The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1849-12-30

~.
INJUNCTION OF SECRECY IN THE PARKSAN CASE
The Policy OF DEsPoTIsM-Sin the injunc-
ton Of secrecy was laid by the Coroner of Boston
on the jury Of inquest in the Parkman case, we
have had frequent occasion to differ from that wor-
thy functionary, on the propnety of his course of
action. The main argument alleged In favor OF
secrecy has been, that, by making the facts
brought out public property, the mind of the COM
muniy would be prejudiced, and no impartial hear
ing could be had when the case came to trial.
Now, it would not be difficult to show that this
reasoning Is utterly without foundation even were
there no historical precedents to argue from. For
the commonest readers of the annals of despotic
governments know that, under the same plea, ty-
ranny has in all ages sought justification for its
deeds Of cruelty and blood Even as far back as
old Rome, her courts OF justice were never held
in secret until the integrity Of the republic de-
stroyed. To go back still iurther-it is known to
all scholars that the practice Of all oriental nations
from the time Of the founder of the Hebrew ma
ton, has been to administer justice at the gates of
cities. No privacy was admitted in the invcstlga-
ton Of crime. 1t was conceded that Ia every trial
for crime or breach of the civil laws, the indicted
man had the right of a public examination
and public trial. Impaitality, it was conceived,
was more likely to be secured by pablo than pri
vate proceedings. This was the law of reason
and common sense, and the experience of all ma
tons has confirmed the opinion. IL was practice,
too, which the earlier nations adhered to with as
much earnestnes and tenaciiy as the Angle. Saxons
insisted on the right of public trial by jury. The
same spirit Is manifest in the English and Ameri-
can nations, in all their Judicial proceedings.
Nothing exces more suspicion Of unfair play, than
secrecy; and in judicial matters IT Is seldom called
for. We have said that secrecy in such proceed
ings Is the policy of despotsm-and we will prove
it. Our readers are familiar with the fact, that in
every tyrannica government of the world, the
doings of courts of justice in all criminal cases
the so-called court martial which condemned King
Muret to death, after he had landed on the shores
of his once loyal Naples Such was the case with
the criminal tribunals Of the republic of Venice;
Qt should, during the two last centuries Of Its ex.
lstence, have been called the olgarchy Of Venice)
We have all heard of the Council Of Ten, which so
long held its bloody sway over the lives and for
tunes of that elegant but unfortunate people. All
the proceedings of that terrible council were con-
Quoted in secrets and what was the consequence
Not man in Venice could go to sleep at night,
with any certainty that his sumbeis would not be
disturbed by the rufan hand of the spy the exc
cutioner. No illustrations are drawn from history,
more terrible than from the bloody records of the
republic OF Venice Ten men ruled that devoted
city with a rod of iron. II "a great or an obscure
citizen disappeared suddenly, no one knew whe-
ther he had been sunk in the lagoons, or slowly
tortured to death in the prison Of the Bridge of
Sghs. All that was known of HIM was, that he
suddenly disappeared!
Even to this day, secrecy has been the grand
adjunct of despotism in every part of Europe,
where tyrants have held sway. Ii was only ten
days before Pho Mono was Unexpectedly elevated
to the throne of the Catholic world that the Jesuit
inquistion held its midnight tribunals under the
Collegio della Propaganda Of Rome, over men
charged with republican tendencies, and one by
one, the noblest and the best men of Rome werc
put to the torture, and slowly racked to death.
Privacy of judicial proceedings has always been
the policy Of despotisms. Tyrants have always
loved darkness rather than light, because their
deeds were evil.
But il does seem strange, that IN our own Ame-
rican republic, where publicity in judicial trials
has, from the beginning. been the svowed policy Of
the repsblic, and one Of the rights Of citizens so
new, and we must say, so dangerous a principle
should be adopted, of conducting criminal TRIAL
IN the privacy Of a court ROOM Some special and
very apparent reason should be adduced in JUS
tiGcahon Of practice which has hitherto been re-
sorted TO only by the disciples of despotism.
The alleged justification in the Parkman case
was, that privacy would leave the public mind free
from prejudice, while to divulge the evidence eli
cited, would create prejudice, and render an i'm
partial trial less probable. Anything might be
good reasoning, if 1t were not evidently false.
Secrecy has been observed-nominally at least
and yet thousands of journals printed in this
Try furnished overwhelming evidence that no Sc
crecy can be observed in SO exciting case, where
all the passions Of the popular mind are so deeply
stirred.
In proof this, we have only to allude to the vari-
Gus rumors that have been aloat since the Co
roners jury sat for the investigation. One by one,
portions of the evidence have leaked out, and
when no more could be got at, il was invented.
In the absence Of clear history Of the examnl-
ton, the fancy of the public amuses itself with In
venting and imagining facts, some of which are
Ingenious and probably true. But 10 the mean
time, still deeper and more unconquerable preju-
dice is raised throughout the country against Pro-
fessor Webster. So far from believing that, by
keeping the facts away from the public, impartiali-
! ,y will be gained, IT Is just the way to render it
impossible. The only cure for prejudice Is truth.
Il useless to say that the facts We have the
more shall be prejudiccd. The contrary hap
pens 10 be the case, exactly; aud the Coroner Of
Boston will make the discovery before this case is
fully disposed 81.
| Our Key west CORE. pcndepcc
- XIV wrsr, Dee. 81 Isto.