, 1860-12-10
RECORDERS COURT.
4 Grand JuKy Pfezentn1ent-A sport.
nbfe CoUFtss3

Some ofour readers will recollect the a1lus!on
made by Judge Wilson of the Recorders Court
to the "portab1e Court" in delivering his
charge to the Grand jury LAST week That Jury,
under the Recorders instructions, On Saturday
mnde the following report;
rREsHsrNES7 OF TIE GRAND IrRT.
To Hon. r. s Huson,
Judge Of The Reconder's Cou1t:
The Grand Jurors Of said court would re.
speetfally submit tic following report:
That case has been before US on cxanina-
tion, and from the evidence In that case, 1t ap-.
pears that the dwelling Of Samuel Hoar1 was
recently burglariously entered, md articles Of
value, including gold watch, were burglari-
ously and felonlously taken thcrefrom- That
on The morning following, Information Of the
burglary. together with 4 full description Of
the property, particularly, the witch, was
lodged BY Mr. Hoard, at the Marshal's Office
And the case WIS at once giEen In charge By the
Marshal to the City Detectives, with view to
tho recovery Of the property and the detection
Of the burglars.
It would seem th7t the case WIS most skill
fully handled by those having the mattcr in
charge; for with the aid of one John Noyes,
| they weresoon enabled to restore to Ar. Hoard
bis stolen witch, but upon tho payment Of
forty dollars, which, It Is alleged, was paid to
induce him to part with the property; but who
the thief WAS, the Grand Jurors have not been
| able to ascertain fntber than that he WAS known
to said John Noyes as i noted thief, and went,
| by the name Of = Aac,h innaedidt9v out Of the
city, as soon as he delivered the watch to John
Noyes, and received his reward Of forty dollars
for stealing It.
It further appears from the evidence that
complaint WIS made By Mr. Hoard to the
Mayor Of the alleged misconduct Of the city
detective who had the charge of the case; and,
ut the special instance Of the Mayor, an exam.
nation was lad in the Mayors office Of said
detective, at which examination John Noyes
appeared Us witness ogaina said detective, and
upon his examination the said Noyes ut frsi
declined to state What consideration he paid
for said watch, but finally claimed he paid ths
party from whom be received tie watch, thirty
dollars in cash, and the rest in broken dowr
or worthless bills, md that he received tht
watch upon the express condition that Ut
Us he, Noyes, received the watch, and pait
therefor as nfo1esaid, the party whose name b
did not know, only he was called "Aac," i'm
| mediately left the city.
The Grand Jurors, not being able to ottai,
evidence fiom any other source than the state
n,cnts ct said john Noyes, touching; the idcu
tity Of the persons who originally perpt
trated the burglary, have not been able t
indlct the party or parties bellies ed to be guilty
and believing that the aytut is not more gull
ty than his principal hare not felt it to be thci
duty to indict the said John Eoyes.
But lest ipjustfce may be done to the pei
Sous namel and alluded to In this report, II
have attached hereto copy Of the eyidenc
taken in the case.
In view Of the facts disclosed, VIC cannot re
fratn from expressing our opinion that any sy'
ten ofd9tection Of crime whereby the owne
whose property has been stolen is made to pa
half What the property is worth to the this
who stole 1t in order to obtain It, aud this III
on condition that his name Is to be withheld
and himself allowed to escape, must soon d
struy all confidence In those engaged In the d
lection OF crime, by confounding the faithf'
and upright officer with the corrupt and und
serving, We would also take the liberty
suggest {not feeling competent to do moro u
; on 80 grave sub}ect} the propriety Of son
; legislation which shall place the police dcpar
mcnt Of the city upon some basis where COZ
: tinuancc In the public service shall depeu
somewhat on the integrity and competency
/ 4fe offferr