New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1870-03-28
living healthy body moving in harmony, not a
diseased mass of warning members
THE EMPIRE ACQUITS ITSELF.

Prince Pierre Bonaparte has been acquitted
of what French accusers call voluntary or
willful homicide. The charge against him in
more specific terms was that he had murdered
without provocatiOn man who came to chal-
lenge him, to which the Prince rejoined that
his victim had given him a blow. Acting on
behalf of the State, the French Procureur-
General brought him to trial under articles OF
the Code. the severest OF which prescrlbes
death, and in speech before jury OF thirty
six demanded his condemnation, because the
homicide, so-called, committed by the Prince
was not done in elf-defense. The triple jury,
three times less trustworthy, perhaps, than an
ordinary jury of twelve, delivered, we are to
understand, verdict of not guilty.
No thoughtful observer of the proceedings
at Tours, and the train OF events when mas
led to them, can be surprised at this result.
The same influences which in some degree,
small or great, were at work to cause the
murder in the Rue d'Auteuil, were present In
the formation of the High Court OF Justice
and its Jury of Imperial partisans, drawn by
lot il is true from the Councils-General, but
not above the suspicion of being chosen from
bodies VIGOROUSLY open to Imperial direction.
All the Justice of France is under the conHoi
of Imperial judges and jurymen; Tor this Is
one of the plainest meanings OF the PERSONAL
Government which makes every representative
wear the livery and do the will OF Casar ne
Republc accused Prince Bonaparte, but all the
world knows that the Empire tried him. In
its verdict it merely acquitted itself OF the
crime of shooting at the Republic
But the Jury of mankind at large must now
pass its verdict upon the decision rendered at
Tours-the verdict which at first appears to US
like royal stamp given in very blundering
way TO an awkward act of assassination, but
which we shall be pleased to see in any way
palliated by the evidence. The strangest
thought in the circumstances of the case at
Tours is that judges and jury, as well as
Prince BOnaparte, have been on trial, and an
empire beside. There is a disposition in the
public mind to convict the Court and bring in
a verdict of guilty against the Emperor. Curl
ously enough the most unblushing champion
of French justice never dared to assert that
Prince Bonaparte would be convicted.
What should, in justice, be the verdict OF
mankindi All the English correspondents
present at the Princes trial-few, II any or
them, inclined to judge the republican move
ment in France without cynicism or tiunkeyism-
are agreed that, if many of the witnesses In the
trial were suspiciously superseryiceable, the
Court was equally subservient to the Imperial
interest in the prisoner. Yet, independently OF
these considerations, the trial had its dificul-
ties 1t presented a case where there was
but one essential witness on each side;
and though we believe that enough was proved
and even admitted to have justified a severe
penal sentence, the issue made out was one
which easily called prejudice and servility to
its decision. One regulation of the High Court
of Justice is that majority of twenty is neces-
sary to convict, and perhaps that bare majority
was wanting. Under these circumstances the
most mercful form of verdict which could be
rendered against the Court would be Guilty,
"with Extenuating Circumstances" None the
less, however, is the crime of Prince Bonaparte
condemned before men, and the man of four
violent and bloody deeds convicted by the
verdict which is given in secret. and the Judge
who sentences in silence.