Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1880-07-07
A Striking Contrast.

New Era. Lawyer Warfel's paper.
The Judges of the courts Of Philadelphia
take a different view of the responsibility
of their relations to the subordinate officers
fthe court from that which actuates our
Lancaster judges. When the Press exposed
the prostitution of the machinery of justice
in the office of the clerk of quarter ses-
siOns, by which numerous fraudulent IL
quor licenses were issued, the court did not
wait for formal complaint to be made
against the official offenders, but promptly
directed the grand jury to investigate the
matter. This was done, and the district
attorney directed by the grand jury to
present bills of indictment. Through GER
tain influences which are sometimes potent
around the sessions and recorders offices
(both of which were implicated in the
license frauds) the grand jury at the May
term ignored the bills. Then the twelve
Judges of the courts of common pleas, who
also have control of the courts Of quarter
sessions, met and discussed the situation,
| reaching the conclusion that the action of
the grand Jury was altogether unsatisfac-
tory. They argued that although the
clerk of the sessions holds an elective
office, his official relations and that Of his
subOrdinates are so close to the court that
they were justified in insisting upon MIR.
Leeds taking some action in the matter Of
the abuse practiced upon the confidence Of
the court by his subOrdinates. The board
of Judges authorized Judge Yerkes to
act for them, who sent for Clerk Leeds
during the June term and presented the
| views of the court But no action having
been taken, Judge Yerkes had another in
| terview with him ON Friday, which result
ed in the discharge the day following OF
| Deputy Mcbride and three of the assistant
clerks most deeply implicated in the pros
titutiOn of the machinery of justice ex-
posed by the Press.
The Offense against justice committed by
these subOrdinates in the Offices of the
quarter sessions and the city recorder was
trifling compared with the official miscOn-
duct of the district attorney and his as
sistant, in the quarter sessions of Lancas-
ter county, when they abused the conf
dence of the court in tho official presence
Of the presiding judge, the evidence OF
which was laid before them by their own
sworn testimony in a subsequent trial. In
stead of calling the offenders to account, as
did the Philadelphia judges, ourcOurt pro-
ceeded to punish the editors who exposed
the abuse of confidence practiced by its
officials, by disbarring those who hap
pened to be attorneys as we'll as editors
and making a personal issue with the
others whom they could not reach by that
summary process. No greater contempt
of court can be committed than is involved
in the abuse of its confidence by it's Off
GERS, in the presence of the court, by which
the administration of justice is obstructet
and finally defeated. But when the court
takes the real offenders to its bosom and
into its confidence, while at the same time
it undertakes to punish those who, in the
interest of public justice, exposed the out
rage upon itself and the public, the aver
age Philadelphia judge must conclude that
Lancaster county has fallen upon evil
times