New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1871-06-02
THE ABUSE OF LAW.

tons of that city. A gentleman named
Putnam was accompanying two ladies
home, when rowdy named Foster grossly
insulted one of the females Mr.. Putnam
closed the door of the car, which greatly
incensed the rough, who became very
demonstrative in his language, and very
threatening in his actions. When MIR.
Putnam left the car Foster seized large
iron hook and struck him number OF
blows, from the effects of which he died.
The Tribune Indignantly denounced. the
cowardly murder, and demanded the
prompt punishment of the rowdy, but
expressed a serious doubt as to the
efficacy of the criminal courts to effect
this result, since they were accused OF
leaning toward the roughs for political
reasons, and since it was 80 difficult to
obtain an honest and capable jury. For
saying this, which was not only the truth
| in New York, but which is truth as
applied to most other American cities, a
| deliberate effort was made to arrest the
editor of the Tribune, and to imprison
him indefinitely as for contempt.
The tenor of the Tribune'S editorial was
to correct positive evil and to discuss
political question. The courts of New
York are charged with being lenient to
criminals for political reasons. The
judges being elective AMI offenders being
sort of community to themselves, it is
considered good policy to maintain sort
of good fellowship with the criminal
element in New York, just as it was once
considered competent capital in New
Orleans to be the favorite of this or that
rowdy. The trial of Foster was made
sort of test case by the lawless whether
they would not get him free. The roughs
bled freely in money and promises to pro-
vide for his escape. The Tribune sought
to counteract this effort by warning the
court and its officers that the eye of the
press was upon them, and that no i'm
proper practices would be left unpublished
if they were attempted and discovered in
this case. Every motion and movement
was watched with untiring vigilance by
the newspaper men in the interest of the
public, and the end was that Foster met
with just verdict at the hands of the
jury selected by him.
In the next place, the Tribune was en-
gagged in discussing the matter of grand
and petit juries generally, as to their use
fulness under existing laws. Years ago it
was established as rule that Whosoever
had heard enough of the facts to fix. an
opinion upon his mind should not be ell
gible as a juror. This old rule prevails to
day, notwithstanding that all the circum-
stances and surroundings of the law have
undergone change. Long years ago,
when the vicinage was vexed with thou
sand stories told to ignorant and obsti-
nate people, it was right and proper that
an unfortunate should be protected from
at the hands of jury that
might deliver its judgment upon the i'm
probable gossip of the neighborhood.
The information which is published in
the newspaper to-day is entirely different |
from the verbal reports that used to be
handed from neighbor to neighbor, exag- |
gerated and distorted according to the |
ability Of the gossip to receive story and
then to impart it correctly.
What the press publishes is as near the
truth as can be obtained. 1t is the en-
1eavor of the reporter to conform his re-
ation to the exact facts as they will be
developed on the last examination. The
report is made to all in the same language,
md it is very rare circumstance for the
editor to accompany it with a criticism.
An opinion founded upon this sort of tes-
imony is not the sort of opinion that the
aw reprobates. If man has heard the
ruth, and has formed and expressed an
opinion thereon, should this fact debar
him from the jury? Is this not just what
ociety expects from every intelligent citi-
zen?
And yet when Foster was brought to
rial in New York for the murder of Mr..
Putnam, four days were consumed by the
ourt, and five hundred jurors were
from their engagements, because
welve men could not be found who had
lot heard of the case in a community
hat was almost in a state of frenzy about
he crime. The Tribune was pointing to
he necessity for an amendment to the
aw which rejected decent jurors because
hey read the papers and had rational
pinions about current facts. 1t was in
listing that the reason of the law was
,one, and therefore the law itself should
re laid away. 1t was appealing to the
,ublic for the erection of an ordinance in
with public safety, and for the
destruction of a rigmarole that belongs
0 the past. 1t asked for intelligent and
apable jurors, who would found verdict
n the facts of the case, whether they got
hese facts from the newspapers or the
witnesses. 1t asked for such a jury, in
act, as is contemplated by the law-just,
lonest, intelligent, conscientious and
)rave. No decent man need fear such an
and no scoundrel need hope
or weakness from its decision.
1t will be seen that this was editorial
going sat once to the pith of
,fficial wickedness and to the marrow of