Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1880-03-31
RIOT rBRIBERY CASES,


It was stated on the streets last evening
that the next probable move of the counsel
for William II. Kemble and others will be
to induce Judge Pearson to permit their
clients to enter new bail for their appear
ance for sentence on the April term, be-
ginning on the fourth Monday of the
month.
Upto last evening they have received no
encouragement, although they have ap-
preached the court on the subject. They
inst asked the court whether if the defend
ants were produced before it while in ses-
sion new bail would be accepted until the
April term. To this question they received
the emphatic answer that the court would
sentence the defendants.
Counsel then tried to ascertain what
would be the action of Judge Pearson if
the defendants were brought before him to
enter new bail when court was not in ses-
sion. But they were given no assurance
that he'would accept it. He can either
have them committed to Jail or admit them
to bail, and in view Of this uncertainty it
is doubtful if the defendants will take the
risk of appearing before Judge Pearson.
The commonwealth will make every effort
to apprehend the fugitives from justice,
and as soon as proper plans can be perfect
<
requisition on the governor Of any state in
which they may be found.
1t was expected that in few days time
the whereabouts of the fugitives will be
known, competent detectives having been
employed to look them up. If they are in
another state, there are two ways to Sc
| cure them-frst, by bench warrant, ac-
companied by requisition warrant and,
| secondly, by bail piece. The latter,
however, will not be resorted to, as the
bOndsmen have all been secured against
| loss. Bench warrants have been issued in
| all the cases, and will be put in the proper
hands soon as expedient.
Yesterday morning reporter of the
Philadelphia Telegraph met Col. Matthew
| s. Quay, who, as secretary of the common
| wealth, is one the members of the board of
| pardons. He intimated that some of the
members advocated at the meeting on Sat-
urday that argument should be heard, and
that the decision of the board should be
rendered ON Monday afternoon. after the
| sentences had been passed. After the
grand array of protests had been presented
on Saturday, and the arguments had all
been made, the board went into private
session, when he himself submitted this
proposition:
"That previous pardon be refused by
this board and that it adjourn until Mon
day to consider the application after the
defendants had been sentenced, and then
to remit the Imprisonment, but not the
fine or disabilities" This proposition was
put to vote and resulted yeas and 2
nays, Colonel Dunkel, secretary of inter-
nal affairs, voting with Mr.. Quay in the
affirmative, and Stone and Palmer in the
negative. Colonel Quay said: "The
board showed no dispositson to grant a
previous pardon" He declined to forecast
what might be the further action Of the
board.
Curious Morality.
| New York Herald.
A friend of Mr.. Kemble, with whom he
has had much intercourse during bis stay
here and whose words may be fairly taken
as rejecting Mr.. Kemble's feelings in this
matter, said yesterday: ''The case has
been pushed beyond precedent, and far
beyond what the offence deserves. At
torney General Palmer went too far.
He pushed case against people within
his own party. He has been unreasonably
disloyal to his party and its interests.
and Mr.. Kemble thinks so. The offence of
bribery as charged is not a serious moral
one, nor a serious one in this instance, as
results have shown to the best interests of
the state. The great mistake has been
that Kemble, Petrotf, Salter, Crawford and
Rumberger ever pleaded guilty at all.
They should have fought the cese
from court to court and jury after jury.
That's what they now recognize should
have been their course. But speak more
especially for Mr.. Kemble when say that
| it was not the wish of the defendants to
be contumacious and to put the state to ex-
pense and trouble. So they pleaded guilty,
hoping to be met by tho prosecution with an
equal li5erality. In this they.were deceived.
They feel rather bitter about it, for the
reason that while they did not bargain for
pardon, or even light punishment, they
were allowed to believe-even induced to
believe-they should escape with only a
fine, or perhaps be pardoned after publicly
expressing their guilt as construed by the
| law. Well, the thing all through has
been bad affair and badly conducted"