National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1875-04-08
MORE WILLFUL LIES.
The New York Times end the Dana Sum-
NOM,


Some curious GalsitiSs have been developed
touching the Issue of he subpoena commanding
Charles A. Dana to appear before the grand jury
here as a witness in the Wiard-Snyder larceny
case 1t is published "thst the grand jury IN
vestigated u at case and marked the bill iguo-
ramus," sig nifying I've ignore It," on March "a,
Now, We write with the official papers before
U.S. and here are the facts: There never was an
Indictment in the case to be marked "ignoramus,"
and ,.ignoramus" does not signify Two ignore It.
mt means 1--WE are ignorant" and refers properly
10 writers for the New York press who undertake
TO evolve facts from their inner consciousness.
Here IS the record. We take an extract rom the
fles Of THE REPUBLICAN of March 30, 1875, in
which we gave all the record which had then
been made up, as follows:
"In the Criminal Court yesterday afternoon
District Attorney Fisher moved al attachment
against Charles A. Dana, of New York, for non-
appearance before the grand jury OF this District
on Monday, March %, as required by the sun
mons heretofore issued from this court. District
Attorney Fisher read the statutes giving the
court jurisdiction in the case. He said that last
week the following summons was issusd:i
THE SUMMONS.
"In the Supreme Court Ofthe District Of Ilumbis,
holding Criminal Court for said District, the
10th day Of NJ arch, 1875.
A. Dana, New York city: YoH are hereby COM
manded to attend the grand jury on the 18th of
States, and not depart the court without leave Of
ar J. ME1Gs, Chief Clerk.
s'Witness: ID. K. CARTIER,
Chief Justice of said court.
THE following certificate proves the service in
the case:
THE SERVICE
IL hereby certify that on the 25th day of March.
1875 at the city of New York, in my district, l
personally served the within summons upon the
Unnamed Charles A. Dana by exhibiting to
him the within original, and at the same time
leaving with him copy thereof.
dated March Is, 1875. OLIVER FISK,
United States Marshall, Southern District New
The court ordered that the attachments be
issued. Like attachments we're ordered 10 the
cases of George Marthaler, Of New York, and Q.
+. Pike, of Connecticut"
THE TRUE DATA.
We follow this with the record made since:
Police Court Bond Indorsemeak
"Closed-dismissed; 4-I-75, lO457. U. ). vs..
Fred. H. Snyder; larceny. Dismissed by the
grand jury (see withiD) April l, 1872
PrCSenfmeEt In6orsement
"Closed, TO- $50: dismissed, 4-l-75 Frederick
H. Snyder, Henry L. Stewart aud Harry B.Hays.
Conspiracy. Dismissed April l, 1875"
And yet it is falsely said the bill was dismissed
In view of such record, what terms ought to
be used to characterize the following special dis
patch to the New York Times:
''WAsHINGToN, April 5.-SOme curious facts
have been developed touching the issue of a sub
IUna commanding Charles A. Dana, of New
York, to appear before the District Court here as
a witness in the NiGrd-Slyder larceny case. 1t
appears that the grand jury investigated that
case. and marked the bill rgnOramus,' signifying
I'VE ignore it, on March q. Nothing was said at
that time about requiring the presence of Mr..
Dana as a witness, and no request was made for
Dana by the prosecutor. The subpoena was mailed
to Mir. Dana from w ashington the night OF the
24th, and after the case had been dismissed, with
out the knowledge of the grand jury, the prose-
cutter, or clerk of the court, the subpoena was is
sued by the District attorney, Judge Fisher.
Such papers are generally signed in blank for
general convenience and expedition of business,
and are in charge of the court officers. The sub
uua issued to Mr. Oar a also failed to sta 10 the
particular cause in which his testimony was
Quired. If the facts are as represented, there
would seem to be foundation for the suspicion en-
tertained by Mr.. Dana that he Is wanted for
other reasons than that assigned by the summons
to testify before the grand jury"