The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1878-04-03
WHY ANDERSON GOES FREE.
The Court Says II Cannot wrest the Law even
TO Punish "a Great Maiefactor.

NEW ORLEANS April 2.--In its decision
refusing q rehearing in the Anderson case. the
Supreme Court dwells upon what 1t considers
the faultness and actual Illegally OF the In
dictment and Information against the prisoner.
The decision bears severely on the State OFF,
cas for what is called the glazing fault in
the information OF not charging the offence In
conformity to the laws direct mandates. and OF
emitting to charge the crimes TO public
officer instead Of making the charge against
private individual. who. in that position. was
utterly incapable Of committing the offences
and doing the injury charged, when 1t
was notorious that as public official he
did effect the injury and commit the crimes
complained or The Court is bitterly denunci-
atory OF the Returning Boards frauds, OF which
1t remarks that. being done In their official ca
pacity. their famo and infamy filed mems
mouths. Everywhere. in the market place and
at the Preside in the press and the forum. at tho
council board and in the Legislative hall tho
official act is the thing complained OF and de-
nounced. The theory OF the prosecution
throughout. outside Of tho information. is
that tho act was done in an official
capacity. and therefore defrauded. The
argument Of counsel. the charge of the
Judge tho bills Of exception to that charge
and TO his ruling in the course OF the
trial. are based on that assumption. II is that
feature which has impaired to this prosecution
the interest and invested it with the character
Of State trial. which gave to tho events that
then transpired. and to the criminal acts which
arc part Of them. national importance; and
that feature. conspicuous everywhere else. is
absent from tho information.
III this Court had yielded to the impassloned
and justilable zeal Of the prosecuting officer.
or mad been swayed by the feeling. natural and
spontaneous among all good men. Of detesta-
ton OF n great crime against free government
and the rights Of the people. and by
reason thereof had permitted its judg-
ment to be couded by passion or warped by
rove OF applause. or to be influenced by any con-
sideraton other than its duty with sedulous
care TO ascertain the law and with firm purpose
to apply it, II would be unworthy OF the high
place II holds in the Government OF the State.
II would argue deplorabe state OF public
morals II II could be confidently assumed
beforehand in case such rs this what tho de-
clsion Of a court would be from the known po-
litical affiliations or antpathies Of its members.
II would be public calamity the extent Of
which could not be measured II a court should
prevent tho Escape Of an accused person by
torturing the wcll-settlcd principles Of law ap-
piled through long years to criminal prosecu-
tons with unvarying uniformity. and bend them
to tho accomplishment OF partisan desires.
Rather let ii be known OF all men that n
Court can consider neither expedency nor
policy that it cannot shape its judgment either
to realize the hopes OF friends or to quiet the
fears OF foes; and that Judges may abhor O
maleiactor and yet refuse to condemn him con.
trary TO the law.
1t is, therefore, ordered that n rchearing is
refused. and that our judgment In this case
remain undisturbcd"