The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1860-10-01
BALTIMORE.
MON DAY, OCTOBER l, 1860

In the Maryland Code of public General Laws,
article 20, section 7, PIP. 1913, under the title Of
Courts, it is thus provided:
APPOINTMENT OF ASSISTANT COUNSEL
The Circuit Courts for the several countless and the
Court Of Baltimore may appoint assistant
State cases in said Courts whenever in the Judgment
the Court in which any such is pending the public
interest requires it. rHE.. ...
Our court report Of Friday dscloses the fact that
ERASMUS LEVY, indicted for the murder of FRANK
LIN NAFF, has been arragned, has pleaded mot
guilty and fixed his trial for next Thursday
That the 'publc interest will be promoted by
allowing this prosecution rest in the hands of Mr.
MnroN WHITNEY, viii admit of very serious doubt.
We have already called the attention Of the public
and the Grand Jury to the fact that in two instan-
cesat least, those Of GREGORY BARRETT and SoMERs
both indicted for very grave oGences-the States
Attorney has seen fit TO save them harmless of the
penalties of the law by confessing, in the case of
each, plea of "not guilty" We presume that
this was done in some covert manner, without
due notice or sufficient explanation to the Court,
for we would be very sorry 10 think that
such things could take place with the con-
sent and appreciation of Judge BOND. In
addition to these two most gross and palpa-
bic instances of mafeaSance, there are others
quite within the recollection of our attentive read
ers, in which the administration of the Justice of
the State has been rendered worse than farce by
the failure, on the part of Mr.. WHITNEY, to sum-
mon witnesses, whose testimony would have been
conclusive, or to examine them even when in
Court. In the case of this very prisoner, LEVY,
before Judge BARToL on n habeas corpus, the
States Attorney, after deceiving Marshal KANE
by pretended interest in the affair." took
no part whatever in the investigation, but
went through the mockery of sending his
deputy, who openly avowed that he knew
nothing at all about it, and thus LEVY
was discharged upon proof of an alibi which no
one knows better than Mr.. WHITNEY, rested upon
the most outrageous and unblushing perjury
Yet if the Grand Jury fail promptly to indict the
States Attorney for these and other misdemean-
orS in office, and the Court does not interpose its
authority by appointing other counsel for the State
the cases of such as LEVY, and others in which Mr.
WHITNEY S interest to violate his official oblga-
tons, may not be SO apparent but is not less
weighty, will all pass through his hands, with a
result in which the ends of justice may be as lit
tie considered by him, as in similar cases they
have hitherto proved TO be. As Jnries can no
longer be packed, to permit an ostentatious dis
play of official zeal and ability without harm TO
a favored criminal the only course now
left for u States officer, regardless Of his
duty, is either 10 fail to present his case
properly, Or to abandon the prosecution outright.
That Dir. WHITNEY is capable Of taking either
course he has left no one familiar with his con-
duct any room to doubt. We therefore call upon
the Grand Inquest of the State TO consider whether
1t will avail to indict certain class Of offenders
if their prosecution is to be left in the hands which
now represent it; and if they are not vet
prepared to submit the official conduct of Mr.
WHITNEY TO a criminal investigations we ask
whether, in view Of all the circumstances, it would
be improper for them 10 unite in requesting Judge
BOND to exercise the right and the duty deyolyed
upon the Criminal Court by the section we have
quoted above from the Code To such sugges-
ton, from such source, we have no doubt that
the Court would listen with respect and acquies,
cence. We have awaited ourselves Of the case OF
LEVY to express these views because it suggests
and illustrates their propriety, and is one which
Justlhes their immediate appica tion. We have,
however, no wish to PREJUDICE this prisoners case
nor create any improper prejudice against him, but
only desire TO see the law fairly and honestly
let the result be what it may. Ifhe
Is innocent, he will no doubt be SO declared. If
however, he is guilty, we protest against his be-
ing let loose on the community, through official
neglect or connivance