Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1841-1853, 1850-11-14

of mine can be instrumental fastening permanent
y upon the country. was gratifed to hear the gen.
teman from Tippecanoe Mr. Pcttit) speak with his
customed holiness of the sessions of the Senate
of the United States With due Difference to that illus
riOus body, must say that when, this middle of the
nineteenth century, and in this country of all others
EARTH they 20 into secret session. upon any subject i'm
portan or unmporant, feel for such act little
respect than should feel for sixty hooded monks
of the middle ages, sitting among the Holy lnqu-
stOn. hold that great and free people SHOULD do
nothing which they ashamed afraid do openly
and in the face Of all the world. Sir such things
all in conflict with the spirit of this age. desire that
whatever affects the rights of the citizen the welfare
Of the body polite should be open the light of day
But has been said that secrecy is necessary to pre-
the escape of parties accused. 1t is undoubted
fact that in out Of ten OF the graver offences
in which indictments found and convictions result
the accused party is already in Jail recognizance
when the Grand Jury But if there is danger of
escape he is subject be arrested at any moment;
the affidavit of any prosecuting witness before mag
strate And speaks much in favor of the law-abding
character OF the American people, that cases OF crime
rare, when there is ready to aid in bringing
the offender to justice.
1t has been argued elsewhere if not here, that if the
seal of secrecy removed from proceedings before
Grand Juries, will be preiudged in the public
mind. that impartial jury cannot he had
Ii is a sufficient to such argument that IN
very large majority of cases, at present, public
aninations DO take place, before committing magis-
trates, without any essential effect upon the final trial
We cannot If would, keep from the public ear the
gentlemen say reform the system in this respect
Sir, do away with its secrecy. and you strike fatal
blow at its distinctive feature, the principle
which underies it all, and which is involved in its very
name.
But, there is to my mind, another objection almost
equally insurmounable 1t is the strictly pGrfe char
of the proceeding before Grand Jucs They are
all behali oil the crown State, and none but the
counsel for the awocer of the State, ad
mited the conclave while the jurors themselves are
bound to keep them to the end of their lives The
party accused is not only denied the privilege OF being
present, in person by COUNSEL hut is kept profoundly
ignorant Of that which seriously involve his liberty
life. hold sir, that this is all wrong and lnconsist-
ent with the highest rights of the citizen or the most
udicious administration of the laws. hold. SIR that
there is being who the human form, posses
the attributes Of our common humanity. who should
he treated in such However STEPPED In niamy,
and stained with crime, wonld permit him in all stages
of prosecution to he confronted with his accuscrs and
the witnesses against lin face to face, with the
privilege of crosseXamnaton. Then be may elicit facts
IN his excuPatOn, and II witnesses, ipon his hnal trial.
make statements in conflict with their evidence upon
the first examination he has the power t. prove it.
Such privilege should never be withheld. The State
afford to he manly and generous and to give to the
poor cuprt every opportunity to show that he ought not
to b2 condemned
The gentleman from Cass has well argued that man
should he accused without the consent of his peers.
meet the gentleman on lis own ground. and even 90
much further contend. only, that he should not
he put upon trial in criminal proceeding without the
consent of his peers but that the accusation should not
he preferred upon parte examination,
in session. and where he and his counsel for
hidden 10 inrnde. How such plan can be less mercl
ful or Just, than the SYSTEM am wholly
bic to ina CINE
As has been forciby remarked by the gentleman from
Tppccanoe, Grand Jures, at present ORGANIZED, are
often the vehicle for personal animoses. Petty malice
would shrink from the face of day. while the honest pu
pose to bring offender to justice, would ask no con-
cealment.
The gentleman from Cass has referred with propriety
and effect, to a case coming under bis observation,
in which recognized by Justice Of the peace
through the influence of popular prejudice, the complaint
being dismissed by the Grand Jury. am lar from de-
nyng the Grand Jury all merit. II true, that nd
vdual do settle principles, establish rules
but they help illustrate their truth and propety
In contrast with the instance spoken of y the gentleman
from Cass, | may be permitted to mention two cases
within my own knowledge, of strikingy opposite
character, from that related by him.
At the LAST Spring term, OF the Marshall Circuit
Court was employed 10y an aged man. Just as the cause
called for trial defend him against indictment
for a common assault and battery. On reading the in
dicmen, noticed that the sirnames Of the defendant,
and prosecuting witness were the same. | asked my
client if they relatives He replied that the pros
ment why 1t was not reconced, and why they permit
ted such to come into court. He SAID that his
son did not wish prosecute it, bat that he COM
PEELED to do it. On inquiry of bis sOn-a man some for
ty years of age-these statements confirmed
also learned that previous hill of Indictment had been
found TOR the offence, but was quashed Tor some IN
lOrmalty IN the empannelllng oil the Granu jury.
stated the facts the Court and called them to
order ROlie proSeq be entered in the case which,
as thought was very properly done.
among the records of of the northern
counties OF this State that one OF the best citizens oil
that regiona some fifty years of age whose char
for integrity and moral worth among his neigh
bOrs Is and ALWAYS has heen as far above reproach as
that of who walks this footetool indicted
for perjury In order that the might be disposed of
without delay he consented TO into court aud sit
quietly by without utterng word in his defence, eth
they heard the evidence only for the prosecution and
they acquitted the accused they could not fail TO do,
without dissenting voice, and without moments hes
taton. The defendant Lad been long known in older
portion Of this State and assure you sir that there
living who entertain shadow of doubt,
to his innocence. will add that believe the prosecu-
ting witness was an honest man, but acting under the In
fuence of temporary excitement and prejudice, from
which, even good men not always free.
In saying this, sir, would not disparage the Grand
Jurors themselves. / claim that there is more
otened portion Of the West than that part of Indiana
which it is my fortune reside j respect the Grand
Jures Of that region of country. They have been in
teligent minded men, intending honestly to DIS
charge their duties. though have often thought that
they must feel Inundated at the nature oil those duties,
rather at the in which they compelled
perform them. hold the fault be in the system
than IN the Bit how. may he asked could this
man have been indicted? cannot They acted
in the dark Suppose sir, that those proceedings had
been open and pubc-that the defendant had been per-
mted to he present with his COUNSEL and to cross-ex-
anime and exPain-thnk you that that Indictment would
have been found7
admit again, that such single instances establish
rule they Of but little comparative weight impor-
lance But If gentlemen array individual cases
showing the virtues Of the Grand Jury system,
array quite many illustrating defects What prac-
ticing lawyer this body, what other gentleman
customed be aont houses hut has evidence
that the sittngs of Grand Jures often made
the medium through which malicious preiudiced in-
vduals seek to wreak personal spite and spleen upon
their nenhiors1 And who &c the system