Mineral Point tribune. (Mineral Point, Wis.) 1869-1938, 1879-10-02
A Friend Of Assassins and Trial by
Jury.

SICSs lIou mississippi W Nhbuc Va VIC
grossest frauds and intimidation, has
given his opinion of the result of the
trial of one of the assassins of the CHS
holm family. Referring to Gen. Wood
ford's statement that the trial was con-
Quoted in fair manner, but that the
verdict of acquittal was not in accord
ance with the evidence, but plainly the
result of sympathy with the murderer,
and fear of the vengeance of the mob,
Chalmers says:
For this verdict Gen. Woodford villi6es
the jury and the country, and the Republi-
can papers ask that a search be made
through the statutes to see il some means
cannot be found whereby the nation can
protect its citizens. In other words, wheth-
er the nation cannot take away from Mis-
sissippi Democrat when charged with kill.
ing Republican, the right of trial by
jury.
1t is not strange that man of Chal-
mer's character should lie in defense of
the immunity OF the system of outrage
and crime which he represents and by
virtue of which he is a iaw.maker; but
his vaporings will not deceive intelligent
people rs to the true issues involved in
matters of this kind. What Repubh-
cans and Republican papers demand is
that the right to life and property and
the freedom and expression of opinion
shall be as rigidly protected in the south
as at the north; that when such rights
are trampled down by armed mobs, and
the laws for the protection of the citi-
zen openly de6ed, punishment in pro-
portion to the enormity of the crime
shall speedily follow. This demand is
but the simplest justice, as Chalmers
and every other rebel knows if he has
the remotest conception of what justice
is, and in what free government con-
sists. Never yet have Republican pa
papers advocated the abridging of a sim
gle right of any individual, south or
north; but they do not recognize the
killing of political opponents as an in
alienable right, as Chalmers and his fell
low rebels seem to do.
Republicans have no desire to deny
southern Democrats the right of trial by
jury, although the full benefit Of that
right is practically denied to southern
Republicans. That right was intended
to be two-fold in its benefits-it was to
protect the accused against unjust
condemnation, and also to secure
the adequate punishment of trans
gressors. When, therefore, this
sacred right is utterly perverted,
and made shield for assassins,
as in the case of Gully, one of the
fends who slew the Chisholms, it may
reasonably be inquired whether some
thing should not be devised which will
insure the protection of the innocent,
and the prompt and effective punishment
of the guilty. When community
shows such sympathy with, or fear of,
criminals that trial by jury is farce, it
is the height of impudence for the
spokesmeu of that community to pirate
of the sacredness of that right, and de-
nounce those who insist that it shall not
be perverted TO the protection OF crimi.
mails from the just punishment of their
crimes.
Chalmers winds up his denunciation
of Republicans by declaring that they
demand +" new batch of reconstructed
laws, under which the bloody scenes of
judicial murder under Jefreys and
Scroggs may be re-enacted." If we
could reach Chalmers ear we would
ask him what warrant he has for saying
that Republicans desire to murder,
judicially or otherwise, any one. Have
the reconstruction laws, which he affects
to fear, secured the punishment of any
innocent person! Are there not scores
of men to-day at large in the south
whose skirts are tull of the blood of
innocent people, and whose punishment
has not even been attempted by the
local authorities? Were a hundred
wholly innocent and inoffensive Repub-
licans to be assassinated in Mississippi
between this and election day would any
one be punished therefor, even though
the evidence in each case was plain as
"proof of holy Writ"
When Chalmers and his fellow rebels
can point to single case where the as
sassins of a Republican have been
promptly and adequately punished by
the local authorities it will do for them
to talk about the right of trial by jury
and demand that the South be left to
regulate justice within its own borders;
but until such time it behooves them to
be modest in regard to the rights guaran
teed by law and the constitution. Had
the policy of reconstruction been as Sc
verely just as it might have been under
the constitution and laws of the coun-
try, Chalmers and his associates in trea-
son would now be incapable of CRITICS
ing policy whose fault was that it was
too lenient to persons who have shown
themselves incapable of apissciating the
primary principles of justice and mercy.
Then and Now.