The independent. (Harrisonburg, La.) 1853-18??, 1854-06-14

the year 1852, the public mind Of this Par
ish was thrown into CONSERVATION by rumor
that two men, named Samuel Glenn and
Moses Virgins, had been killed on Little
River. The excitement grew intense when
rumor assumed the definite form Of fact, and
when it came to be well understood that the
killing had been openly avowed by Maj. St.
John r. Liddell, wealthy planter residing
in the neighborhood, and gentleman of
high standing in the community. The naked
fact Of the killing transpiring, uncoupled with
extenuating circumstances going to show the
motives and provocations under. which the
act was done, and being rapidly spread from
mouth to mouth, created, in portions of the
Parish remote from the scene of the tragedy,
a strong feeling Of prejudice against Maj.
Liddell. That gentleman, however, immedi-
ately signifed to the Sheriff his intention to
submit to the authorities. Accordingly, on
the day fixed for the purpose, he came to
Harrisonburg, in company with that officer,
and the affair underwent preliminary inves-
tigation before Judge Barry, the presiding
Judge of the district, and Col. Simeon Thomas
the Magistrate for the ward in which the al
lodged offence was committed. The investi-
eating court deemed it to be its duty to CON-
init Maj Liddell for trial, and in the absence
Of a suitable and wholesome Jail at this place,
he was sent to the Parish of Concordia, there
to await the action of the District Court,
which was to assemble here in the following
December. In December the Court met, and
the Grand Jury, after careful investigation
of the case, ignored the bills presented against
Maj. Liddell, and he was, therefore, immdi-
ately set at liberty.
These facts, although they occurred pre-
vious to oar coming to Catahoula, are familiar
to most Of our readers. We come now to
speak of matters connected with this affair
which have fallen under our own observa-
ton.
The Disrid Court did not hold a session
in this Parish again until September, 1853.
At that term the Grand Jury found true
bills Of Indictment against Maj. Liddell for
the killing Of Glenn and Virgins, and at the
April term Of the Court, he came forward
voluntarily, and delivered himself up for trial.
The result If that trial has already been made
known. He was first arraigned upon the
Virgins case Upon the close Of the testi-
mony for the prosecution, the counsel for the
defence made proposition to submit the case
upon the testimony Of the State witnesses
provided tbsy.night be allowed to close the
argument. Tsthis the State dissehted. The
witnesses fcs tie defence were then examined,
the case was submitted without argument,
and the Jury gave in verdict of acquittal
without retiring from the box. Much Of the
testimony elected in this case bore directly
upon the guilt or innocence Of the accused,
so far as the killing Of Glenn was concerned.
Had that case been tried, the same witnesses
would have been again called to the stand.
Rather, therefore, than 60 through with a
useless form, and in the exercise of what we
thought very proper discretion as a public
officer, District Attorney Hough entered a
nolls proseqsi in the Glenn case.
Hitherto We have forborne saying anything
whatever in relation to these cases. In doing
SO, we have Been guided by the dictates Of
what we con,idered public duty. When a
crime has bean committed, or is alledged to
have been committed, the duty Of the public
is silence until the Courts have had
fslly to investigate and lay open
the circumstances attending the commission
Of the offence. It is not his province, before
hand, to defend the innocent, or punish the
guilty and certainly he departs widely from
the scope Of his shigh ealing" when remarks
which fall from him, based upon loosely
gathered facts, may have tendency to pre-
judice the cause Of one innocently accused,
Or to shield the guilty from the just penalties
81 crime. Acting upon this principle, we
have carefully excluded from the columns
of the Independent any mention, favora-
bic or otherwise Of Maj. Liddell and his lately
pending trial, until he had a full legal hear
ing. Now that that hearing has been given
him, We feel ourself 1t liberty to speak in
,uch terms q we deem just and fitting Of the
made by the testimony on the
rial. We shall not say much to-day, how
sver, and that only to express our qualification,
md We believe the qualification Of nearly all
Who were present and heard the testimony,
i the verdict Of the Jury. II anything more
han smother could speak louder in Maj. Lid
1ells favor, Il would be the very remarkable
change which took place in the public mind
# the Parish during the progress Of the trial.
50 great was the prejudice existing against
- 4 -. -