The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1860-10-19

| cases OF BARRETT and SOMERS are qulte SuuIcleAl
for the purposes of public justice in that connec-
ton In the case of BARRETT, VIGOROUSLY polit-
zeal friend and confederate of Mr.. WHITNEY, and
a member of the Convention which gave him his
nomination, plea of "not guilty" was confessed
! by Mr. WHITNEY, upon an indictment for riot at
the polls last November-an Indictment by the
by, which fell far short of the 81 oss and enormous
offences charged in the presentment The con-
fession of "not guilty" we deliberately charge,
was wilfully made by Mr.. WHITNEY, when he
! knew perfectly well that the accused was guilty;
the testimony of most respectable eyewitness
to the fact having been given but short time
before, in open Court, when, upon that very
| testimony, MCGUNNIGAN, BARRETT's accomplish,
presented at the same time, and charged under
the same indictment, tried and convicted
From the bare-aced criminality of this insolent
outrage there can be no escape for Mr.. WHITNEY,
unless the Grand Jury forget their duty or are
msled by bad counsels. The plea of ''not guilty.
is one which the Prosecutor can only confess
upon his own responsibility for it is matter
within his own especial and exclusive province
and discretion, and in regard to which not even
the Court would have the shadow of right to
coerce or influence his action. IF Judge BOND
had ventured to direct Mr.. WHITNEY to make such
confession, lie would only have transferred TO
himself the indictment which public Justice
now demands against Mr.. WHITNEY. Whether
the act was well done or i'll done, is for the Grand
Jury to decide, as matter of fact, and if Mr..
WHITNEY were to prove to them that the Court
had concurred with him in its propriety, and the
Grand Jury should still deem tito be the high.
handed misdemeanour which it really was-the
guilt of Mr.. WHITNEY, and the obligation Of the
Grand Jury to indict him, would still be the same
leaving the question as to the conduct of the
Judge matter for additional consideration.
The case of SoMERs presents precisely the same
features of audacious contempt, on Mr. WHITNEY s
part for public Justice and his own sworn oblira-
tons. The Grand Jury have only to examine
for themselves the dockcts and records of the
Court, and to send for the witnesses through
whom Mr.. WHITNEY had access TO the guilt of
both BARRETT and SoMERs, in order to present for
trial at least two cases of the grossest and most
criminal ''misdemeanor in office" on his part
each involving his removal from the office which
he discredits. While the Grand Jury are engaged
in such examination, let them have before them
all the dockets of the Court, and of the several
Sherlfs during Mr.. WHITNEY S incumbency Let
them carefully examine the same with their own
eyes-taking no mans word for their contents.
Let them see how many cases have been tStet-
ted or compromises; in how many, "not
guilty. has been confessed; what recognizances
have been left unforfeted; what fees and costs re-
ceived; how many indictments, for gross offences,
have been hanging over, from year to year I'M
tried. Let them ascertain in whose favor all
these laxties and abuses of the law have been
granted or conuived at; how many abandoned
outlaws and assassins and their confederates have
thus been let loose or left loose upon this COM
munity. Our word for it--such researches will
present a result that will starte and confound
even those who think worst Of Mr.. WHITNEY, and
of the ends he has served. They will make men
shudder at the feariulness of the depths into
which official delinquency and the public secu-
rity have descended. The Grand Jury may per-
chance discover too that the States Attorney is
not the only officer of the Court who requires
their supervision and attention. 1t is true that
such investigations may demand both time and
perseverance. But an honest determination to
discharge their solemn and vital obligations will
be all that the Grand Jurors will need to over
come the moderate difficulties of such a duty A
little careful attention, at first, will make the
of their labors plain sailing. The pub
lie gratitude which they will earn, in addition
10 the consciousness of duty discharged, will be
their ample and honorable reward. Nor need
there be any embarrassment, from the fact that
against the States Attorney may him
der the business of the Court or deprive the Jurors
themselves of proper professional counsel. In case
IF the conviction of Mr.. WHITNEY Of misdemeanor
Office wilful neglect of duty the Court is au-
horzed, by the Constitution, TO fill his place. until
The election and qualification of his successor.
By the 23d section of the lh article of the Code
the Court is authorized to appoint a substitute for
the States Attorney in case of his "abseGce
sickness, resignation DEATH" and under the
18th section of article %, the Court has power to
appoint assistant counsel for the State to aid in
the trial of criminal or other State cases. when
ever sin the judgment of the Court the public in
'terest requires it." Independently indeed of all
egslation, the Court would possess an inherent
power, upon principle, to appoint counsel to rep
eSent the State, in every case unprovded for,
where the absence of such counsel would result in
he manifest overthrow Of public justice and the
lefeat of great purposes of public interest and
policy. The 2lst section Of the I'd article of the
Constitution clothes the Governor also with the
power to employ counsel ''whe2 the public inter
est requires it." With such variety of provis-
ons surrounding the case, the simple intimation
~ the Grand Jury, to the Court of their desire to
nave other advice than that Of the States Attor-
ney, would make it the duty Of the Judge not only
10 counsel them, himself, but to use his own powers
Of appointment or recur TO those of the Executive
that the interests of the public should receive no
ietriment. The Grand Jury will find, in this as
N all other cases, that there is law enough for
hose public functionares who are honest and fear
ess in the performance of duty, and that it is only
he faithless, the corrupt the incompetent in
whose hands authority is without resources for
good.
1t In pressing these matters upon the attention
ot the public and the proper officers, we have
given them an apparently disproporlionate share
Of our columns, it has been under the deliberate
which we asserted day or two ago,
hat Mr.. WHITNEY is now the chief remaining
obstacle to the complete restoration of good gov
rnment and the triumphant re-establishment of
'ffcial integrity and responsibility among US
----