The daily gazette., 1876-02-26
Lhe Press on tie AcquitfnI Of
Ba6cOcE.
THE vEED,cr NOT SURPRISING.

THE vEED,CT NOT SURPRISING.
N. Y. Sun says the verdict is not
surprising. The whole power and in
fluence OF the President and his near
est frieuds have been earnestly applied
to produce such result. But the facts
proved on the trial are not obliterated
and will not be forgotten, Now, wait
and see Secretary Bristow driven out.
WILL GRANT HEED TUG LESSON?
N. Y. Tribune congratulates the
country on the acquitlal. Every pa
triotic American would have been
mortified to have the Presidents PHI
vate secretary convicted of such a
charge. Thank heaven the faint of the
Whiskey Ring does not go as far as
the White House, at the entrance of
which the scandal was met and turned
back. The trial was severe, fair and
satisfactory, but some things were not
fnlly explained. Babcock tried to
avoid trial. He was in very bad com.
pany, and q friend of the Ring, but he
is no more reckless than the President,
whose be3etting sin is getting into bad
company. We shall soon see whether
he has profited by the lesson, or wheth-
er he Will insult the country by trying
to drive Secretary BristUw from office
for nobly doing his duty.
FAILED TO CLEAR HIMSELF.
n Y. World says if Babcock has OBJ
| tanned legal acquittal it is only at the
cost of moral conviction. In the nome
ly phrase of Mr.. Dyer, he is like the tur-
key to whom the hunter remarked after
shooting off his leg-he has got away, but
he will roost low hereafter. The strong
est evidence against him was contributed
by himself and his counsel. 1t does not
assert that the jury are to blame, but all
has not been explained nor Babcock's iu-
nocence demonstrated to the public sat-
}isfaction. Mr.. Dyer has failed to convict
him but Babcock has failed-indee he
has made no effort to clear himself.
| A CONFESSION OF QUILT.
Phila. Times says: Judged by the rec
ord the verdict was proper one. The
evidence was not sufficient to warrant a
judicial condemnation. He was not pos
itively proved to be in guilty completely
with the whiskey thieves. Babcock's fail
ure to explain the mysterious telegrams
was o blunder which he can never over
come. 1t wiIl'confront him at every step
il the future. 1t is a confession of guilt.
Tde truth would have exposed debauch-
cry before which Grants administration
could not stand.
THE HONOR OF THE COUNTRY AT STAKE. 4
Phila Press says Gen Babcock's acquit-
tai will he u matter Of sincere congratu-
lation to the country at large. 1t was
the honor of the country which was at
stake. Immediately, it was the Se2re-
tary Of the Executive who stood at the
bar, but in broader and deeper sense it
was the public virtue which was on trial.
land IN this sense the end of the trial is
gained fully as well in theacquittal as in
the conviction of the defendant.
The VERDICT HIS COMPLETE vINDIcATIoN.
Phila Inquirer says the case of The gov
ernment was never strong one. The
levidence was too weak to warrant any
other verdict. The plan of defence was
generally considered u confession of guilt,
and was not his defence, but his lawyers
Fortunately for him the evidence they
tried to exclude was admitted, or his ac-
quittal, merely on technical grounds,
would have involved the supposition
| that all OF it would have convicted him.
| The verdict is his complete vindication.
| There are few Americans who will not re-
joice. 1t is probable that he will now
avoid tie society of the very bad men
with whom he was formerly on very in
innate terms.
| WHAT TIE JURY SAY.
Said Juror, Jewett, in his plain far
mer's way, subsequent to the verdict,
II wouldn't say that General Babcock
isn't guilty, but we did what we
thought was right. There was the in
strucitons about the testimony, and
some of the testimony was kept back
from us, and on what we had we all
thought we couldn't convict. There
wasn't testimony enough not to leave
a doubt. We didn't let our moral con-
victions, as you call 'em. have any
thing to do with it"
Said another jurer. The evidence
showed us plain enough that Donald
and Joyce and Avery were in the
thing, but about Babcock it didn't
come out so plain. We could have
convicted them easily enough, but we
didn't feel certain here. | wish we
could have known the inside history
of the business, but that we couldn't
get at, and we did just what we
thought was our duty under the cir
cumstances."
These comments indicate the opin-
ions of each member of the jury. 1t
is not believed that any of the jury
men were bribed ertherwise impro-
perly influenced for Babcock, but their
sudden verdict is held to have come
from tho bewildering situation in
which they found themselves-th
awing effect upon of Grants depesi-
tion, the imposing array of witnesses
to Babcock's character, ,and the charge
of the Court. The opportunity now
afforded to become more intimately
acquainted with the character of the
meu shows them to be rather mar
rew-minded, apparently well-meanipg
lot, totally unfit for subtle distinc-
tions in evidence, and bound to all 60
| in one WAY or another together.