Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1841-1853, 1850-03-14
Frcm the Wabash Express.
OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES Iurv

The great Object uf constitutional should
be, to every Of constitution which in
practice has operated well aud expunge ALL that in Prac-
fics has proven be bad perfect political and civil
stitntiOn made, theory
eminent Of human conduct has been put to practical test
-expeence such is the only safe instructor PHI
losopby ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS d,aw fine distractions
but the knowledge derived from ria IS the criterion
from which TO deduce rule OF aco1 IL therefore ex-
tTemey hazardous u leave theory in government which
has always operated WELL and launch upon the Of
untTed experiments.
There are many sections Of our State constitution which
seems US, be efficient all probability human
wisdom make them, and there Others tha hom prae-
teal tests have proven 10 be wrong
Among those equal soUhdues to any is that part OF
Section H. Article Ist which says, "No person shall be put
TO any criminal charge, but BY pesenimen indie
81 impeachment
An a written seeusatiOn preferred by Grand
jury under oath the CouTt the dsniereslsi finding
Of twelve ndscTimnatsy selected for that purpose
II Is the duty Of the Grand July examine into the
grounds Of accusation against offenders and they see just
cause find kills Of indetment-they sworn 10
diligently enquire AMI p'esenment make" and yet
writer in the State Sentinel the signature OF says
"n my Judgment the Grand Jury vicious, TO say The
least Of useless appendage to Courts aud orgh TO
b. abolished"
This coming from one whom Editos endorse zone
Of ihs oest Lawyers IN the State we nnK deserves no
ee. The writer says before the Graud jury the evidence
ON part Of the State only heard and on the part
Of the sccused Is this in fact true Tie ue that the
accused permitted person before tn o"aJ
but is thai any evidence that the mitigating ciicumsances
taken into consideration! The obligation OF
every Grand Jury tells them they shall diligently enquire
behalf Of the State alOnenoT the part oil The
accused alone but they enquire Of The whole case ia
order that they may True Bill Then the pro-
ceedngs Of the grand inquest not strictly PdTs-they
may perhaps considered far the personal presence
of concerned but far the Imperative
duty oil lneir oatn Is concerned rue me seeueo eno
here his "ace 10 faeethai IS deemed unne-
eessary until twelve honest say In their honest judy
the secusans worthy the attention Of the aceus
ed then he into OF Law and establish his in
But, Mr.. "P " the simple finding OF Grand
July is "bEht and midew a mans Character" This
may be the fact; say 10 Of 30 who
Of
number get clear before traverse jury stll that But
little evidence Of their nnocenesit can be traced to the
of skill in the Prosecuting Attomey-some technical
defect the indictmsnhe ophisty Of the counsel Tor the
defence &c There however cases, where tbis
body might be considered strictly pGTte in its enquiIies-
for instance individual has particular
sOn violated the Law-wheTe A. not having license so To
do sold liquor B. Here the Grand Jury is bound to find
bill 'or ignorance Of the law excuse for its
violation" But if A. TO strike B.. would not the
Grand Inquest enquire IL il done in self defence In
Perjury and Larceny, would they take into consideration
all the mitigating circumstances? Most certainly they
would, and they do
app says ihe accused should be liberty from the
last step the prosecution, to his in
public aee There many accusations preferred
before the Grand jury after dgeHt inquiry into
indictment found As general thing, not half Of the
individuals whose conduct The subject Of inquiry in
dcted aud though serious charges be alleged against
vuous citizen. yet If bill IS found. the secrecy impo,
ed upon each individual member by yitse OF their OATH
keeps charges ON being made public Hence
Of the principal objects of Grand jury IL 10 prevent
that which Mr. "P" thinks should prevented w.t.
that the and the accused might om the hrst meet
face 10 face in public.
Adopt course snd vague and defamtory would
lying hundreds Of unsupported and
innocent citiZens-
There is no question as the utility Of court Of inquiry
pTecede the Of individual and his a 10 court
of aw-et inquiry be made before Justice before
any other public tribunal and much odium will then at
tach simple association TO indictment.
is natural for mankind judge too severely Of their
fellows when accused Of crme-the dk side OF the pictu
IL mostly discussed.
system Grand Juries incident to courts Of JUS
tee Of remote antiQuiyas old the precedents Of the
common 1t has always operated we-been engrafrd
of courts which in Itself when not abused has met the
universal appreciation Of all We cannot therefore see the
least shadow of a reason Mr.. ops" article why the
Grand Jury should be aboshed; and inclined to
think Mr.. "P" would have written the article had he
familiar with section 9th Of The amendments to the
Of Uuited which No
shall be held for capital otherwise infamous
crime. unless presenment indictment By Grand
jury" &C. T.