Orleans independent standard. [volume] (Irasburgh, Vt.) 1856-1871, 1857-07-17
Grand Juries and Indictments.


this court the Grand Jury were in ses-
sion some nine days, and we are told
found thirty-three true bills of indict-
ment, end returned some seven or eight
not found. AT first this might strike an
observer as a very black mark against
Orleans County. Forty bills returned to
court at a single term We are told
that some three hundred witnesses were
examined by that body. 1t has a bad
look upon the face. But what is the re-
suit? When these indictments are bro't
into court it is found that a small part
only will stand the test of cross examin-
alton. Out of the large number of state
cases on our county docket, entered at
this and previous terms, there have been
but few trials, and but one conviction ,
Two or more plead guilty for selling IL
quor, two for other crimes, and the re-
mainder tried were acquitted. The one
conviction was not upon an indictment
by the Grand Jury, but on information
filed by the States Attorney. So that
not single contested case brought upon
an Indictment by the Grand Jury was
sustained in court. Ifihis is to be taken
as a criterion, it does not follow that the
county has become so vastly corrupt as
by its docket would appear. Now, altho'
we are about as ignorant of such matters
as we are of the rules of foreign ambas-
sailors, we venture to offer a word or two
IN our rough way upon the subject. We
would advise both jurors and States At
torneys to be very cautious about this
matter of finding bills of Indictment
But while we say this we would by no
means cast a slur either upon the Grand
Jury or the States Attorney. Mr. Sar-
tie is a gentlemen whom we esteem. and
the Grand jury has been pronounced the
ablest panel that has been called here for
years.
1t appears to us that every bill that is
beaten in court weakens the power which
such things have had over the public mind
TO deter from crime. Let father prom
Use his offending son fogging for some
offence against parental authority, but
let that son be able to plead off the exc
cution, or to avoid it by any means, and
he will have less fear of the next threat
than of the first, and so on, and be en-
boldened to commit crime. So in this
case; let the Grand Jury accuse man
of crime and bring him up before the
court let him prove the indictments TO
be unfounded, and let this be followed by
another successful resistance, then anoth-
or, and very soon one of these missiles
Is looked upon as a passport to notoriety.
a little expense perhaps being hazarded,
and nothing more. Who does not see
that every successful defence disarms the
prosecution of its terror? Take par
ticular class of MISUNDERSTANDING for
instance, crime that is altogether too
common and alarmingly on the increase.
Such is the difficulty of procuring a con-
viction, and so many legal points have to
be met, that it must be a very plain case
that results in conviction. Now is il not
evident that every failure to convict en-
boldcns the transgressor? They come TO
think there is no danger, and therefore 20
on with impunity. Even petit jurors are
slower TO convict than they would be
were it not for the fact that all juries in
the past have acquitted. 1t follows
therefore; according to our reasoning, that
Grand Juries, if they would provide for
the greatest security Of the people against
this crime, should be very cautious how
they find bills on its commission. WHY.
in almost every litigated case there is tes-
timony given that cannot be true, because
it is perfectly contradictory. Yet it NAV
be that prejudice, or ignorance, or inter
est, has so warped the understanding that
the testimony is not wilfully false. III
anything of this kind can be shown. il
seems to us the Grand Jury should be in
possession Of the facts, and weigh both
sides. 1t is true that it is not absolutely
necessary they should have but one side
in order 10 their finding a bill, but we
think sufficient regard should be had TO
the consequences to cause them TO look
little at the other side. And what we
say of this class of crimes we might say
OF others. Unless the grand jury are
convinced that on fair trial a conviction
will be the result it would seem to us thai
bills should not be found. They should
look at both sides, at least to a sufficient
extent to satisfy their judgments as TO
the guilt of the accused. This may not
be law. We know nothing of that. but