, 1877-03-11

L. AoSe 44AA l. A3A@As - -"~ ~ @-~'
crime in seeking out HASFoRD, with the re
suit that followed. =:
No one with a proper appreciation of th'
sanctity of human life can fail to understand
that Su11yAss complete acquittal is re
Election on our criminal jurisprudence, and I
menace to society. Itis not unlikely TIM
the circumstances were Of q nnture to miti
! gate ths e1ense from the charge Of murder
punishable with death, to that Of man.
slaughter, punishable with imprisonment;
but to label SULLIVAN as entirely gul1tless,
| aud send him forth as the perpetrator Of a
| justi6able homicide, is strange sort of JUS
tice.
! The fact remains that SULLIVAN was the
aggressor; that be sought out HANroRp with
| londed revolver in his pocket; that he
| struck the first blow, knocking the man
| down; that HASFoRD was unarmed, and
that he killed HASFoRD the moment the lat
ter made an effort to resist tho assault Of
SULLIVAN, offering in justification therefor
that be heard his wife e1c1aim that HAEFoRD
had struck her, which other persons equally
close swore they heard not word of. If
this is killing in self-defense, then it will be
better and fairer to sanction the duello by
law, that men may at least have
notice and an equal show for their
lives. If it be said that HAsFoRD had ms
igned Mrs. SULLIVAN, it has not been Sue
cessfully maintained that he SO much as in
timated any aspersion on her womanly or
wifely purity. The punishment for slander
is not death; and, if it were, ALEXANDER
SULLIVAN was not the public executioner.
The alleged provocation was very small in
decd compared to the bloody revenge that
was taken. The poor wretch with starving
family who steals in excess Of 315 is sent to
the Penitentiary for years but here, where
murder was committed, no punishment was
inflicted.
Of course, SULLIVAN is not to be blamed
for making the most desperate fight for his
ing the active assistance Of shrewd and faith
ful friends. But there is q 1amentable defect
in the machinery Of the law that makes an
acquitta1 under such circumstances possible:
One fatal error is, that q criminal may select
his own Judge out Of eight, and refuse to be
tired by my other, either inside or outside
Of the county. Another defect, equally
fatal, is the construction of the law which
enables the criminal to pick his jury
mainly from the most ignorant and worth J
less men in the community. It will |
scarcely be maintained TINT th ere are twelve !
intelligent, upright men in Chicago who
have not formed or expressed On opinion in !
the SULLIVAN case after all the comment it !
elected before and at the first trial and set !
all the men except one who tried the case
the second time 1--we within the city limits.
The Inference is inevitable that the
jury was either uninteligent or some
thing else. It is reported that the
States Attorney will present some of
them to the Grand jury, with evidence that
they committed perjury in order to get
places on the jury; if he has such evidence,
they should be vigilantly prosecuted, and an
example made that will serve as some protec-
lion in the future. As to the wide latitude
If criminals in the selection of their own
Judges, the public can only look for relief to
4 proper revision Of the criminal law by the
Legislature.
We hope. yet almost without hope, that
he ncquittal in this casa will not make man
laying any more common in the community
This is the great danger Of such verdict,
hough, without that, it is all the same an
'fense to law and common sense that man |
yho kills another under the circumstances of
he HANFonD homicide is not even punish
ble as much as poor wretch who steals q
2af of bread or bucket Of coal.