New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1881-07-02
POLITICAL INDICTlTI'NTc.


The indictments found by the Albany Grand
jury, and the conduct of the Court and Dis
trict-A ttorncy, become ut once proper subjects
of public criticism. The motives of these pro-
cccdings are known. No honest man can he
found To say that he has any doubt about Them
The man who prctcnds that these proceedings
were not designed to reach Il political end
convicts himself of Ignorance or falschood in the
private Judgment of all impartial observers
The persons who procured the indictments, and
who had also, on no evidence whatever, pro-
cured from the same Grand jury one vote to
indict Mr. Dcpew himself. though they were in
stantly forced to retreat from the latter step lV
more sober associates, who saw that it would
rccoil upon them with fatal effect were active
politicians Of the Conking- Democratic coali-
tlon. lbelr intentions were openly avowed in
political circles. The adhercnts of this coali-
ton made open boasts that these indictments
would defeat any election of Senators Mt this
session. The facie tools of these politicians
were ready, in public Office or in the Jury room
to get up indictments on any preteXt or Oh no
pretcxt whatever, if directed to do So The
question asked was not whether there was nroper
evidence, but whether this or that Indictment
would probably prove helpful or hurtfu to a
political faction. Now The TRIBUNE does not
hesitate to say that this is an Infamous scandal,
which VIII bring disgrace upon every body en-
gagged i'll it. The judicial crmne has been
dragged in the mirc quite often enough But
when the laws enacted and tie machinery of
justice created for the protection of the COM
munity are prosttuted to serve the purposes of
political faction, the proceeding is unspcak-
ably disgraceful The only persons who are
covered with shame by indictments found under
such circumstances and with such a motive are
the persons who procured, advised and partici-
pated in this prostitution of justice.
This would be true if the evidence against the
accused had been strong. The manifest DUR
pose of these proceedings makes them infa-
nous, whether the persons accused are guilty
or not. But the evidence is nos strong The
whole world knows what it is. There can be
no hesitation in discussing these proceedings,
because it is confessed that substantially all
the evidence placed before the Grand Jury had
previously been given in public before the Leg
lslatlve Committee. There is not evidence
enough OF the commission of any offence. by
either OF the persons accused, to justify any
decent man in fastening the odium of an in
dictment upon anybody. The case against MIR.
Sessions is absolutely che only one in which it
can be said that there is direct evidence. even
by single witness, to support a charge of
bribery. Mr.. Bradley is not only contradicted
by the person accused-a man in every respect
at least us worthy of credit--but by himself, bv
other witnesses, and by circumstances Hence
the District Attorney, with wonderful lack of
shame, confessed that he could not hope To try
the case with success mt this time, with all the
evidence fresh i'll the public mind. He knows.
and everybody else knows, that he does not ex-
pect ever to get verdict from twelve honest
men on the unsupported and contradicted tes-
tmony of Bradley alone. Juries sometimes do
strange things. But jury packed with twelve
ultra-Conkling men, when under oath, would
| refuse to convict anybody on such evidence.
These cases were never intended to be tried.
That is the most shameful part of the business
1t is intended that the stigma of indictment
shall rest for months upon men who are never
to be allowed Il trial For the instigators of