The daily Gate City. [volume] (Keokuk, Iowa) 1855-1916, 1858-09-10

ing this notice.
For the Gate City.
How the Judge Didn't s.Attena TO
it,,..And why.
To rnE PsoPLE: An article appeared in
the Gate City on the 9th inst, containing
report OF the Grand Jury, wherein the Prose-
outing Attorney is charged with suppressing
indictments and defeating the ends of JUS
tice, asking Thomas W. Clagett to Inform
the people why he quietly passed the matter
by-why he did not do his duty, and hold the
Attorney to answer Mr.. Clagstt has made
no reply, save in his harangue while under
color Of charging the Grand Jury with their
duty, he said he had not done anything in
the matter because ho could do nothing with
out presentment by tho Grand Jury, that
he should not regard the slang published
against him by members Of the bar or edi.
tors. At other times he has given as the
reason for not proceeding against the Attor-
ney, that "the report was made a. the court
was about to adjourn, and he had not time"
Here are two distinct, independent reasons,
each given ~ the sole reason for one and the
same ~, and each contradicting the other.
Now let US learn the facts and know wheth-
or the Judge did discharge his duty, and II
not, what was the reason.
On the Gath Of May, 1858, the court con-
vened. On the ID Of June the report was
made. On the 18th Of June the court ad-
journed. Here then, again, the Judge is
mistaken, for be had fifteen days, and as
many more as he should sec fit to hold court.
in which he could have Investigated the
charges.
1t isl principle in the law Of evidence, if
one accused tells different stories about the
same transaction, the presumption is against
him. There 10 no reason for an exception
in the Judges case. save that he is great
talker.
II will be seen by reference to chapter 81
OF the Code OF Iowa, that the charges, il
true, subjected the Attorney to removal from
Office, and the District Court has exclusive
and original jurisdiction in such cases, by
q summons, and not upon presentment by q
Grand Jury.
By reference to section 1922 Of the Code,
it will be seen that il any Of the charges
were true, the Judge could disbar the At
torney. Now, If it was matter for the
Grand Jury to present, it was the duty Of
the Judge to have at once sent the Jury to
their room to take such action as the facts
would warrant. II it was not matter for
indictment by the Grand Jury, then it was
due to the Prosecutor, due to the people.
whose public officer he was, that the Judge
should have specifications fled against the
Attorney, and put him upon his answer, for
an outrage upon the Grand Jury and for
gross contempt Of the Court.
We see, then, there were two modes by
which the Judge could have held the Attor-
ney to answer, without the intervention of =
Grand Jury. He adopted neither. No man
acts without a motive. Thomas. w. Clagett
had his! lie was looking forward to the
election for Judge. A convention was not
the thing. His political principles were too
we'll known and appreciated by the Democ
racy. The indepeadc ticket would be the
trick But how to get rid OF the long e..
tablished usage Of the party was something
which others had voice in. And here tits
necessary to name gentleman who in this
transaction 10 innocent:-Dr. Eads WIS EN-.
powered to call, or refuse to call, oonven.
} ton. The Prosecuting Attorney was the
Law partner and political friend Of DR.. Eads
} and would influence him hence it Was neccs-
sary to be kind and gentle with the Prosecu-
tor, and at the same time hold the rcins on
} him which the Grand Jory had put into the
, Judges hands. And, to be consistent, in.
stead Of arraigning him, the Judge APPOINT
, I'D the Attorney, with the Grand Jury's re-.
port fresh upon him, TO investigate charges
against others who were charged by ths
Grand Jury at the same time and in the sam,
Q report with the Prosecutor himself.
7 OIL consistency, thou art jewel! Thil
il no slang OF members Of the Bar or editors
1t is mn allegation Of FACTS, alleged in ,
specific way, which, II untrue, can be die
/, proved. 1t 10 serious matter, Involving
the legal competency and high moral wortl
> Of our Judge, which free-thinking AMI
intelligent people haveA right to have ex
planned to them by one pho best knoscs.
] Fellow. citizens, il you would be protectet
in your persons, secure in your life.lonI
earni ngs, preserpe your judiciary pur1 an
: untasnished. WILL.
INDIANS BECOMING CIvILIzKp.-We are in
formed by MR. Daniels, Of the Sioux Agen