The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1874-12-01

Auo SAFE burglary ITldl al WaSnlngLOn has
come to the conclusion at which everybody
supposed it would arrive, namely, a disa-
greement of the jury. Legal machinery has
now become so complex, that, with able
counsel, a prisoner is almost always
certain of avoiding a conviction, if not Sc
curing an acquittsl. There are so many
legal bubbles that can be employed, and so
many tricks of oratory that can be made use
OF to fill a jury full of doubts, that it is
only in very rare cases that the
twelve good men and true can be
brought to a harmonious conclusion.
Indeed, if a case is one that has created
much public discussion, or that enlists the
prejudices of men, or that involves the in
terests of parties, it is very apt to end as it
begun, with the prisoner ~unconvicted and
u~nvindicated. The celebrated trial of the
safe burglars at Washington was one which
could hardly, in any event, result in con-
~victIon. The guilt of the parties accused in
volved a degree of reckless iniquity unfa-
miliar in American politics. 1t p~resupposed
a deliberate plan on the part of government
officials, some of them the trusted agents of
the secret service, to ruin the character of a
respectable citizen by working up a false
burglary, and accusing him by suborned
witnesses of an active part in it. Moreover,
the conspiracy involved the guilty knowl-
edge of Boss Shepherd, and perhaps, hor-
resco referens, the completely of the presi-
dent himself. The villainy of the whole
scheme was so preposterous that it would
naturally tax a great deal of evidence to
prove the existence of the plot. Then, even
granting the guilt of the accused and the
strength and consistency of the testimony
against them, there were circumstance at
tending the trial which would natur-
jury. Much of the evidence was
given by accomplices in the crime. and
by some minds their testimony is taken as
disproof of the facts they swear to. Again,
the arrest of Hayes for perjury in the midst
of the proceedings must have served to
break down his credibility if it came to the
ears of the jurors, as it probably did at a
subsequent period. And, finally, the con-
sideraticn with which the accused were
treated, their local repute, and the fact that
they went from the prisoners dock to the
parlors of the White House as honored
guests-all these circumstance must have
had an influence. 1t is no wonder
that so many of the jurymen failed to make
their minds to convict. Their action
can be explained without supposing them
guilty of corruption although bribery would
nave been spared if necessary. On the
other hand, there was reason enough in the
testimony against the accused-alI the direct
and circumstantial evidence which was
brought to bear-to afford to some minds
sufficient grounds for a verdict of guilty.
Take the matter all in all, and the public
will rest satisfied with the result attained.
1t leaves Harrington and the District of Col
ring branded with the suspicious de-
claration, "Not Proven" with which a
Scotch jury is wont to express its doubts of
The prisoners innocence. For the people
that will be a grave accusation.
In commenting upon the end OF the trial,
it does not become any hon
EST journal to pass over in silence
he bullying, browbeating and quarrelsome
lemeanor of the lawyers, and the unjust and
devices resorted to by official
parties to break down the prosecution.
zen. Grants friends will now need more
han his invitation to a social entertainment
is a certificate of character. They will re- /
Iuire one of those elaborate letters of eulogy I
With which he las been accustomed to dis
Miss advisers whom the people no longer !
rust. {