in
troduce four of thoso telegrams as pertinent to the issue Tho
others as wo conceive havo no pertinency at all, and being
irrelevant wo do not see fit to introduce thom ; and, upon that
ground, wo think they are not competent to be put in evidence.
They are irrelevant. I can see no reason why they should
be Introduced by way of cross-examination,
Mr, SMITH. I withdrew my objection to their introduc-

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 1005
tion when they were offered this morning, supposing that they
were all in evidence.
Mr. BRAGG. Mr. Chief Justice, there is nothing clearer
than that where a party summons a witness to produce a paper
the fact of summoning him does not necessarily put the paper
in evidence. He is required to produce the paper, and to file
it in order that counsel may see as to its relevancy. I do not
conceive that what has been done with reference to these tele
grams puts them in evidenco unloss they aro offered in behalf
of the managers or in behalf of the respondent. They wero
simply produced for inspection, the operator declining in the
first instance to furnish them, and only doing so under tho
order of the court compelling him. I do not understand how
they can come in by way of cross-examination. The proper
way it seems to mo is for the respondent to introduce them
when he comes to his defence.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer was not
under the impression that the telegrams were made evidence by
the action of the managers. The presiding officer decided that,
in the administration of justice, it was in the power of the
court to compel the production of this correspondence. Ho
desired to infringe the rights of tho telegraph company as little
as possible, and suggested, therefore, that the telegrams could
bo filed and examined, and each side could take out what they
wanted and have them read in evidence. Thoy aro in posses
sion of tho court, and can bo introduced at any time counsol
think fit.
Mr. GRAIIAM. I desire to call tho attention of the chief
justico te thia conaideration. Any of these telegrams that
relate to these which we have given in evidence are competent
to be offered at any time ; but we conceive that none of theso
which are proposed to be offered by the respondent are admis
sible, because they are the dec larations of the respondent or
thoso undor him. Hence the point does not arise now.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. Tho presiding offlcor will hold
that tho oounsel are roitrloted at this stago to those telegrams

1006 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
that seem to be connected with thoso rood. Tho others can bo
admitted afterwards.
Mr. McCORKLE. Thoro are some of the telegrams, Mr.
Chiof Justice, which are explanatory of those read by tho
managors. For instance there is one as to the arrest of Mr.
Turner. There aro others that wo propose to read explanatory
of tho conduct of tho governor, and of the animus of Mr.
Turner towards tho governor made about the time of the
arrest. Mr. GRAHAM. B«t we submit you cannot prove Mr.
Turner's animus by tho declarations of the governor or his
agent. Mr. McCORKLE. Wo got tho animus from Mr. Tumor's
oavh telegrams.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer is ot the
opinion that you havo a right to offer tho telegram which Mr.
Turner sent.
Mr. BRAGG. I hope it avUI appear on tho journals that tho
telegrams Avoro offorod by tho rospo ulont.
Mr. GRAIIAM. Mr. Chiof Justico, I do not think that the
telegram should bo allowed. They purport to bo a despatch
from tho private secretary of tho governor to Mr. Turner, in
which somo inquiry ia mado in reference to tho circumstances
of an outrago upon Mr. Tumor's family. Mr. Tumor replies
to tho govornor. What light doos such evidence afford in
regard to tho question of whether tho arrest of Mr. Turner Avas
or Avas not proper. Supposo Mr. Turner had offended the
governor, thero would bo no justification for seizing him and
putting him in a dungeon. It seems to me that the correspon
dence is a sort of badinage outside of this inquiry, based upon
a charge of the unlawful arrest of Mr. Turner by the accused.
Mr. MERRIMON. Upon further consultation the man
agers have conclnded to withdraw^their objection, and to allow
the telegrams to be read.
Mr. GRAHAM. I hope it will ' appear that this evidence
Avas offered on the part of the defence.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 1007
Tho Clerk proceeded to read the telegrams in the words
following: Raleigh, 15.
Hon. Josiah Turner :
I send up a guard of twenty men by first train. Command
ing officer will report to yon. Arrest every suspicious person
and I will deal with them. Keep me informed. Wm. J. Clarke,
Col. 1st N. C. State Troops.
Raleigh, 16, 1870,
Josiah Turner, Jr. :
Pleaso givo mo auch information as you may have in regard
to attempted outrage on Mra. Turner. W. R. Riohardbon, Private Sec'ty.
IIillsbouo', N. 0., 16, 186.
To Governor Holden, Raleigh :
Tho telegram ot your private socrctary asking the particulars
of acts of violonco committed on my family in my absence has
boon received. I see no necessity for taxing tho state to pay for
euch information. Tho parties are unknown. John Ledbetter,
the negro you pardoned out of the penitentiary has been seen
in my vicinity. Dennis Hanes for whom tho sheriff has a
special capias Avas seen near the night after the firing into my
house, he is the negro twice convicted for larceny and the ver
dict twice sot aside by Judge Tourgee. I informed Col. Clarke
that the civil law was ample in Orange for my protection and
if his militia dared put foot on my land I would have them
arrested for forcible trespass. I will give you further particu
lars by letter through the Sentinel. Josiah Turner, Jr.
Mr. MERRIMON. We now offer in evidence certain num-

1008 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
bers of the Raleigh Sentinel, which it was shown yesterday was
received at the executive office containing printed statements of
the outrages perpetrated in the counties of Alamance and
Caswell, as affording additional proof that the respondent was
aware of what was transpiring there.
Mr. SMITH. We object to the evidence. Any reliable
information which was conveyed to the governor in a form in
which any reasonable man would act, is competent for the pur
pose of showing notice. But I submit whether it is the duty
of a high executive officer of the state to act upon newspaper
statements made not under oath and not even with a responsi
bility of a name attached to them. We contend that such
notices would not authorize him to act officially in the matter
at all.
Mr. MERRIMON. Mr. Chief Justice, they would at least
put the accused upon an enquiry to know whether there was
any ground for the statements or not, and especially where the
statements are most pointed in .reference to the alleged outrages.
Mr. McCORKLE. I suppose, Mr. Chief Justice, that it
this evidence is introduced it is equally competent to produce
the Standard newspaper to show that a large number of an
other class of outrages were perpetrated in those counties ; and
the question would then arise, would it be competent for the
governor to act upon that kind of testimony. Certainly, if he
would not be authorized in the one case to act officially, the
statements in the other case would give him no authority. If
any information is conveyed to the governor of a reliable char
acter, it would be either a justification or no justification for his
conduct, and if thia evidence now offered ia to be admitted to
show that ho waa aware of the outragea committed against
prisonera, it certainly would be equally competent to show that
other newspapers contained evidences of outrages of a different
character as a justification for his action. It strikes me, sir,
that tho testimony should not be admitted.
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. Chief Justice, this evidenoe is admis
sible on the some principle that obtains in the case of a disso-

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 1009
lution of a co-partnership. In a case of that kind a person
interested in the affairs of the firm who is in the habit of read
ing the newspapers in which the disolution is advertized, is
presumed to have notice of the dissolution. But, sir, it is ad
missible upon far higher ground. A legislative body may in
stitute proceedings on rumor against any of their members
charged Avith infamous crimes, and sir, a miUtary officer — a
major general commanding a division of the army of the
United States Avho is in the habit of daily reading that his
men are committing outrage upon citizens of a county, if he
take no notice of the fact, he would be cashiered if not shot,
if it turns out that he had instituted no investigation after
these things were called to his attention. He neglects an in
vestigation at his peril. If he chooses to pass it by as idle
rumor and information not to be relied upon, and it turns out
that real oppression is practiced and he had power to prevent
it, he is held responsible for all the consequences. This was
the only military business this respondent had to do. It was
outside of his regular duties ; and he seems to have concen
trated his whole energies upon it, and he looked upon the
operations of Kirk with quite as much interest as General
Grant looked at the operations of the army of the United
States during the late AA'ar. His eyes were turned toAvards
those two counties and no where else, and wherever it was
alleged that the crime had been committed by this force as
a matter of public notoriety, through the newspapers (which
are a means of communication between people, invented with
in the last two or three centuries, and never known before) it
is most convincing evidence that he was apprised of what was
transpiring, and if he chose to underrate the magnitude of the
crimes alleged, it is an aggravation of his offence.
Mr. SMITH. It seems to me, Mr. Chief Justice, to be a
very extraordinary proposition that a man is to be held crim
inally liable in a proceeding calculated to degrade him beyond
any other punishment upon a presumed knowledge obtained
from publications in newspapers, especially in tho present con-

1010 OOURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
dition of the country and party feeling. Under all eircura-
stancefl such statements are more or less unrehable, being
anonymous. If the matter waa of sufficient importance why
did not the editor convey to him a knowledge of the fact by
letter ? Why not have some responsible name annexed to
these articles published, and in that way bring the facts to the
knoAvledge of the respondent in a form that would justify the
action of the executive ? What evidence had he that these
atatemente Avere truo ? What right had the governor, sitting aa
a grand jury, to accept every fact alleged in an ordinary news
paper ? If he done that, what othor function of his office
could he have performed ? As my associate has already said,
if the executive is to take the files of the Sentinel, is it not
equally incumbent upon him to take tho files of the Standard and
act upon every allegation of outrage reported there. I Bay
that it is the duty of a high public officer to act upon infor
mation as to unlawful acts which come to him in a reliable form
and which any reasonable man would regard under similar cir
cumstances. I admit that whatever he does do should be upon
the best information ho could get. But they do not attempt
hero to sIioav that he knew of the existence of these articles pub
lished. They charge him with knowledge and they only bring
proof that Bomcbody, in the executive office took this news
paper without tho slightest evidenco that the respondent ever
read one of the articles. Tho case of a co-partnership which is
cited by the learned counsel [Mr. Graham] as analogous to this,
is not parallel at all. The managers undertake to charge the
respondent with a knowledge of acts without a responsible
name attached to statements and without any proof that he
took the newspaper and much less that he read it, and to hold
him responsible for non-action in tho premises. For ought
that to appear there ? These outrages may have existed over
tho whole State. I do not suppose they were confined to
Alamance oounty.
Mr. MERRIMON. The charges of outrage complained of
in the articles were in those two counties.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 1011
Mr. SMITH. The enquiry is as to the culpability of the
respondent for what he did in the counties of Alamance and
Caswell. If he ia culpable for not taking notice of any act or
acts in those counties, then it must be shown that he Avas aware
of those acts, and that he was guilty of non-action with that
knowledge. Mr. GRAHAM. Restricting this investigation to thoso two
counties, and the case stands thus. It is proved by Murray and
Patten and Rogers that they were hanged. There is no doubt
about that. Wo proposo to show that the governor is a reader
of this noAVspapor and hence had information very early of thoso
occurrences and that he took no stops to prevent any such
things in tho future.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. Tho presiding officer ia of the
opinion that the evidence ia competent upon tho ground of ita
being proved that the Sentinel waa aont to the executive offico
every morning ; and there is a fair presumption that tho attention
of tho goA'ernor Avas called to it. Whether it waa incumbont
upon hiin to act upon information derived in that way, waa a
question for him to determine then and will bo a question to bo
judged of by thia court on ita final action. But it ia not hoav
before them. Tho question hero ia simply ono of evidonce,
and turna not upon its competency but upon its weight.
Mr. Manager SPARROW read from the Raleigh Sen
tinel of July 20th, an article in tho words following :
KIRK'S WORK.
" The telegram and letter below, will show how Kirk and his
<¦ men are 'obeying orders ' in Caswell. Their actions aro so
41 calculated that we might be astonished at it if tho time to bo
<( astonished at anything had not passed. The telegram is
dated Salisbury, July 20th, 1870.
Mr. Editor": — On Monday Kirk arrested Judge Korr, Dr.
" Roan, Hon. 8. P. Hill, J. C. Williamson, W. D. Bowe, Rob't.
"Roan, Joseph Fowler, Mitchell and James Neill, Jesso

1019 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS. ,
" Griffith, Dr. Yancey, Thomas Womack, James P. A. Wiley,
" And D. Rainoy. Some ono hundred and fifty or two hun*
" drod were nrrestod and detained in the court home from ono
" until flvo o'clock. W. D. Bowo demanded by what authority
11 thoy arretted him, unarmed, ho refused to go and wai struck
" ovor tho head with gum and dragged off,"
Mr. SMITH. As I understand it, Mr. Chief Justice, the
managers offer this newspaper article as evidence tending to
show that notice of the fact stated was brought to the execu
tive. In that view I don't suppose it proper to read the com
ments. The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer understood
that it was admitted as a statement in reference to the conduct
of tho soldiers.
Mr. BRAGG. I hope we may be understood, Mr. Chief
Justice. Of course we do not offer anything contained in a
newspaper as being proof that particular acts were done. Wo
have proved by other evidence acts of violence. The pnrpoae
of this evidence, as I understand it, ia to show that there Avas
brought to tho notice of the governor statements that outrages
wero committed bo as to at least put him upon enquiry and
make it his duty to have applied a corrective, and not to allow
these men to go on in these acts of violence, if they were
guilty of them. The presiding officer has very correotly deci
ded that the question is one as to the weight of testimony, and
not as to its admissibility ; and tho question is whether the gov
ornor had sufficient notice to put him upon enquiry, and if
he found the allegation true to apply the remedy.
Sonator JONES. Mr. Chief Justice, I would like to ask
tho counsel for the managers if they propose to read every pub
lication in relation to charges already proved ?
Mr. MERRIMON. Mr. Chief Justice, our object is simply
to sIioav that those facts wore published to rai so tho presumption
that notice of tho outrages were brought to the attention of tho
govornor.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 1013-
Mr. GRAHAM. We contend that if they were brought
to the attention of tho respondent and he took no measures to
prevont the outrages, his non-aotion is a part of the criminality.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. Tho counsel may separate those
portions of the articles which havo reference to the outrages
from the rest, tho comments hy the editor.
Mr. Manager SPARROW road the residue of the article in
the words following :
" The arrest of Mr. Wiley was brutal, he was plowing with
" his coat off and refused to go with them, he was knocked
" down and put on his own horse, his feet tied under the horses
" belly and his hands behind his back. Bare back with his
" coat off he rode into town to Kirk's camp. Judge Kerr is
" vilely cursed by the sentinel who stands at the window of his
" house. Ladies aro insulted and with their children are leav-
" ing the town. These facts are given to me by a gentleman
"just from Yanceyville, I feel sure they are true.
" The dispatch is signed by a gentleman of reliability."
Mr. McCORKLE. I submit this consideration, Mr. Chief
Justico : suppose the man who wrote that communication wero
here ; ho would not bo permitted to testify to the facts he
stated in the article, because they were hearsay. He got them
from others.
Mr. MERRIMON. I submit, Mr. Chief Justice, a further
consideration : supposo that the man were hero and he stated
that he had told the governor of these facts, I ask if the fact
would not be oompo?ent to be proved.-
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE. Tho evidence is not offered by
tho managers as proof of the facts set forth in tlie printed state
ment, but simply as ovidenco of tho fact that the governor had
notice of tho alleged outrages.
Mr. SMITH. Then I suppose tho senate will overrule tho
decision mode yesterday, and let us show what tho declarations

1014 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
of the governor were in respect to these outrages when he
heard of them?
Senator WARREN. I , think, Mr. Chief Justice, that the
question is understood.
Mr. Manager SPARRQW read in evidence the following
from tho Sentinel of July 30th 1870 :
WORSE AND WORSE.
MORE ARRE8TB BY KIRK.
THE HANGING BEGUN.
HOLDEN IB DETERMINED TO FORCE A CONFLICT BEFORE THE
ELECTION.

Wo rocolvod tho following dispatch at 4 o'clock, datod
IIiLLsnouo', July 80th.
" I loom from pasiongors and employees of tho railroad just
" from Alamanco that Holden's troops arrested thirty citizens of
" Alamanco last night. Among thom is William Patton, as
" rospoctablo a citizen as thero Is in tho county, who was hung
•' up throo different times and cut down to mako him confess
" avIio killed OutlaAV. The last timo it was an hour before ho
"recovered. He. made no confeaaiona to the laat. Kirk will
" have to aiTeat more than thirty men to elect William A
" Smith." Senator JONES. I move, Mr. Chief Justice, that only such
portion of the article be admitted upon the record of the court
as it relates to the facts, and that tlie editor's comments thereon
be not allowed.
Mr. SMITH. I would suggest, Mr. Chief Justice, on further
conaidera?ion, that by leaving out tho comments, the court do

[TRIAL OF "WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 1015 t
the respondent a wrong. It is the comment of the editor
which shows the animus.
Senator JONES. I withdraw the motion.
Mr. Manager SPARROW read in evidence the telegram
printed in the Raleigh Sentinel of. August 5th, 1870, in 'the
words following : Hillsboro, N. O, August 5.
Mr. Moore, Sentinel Office :
I was arrested by Lieutenant Ilunnicutt this morning.
J. Turner, Junior.
Mr. Manager SPARROW also read in evidence he editorial
published in the samo isauo in tho Avorda following :
" LAWLESS ARREST OF THE EDITOR OF THIS
PAPER.
" Tho abovo telegram announces tho fact of tho arrest of Mr.
" Turner, editor of this papor, by order of Gov. Iloldon. No
" eauao for the arrest has boon asaignod, Indeed, nono exists. . Tho
" arrest has boon mado with a tAvo-fold vIoav. Ono to gratify
" tho malignity and vulgar vanity of an upstart who ia gov-
" ornor ot tho atato by accident, and the other to Biipprces tho
" voice of thia press in its exposition and denunciation of the
"crimes and ontragea against public and private property.
" This ia intended aa a blow at Mr. Turner, peraonally, because
" Holden hates and fears him, and at public liberty by putting
" down the press ?"
Mr. Senator JONES. I dislike, Mr. Chief Justice, to inter
rupt the reading, but I must object to these editorial com
ments. Mr. Manager SPARROW. I will stop right there. I now
read a paragraph in a communication from Mr; Turner p>ub-

1016 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
llshed in the Sentinel August 6, 1870, under date of Hillsboro,
Aug. 4.
" Now we repeat, come on with your chains. Patton has
" felt your rope and I can bear your chains and defy you too, —
" you are now in a desperate conflict with a secret society yon
"pretend to believe that I am connected Avith, but I know this
" to be only pretence on your part. I have reason to believe
" you have had a spy and detective visiting my office for three
" months or more. You are welcome to all you have learned
" through the scamp."
Mr. Manager SPARROW next read an editorial paragraph
contained in the same paper in the words following :
"Patten. — The Standard this morning has a card from
" from William Patten denying that he was hung up by the
" neck by Bnrgen in Alamance to make him confess in regard
" to the Kuklux organization. In regard to this card wo say
" emphatically that it was either extorted from him under
" throats, which method of procuring certiflcato Booms to be
" getting quite common lately, or he deliberately states facts in.
" hopes of currying favor. The hanging can be substantiated
" by competent witnesses and Avas acknowledged by Burgen
" and Patten last Monday."
Mr. Manager SPARROW next road in evidence from an
editorial in the Sentinel of August 9, in tho words following t
"LAWLESS OUTRAGE.
"Mr. Turner, the editor of this paper, having been seized by
"surprise and borne off to prison, we have not until very
" recently, been informed of the circumstances of outrage and
" indignity to his household.
" We learn on undoubted authority, that after surrounding

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 1017
" and capturing him when alone near the railroad station, a
" band of armed men went to his dwelling, half a mile distant,
" outside of the town of Hillsborough, and there hunted through
"every room in the house without warrant, taking seA'eral
" pieces of fire-arms, including the shot-guns of his little boys."
Senator JONES. I understood the decision of tho chiof
justice to be that only those charges referring to Caswell and
Alamance were to be introduced in evidence.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The paragraphs that have just
been read have relation to tho conduct of the troops towards
Mr. Turner, and they explain the correspondence between him
and the governor's secretary.
Mr. Manager SPARROW read in evidence an editorial
from the Sentinel of August 12, in the words following :
"CONTINUED LAWLESSNESS IN ALAMANCE.
" We learn that about daylight a few mornings since, tho
" mail train on the N. 0. road was required by an armed band
" of Kirk's men to stop at Graham station, and that this band,
" numbering about twelve men, leaped on board with seven
" citizens of Alamance whom they had seized as prisoners,
" yelling and cursing the prisoners and pointing pistols at thoir
" persons, with throats of instant death, &c, and in this way
" took them to Company Shops. The leaders in the crowd
" and most boisterous in tlieir throats, Avere three negroes avIio
" appeared to take great delight in the scene of barbarity. Tho
" defenceless victims appear to have been taken from their beds
" in the night, and not to have been allowed to dress corafort-
" ably and hardly decently."
Mr. SMITH. The evidenco of the railroad conductor on
that train is directly to tlie contrary of the statement made in
the article which has just been read.

1018 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE. It will enable the members of the
court to fix the proper weight to be attaohed to the artiole.
Mr. MERRIMON. The inferenee is that this does not refer
to tho same transaction which was testified to by the con
ductor. Mr. Manager SPARROW read in evidence an extract from
a letter quoted in the Sentinel of August 15th, in the words
following :
" This forenoon, Mrs. Turner went down to look at her
" husband through tho Avindow and have a few words with him,
" but he was not allowed to como to tho window. Ho waived
"hia hand and ehook IiIb hoad to intlmato to hor that ho Avas
" not allowed to [boo or spoak to hor. O Liberty 1 how many
" crimes are committed in thy namo 1
" Mrs. Turner has not yot givon Avay once, but keeps up
"bravely. Last night hoaringhor talking, thoy throw aovoral
'• largo Btonos towards tho plaoo whoro thoy hoard her voice
" ThoBtonoa struck all around hor but fortunately did not strlko
her." Mr. Manager SPARROW read from an editorial in the
Sentinel of Auguat 17th, 1870, au extract in the words follow
ing :
OUTRAGE UPON MR. TURNER AND OTHERS!!
HOLDEN AND HIS CLIQUE DOING THEIR
WORST. (FROM GRAHAM.)
" We learn from undoubted authority that on last night,
" Hon. Josiah Turner, Jr., sheriff* Griffith and Mr. Wiley, of
" Caswell, who with the other arrested parties had been kept in
" the court house at Graham since their removal there, were
." men taken out of the court house by Kirk's men and locked
" up in the dungeon cells of the oounty jail.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM AV. HOLDEN. 1019
" Hon. John Kerr with a dozen others we are told were per-
" mitted to board at the hotel in Graham ; the rest except
ft' Messrs. Turner, Wiley, Griffith and perhaps others Avho were
" imprisoned last night in the jail Avere permitted to remain in
" the court house."
Mr. Manager SPARROW read in evidence affidavit of
Lucien II Murray, published in the Sentinel of August 20th,
1870, in the words folloAving :
" Unwed States cf American, )
" District of North Carolina, j
"Lucian II. Murray, being duly sworn, deposeth and saith,
" that he is a citizen of tho United States and of tho state of
" North Carolina, residing iu the toAvn- of Graham in the
" county of Alamanco in said state, that he belongs to no
" military organization and ia in no manner subject to military
" Iiiav, but that his occupation ia that of a clerk and salesman in
" a retail etoro in aaid toAvn of Bason & Son, that ho is a native
" of and has all hia life resided in the said county of Alamance
" and is iioav of the ago of tAvcnty-scvcn yoars. That on the
41 27th of July last, being informed that a guard of soldiers
" from the camp ot G. AV. Kirk at Company Shops, had been
" to his place of business to arrest this affiant while he was
" absent therefrom, he Avent to the said camp and reported
" himself to ono B. G. Burgen who claimed to be lieute
nant colonel under Kirk in the command of a regiment
" Avhich they called "state troops," that said Burgen immedi-
" ately ordered this affiant to be put under guard and de-
" tained in said camp as a prisoner. This affiant Avas placed
" in a tent with two other persons, also prisoners ; and in the night
" succeeding about 1 o'clock a. m., the Baid Burgen came to
" the tent with a candle and addressed this affiant who was
" awake asking " Is that you Murray," to which affiant replied
" • Yes.' Said Burgen then retired to his own tent, and
" shortly afterwards came back without a light and touched
66

1020 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
" this affiant upon his feet and iti a low tone of voice ordered
" him " to get up" the otlier two prisoners being apparently
"asleep. — This affiant replied, ""Very well, can I get my!
" shoes ?" The said Burgen answered, " No you will not need
" them long." He then took this affiant to his own tent where
" there Avere three of his mon armed with pistols ; the said Bur-
" gen then said to this affiant that " he must tell him all about
" the hanging of Wyatt Outlaw." This affiant replied that he
" kneAV nothing about it and that ho did not know that
" Outlaw had been hanged till aftersunrise the morning after it
" was done. The said Burgen replied " It ia a damned lie, I
" know that you do, and proceeded to say that there Avas an affi-
" davit filed in his office against this affiant stating that he
" this affiant had seen Outlaw hanged by one Adolphus
" Moore. This affiant replied it Avas false, that he knew noth-
" ing about it ; the said Burgen put a rope around the neck of
" this affiant, and eaid : " Patton and Rogers (alluding to tAvo
" others of his prisoners) Ichoav nothing about it till they were
" hung up, and they could then tell all about it, and you must do
"tho same." IIo. then took thia affiant to a tree about fifty
" yards from hia tent, Avith tho threo armed men aforesaid,
" threAV the end of tho rope still on this affiant's neck over a
" branch of the free, and having already tied thia affiant's anna
" in the maimer usual Avith criminals about to be executed, he,
" tho said Burgen, droAV the rope and Bwung this affiant up by
" tho neck. After suspending him for a short time he Avaa
" let doAvn. Tho aaid Burgen asked him if ho Avould confeaa ;
" then thia affiant replied that he kneAV nothing to confeaa.
" Tho eaid Burgen and hia men aforesaid then preaented their
"pistols at thia affiant's breast and threatened to bloAV hia
•' heart out if he did not confees. This affiant Btill refusing
"to make tho admission demanded, tho said Burgen
" seized tho ropo and again -hoisted this affiant from
" tho ground more roughly than before, and suspending him
" longer. Upon being let down thia affiant was unable to speak
'"for Borne time. Tho aaid Burgen then said, "Now confess

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. nOLDEN. 1021
" that you saw Mooro." Affiant replied that he could not do it ;
" said Burgen replied, " You must acknowledge it or die," and
" said to one of hia mon, " Sergeant, hang him up to that treo
" and let him hang till 8 o'clock in the morning, then cut him
" down and bury him under the tree." After other conversa-
" tion, and threats of killing this affiant, the said Burgen said to
" this affiant : " I will noAV give you until to-morrow night, and
" if you don't confess then I will kill you dead." Affiant re-
" plied : " I will never confess, for I have nothing to confess."
" This affiant was then taken back to his tent aforesaid, after
" being charged to say nothing about what had occurred, and
" threatened with death if he divulged it. He was not tortured
14 again, but has been held by the said Kirk as a prisoner until
•' brought to Salisbury before his Honor . Judge Brooks on
" yesterday. Luoiua II. Mauny.
"Sworn and subscribed before mo this 19th of August, 1870.
Wm. Larkins,
Clerk U. S. District Court, Dist. Capo Fear."
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer thinks it
bart'ly necessary to detain the court by reading tho other two
affidavits. They can be considered in evidence and referred to.
The affidavits referred to are in the Avoids following:
"United States of America,
" District of North Carolina.
" D. W. Weedon, being sworn deposeth and saith, that he
" is a citizen of the United States and of North Carolina, iioav
" residing and has ahvays resided in the oounty of Alamance
" in said state, that ho is in no military organization and in
" no way subjeot to military law.
" That on or about the 28d of July last, he, his affiant,
" was arrested by one B. G. Burgen claiming to be lieuten*
" ant colonel of a body of armed men, called by him North
" Carolina state troops encamped at Company Shops in said

1022 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS!
" county, no cause being assigned for said arrest, and detained
" Avith sundry other citizens of the state held also as prisoners
•' by the said Burgen and G. W. Kirk who claimed to be
" colonel of tho said troops. That he was paroled at one time
" for two or threo days, with an obligation to report to said
" Kirk at Yanceyville Avhon he again went into confine-
'* mont with many othor prisoners, that while thus confined
" in tho upper room of the oourt houso of Caswell, upon soe-
" ing a soldier beloAV onrelesBly handing a pistol ho, this
" affiant ronionstrated that ho might shoot somo ono. The
" aoldior Immediately replied with an oath, "I Avill shoot you,"
•• and fired his pistol, tho ball pasalng near the head of this
" alllant. From this timo forward thie affiant seemed to havo
"incurred tho hostility of eaid Kirk and his officers, who cursed
"and maltreated him on divers occasions; that after tho service
" on said Kirk of the writ in this case, ho went with this affiant
"and other prisoners to Graham, in Alamanco county, andcou-
" fined hia prisoners, this affiant among them, in tho court houso
" there ; that on Tuesday afternoon, of tho present Aveok, this
" affiant Avaa takon by a lieutenant and guard of said Kirk and
"carried to tho common jail of said county, and there confined
" until Thursday, whon, with tho othor priaoners aforesaid, ho
" was brought to Salisbury ; that on tho morning after this
" affiant was committed to jail, a lieutenant Banner, of the aaid
" troops, avIio seemed to be the keeper of tho prisoners who
" had been committed to jail, placed an iron manacle on one of
" tho legs of this affiant above the ankle, to which waa affixed
" a chain and staple, fastening it to the floor ; that
" tho said Banner riveted the manacle on the leg of this affiant
" in a very rough manner, giving to this affiant great pain in
" tho operation ; that ho was kept thus ironed until taken from
" tho jail aforesaid to be earned to Salisbury before his honor
" Judge Brooks. That this affiant Avas never informed of any
" charge against him on which he was arrested and confined
" and had dono nothing to provoke the cruel usuage aforesaid
" to which he was subjected. That during all the time of this

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 1023
" affiant's confinement in jail he suffered for the want of water
" to drink ; a small quantity of stale water in a canteen was
" placed by him soon after his commitment to jail, and nono
" other furnished to him during his confinement ; he asked for
" water several times and it was refused and he was cursed in
" every instance. When food was sent to him by the citizens
" of Graham, the guard threw it to him on the floor of tho jail
" and forbid him to use a knife, fork or spoon, presenting their
"pistols in his face and threatening to shoot him at the samo
" time. "D. W. Weedon.
" Sworn and subscribed this 19th of August, 1870, before mc,
"Wm. Larkjns,
" Clerk U. S. District Court District Capo Fear."
" United States of America,
" District of North Carolina.
" Georgo II. Rogera being duly sAvorn, deposoth and eaith,
" that ho ia a citizen of the United States and of tho state of
" North Carolina, that he is a native of the county of Alamanco
" in eaid state, has always resided and still resides in the samo ;
" that he is now nineteen years of age and resides in the family
" of his parents, that on Wednesday, the 26th of July last, he
" Avas arrested by one Ilunnicutt, claiming to be a lieutenant
" in a body of troops encamped at the Company Shops under
" the command of one George W. Kirk. After being arrested
" this affiant was required to accompany a 6quad of these armed
" men in traversing the county and arresting others and finally
" reached tho camp aforesaid near 10 o'clock that night. On
" tho noxt day ono B. G. Burgen, claiming to bo lieutenant
"colonol of the troops aforesaid, began a conversation with
" this affiant, and after it had been for somo timo continued
" inquired of him whethor he knew Adolphus Moore. Affi
ant replied that he knew him by sight but had littlo
" acquaintance. Said Burgen then told this affiant that he this

1024 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
" affiant knew something of the murder of Wyatt Outlaw.
" This affiant denied it. The said Burgen after pronouncing
" tho denial a damned lie, said he would give this affiant till
" that night to tell about it. That night about 10 or 11 o'clock
" the said Burgen took this affiant to his tent and asked if he
"was ready to tell about the murder of Outlaw. Affiant
" replied that he had told him all he know. Said Burgen then
" said, " Step right thero, you are telling a damned lie, I know
"that you do know and Avill make you tell it. He then
" took this affiant accompanied by said Ilunnicutt and several
" men to the woods and again asked this affiant if he would
4i tell about tho murder. Affiant replying as before, the said
" Burgen said that Patten did not know anything till he hung
" him up and then he could tell all about it. He then asked
" affiant if he had anything to 6ay. Thia affiant replied that ho
" had said all he wished to say. Having put a rope about
" the neck of this affiant shortly after leaving the tent, the said
" Burgen then ordered the lieutenant, who threw the rope over
" tho branch of a tree, to swing this affiant up. The lieutenant
"drew until the rope was stretched tight around this affiant's
" neck. Said Burgen then told the lieutenant "that will do," and
" asked affiant if he would then confess and the same reply was
" given as before. Affiant was then taken back to the tent.
" Affiant has been kept as a prisoner until released by his
" honor Judge Brooks, on yesterday. George S. Rogers.
" Sworn and subscribed before me this 19th day of August,
-11870. "Wm. Larkins,
" Clerk U. S. District Court, District Cape Fear."
WILLIAM II. BATTLE, a witness on behalf of the Man
agers, was duly swoiii :
Mr. MERRIMON. Mr. Chief Justice, avo propose to provo
by tho witness, Judge Battle, that it was a notorious fact in the
city of Raleigh and upon almost everybody's tongue that Mr.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 1025
Patten had been hung and that other outrages had been per
petrated and that in that way the knowledge of the tact must
have been brought to the attention of the respondent.
Mr. SMITH. We object, Mr. Chief Justice, to the proof
offered. It must be shown that the fact was known to the
governor. We submit that rumor does not furnish any ground
upon which a state official can be impeached.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The presiding officer is of the
opinion that the evidence is not competent, the fact mnst be
broughtto the knowledge pre3umtively at least, as by theneAvs-
paper sent to his office every day containing the facts. Still
the presiding officer does not desire to anticipate the argument
in reference to its admissibility.
Mr. MERRIMON. I can cite the court to an authority. It
was a case Avhere a murder was committed near the Dismal
Swamp, and it Avas allowed to be proved that there were run
away negroes avIio were living in the BAvamp.
Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE. For what purpose ?
Mr. MERRIMON. As affording some evidence that some
body might have committed tho murder besides tho party
charged. All I claim is that the fact that this was bruped
about by everybody as some evidence that the governor knew it.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. Tho presiding officer is unable to
see Iioav rumor or hearsay can be admitted as evidence in a
court of justice.
CREED F. YOUNG, a witness called on behalf of the
Managers, being duly sworn, testified as follows :
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. State your name, age, place of residence and business ?
A. My name is Creed F. Young ; I reside at Burnsville, North
Carolina ; I am a merchant and trader generally and am thirty-
one years of ago.
Q. Stato whether you have any general acquaintance with
tho peoplo in tho counties of Yancey, Mitchell and Madison ?
A. I have.
Q. State to tho court if you know what was the reputation

1026 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS. .
of the men coannanded by George W. Kirk in that section of
the country during the late war ? A. Bad.
Q. [By Mr. Smith.] Do you know their reputation? A.
I do. Q. Do you know it well or otherwise ? A. I know it very
well. Q. What was their reputation ? A. Stealing and robbing
was their reputation.
Q. Givo tho senate an idea of the oharaoter of the men,
whothor thoy woro orderly or disorderly or otherwise ? A. I
think thoy woro disorderly, and most of them bad men. Somo
of them I havo personal knowledge were very bad.
. The CHIEF JUSTICE. It is not proper to give peraonal
knowledge. What ia wanted ia thoir general oharacter.
Q. IIow Avould you describe thom to tho court ? A. As
being a band of luwloaa mon.
Q. Do you know whothor any of thoao men wore undor Kirk
In tho military movement wo havo boon taking testimony about
hero ? A. Somo of the men woro with Kirk. I saw thom in
com mand of Kirk's officora and thoy said thoy belonged to
Kirk'a command.
Q. Did you aoe thom go this way and come back ? A.I
did. Q. Were theae men members of his old force during the Avar
any of them ? A. Yes, air.
Mr. MERRIMON. I euppose, Mr. Chief Justice, that I
cannot speak of individual acts ?
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The witness is not allowed to
speak of personal knowledge of individual acts but of their
general character.
Mr. MERRIMON. Then, as I understand the presiding
officer, no individual acts done by these men are admissible.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. The ruling of the presiding officer
is, that you must prove by general reputation the character of
the men, that you cannot prove a particular fact to show a gen
eral bad character.

TRIAL OF AVILLIAM W. nOLDEN. 1027
Cross Examination.
By Mr. Smith.
Q. Iu what part of the state do you reside ? A. West of the
ridge, western North Carolina, Yancey county.
Q. Is that the county in which theae troops were raised ?
A. Some of them were raised in that county.
Q. How many ? A. Forty or fifty.
Q. Do you know the men personally ? A. I do a great many
of them— half of them or more.
Q. Do you know the character of them all ? A. Most of
them ; I do not mean to say that I know the character of them
all, but I do knoAV tho character of most ofthem.
Q. Is tho character you have given their general reputation
all over that county ? A. That is their general reputation.
Q. Were theao men in tho United Statea army. They etated
thoy belonged to Kirk'a command. I aaw them under tho com
mand of Kirk'a officers.
Q. During tho Avar? A. About tho close of the war.
Q. Kirk's forco avus a United Statea forco? A. I do, not
kllOAV. Q. Do you not knoAV Avhether thoy Avere under tho United
States flag? A. Thoy aaid they were.
Q. Don't you knoAV that as avoII as you know that any other
troops Avoro under tho United Statea flag? A. I supposo they
were. Q. These men were a part of the samo men who Avere dis
banded Avhen the Avar was OA'er? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And they wero re-enlisted in Kirk's last command ? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. You do not know the great bulk of Kirk's command, some
eight hundred in number? A. No, sir.
Q. You only know of those you speak of? A. I know of
some other3 from Mitchell county and Madison county.
Q. how far do you live from Mitchell county ? A. About
ten or twelve miles.
Q. From tho line ? A. Yes, six.

1028 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. Do you knoAV the reputation of tlio men in Mitchell
oounty among thoir neighbors thoro f A, I think I do.
Q. Havo you hoard thoir neighbors generally speak of them ?
A. I think I havo,
Q, How far do yon live from somo of those persons yon
spoak of? A. Ten, fifteen or sixteen miles.
Q. Hoav far from others? A. I just speak of those that I
know of.
Q. You aro fifteen miles from all that you know ? A. From
ton to twonty miles say.
Q. Twonty miles Avould take In tho most distant of thom
yon know? A. That is in Mitchell county.
Q. Do you undertake to say that you know tho reputation
of these men to bo bad in the neighborhood in which they
live ? A. Most of them I think I do.
Q. In the neighborhood in which they live ? A. Yea, sir, I
think I do.
Q. You do not live in Mitchell county ? A. No, sir.
Q. You live several miles from the county line? A. Somo
ten or twelve miles.
Q. Did theso men have that reputation during the war? A.
Yen, sir.
Q. They had that reputation among the confederate sol
diers? A. It Avas their general reputation.
Q. Was not that the general reputation of all the United
Statea forces in that part of the country ? A. No, sir, it Avas
not. Q. Whit forces woro there Avhich had any better reputa
tion ? A. Thero we're somo forces there of whom I did not
hour that they Avero robbing, s.ealing or plundering.
Q. Wero there any other forces there except Kirk's in that
part of the county ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. United States forces " A. There were some men there
I think who belonged to the 8th Tennessee.
Q. Who commanded them? A. Colonel Miller
Q. Did thoy have the same bad reputation ? A. I think

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 1029
some of few of them, had a bad reputation but not as a general
thing. Q. Was this reputation of Kirk's troops which you speak of
the result of thoir acts during the war? A. I have heard it
during and sinco the war.
Q. Was tlieir reputation which you have spoken of acquired
during or since the war ? A. During and since the war.
Q It has continued since the Avar? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know of any one of them to have been guilty of
the acts of Avhich you have spoken ? A. Yes, sir. I have
known of them being a band of robbers.
Q. Do you know that yourself? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Who do you know that of? A. One John Wilson, a
lieutenant or captain. I know of his stealing.
Q. Since tho war ? A. Yes, sir, at my house. He had
men with him robbing.
Q. Did you take any steps to arrest him at that time? A.
It avus just directly after the Avar closed.
Q. What has been their conduct since the war closed —
liavo you heard anything? A. I have. I know that the
sheriff tried to arrest this man Wilson, so he said, and he Avas
unable to do it.
The CHIEF JUSTICE. You need not tell what tho sheriff
stated. Q. You don't Ichoav Avhether they acquired this reputation
by thoir conduct since there Avas a settled peace, or Avhether
they acquired it during tho Avar? A. What time Avas lhe Avar
over ? It Avas some timo after the war that theso dopreda-
tions Avoro committed. I do not knoAV exactly how to answer
your question.
Mr. GRAIIAM. I believe that" the president's proclama
tion announced that poace Avas restored in 1860.
Q. (By tho Chief Justice.) Do you know what timo the
armies were disbanded ? A. I do not know as I do.
Q. Wero there some of these soldiers who were in the Con-

1030 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
federate army before they went into the federal service ? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. They were in both armies ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were yon in the Confederate service ? A. I was.
Q. Were you in that part of the country during tlie war? A,
No, sir.
Q. You were at a distance ? A. At a distance. I resigned
and came home before the war closed. I was captain in the
confederate army.
Q. When did you como home ? A. In 1862 or 1863.
Q. And you remained thoro after that ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were you in the service after that ? A. No, sir.
Q. What regiment were you in ? A. The 16th North Car
olina. Q. Who commanded it? A. Col. McElroy.
Q. You left the service in 1862 or 1863 ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And wero in the araiy no more ? A. No, sir.
Re-D 1 1 ect Exav i in a t Ion.
By Mr. Memumon.
Q. Did you haA'o any general acquaintance In tho county of
Mitchell and In tho County of Madison, and If so, how did you
become acquainted ? A. I had been buying stock for several
years and I bceamo acquainted with the people by riding
through those counties purchasing stock.
Q. State Iioav extensive your acquaintance AA'as? A. I am very
avcII acquainted in tho county of Yancey. There are but Ioav
pooplo Avhom I don't Ichoav and I have a general acquaintance
in tho counties of Madison and Mitchell.
Q. I understood you to say in reply to a question that theso
men had belonged to both^irmies ? A. Some of them had. I
understood they belonged to the Confederate army, and they
stated they had belonged to tho United States army. I saw
them under the command of United States officers.
Q. Do you knoAV the reputation of Kirk in that countiy ? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. What is it ? A. It is bad.

TRIAL OF AVILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 1031
Q. In what respect ? A. His general reputation ia that of a
robber and murderer.
Q. Do you know that this man Wilson committed any otlier
outrages than the one you have referred to? A. Not of iny
own personal knowledge.
Re-cross Examination.
By Mr. Smith.
Q. Do you knoAV Col. Kirk personally ? I knoAV him when
I see him.
Q. Do you know what his reputation is among his neighbors ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Where does ho live ? A. Near Greenville, Tennessee.
Q. Hoav far from your residence ? A. I suppose between
75 and 100 miles.
Q. Do you knoAV what hia reputation ia among hia neighbors
75 miles dietant from you ? A. I know what is talked of
among them. I have hoard several speak of him. I have been
to Greenville, Tennessee, often where he lives.
Q. Wero you ever ot Joneeboro' ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Many times sinco Kirk has lived there? A. Yes, sir,
since ho has been living over there.
Q. Do you knoAV what hia reputation is among tho people
about Joneeboro' ? A. I havo heard his character spoken of.
Q. Do you knoAV hia general character and etanding among
tho peoplo at largo ? A. I don't knoAV only from those I have
hoard speak of hie character.
Q. Havo you heard enough spoken of him there to knoAV
Avhat the general opinion of liim is ? A. I have heard several
apeak of him. I do not know how many it would require to
mako up reputation.
Q. Have you been in that place for the last four or five
years ? A. Yes, sir, frequently.
Q. When last ? A. About a year ago.
Q. Is that the last time you have been there ? A. Yea, sir,
I think so.

1082 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Q. Wm Kirk thero thon f A. He wai not living in Jonos*
loro\ Q. Whore was he ? A, Somowhero noar Groonvlllo.
Q. You don't know whero ho was living? A. No, sir, I
novor Avas at his houso.
Q. You don't know thon what the opinion of his neighbors
is, bocauso you do not know whore he lives ? A. I never was
at his house.
Q. You never saw that? A. I never did.
Q. You do not kno n who his neighbors were at that time ?
A. I suppose men living eight or ten miles from him might be
regarded as his neighbors.
Q. But you do not know who were hia surrounding neigh
bors ? A. No, sir.
Q. And you don't knoAV that you ever heard them say any
thing about him? A. No, sir.
Q. Did he live in this state alnce the war? A. No, sir.
Q. Don't you know that he kept a store ? A. Directly after
tho Avar he had a store at Asheville, North Carolina.
Q. Do you know how long he kept that store ? A. I do not
know how long.
Q. Did he live in Asheville ? A. I think he Avas there in his
store. Q. Was his family there ? A. I do not know.
Q. Was that his residence ? A. I do not know.
Q. AVhat I desire to knoAV is whether the reputation which
you have spoken of was not based upon his conduct during the
AA'ar while ho was in command of a regiment — did you ever
hear anything to his prejudice outside of hia military opera
tions ? A. I don't knoAV that I have.
Q. (By Mr. Merrimon.) Waa ho a very notorious person /
A. He ia aaid to be.
Senator JAMES A. GRAHAM, a witness called on behalf
of the Managers, being duly sworn, testified as follows :
By Mr. Merrimon :

TRIAL OF AVILLIAM W, HOLDEN. 1088
Q, Look at tlil» papor, I now give you a printed copy of tho
muater roll of Kirk's command, nnd say how many porson*
aro namod thero who aro poraons of color ? A. I find tho
namo of Alfred Barnhlll, of tho town of Graham, Lovl Dickey,
I think ho la a colorod man, though I do not know him per
sonally ; I havo learned that he ifl a colored man.
Mr. SMITH. I Avould liko to enquire tho object of this
testimony. Mr. MERRIMON. To show that colored men were enlist
ed in the service whereas the act provides that the two races
Bhall be organized in different companies.
Mr. GRAIIAM. The militia law of North Carolina re
quires a separate organization for each of tho races.
Q. Do you find any others ? A. Levi Hurdlo is a colored
man and Anderson llarrell.
Mr. SMITH. These mon Avere volunteers, not members of
the militia.
Mr. GRAIIAM. Under our laAV the state cannot haA'e any
thing but militia.
Mr. SMITH. I think the statute which the gentleman refers
to speaks of the enrollment.
Q. Do you find any others ? A. Aleck Ruffin is a colored
man. These are all parties living -in the town of Graham, and
I have seen them in uniform with Colonel Kirk's troops.
Q. Do you notice any others which are put doAvn as men of
color ? A. There is ono otlier name — Edward Freeland. I
think that ho lives in the town ot Graham, but I am not
certain. Q. Is tho namo of Hark Ruffin there? A. No, sir, his
name is not here.
Cross examination waived.
ALEXANDER C. McALLISTER, a witness on behalf of
the Managers, being re-called, testified as follows :
By Mr. Merrimon.
Q. Do you knoAV of any colored men in the town of Graham

1034 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
who were members of Kirk's troops? A. I know' that Levi
Dickey. Anderson Harrell and Aleck Ruffin are colored men.
Q. Do you know a colored man of tho name of Hark
Ruffin? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did he servo in that army? A. Yes, sir, I recollect
seeing him in uniform. I do not know what capacity he served
in, but he was in uniform.
Mr. SMITH. I haA'e now found the militia law of 1868.
It is on page 35 of the laws passed at the special session of that
year. Section 7 reads as follows: "The white and colored
" militia shall be enrolled in separate and distinct companies
" and shall never be compelled to serve in the same companiea."
Mr. MERRIMON. Mr. Chief Juatice, tho managers rest
their caso for the proaont.
Mr. McCORKLE. Mr. Chiof Justico, tho prosecution having
announced that they have cloaod their caso for tho present, I
supposo, undor tho agreement that Avas mado somo tlmo ago, an
additional time will bogivon, after all tho ovidenco has boon pub
lished, to enable tho respondent's counsel to prepare to opon
thoir case. Tho printing of tho proceedings ia somo days in
arrears, and it will bo apparent to tho court that avo ought to
havo timo enough to look over the proceedings before Ave are
compelled to go into our defeneo, and I Avould suggest that
Avhen the court adjourns it adjourn to meet on Monday week.
In the meantime I will state that we have not our witnesses here,
having summoned veiy few whom we deemed to be material,
and it is essential, before we proceed to open the case, that avo
haA'e an opportunity to consult with the witnesses.
Mr. CONIGLAND. Mr. Chief Juatice, I desire to make a
brief statement in respect to the length of the recess of the court.
The court has exhibited to us all the courtesy that we could de
sire, and has acted with a very liberal spirit. Thirty days was
given the respondent in the first place to enable him to file his
answer, though, undoubtedly, that time was. as much required
by tho managers as by the respondent. The respondent could
not summon his "witnesses until the bill was passed by the leg-

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 1035
lature authorizing an appropriation for their pay, and he had
to await that event before he could summon any witnesses at
all. Whilst that matter was pending, another question arose
which prevented the respondent from summoning his witnesses
and that was in reference to the admission of evidence. Until
that was determined he could not know what witnesses to sum
mon. No doubt if the respondent is allowed a reasonable time
to make a preliminary examination of witnesses the time of the
trial Avill be materially shortened.
Mr. GRAIIAM. Mr. Chief Juatice, ono of the counsel for
tho respondent [Mr. McOorkle] spoke of an agreement which
was mado in reference to an adjournment. While I desire that
tho respondent should have all tho indulgonce consistent Avith
justico, yet I am not awaro of any agreement having been, en
tered into botwoeu counsol for any extended recess in the trial.
Mr. McCORKLE. What I had roforonco to was the agree
ment that tho proceedings should bo printed ovory morning
and laid upon tho desks of mombors and counsel.
Mr. GRAIIAM. That was an expectation but I am not
awaro that there was any agreement on tho part of the Mana
gers that there should be any lengthened adjournment.
Senator ROBBINS of Rowan. Mr. Chief Justice, I stated
several days ago that I should move, when tho case for the
managers was closed to allow the respondent two days to pre
pare for his defence. I am willing to extend the time and
make it three days and to that end I offer the following order :
Ordered, That the respondent be allowed until Thursday,
February 23d, to open his case.
Senator EDWARDS. While the court is discussing this
question I think, Mr. Chief Justice, that every person not a
member had better leave the chamber and allow the members
to decide the matter without anybody being present.
Senator ROBBINS, of Rowan. I do not think it necessary.
Senator MERRIMON. I think if the respective counsel
could agree upon the time, it would relieve the oourt of any
embarrassment in the matter.
67

1086 COURT OF IMPEACHMENTS.
Senator ROBBINS, of Rowan. Mr. Chief Justice, I think
tliat it is the business of the court to determine the matter.
Senator EDWARDS. I move that the court be cleared and
that nobody be allowed to be present whilst the subject ot the
adjournment is being considered.
Senator WORTH. I hope, Mr. Chief Justice, tliat we shall
have no secrets in reference to our action in this matter.
The CHIEF JUSTICE put the question on the motion of
Senator Edwards, and it was decided in the negative.
Senator WARREN. I would like to inquire, Mr. Chief
Juatice, of the counsel for the respondent the probable length
of time that they will consume in the examination of their
witnesses and what number they propose to examine.
Mr. McCORKLE. I really cannot tell. I have had the
management of the case ; thus far we have issued some thirty
subpocenas. Mr. MERRIMON. How many names in each subpoenas.
Mr. McCORKLE. I mean I have issued subpoenas for
thirty or forty witnesses. We may have to summon othera.
Senator WARREN. I move, Mr. Chief Justice, to amend
the order offered by the gentleman from Rowan, [Mr. Robbina]
by striking out Thuraday and inaert in lieu thereof Tuesday.
If, at that timo, the counsel for tho respondent think they
ought to have further time to enable them to open the case, I
for one would be willing to grant it. I do not seo that it is
necessary for tlieir opening that they shall havo the entire
printed proceedings on the part of tho managers. I suppose
that tho opening of tho case Avill consist of a statement of the
law and the facts on tlieir 6ide.
Senator ROBBINS, of Rowan. Mr. Chief Justice, I do not
think it is necessary that so short a time should be given aa is
proposed in the amendment and I inaiat upon the original
order. By taking a recess until Thursday, inasmuch as that
day will be mainly occupied by the opening of the case for the
respondent, it will give them practically four days to prepare
their proofs, and I ho'pe that that time will be allowed.

TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN. 1037
Mr. CONIGLAND. I deaire to say, Mr. Chief Justice, (and
I presume that credit will be given to my statement,) that wo
cannot with the number of -witnesses we have, be prepared to
open our case before Thursday next with justice to the interests
of the respondent we would like to have an adjournment till
Monday week, but we will be content with Thursday. I ani
satisfied that we cannot be ready any sooner.
Mr. McCORKLE. I will further state that our witnesses-
are not to be here till Monday, and that we will have no oppor
tunity to examine auy of them till then.
The CHIEF JUSTICE announced the question on the
amendment offered by Senator Warren.
A division being called for, t
The CHIEF JUSTICE put the question on the aioption of
the amendment, and it was decided in the negative ; but
Before the announcement of the decision,
Senator EDWARDS called for the yeas and nays,
A sufficient number seconding the call the yeas and nays
were ordered.
The Clerk proceeded to call the roll of Senators on the
adoption of the amendment, and it was decided in the negative
by the folloAving vote :
Those who voted in the affirmative, Avere :
Messrs. Adams, Albright, Cowles, Currie EdAvards, Gilmer,
Graham, of Alamance, Linney, Love, Mauney, Merrimon,
Skinner, Troy, Waddell and Warren — 15.
Those who voted in the negative, were :
Messrs. Allen, Barnott, Battle, Bellamy, Brogden, Brown,
Cook, Council, Dargan, Flomming, Ilyman, Jones, King,
Latham, McClammy, McCotter, Moore, Murphy, Norment,
Olds, Price, Robbins, of Davidson, Robbins, of Rowan, Speed,
Whiteside and Worth— 26.
Tho CHIEF JUSTICE then put the question on the adop
tion ot the order offered by Senator Robbins of Rowan, and it
was decided in the affirmative.
On motion of Senator Jones the court' adjourned to meet
on Thursday, February 23d, at 11 o'clock, a. m, ;

APPENDIX, NO. 2.

State of North Carolina,
To the Honorable Richmond M. Pearson,
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court :
The petition of Adolphus G. Moore respectfully showeth
unto your Honor, that he is a citizen of the county of Alamance
in said State ; that he on Friday morning, the 15th day of July,
A. D. 1870, In said county, at tho house of Thomas M. Holt,
ho waa arrested by a number of armed men purporting to bo
fioldlors and acting undor tho orders of ono Goorgo W. Kirk,
claiming te aot aa a military officer ; that ho was forced by said
armod persons to go to tho headquarters of tho said Goorgq
W. Kirk at Company Shops In said county ; that tho said
Kirk informed him that ho, the Baid Kirk, had ordered his
said arrest and detention and had done so by tho ordor of his
auperior officer — but ho did not state Avho his superior officer
was ; that he domanded to know for what cauae and by what
authority ho waa ao arrested and detained ; that no cause was
giA-en other than as aforesaid ; that petitioner is still so held
and detained and deprived of his liberty by the said George W.
Kirk, at Company Shops aforesaid ; that he is not aware of any
cause for his said arrest and detention ; that he is a peaceable
and law-abiding citizen and has committed no offence to his
knowledge; that there was no warrant or authority for his
arrest to his knowledge ; that he made demand for copies of
the process authorizing such arrest and received for reply what
he herein stated ; that said arrest is unlawful because made
without any lawful warrant or authority, and that the matter
2

14 TRIAL OF WILLIAM W, HOLDEN.
of said arrest has not beon examined and adjudged upon any
writ of habeas corpus heretofore granted.
May it pleas© your Honor to grant unto your petitioner tho
writ of habeas corpus, to be directed to the said George W,
Kirk, commanding him to forthwith produce your petitioner
before your Honor, together with any cause for such arrest and
detention, to tho end, your petitioner may be set at liberty and
enjoy his rights as a citizen of tho State.
(Signed) E. S. Parker,
and A. S. Merrimon,
Attorneys Jor Petitioner.
Sworn to and subscribed before me this 16th day of July,
A. D. 1870.
(Signed) W. II. Baoley, Clerk.
State of North Carolina,
E. S. Parker maketh oath, that he has Ireard read tho foregoing
t petition and knoAva tho facts therein stated te be substantially
true ; that aa attorney for said petitioner he saw the said Kirk
and demanded to knoAV by Avhat mithority said petioner Avaa1
bo held and ho gave substantially the grounds stated in tho
petition ; that he knows that said petitioner is bo held and
•detained by the said George W. Kirk, and without authority
other than as stated in said petition aa said Kirk so informed
affiant. E. S. Parkeh.
State of North Carolina,
Lot this writ issue as prayed for in the within petition,, at
at chambers. (Signed) R. M.Pearson,
Cliief Justice Supreme Court.
16th July, 1870. ,,,.,,

appendix. 15
State of North Carolina,
To Gicoroe W. Kiuk, greeting : —
Wo command you, that tho body of Adolphus G. Mooro,
being confined and detained in your custody, as it is said,
together with tho day and canso of his capture and detention,
whatever namo ho may be called, you havo before me, Rich
mond M. Pearson, Chiel Justico of the Supremo Court of tho
State aforesaid, at the Chamber of the Supremo Court in tho
city of Raleigli, immediately after tho receipt of this writ, to
do and receive Avhat shall be then and there considered of him
in this behalf.
Witness, Richmond M. Pearson, Chief Justice of tho Su
preme Court, this the 16th day of July A. D. 1870.
(Signed) R. M. Pearson,
Chief Justice Supreme Court.
It is admitted by the counsel for the respondent that tho
writ in tho case of A. G. Mooro was served by Mr. A. C.
McAllister, but not the legality of said service.
State of North Carolina,
At Chambers, Raleigh, July 18th, 1870.
To His Excellency W. W. Holden, Governor of North Carolina.
Sir: — I haA'o tho honor to enclose copies of four writs cf
habeas corpus — issued by mo to Col. Georgo W. Kirk, together
with affidavits setting out that Col. Kirk refused to make return
of the Avrits, and stating that ho made tho arreat by your order.
Aa Col. Kirk does not make return I do not feel at liberty to
assume the fact that he acted under your orders from the con
versation set out in the affidavits.
Please inform mo if Col. Kirk acted under orders from you
in making the arrests.
Very respectfully yours, &c.
(Signed) R. M. Pearson,
Chief Justice Supreme Court.

10 trial of william w. holden.
Executive Office,
Raleigh, July 19th, 1870.
To the Honorable Richmond M. Pearson :
Chief Justice of JV. C.
Sir: — Your communication of yesterday concerning the
arrests made by Col. Geo. W. Kirk, together with the inclos
ures is received.
I respectfully reply : That Col. Geo. W. Kirk, made the
arrests and now detains the prisoners named, by my order.
He was instructed firmly but respectfully to decline to deliver
the prisoners. No one goes before me, in respect for the civil
law, or for those whose duty it is to enforce it ; but the condi
tion of Alamance county and some other parts of the State
has been and is such that though reluctant to use the strong
powers vested in me by laAV, I have been forced to declare
them in a state of insurrection.
For months past there has been maturing in those localities
under the guidance of bad and disloyal men a dangerous secret
insurrection. I have invoked public opinion to aid me in
suppressing this treason. I have issued proclamation after pro
clamation to the people of the State to break up these unlawful
combinations 1 I have brought to bear every civil power to
restore peace and order, but all in vain I The constitution and
laws of the United States and of this State are set at nought ;
the civil courts are no longer a protection to life, liberty and
property ; asssassination and outrage go unpunished and the
civil magistrates are intimidated and are afraid te perform their
functions. To the majority of the people of these sections the
approach of night is like the entrance into tho valley of ths
shadow of death : the men dare not sleep beneath their roofs
at night, but abandoning their wives and little ones wander in
the woods until day.
Thus civil government was crumbling around me; I deter
mined to nip this new treason in the bud. By virtue of the

APPENDIX. 17
power vested in me by the constitution and laws, and by that
inherent right of self-pre6ervation which belongs to all govern
ments, I have proclaimed the County of Alamance in a state
of insurrection.
Col. George W. Kirk is commanding the military forces in
that County, made the arrests referred in the writ of habeas
corpus, and now detains the prisoners by my order.
At this time I am satisfied that the public interest requires
that these military prisoners shall not be delivered up to the
civil power.
I devoutly hope that tho timo may be short when a restora
tion of peace and order may release Alamance Oounty from
the presence of military force and the enforcement of military
law. When that time shall arrive, I shall promptly restore
the civil power.
(Signed) W. W. HOLDEN, Governor.
[After the reply of the Governor to tho communication of
the Chief Justice yesterday was read]
* Chief Justice Pearson said :
Before the argument opens, I will observe to the counsel —
the object of argument is to aid me in forming an opinion on
four questions of law : —
1. Do the facts set out by His Excellency show that Col.
Kirk had " a sufficient excuse" for not making return to the
writs of habeas corpus, so aa to relieve him from pains and
penalties of an attachment ?
2. Do the facts set out show an " insurrection," and a condi
tion of things putting the fives and property of our citizens in
such imminent peril as te suspend the writ of habeas corpus in
the counties subjected to military occupation ?
3. Suppose the writ not to be suspended. As in the present
condition of the counties it is highly probable, nay, in my
opinion, oertavn, that an order to tho sheriff of a county to call

18 JrRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN.
out " the power of the county" and, with force, take the peti
tioners out of the hands of the military authorities, will plunge
tho whole State into civil war, should not the Act of 1868-69
be so construed as to make it subservient to that clause of the
constitution which confers power on the Governor to call out the
militia to suppress riot and insurrection in counties where the
Governor has exercised this power, and taken military posses
sion? 4. If bo, should the writ be directed to the Governor ?
I ehall be pleased to hear argument on these subject's, as
questions of law, and will leave it to the good sense of counsel,
to decide whether an excited discussion, such as on yesterday,
Avill be calculated either to aid me in forming an opinion, or to
answer any other useful purpose.
[After argument of counsel, the Chiof Justice delivered hia
opinion, and ordered as follows :]
To David A. Wicker, Marshal of tho Supreme • Court :
You are hereby commanded, in tho name of tho State of
North Carolina, forthwith to bring Adolphus G. Moore—
Avherovor to bo found — boforo mo, Richmond M. Pearso&,
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, at tho room of tho Su
preme Court, in tho city of Raleigh.
Heroin fail not, have there this Avrit and mako due return,
July 23d, A870.
(Signed,) R. M. PEARSON,
Chief Justice Supreme Court.
Instructions : — You will Avait upon His Excellency the Gov
ernor, exhibit to him this Avrit, and a copy of the opinion in
" Moore's case," and mako return to me.
(Signed,) R. M. PEARSON, C. J. S. C.
On Saturday, 23rd inst., I delivered to His Excellency a
copy of the opinion in the case of Moore, and informed him
that I had a writ for tho body of Moore. His Excellency di-

APPENLIX. 19
rected me to call on this instant, he declined to deliver the
body, and handed me the Avithin communication for the Chief
Justice. ¦(Signed,) Daved A. Wicker, Marshal.
July 26th, 1870. Opinion.
Upon proof of service and the failure of Col. Kirk to return
the writ, tlie counsel of the prisoner submitted two motions : —
1 For an attachment against G. W. Kirk, for failing to make
return :
2 For a writ, to be directed to the sheriff of some county,
commanding him, with the power of the county, if necessary,
to take the prisoner out ot the hands of said Kirk, and have
him before the Chief Justice.
The fact of service and the failure to mako return was a suf
ficient foundation for theae motiona. But the affidavit sets out
further that G. AV- Kirk said " ho was acting under the orders
of Gov. Holden and should mako no return."
This extraneous matter if true, had in my judgment an im
portant bearing on tho pending motions, and not being at
liberty to assume it to bo truo on the verbal statement of Col.
Kirk, I addressed a communication to Ilia Excellency asking
te be informed if Col. Kirk had his orders. The purpose Avas
to havo the orders to Col. Kirk avowed or disavowed, and make
it a fixed fact one way or the other and to afford an opportunity
to his Excellency, if avowed, of setting out the ground of his
action, and of being heard by counsel. The cause of truth- is
always served by argument on both sides.
1 The main question, and one on which both motions depend,
is this : does the fact that the Governor had declared the county
of Alamance to be in a state oi insurrection, and had taken
military possession, have the legal effect to suspend the Avrit of
habeas corpus in that county ? If eo, the prisoner takes nothing
by either motion ; if otherwise, it , will, become necessary to
give them further consideration.

20 COURT of impeachments.
It was insisted by the counsel of the prisoner that the Gov
ernor's reply is no part of this proceeding, and cannot be
noticed. In my opinion it forms a part of the proceeding to
the extent of the avowal of the orders given to Col. Kirk (that
is in direct response to my inqniry) and of the fact that in the
exercise of the power conferred on him, he had declared the
county of Alamance to be in a stete of insurrection — taken
military possession and ordered the arrest and detention of the
petitioner as a military prisoner ; the action of his Excellency
is relevant for, if the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus be
suspended, the Avrit now sued for ought not to be awarded —
{exparte Tobias Watkins, 3 Peters, 193.) The Chief Justice
aaya : " The writ ought not to be awarded if the court is satis
fied that the prisoner would be remanded." This case is cited
and approved, {exparte MiUigan, 4 Wallace, III.)
His Excellency was also pleased to set out soaie of the special
facts that satisfied him that the civil authorities of the county
were unable to protect its citizens in the enjoyment of life and
property ; it is not mine to pasa upon theae facts or judge of
their sufficiency.
Mr. Badger, of couunsel for His Excellency, relied on the
constitution. " The governor shall be commander-in-chief, and
have power to call out the mihtia to execute the law, suppress
riots or insurrections and to repel invasion." Art. 12, sec 8,
and on the Statue 1869-70, chap. 27, seo. 1 — " The governor
is hereby authorized and empowered, whenever in his judge
ment the civil authorities in any county aro unable to protect
its citizens in the enjoyment of life and property, to declare
such county to be in a state of insurrection, and to call into
active service the militia of the state to such an extent as may
be necessary to suppress the insurrection "; and he insisted :
1. This clause of the constitution and the statute empowers
the governor to declare a county to be in a state of insurrection
whenever in his judgment the civil authorities are unable to
protect its citizens in the enjoyment of life and property. The
governor has so declared in regard to tlie county of Alamance

APPENDIX. 21
and the judiciary cannot call his action in question or review it,
as the matter is confided solely to the judgment of the gov
ernor. 2. The constitution and this statute confers on the governor
all the powers " necessary" to suppress the insurrection, and
the governor has taken military possession of the county and
ordered the arrest and detention of the petitioner as a military
prisoner. Tliis Avas necessary, for unlike othor insurrections it
is not open resistence but a novel kind ' of insurrection seek
ing to effect its purpose by a secret association spread over tho
country ; by scourging and other crimes committed in tho dark,
and evading tho civil authorities, by masks and fraud, perjury
and intimidation ; and that —
It follows, that the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, is
suspended in that county until the insurrection be suppressed.
I accede to tho first proposition ; full faith and credit aro duo
to the action of the governor in this matter because he is tho
competent authority acting in pursuance of the constitution
and tho law. Tho poAver, from its nature, must be exercised
in the executive, as in case of invasion or open insurrection.
The extent of the power is alono the subject of judicial deter
mination. As to the second, it may be that the arrest and also the de
tention of the prisoner is necessary, as a means to suppress tho
insurrection. But I cannot yield my assent to the conclusion ;
the means must be proper as well as necessary, and the deten
tion of tho petitioner as a military prisoner is not a proper
means. For it violates the declaration of rights.
" The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be
suspended." Constitution art. 1, sec. 21.
Thia is an express provision and there is no rule of construc
tion or principle of constitutional law, by which an express
provision can be abrogated and made of no force by an impli
cation from any other provision of the instrument. .
The clauses should be construed, so as te give effect to
each aud prevent conflict. This is done by giving to art. 12,

22 TRIAL OF WILLIAM W HOLDEN.
see. 8, the effect of allowing military possession of a county to
lio taken and the arrest of all suspected persons to be made by
military authority, but requiring by forco of art. 1, s<jc. 21, ,
tlio persons arrested, to be surrendered for trial, to the civil
authorities on habeae corpus, sliould they not be delivered over
Avithout tho writ.
This prevents conflict with the habeas corpus clause and
liarmomzes with the other articles of the " declaration of rights"
trial by jury," etc., all ot which have been handed down to us.
by our fathers and by our English ancestors as great funda
mental principles esaontial to the protection of civil liberty.
I declaro my opinion to bo, that tho privilogo of tho writ of
habeas corpus has not boon HiiBpondud by tlio action of hii
excellency j that tho governor has power undor tlio constitution
and laws to declare a county to bo in a Htato of insurrection, te
tako military possession, to order tho arrest of all suspoctcd
perflons, and to do all things necessary to suppress tho insur
rection, but ho has no poAvcr to disobey tho writ of habeas
corpus, or to order tho trial of any citizen otherwise than by
jury. According to the law of the land, such action would bo
in excess of hia power.
Tho judiciary haa power to declaro tho action of tho execu
tive na avoII as tho acta of tho gonoral assembly, whon in viola
tion of tlio constitution void and of no effect. Having eon*
coded full flilth mid credit to tho action of his oxoollonoy within
tho scope of tho power conferred on him, I fool assured ho will
In liko manner givo duo obaorvanco to tho law aa announced
by tho judiciary, Indeed ho cannot rofuao to do so, without
taking upon hluntoli tho rowponalblllty of acting on tho extreme
principle, " tho onfoty of tlio state is tho Biipromo law," I will
venture te hopo, as ovll ns tho times may bo our country lins
not yot reached tho point when a resort to extreme measures
has bocomo a public necessity.
2. The motion for an attachment against Col. Kirk is based
on tho habeas corpus aot, Acts 18fl8-'00, chap. 110, seo, 16 s
"If nny person on whom a writ of habeas corpus is lorvodihivll

APPENDIX. 28
refuse or neglect to oboy tho same by producing tho body, &c,
Avithin tho timo required, and no sufficient cause be shown, it
shall bo tho duty of the judge or court forthwith to issue an
attachment against such person to tho sheriff of any county in
the state, commanding him immediately to arrest such person
and bring him before tho judgo or court, and such person shall
bo comjnittod to jail, until he shall make return to the Avrit
and comply with any order that may be made in relation to the
party for avIioso relief tho writ shall have been issued."
Col. Kirk has refuaed to mako return. Tho question is, do
the facts before me " show a sufficient excuse ?"
Tho affidavit sets out that Col. Kirk put his refusal on the
ground that he had orders from his commander-in-chief who is
tho governor of the state, not to obey the writ. His Excel
lency avoAvs that Col. Kirk Avas acting under hia orders. ^' So,
we havo this case: Col. Kirk is commanded by the chief justice
to produce the body. He is ordered by his commander-in-
chief not to obey the writ. What AA'as the man to do ! He
elected to obey his orders. In my opinion there was sufficient
excuse for refusing to return the Avrit. The motion is not
alloAved. Tho act in question docs not rest ou the idea of punishing
for a contempt of the judge or court, but of compelling a return
to tho writ, and tho production of tho body. It is a substitute
for tho provision in tho old habeas corpus act which punished
tho officer or person refusing or neglecting to mako duo return
" upon conviction by indictment," with a fino of $500 for tho
first offence, of $1,000 and incapacity to hold office for the
second. Tho late act is an improvement on the former, by
substituting tho speedy remedy of attachment in place of indict
ment, and the severe punishment of imprisonment in place of
fine. Both acts aro evidently intended to puniah for not making
return and tho last ia alao intended for the immediate rolief of
the party in whoso behalf the writ is issued. The motion oi
punishment for a contempt of tho judge or court ia not involved
in either act, certainly not in that of 1868-'60 ; that is pro-

94 TRIAL OF WILLIAM W, HOLDEN,
vldod for by " the contempt aot," (samo session). Tlio proceed
ing is, by a rule to show cause why an Attachmont should not
issuo, And yot I was urged, with much vehemence, by learned
and agod counsel to rulo Col. Kirk up for a contempt of tho
chief justice iu this ; tho affidavit of service sots out that Col.
Kirk whon tho writ was sorvod said, " Toll thom such things
aro " played out," I havo my orders from Governor Iloldon
and shall not oboy tho writ." " I will suiTendor them on
Govornor Holden's ordor but not othorwiso, unless thoy sond a
HiitHoIout forco to whip mo," This, as was avoII said by Mr.
Badger, is tho language of a rudo soldier, and not as courteous
as wo usually find iu Judicial prooocdlngs, Tho motion for a
rulo to show cause for this contempt is not pertinent to tho
matter now on hand. Tho ovidenco on which it rests comes in
a questionable Bhapo — extranoous matter put into an affidavit
of sorvice to excite prejudice, and a motion made at the in
stance of one who is under arrest for the horrid crime of murder
by midnight assassination 1 At a time when, as Mr. Bragg
feelingly remarked, " we are in the last ditch, we look to tho
judiciary as our only hope. If that fails us, the country ia
gono 1 gone ! gone 1" I do not feel it to be my duty to leave
grave matters, and then turn aside to put a rule on a rude
soldier to show cause for making a flippant speech. I will bo
borne out by every member of the profession in saying, during
the thirty five years I have had the honor of a seat on tho
bench, I have never been slow to punish for contempt and
preserve the dignity of the court, when I believed there was an
attempt to assail it. I know my duty and trust I have firmness
enough to discharge it. These remarks seem called for because
of the earnestness with which the motion was presaed in
language more courtly but fully aa etrong as that used by the
rude aoldier, and the excited manner in which I was reminded
of my duty and exhorted to perform it ; nay, the oath of office
was read to me and I had the benefit of hearing read much of
the lofty language of Lord Mansfield.
3. The motion for a precept directed to the sheriff of some

APPENDIX. 25
county to bring the petitioner forthwith before me, and if nec
essary, to take with him the. power of the county, is based on
the 17th and' 18th sections of the habeas corpus acts.
" The court or judge may direct a precept to any sheriff,
coroner or other person, to be designated therein, commanding
him to bring forthwith before such court or judge the party
(wherever to bo found) for whose benefit tho writ of habeas
corpus shall havo boon granted." " In the execution of this
writ the sheriff or person designated may call out the power of ,
the county."
The petitioner is entitled to this writ ; the only question is,
to whom shall it be directed. The motion is that it should be
directed to the sheriff of some county.
I have considered the matter fully, and have come to the
conclusion not to direct it to a sheriff. The act gives a discre
tion. In the present condition of things, the counties of Ala
mance and Caswell declared te be in a state of insurrection
and occupied by military forces, and the public mind feverishly
excited ; it is highly probable, nay, in my opinion, certain, that
a writ in the hands of a sheriff (with authority to call out the
power of the county,) by which he is commanded with force,
if necessary, to take the petitioner out ot the hands of the
military authorities, will plunge the whole state into civil war.
If the sheriff demands the petitioner of Col. Kirk, with his
presont orders, he will refuse, and then comes war. The country
has had war enough. But it was said' by the counsel of the
petitioner, " if in the assertion of civil liberty, war comes, let
it come ! The blood will not be on your hands or on ours ; it
will be on all who disregard the sacred writ of habeas corpus.
Let justice be done if the heavens fall."
It would be to act with the impetuosity of youth and not with
the calmness of age, to listen to such counsels. "Let justice
be done if the heavens fall," is a beautiful figure of speech,
quoted by every one of the five learned counsel.
Justice must be done, or the power of the judiciary be exhaus
ted, but I would forfeit all claims to prudence tempered with firm-.

20 TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN,
ness, should I, without absolute necessity, add fuel to tho flame
and plungo tho country into civil war, provided my duty can bo
fully discharged without that awful consoquonce. Wisdom
dictates if justico can be dono "lot heavon stand." Unless tho
Govornor revokes his orders, Col. Kirk will resist ; that appears
from tho affidavit of service.
The second branch of the motion, that the powor of tho
county be called out if necessary, to aid in taking tho petitioner
by force out of the hands of Kirk, is as difficult of solution as
the first.
The power of the county or "posse comitatus," means the
men of the county in which the writ is to be executed; in this
instance CasAvell, and that county is declared to be in a stato of
insurrection. Shall insurgents be called out by the person who
is to execute the Avrit to join in conflict with the military forces
of the state ?
It is said a sufficient force will volunteer from other coun
ties ; they may belong to the association, or be persons who
sympathize with it. But the "posse comitatus " must come
from the county where the writ is to be executed ; it would bo
illegal to take men from other counties. This is settled law ;
shall illegal means bo resorted to in order to execute a writ ?
Again ; every able bodied man in the t tate belongs to the
militia. The governor is, by the constitution, " Commander-
in-Chief of the militia of the State," art. 13, sec. 8. So the
power ot the county ia composed of men who are under the
command of the governor; shall these men be required to
violate with force, the orders of their commander-in-chief, and
do battle with his other forces that are already in the field 1
In short, the whole physical power of the state is by tho con
stitution under the control of the governor; the judiciary has
only a moral power ; by the theory of the constitution thero
can be no conflict between these two branches of the govern
ment. „ : '
The writ will be directed to the marshal of the supreme
court with instructions te exhibit it, and a copy of this opinion,

appendix. 27
to his oxcellonoy, tho governor. If ho ordors tho petltoner to
bo delivored to the marshal, woll ; if not, following tho oxnm-
plo of Chief Justico Taney, in Merriman's case, (Annual
Cyclopoedia for the year 1861, page 555,) I havo discharged my
duty; the power of the judiciary is exhausted, and tho responsi
bility must reet on the executive.
(Signed,) Pearson.
Executive Department of North Carolina,
Ealeigh, July 26th, 1870. «
To tlie Honorable R. M. Pearson,
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of North Carolina:
Sir : — I have had the honor to receive, by the hands of tho
Marshal of the Supreme Court, a copy of your opinion in the
matter of A. G. Mooro ; and the Marshall has informed me ot
the writ in his hands for the body of said Moore, now in tho
custody of my subordinate officer Col. Georgo W. Kirk.
I have declared the counties of Alamance and Caswell in a
state of insurrection and have taken military possession ofthem —
this your Honor admits I have the power to do " under the
constitution and laws," and not only this, but " to do all
tilings necessary to suppress the insurrection " including the
power to " arrest all suspected persons " in the above men
tioned counties.
Your Honor haa thought proper also to declare that the
citizens of the counties of Alamance and Caswell are insurgents,
as the result of the constitutional and lawful action of the
Executive and that, therefore, you will not issue the Avrit of
for the production of the body of Moore to any of the men of
of the said counties, that the posse comitatus must come from
the county where the writ is to be execnted," and that any
otlier means te enforce the writ would bo illegal.
I have official and reliable information that in the counties
above named during the last twelve months, not less than one
hundred persons "in the peace of God and the State," havo

28 TRIAL OF AVILLIAM W. HpLDEN.
been taken from their homes and scourged mainly, if not
entirely, on account of their pohtical opinions ; that eight
murders have been committed, including that of a Btate senator,
on the same account ; that another state senator has been com
pelled from fear for his life to make his escape to a distant
state. I have reason to believe that the governments of the
said counties have been mainly, if not entirely in the hands of
men who belong to the Kuklux Klan, whose members have
perpetrated the atrocities referred to ; and that these county
governments have not merely omitted to ferret out and bring
to justice those of this Klan who have thus violated the law, but
that they have actually shielded them from arrest and punish
ment. The state judicial power in the said counties, though in
the hands of energetic, learned and upright mon, has not been
able to bring criminals to justice ; indeed it is my opinion,
based on facts that have come to my knoAvledge, that tlie life
of tho judge whoso duty it is te ride the circuit to which the
said counties belong, has not been safe, on account of the hatred
entertained towards him by the Klan referred to, because of
his wish and purposo to bring said criminals to justico. For,
bo it known to your Honor, that thoro is a wldo spread and
formidable secret organization in this state, partly political and
partly social in its objects; that this organization is known,
first, as " Th Constitutional Union Guard /" secondly as
" The White Brotherhod;" thirdly as " The Invisible Em
pire" — that the members of this organization are united by
oaths which ignore or repudiate the ordinary oaths or obliga
tions that rest upon all other citizens to respect the laws and
to uphold the government ; that these oaths inculcate hatred
between the two races that inhabit this State ; that the mem
bers of this Klan are irreconcilably hostile to the great princi
ples ot pohtical and civil equality on which the government of
this Stete has been reconstructed; that these Klans meet in
isecret, in disguise, with arms, in uniform of a certain kind in
tended to conceal their persons and their horses, and te terrify
those whom they assault, or among whom they move; that

APPENDIX. 29
they hold their camps in secret places, and decree judgment
against tlieir peaceable fellow-citizens, from mere intimidation
to scourging, mutilations and murder, and that certain persons
of the klan are deputed to execute these, judgments ; that when
the members of this Klan are arrested for violations of law, it
is most difficult to obtain bills of indictment against them, and
still more difficult to convict them ; first, because some of the
members, or their sympathizers, are almost always on the grand
and petit juries, and secondly, because Avitnesses avIio are mem
bers or sympathizers unblushingly commit perjury to screen
tlieir confederates and associates in crime; that this klan thus
constituted, and having in view the objects referred to, is very
poAverful in at least twenty-five counties of the state, and haa
had absolute control, for the Inst tAVclvo months, of the counties
of Alamanco and Caswell.
Under these circumatancoa I avouM havo been recreant to
duty and faithless to my oath, if J had not oxcrciaod the power
in the aaid counties which your honor haa been pleased to say
I havo oxcrciaod constitutionally nnd hiAvfully; especially as
since October, 1808, I haA-o repeatedly, by proclamation and
by letters, invoked public opinion to repress those evils, and
Avam criminals and offbndora against the laAV of the state that
must in the end overtake them if under the cloak of tho klan
referred to, they ehould persist in their course.
I be" to assure your honor that no one subscribes moro
thoroughly than I do to the great principles of habeas corpus
and trial by jury. Except in extreme cases in which, beyond
all question, " the safety of the state is the supreme laAA'," these
privileges of habeas corpus and trial by jury should be main
tained. I have declared that, in my judgment, your honor and all
tbe other civil and judicial authorities are unable at this time
to deal with the insurgents. The oivil and the militaiy aro
alike constitutional powers ; the civil to protect life and
property when it can, and the military only when the civil
power has failed.

80 THUL OF WILLIAM W HOLDEN.
As tho ohief exeoutive I seek to exeoute, not to mbvert the
judicial power.
Your honor has done your duty and in perfeot harmony
with you I seek to do raine.
It is not I, nor the military power that has supplanted tho
civil authority ; that has boon done by the insurreotion in the
counties referred to. I do not soo hoAv I can restore tho oivil
authority until I "suppress the insurreotion," which your
honor declares I have the powor to do ; and I do not soo how
I can surrender tho insurgents to tho oivil authority until that
authority iB restored. It would be a mookery in me to declare
that tho oivil authority Avas unable to proteot the citizens
against the insurgents and thon turn the insurgents over to
the civil authority.
My oath to support the constitution makes it imperative on
me to, " suppress the insurrection," and restore the civil power
in the counties referred to, and this I must do. In doing this
I roneAv to your honor expressions of my profound respect for
tho civil authority, and my earnest wish that this authority
may soon bo rostored to evory oounty and neighborhood in
tho stato. 
I have the honor to be,
With great respect,
Your obedient servant,
(Signed) W. W. Holden, Governor.
On the 27th July, the council for the petitioners moved :
1. For an attachment, or rule to show cause, against the
governor for not making a sufficient return to the writ of
habeas corpus ;
2. If that be not proper, then for a like attaohment or rule
against George W. Kirk ;
8, That the marshal of tho supremo oourt be direotod to
proceed fuvthor in tho oxooution of tho writ direotod to him,
to bring tlie body of the prisoner before him.

APPENDIX. 81
OPINION.
Tho first motion is refused : The chief justico of the
suprorao oourt has no poAver under tho habeas corpus aot, to
order tho arrest of the governor of the stato.
The second motion is refused : It has been adjudicated by
me, that Col. Kirk had a reasonable excuse, his orders having
been avowed by the governor.
The third motion is refused : It would be an idle form to
require the marshal to go to the camp of Col. Kirk and mako
a demand, as the governor has taken upon himself the respon
sibility of declining to produce the body of the petitioner. In
Stacefs case, 10 Johnson, 327, Chancellor Kent, on the return
to a writ of habeas corpus directed to Gen. Lewis, held the
return : " the party is not in my custody," to be insufficient,
and that it should have been: "the party is not in my
custody, or under my control." The custody of a subordinate
is the custody of a superior.
The petitioner, if it will serve his purposo of applying to
the chief justice of the supreme court of the United States for
a writ of habeas corpus as was suggested by his counsel — may
take the fact to be, that the marshal proceeded to the camp
of Col. Kirk, and informed him of the writ, and that Col.
Kirk relied on his orders and refused to deliver the body of
the petitioner.
(Signed,) Pearson.
State of North Carolina,
To th Honorable Richmond M. Pearson,
Chief Justice of th Supreme Court of North Carolina.
Tho potition of John Korr, Samuel P. Hill, N. M. Roan,
Robort Roan, F. A. Wiloy, James 0. Williamson, William B.
Bowo, Yancoy Jones, A. G. Yancoy, Thomas J. Womack, Jas.

82" TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN.
R. Fowler, J. 0. Griffith, A. A. Mitchell, J. T. Mitchell, M.
Z. Hooper, John McKee, J. M. Neal, Barzillia Graves —
Respectfully showeth unto your honor that they are each
citizens of tho county of Caswell in said state; that on Friday
lhe 18th day of July, A. D. 1870, while each of them was
about hia lawful busineas and in no Avay violating the laws of the
land, ho Avas arrested by a body of armed men purporting to act
tho command of one Geo. W. Kirk, who claimed to act as a
miiitarv officer ; that thoy were each delivered by said body of
armed men into the custody of tho said George W. Kirk, and
ho gave them to understand that thoy were arreetcd by hia
order ; that tho aaid Ceo. W. Kirk now haa your petitioners in
hia custody and holda and deprives them of their liberty in the
court houso in Yanceyville in aaid county ; that thoy deman
ded to know by Avhnt authority each had been arrested, and
no authority avub given ; that thoy are each informed that no
Avarrant or legal process isaucd by any lawful officer, or indeed
any ono commanding thoir arrest; that their aaid arrest was
without authority of Iiiav ; that thoy, each speaking for
himself, any that they aro not iiAvnro of any cause for Btieh
'ituuI ; that they aro civil and liiAV-abldlng citizens } that said
arrest avub without warrant or authority; that such arrest and
detention ia illegal because mado Avithout any laAvful precept
and for no alleged oft'onco or any oft'enco ao far aa petitioners
know ; that the matter of their eaid arrest has not been exam
ined and adjudicated upon any Avrit of habeas corpus hereto
fore issued to the knowledge of your petitioners ; that each of
your petitioners has been so arrested and is so detained by tho
eaid George W. Kirk and deprived of his liberty and against
his Avill ; that said arrest wast mado without cause so far as
each knoAvs and without any process oflaAv.
In consideration of the premises, may it please your honor
to grant unto each of your petitioners the writ of habeas corpus,
to bo directed to the said George W. Kirk, commanding him
to produco each of yonr petitioners before your honor,
together with the cause of such arrest and detention, to tho end

APPENDIX. 33 I
that each of your petitioners may be restored to his rights aitd
liberties as a citizen of the state. '
(Signed) Bragg, Battle, Moore & Merrimon,
Attorneys for Petitioners.
State of North Carolina,
Wake County.
Emory B. Holden, Attorney for the petitioners named in
the foregoing makes oath that he has heard read the said
petition ; that he saw the said petitioners in the custody
of the said George W. Kirk, in the Court House at
Yanceyville and knoAvs that the said Kirk so holds and detains
each of said petitioners ; that ho verily belioA'es that tho facts
stated in tho petition aro substantially truo as stated ; that ho
knows tho petitioners and learned tho facta as stated from actual
observation and Avhat ho hoard from them and others.
(Signed) E. B. HOLDEN.
Sworn and subscribed boforo mo tho 21st day of July, A, D.
1870. (Signod) S. D. HARRISON, J. P.
Writs of habeas corpus Avero issued by Chief Justico Pearson
in tho namo of the sovoral parties named in tho petition — the
one in the name of John Kerr ia as folloAva — and the othera
are indentical, changing the name only, and like returns are
made upon each of them.
State of North Carolina,
To Geohoe W. Kirk— Greeting:
We command you, that tho body of John Kerr boing con
fined and detained in your custody, as it is said, together with
the day and causo of his capture and detention, by whatever
name he may be called, you have before mo, Richmond M.
Pearson, chief justice of the supreme court of the Btate afore
said, at the chamber of the supreme court in the city of

84 TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN.
Raleigh, immediately after the receipt of this writ, to do and
receive what shall be then and there considered iu his behalf.
Witness, Richmond M. Pearson, chief justice of the supremo
court, this the 23d day of July, A. D., 1870.
(Signed,) R. M. Pearson,
Chief Justice Sup. Court.
David A. Wicker, marshal of the supreme court, is hereby
authorized and commanded, forthwith to make service of this
writ on G. W. Kirk as provided by law in such cases, and
make return, how he has executed the same, at Raleigh.
(Signed,) R. M. Pearson,
Chief Justice Sup. Court.
July 30th, 1870.
I executed the within writ by leaving a copy thereof with
George W. Kirk, at the court house in Yanceyville, Caswell
county, N. 0., this first day of August, 1870.
(Signed,) David A. Wioker, Marshal.
Head Quarter's 2d Reg't N. 0. S. T.
Camp Holden, Yanceyville, N. C,
August 1st, 1870.
I respectfully reply to the service of the writ in the case of
John Kerr, Samuel P. Hill, Jesse C. Griffith, F. A. Wiley, J.
T. Mitchell, Thomas J. Yomack, A. G. Yancey, John McKee
A. A. Mitchell, Yancey Jones, J. M. Neal, W. B.JBowe, Bar-
zillia Graves, N. M. Roan, Robert Roan, James R. Fowler, M.
G. Hooper, James 0. Williamson and Peter H. Williamson,
that I hold the prisoners under orders from W. W. Holden,
governor and commander-in-chief of militia.
(Signed) GEO. W. KIRK,
Col. Com'd U Reg't N. C. S. T.

APPENDIX. 85
At Chambers, Aug. 2d, 1870.
John Kerr, exparte.
On tho return of tho marshall, Mr. Battle submitted two
motions :
1. An attachment against G. W. Kirk for not making a
Buffiient return.
2. A writ to some competent person to bring the body and
call out the power of the county, if necessary.
The first motion not allowed. The objection, that the
return/ as the counsel terms it, is not sworn to, and other objec
tions taken, are not relevant, for this does not purport to be a
return, but a refusal to make return by the order of the
governor. Treating it as a refusal, the motion is not allowed for the
reasons set out in the opinions delivered by me. I can say no
more than what I have already said : The power of the
judiciary is exhausted — I have no posse comitatus: In this
particular, my situation differs from that of Chiet Justice
Taney, in " Merrimon's case." He had a posse comitatus, at
his command — but considered the power of the judiciary
exhausted, without calling it out. He did not deem it his duty
to command the marshal Avith the possse, " to storm a fort."
It is gratifying to be able to say that the other justices have
been in unreserved conference vrith me, and all concur in the
habeas corpus proceedings.
(Signed) R. M. PEARSON, Ch. J. S. C.
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT,
State of North Carodina,
Raleigh, Aug. 15th, 1870.
To th Honorable R. M. Pearson,
Chief Justice Supreme Court of North Carolina:
Dear Se* : In my answer to the notices served on me by the
marshal of the supreme court, in tho matter of Adolphus G.

36 TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. HOLDEN.
Moore and others exparte, I stated to your honor, that at that
time the public interest forbade me to permit Col. Geo. W.
Kirk to bring before your honor the said parties ; at the same
timo I assured your honor that as soon aa the safety of the state
should justify it, I would cheerfully restore the civil power and
cause the said parties to be brought before you, together with
tho cause of tlieir capture and detention.
That time has arrived, and I have ordered Col. George W
Kirk to obey the Avrits of habeas corpus issued by your honor.
As the number of prisoners and Avitnesses is considerable,
I would suggest to your honor that it would be more con
venient to make return to the writ at the capitol in Raleigh. .
Col. Kirk is prepared to make such returns as soon as your
honor shall arrive in Raleigh.
With great respect,
Your obedient servant,
W. W. HOLDEN, Governor.
Raleigh, Aug. 18th, 1870.
To His Excellency Gov. Holden :
Dear Sir : — Your communication of the 15th inst, was
handed to me by Mr. Neathery. I Avill be in the supreme
court room at 10 o'clock, a. m., inst., to receive the return
by Col. Kirk, of the bodies of A. G. Moore and others, (in
Avhose behalf writs of habeas corpus have heretofore been is
sued here,) together with the cause of their arrest and deten
tion. Receiving the return after the delay to which you allude, of
the several weeks, is not to be taken as concurring on my
part in the necessity for the delay, or as assuming any por
tion of the responsibility in regard to it.
The entire responsibility rested on you. I was unAvilling
to plunge the State into a civil war upon a mere question of
time. "W ith great respect, your ob't servant,
(Signed) R. M. PEARSON, 0. J. S. 0,

APBENLIX. 37
At Chambers, August 18th, 1870.
To the Honorable R. M. Pearson.
Chief Justice of North Carolina :
In the matter of the several petitions of John Kerr, Samuel
P. Hill, N. M. Roan, Robert Roan, F. A. Wiley and others,
for writs of habeas corpus, your honor having stated in tho
opinions filed in the several cases bearing date Aug. 2nd, 1870,
that your power was exhausted ; and the said petitioners, in
consequence thereof, deeming themselves without remedy from
the judiciary of the state, and having obtained writs of habeas
corpus from Hon. G. W. Brooks, judge of the district court of
the United States for the district of North Carolina, returnable
before him at chambers, in Salisbury, this day, as counsel for
the said prisoners, and on behalf of our associate counsel we
respectfully ask leave for the eaid prisoners respectively to
withdraw their said petitions ; and we do hereby abondon fur-
therjproceedings under the writs in their several cases.
(Signed) W. H. Battle & Sons,
CounBel for the Petioners.
OPINION.
At Chambers, Aug. 19th, 1870.
The motion on the part of the prisoner to enter a nolle prose
qui or retraxit, ia allowed. The proceeding has taken a turn
for which my experience, and the labor of the learned counsel,
furnish no precedent.
1. Upon a "common sense" view of the question, I can see
no reason why the prisoner if so advised, should not be allowed
to withdraw his application.
2. The Attorney General, anticipating the course that would
be taken on the part of the prisoner, had applied for and ob
tained a bench warrant. Thia cuts off all collateral questions,
and reduces the matter to this ; if probable cause can be made
out on the part of the Stete, I shall commit the prisoner for
trial in the due course of law ; if probable cause be not shown,
I shall discharge him.
4

38 TRIAL OF WILLIAM W, HOLDEN.
I hope it is not necessary, but from what I see in the news
papers, I think proper to say that I enter upon this investiga
tion, of the question of " probable cause " vrith an eye eingle
to truth and justice.
3. It was said by Mr. Battle, of counsel for the prisoner,
that upon information I was obliged to take notice of the fact
that the prisoner had made application to his honor, Judge
Brooks, for a Avrit of habeas corpus, which his honor had
granted. That is true, but I am so entirely satisfied that his
honor has no jurisdiction to pass upon a charge of murder,
and to bind prisoners over for a trial before the state courts,
that I take the responsibility of proceeding on this bench war
rant, without fear of any conflict of jurisdiction.
The prisoner is now out of the hands of the military, and in
the hands of the civil authority, and will be dealt -with accord
ing to laAV.
Noav Ave have plain sailing ; if there be " probable cause "
against the prisoner, let the state prove it.
No more need be said about the manner in which the mili
tary Avas organized, or about a traverse of the fact declared
by his Excellency, that the county of CasAvell was in astate
of insurrection.
State op North Carolina,
Office of Clerk of Supreme Court,
Raleigh, January 30th, 1871.
I hereby certify that the foregoing are true copies of the
original papers, in cases of habeas corpus disposed of at Cham
bers by Chief Justice Pearson, growing out of military arrests
during the months of July and August, 1870, said papers
having been filed with me for safe keeping by his honor the
Chief Justice
In witness whereof I hereto set my hand, at office at the
date aforesaid. Wm. H. BAALEy, Clerk.

3 9002 00590 6616