The Rock Island Argus., 1883-11-17
The Carpenter Case.

A criminal proceeding attracting very
general attention, in which o. A Carpen.
ter is charged with the murder of one Zura
Burns, has for several days past been in
progress before judge Lacey, at Lincoln,
In this state, which resulted on Saturday
last in holding the accused to bail in the
sum of $4,000. the decision of Judge
Lacey in reaching this conclusion was
given in writing and is expressed in fair
and prudent terms.
We know nothing of the evidence in
the case farther than has appeared in the
newspapers from day to day From this,
tested by well settled rules, it may be said
that there is no evidence whatever estah-
fishing or in the least tending toward the
guilt of Carpenter as charged, and it is
difficult to see at this distance frcm the
scene of action, how it is that such a
storm of excitement and Indignation
could exist on the part of the community
against the accused. as appears from
newspaper reports.
But while there may be want of evil
dence as to the guilt of the accused, it is
perhaps better for the good of all con-
cerned that Judge Lacey should have held
him to bail, than that he should have dis.
charged him.
This decision will tend to satisfy in a
degree the excited community, and pacify
the public mind for the present, whereby
better justice may be done in the end
Had the accused been discharged, in view
of the present excited condition OF the
public mind, serious consequences might
have followed; and there is no doubt that
Judge Lacey, taking all things into con-
sideration, deemed it best to take the
course which he has.
One element in the case which seems to
have tended to increase pruiedice on the
part of the community against the accused
was the fact that he did not offer his own
evidence in his defense. as he was allowed
TO do under the statute. This prejudice
would seem to be very unjust against the
accused, from the popularity of his case,
for there does not seem to have been anv
evidence whatever, offered in the case,
calling upon him to answer; in other
words, in the testimony as published,
there was an entire absence of evidence
on the part of the prosecution to connect
him in the least degree with the offense
charged.
And in decling to be sworn as witness
in his own behalf he seems to have been
acting under the advice of counsel, to
whose management be has entrusted his
case. A great responsibility rests upon
counsels in such cases, and the party
when he employs counsel is expected to
submit to their judgement as to the man
agement of his case.
The clamor of the public for the testi
mony OF the accused was warning tc
his counsel that they should approach the
branch of the case with caution, for il
must be understood that nothing the ac
cused might say for his own benefit on Q
disputed point would be taken in his fa-
vor, but as witness in his own behalf ht
would occupy the position of having his
testimony used against him instead Of
for him; in other words, the public mind
as it would in the opinion of coun
sci, was not in that condition TO do jus
tice to the accused in any event, SHOULD
he take the stand as q witness, and al
before stated. no case whatever belns
made out from the evidence against him
there seems to have been nothing in ths
case calling for his testimony in his own
| behalf
Judge Lacey, in delivering his opinion