Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1881-02-04
1allrastcr f.,trl!:ssnrer.
FRIDAY EVENING, FEB. 4, 1881.
The Silent Journal Speaks.

The Silent Journal Speaks.
The Examiner gives half column Of
its space to a correspondent to exclaim
bitterly against the Neu Era editor'be-
cause he published the vote Of the grand
jury on the Triple indictments and ac-
knowledged that he had gone /" to some
trouble to get it, The correspondent
declares that the grand juror who dis
closed his vote deliberately committed
perjury, and that the editor who went
to some trouble ito get him to do it
is equally guilty in the eyes of the law
because "the punishment of an accessory
is the same punishment that is meted
out to a principal.'' We greatly fear
that this critic is not disinterested OBJ
server of the Ner Era editors course.
He manifests his feeling somewhat i'm
prudently. In fact ii is apparent enough
that the Eran.t.'er editor is himself
masquerading as its correspondent. AS
he was on the grand jury lie may have
special means of knowing that none of
were SD indiscrcct as to acIuaint the Ne,r
Era editor with The state of the vote.
but that ''amOng those voting in
faror of a true bill against Triple
there was at least one scoundrel base
enough, in utter disregard of his oath, to
disclose the proceedings of the grand in
quest to the immaculate editor.'' We
admit that 1t is not at all likely that any
OF the twelve jurymen, who voted to ig-
more the bill, would he desirous that their
names should go out to the people so re-
corded. and that the leaky ju:yman was
probably one of the minority, who was
restiye under the severe censlrc visited
upon the grand jury for its action and
who was not anxious to bear the load of
his bretllren'5 sins. Still, the emphasis
with which Mr.. Williamson declares
that none Of the twelve, who may have
been guilty Of perjury i'll refusing to iu-
dict the Triples, were also guilty of
perjury i'll violating their oaths to con-
ceal the grand irry'S counsel, seems to
show that he had peculiar means of
knowing that the information did not
come from them. Did they take an extra
oath of silence among themselves
We are not particularly concerned to
defend the Ncr Era from the assault
upon it for publishing the vote of the
jury. although we also ascertained the
vote and did hot disturb the consci-
ence of juror, either, to get tie
information. \ gentleman OF this
city procured for Us COPY of
the lNTELL!GENCER containing a list
OF the jurymcn which had been marked
with the vote of each mcmbel
by Il couple of them who had exam
ined it, and who left it behind them
wien they Went out, without hav-
ing taken the i'recintiun 10 effectually
erase their markings. But We doubt
whether anyone would greatIy blame
grand juror who told how the jury voted
in case where the people believed it
had clearly voted wrong, and where it
was charged with perjury in finding
verdict contrary to the plain evidence.
The jurors who had voted in the minori-
ty might well he restive under the charge
and he tempted to violate the unimpor-
tant part of their oath to free themselves
from the imputatiOn OF having been
guilty of :. greater wrong.
1t is very natural for the twelve men
who ignored this indictment against
Triple and who are being scariiied by
the public for il, to want to drag their
innocent fellow jurymen into the mire ;
but the E.cn.nirrs is imprudent for lend
ing itself to the effort. \ journal which |
refuses to join in the public condemna-
tiOn of the twelve men who refused TO !
indict criminals upon clear evidence of |
their guilt, should ce, tainly not be,very !
ready to assail the remainder of the
jury for the venial offence of eXculpat-
ing themselves from cens,lre by telling
who of the Jury were responsible for the
verdict. The Ecan.iacr breaks its silence
about the Triple matter very strangely.