Iron County register. [volume] (Ironton, Iron County, Mo.) 1867-1965, 1883-11-15

ohc hSiuS Alb ~. LOUIS, ana are COM
petent witnesses to contradict this
statement, II untrue, and they could
have been called by the late Grand
jury II It had been as anxious to learn
the truth as 1t seems to have been tr
asperse me in its libelous report. The
conduct of the Richeson Grand jury
Will be affirmed or condemned by good
citizens by future developments which
are promised. 1t is we'll to wait and
see the result. Judging from tn.
charges of Judge Van Wagner to the
present Grand Jury, / think some OF
the errors of the late one will be avoid
ed. 1t reads like the charges of some
or the old-time Judges of this State,
when men were indicted for crime
not on prejudice and passion. It il
based on law and sound Judgment.
give you one sentence from it: You
have ample power to investigate crime.
The law clothes you with great power
momentous in Its effects for veal or woe
TO the citizens Of the State. Hence it
Is that the law aims to get for Grand
Jurors men of good character, of ac-
knowledged moral standing; who have
aims higher and notler than spiteful
avengers OF enemies and beyond the
finding Of food to feed the prurient
taste of the scandal-monger and those
who grow fat on the misfortunes of
Others Such a charge might have
emanated from Primm, aMullanphy
or Gamble-men revered for their
great uprlghtness OF character and love
of justice"
asking a continuance in the conspiracy
cases of Caruth, Lutz and others?"
hn S,~
your st. Louis Criminal Courts, / am
informed that each side is entitled to
one continuance. Considering the cir
surrounding these cases,
the peculiar way in which the indict-
ments are said to have been obtained,
the character OF the men indicted, their
presence in court demanding an im,ne-
date trial, and from the further fact
that all the witnesses upon whose tes-
timony the indictments were based
were present in court at the time the
cases were called, many will think the
trial should have gone on when the
cases were called. Some curious per-
sons will say the continuance is con-
fession of the weakness of the prosecu-
ton. An indictment is not play
thing with which to amuse the crowd
Or crafty personal spleen. 1t is a SOL
smn act Of the State against one Of it's
OWN citizens and should not be invok-
I'd without q cause, and without de-
to afford q speedy hearing
10 the accused. The reason for this is
plain and simple, reaching high and
ow alike. The State has the machin-
cry Of the courts to uphold it in max
ing or preparing to make, the charge,
having present only such witnesses as
t chooses, and often a bitter, unjust
partisan to promote its cause; having
'ull knowledge of what those Witness
70 have sworn to in tho Grand Jury
presence at the trial and the advan-
age that an indictment always gives.
In the magnitude of such immense
power and the advantage it has be-
cause OF that power over the single in
who often stands Inundated
oy the Indictment, whether true or
alse, the State ahould never make a
charge which it Is not ready to prove
without delay, for any other course is
lenial of justice and often the ruin of
he citizen. / do not speak in refer
,nce to these cases, alone, but all cases
where the State is arrayed against its |
own citizens. 1t is often justice to |
grant continuance to the defendant,
md as often oppression to extend it to |
he State. The State can with far less |
oss stand defeat than the individual |
an stand a continuance when his
character aud credit are impaled before |
lis fellOw-men by an Indictment
which, in the minds of the thoughtless,
s equivalent to guilt and conviction.
t is thought by many that the indict-
nent of these men is the result of q
60 aI ,to;, ~ ~ 4
Jury by certain ones, land consummAted |
" facile means inside of it. If such a |
umor is true, it should be known. FL
alse, it should be condemned, as the |
equation of a Grand Jury should be
bove suspicion"
HAS the State right to the evil
ence taken before the Grand Jury of
Judge Van Wagoner's Court on the
rial of those Indictments in Judge |
Court?"
MANY good lawyers say. not; that
hat testimony belongs exclusively to
Judge Van Wagoner's Court, and that
here is no law for him or his Circuit
Attorney to give it up to the other.
hat point may be raised at some time,
,hen it will receive judicial determi-
alton. Before closing let me say that
ne of the remarkable features of these
is that, from some cause,
ome of the Federal officials in st. Lou
] have had an active hand in manip-
lating, if not drawing up, the indict-
lents, having been cOnversant with
II the inner working of the Grand Ju-
Y room through it's inquisitorial pro-
esses. Never before in the history Of
MS State has such an outrage been
on its citizens, and it should
e resented by every lover of State
Government in and outside of st. Lou
!. The Department of Justice at
should investigate this /,
interference,.upon the part
its officials i'm the local legal affairs