The Kansas herald of freedom., 1858-07-10

@~S>--~Re@s
! We do not understand that the decision
of Justice LADD, in the case of the Ter
ritory against Lane, is of any more ac-
count because two other Justices of the
Peace sat with him on the trial. It was
legally but the decision of one man. and
he only authorized to decide whether the
facts were such that the case should 90
before jury for full investigation. The
additional Justices of the Peace were
merely advisory, and any other person
could have been employed for that pur-
pose as well as them. With all the facts
before the public, with the numberless
threats which Lane has employed from
time to time, before the occurrence, show
ing malice prepense. Lane is declared
"honoraby acquitted"
Was Lanes life in peril when he aimed
that deadly gun at jenkins? Had he
reason to believe that he would die If
jenkins did not :? If 50, is it not re-
markable that for days prior to this oc-
currence, Lane was telling his friends that
he should shoot jenkins if he came upon
the premises for water?
We understand that the Justices did
not stop to consider whether any offence
lower than murder was committed, main
tanning that they had no power to hold a
party for trial before jury for any other
offence than that contained in the war
rant. We had supposed, in our simple
ity, that in making Justice of the Peace
conservator of the public tranquility
it was the design to invest that function
ary with full power to take such action,
in legal way, as would ensure the ends
of justice. Able jurists and authors upon
the duties of magistrates of this character,
have SO interpreted the law; but in this
case, the "expounders'' of the statutes
have sagely held that they had not even
the power which vests in petit jury,
which is to bring in verdict for murder
in any of the degrees. or even for man
slaughter, when they are satisfied the
higher offences have not been committed,
but that lower one has been.
From remarks which have reached us
from various sources we are confident the
result of this examination was as sup
prising to a majority of the community
as it was to US. True, deep sympathy
had been enlisted in Lanes favor from
the beginning. He told his story, and
repeated it with all the adroitness of
which he is master, and the sympathies OF
the listeners were enlisted for the living.
On every hand he piled his arts, and even
employed Sam. Young, as one of his at
torneys, a gentleman who led an army
against Lawrence on the 30th of March,
1856, to steal from US our franchises, and
subsequently another to blot our town
from existance. 1t is said Lane desired to
go before Judge Cato, for an examination,
feeling confident, no doubt, that that
Border Ruf1ian would bend the forms of
law so as to befriend him. Thank heav-
en-, Cato is Judge no longer. A new
functionary, an honest man, we hope, who
cannot be bought nor sold, will come to
fill C4to's place. Lane will have hear
ing before him, and there, we trust, he
will get equal and exact justice.
The reader will observe that we do not
stop to implicate Lane with any guilt in
this affair." We only urge that this was a
case for jury to pass upon, and should
not have been dismissed by amere Justice
of the Peace, the lowest judicial officer
known to our laws.