Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1881-12-15
lamrastcr fntelliQe1lcer.
THURSDAY EVENING, DEC. Is, 1881.
MOuat'S Misery.

THURSDAY EVENING, DEC. ID, 1881.
Mouat's Misery.
It is veIy well for the honest and effi-
cient administration of justice in Phila-
delphia, where jury fixers abound and
even courts are not above suspicion, that
in the case of a notorious Republican
return tinker, a councilman and pcliti-
clan of influence, the district at
torney is able to say in justifica-
tion of his selection of tribunal
for trial, and for his removal of the case
from the court preferred by the prisoner:
Il have reasons which affect public
justice for refusing to try this case at
this time and in this court, and it is not
the defendants right to know them, and
he shall not know them from me-" For
long time David Mouat has
skulked away from a judicial
inquiry into tie serious charges
against his integrity. They have
been Enthusiastically defined and with
such responsibility OF accusation that
il he was an innocent and honorable
man he would have sought more promptly
to vindicate himself. And if he felt pam
Oplied with guiltlessnesS now, equipped
as he is with the skillful services OF
Counsellor Ker, who as district attorney
drew the indictment against him and
knows all the weak points of the case,
Mouat would have been willing to ap-
pear in any court at any time to
have his homer and fair fame es-
tablished by speedy trial of his
peers. lie kicked most dreadfully
against the motion to take him into an
other court and to have his jury picked
from different panel than he had ex
pected. His counsel aided his resistance
and the court too g; Judge Eicock de-
n0uncing his brother Judge Biddle's
issuance of i bench warrant for Mouat
as a proceeding to he denounced Sc
verely." This is strong language for one
Judge to use against another Il is an
example Of contempt of court which will
not enhance popular respect for
judicial dignities. II the defense
in this case had been duly nOti-
fled to appear before Judge Biddle
for trial, as they admitted, and did not
appear, what else was to be done but to
forfeit the bail and issue a bench war
rant ? With its execution in Judge El-
cocks court, Judge Biddle had nothing
to do, and the district attorney did not
attempt to have that done, save 10y the
grace of Elcock's permission, which was
asked and was not granted. 1t remains
to be shown upon what theory the issu-
iay of the bench warrant is wcrthy of
the " severe denuncia,ion" which FL
cock visited upon il.
The milk in this cocoanut, The Times
declares and the public believe, is that
there was reason to suspect the presence
and influence OF the jury tixer in
Judge E!cOck'S court. This fact is
well worthy that righteous and iratc
judges investigation. Great scandal
has been brought upon courts by their
visitation Of Judgment upon those who
expose the prostitution of justice rather
than upon those who prostitute it. Judge
ElcOck, Eaving shown himself SO seGsi-
tive to a CO. ordinate tribunals demand for
Il defendant who wanted to he tried else
where. should seek to discover why the
commonwealth sought the coordinate
tribunal and to correct the faults or fail
jngs of his own.