National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1884-08-20
Editorial yagaries.

The Philadelphia Times is entirely too
smart. 1t finds fault with Mr.. Blaine for
bringing his libel suit against tho In
diauapolis Sentinel in the United States
court for the following reasons;
lie employs as his attorney distinguished
and able United States senator (liarrisOn). That
senator has recently dictated, largely or wholly
from partisan standpoint, the appointment OF
the federal Judge who would preside on the
trial, and also the appointment of the United
States marshal, who practically selects the
Jury that must hear and decide the suit. This
senatorial attorney who proposes totry tho case
before q Judge of his own creation, and before
jury chosen by partisan marshal who is the
child of his favor, docs not enter tho federal
court to invoke the national laws, but he enters
It to invoke the laws of the state OF Indiana for
the vindication ofhis client and he institutes
the suit In the face of the reasonable certainty
that 1t cannot be tried before the presidential
election.
We should take tho liberty of referring
statltesss Tor r"infdrnation as to the manner
in which Jurors are selected in the United
States courts were it not that tho issue OF
the Times in which these editorial COM
ments appear contains q dispatch from its
Washington correspondent giving the
process of drawing jurors under tho act OF
1870 as follows:
The process of selecting jury for such cases
has been greatly modified, however, within the
last few years. The names of the jurymen
which are to try Blaine VS.. Shoemaker arc
now in the box. There are two Jury commits
gfppprQ oprntpta1 hV IN nnn frnt an nj q,
of the two leading political parties. They
select the names and put them in the Jury box
| Three hundred names are now in the jury box
for the coming September term. This is a gen
eral statute and has an interest now only from
the fact that the mode Of trial in such case
was suggestion of GOV. Hendricks, and was
introduced in the senate by Joseph L, Me-
Donald. Itwas passed in the session of ls7l-S)
There is another little matter which
tho able editor seems to have overlooked
in tho dispatch of his Washington cor.
respondent. The editor says that the
appointment of Judge Woods was die
tated by Senator Harrison. Tho cor
respondent seems to have been differently
informed concerning this matter. Wit
ness tho following:
Judge Woods is political lawyer himself
and got his place through services to his part,
and the friendship of Judge Gresham. In re
turn, Woods was at Chicago in June il
| Grcshams interest as against Harrison for tn,
presidency. Harrison had recommended judge
Hines for the judgeship, but Gresham beat hin
with Woods.
We shall not undertake to say whethe
/ tha nI ha a,nrrauynnHant To ri,ht /,
this matter, but they certainly hav,
derived their information from different
sources.
We must quote again from tho cor
respondent who differs from the editor il
the opinion that the case cannot be tried
bofore the presidential election:
There is a great deal of misiniorm alton abou
the status of tho case of Mr., Blaine agains
Shoemaker, The term OF the United State
court, which begins IN indianapolis in Sep
tenber, may last rs long as the 18th of october
and the case Is to be pushed to immediat
trial The fact that Judge Woods occupies tn
bench win facilitate this Woods is from tn
northern part of Indiana. is an able lawye
sound jurist, and, what is of most importanc
in this case, bitter republican partisan.
The editor Of tho Times has recontl,
been engaged in u controversy with th'
editor of the Press as TO the comparativ
circulation of tho journals over whicl
they respectively preside, and we fea
that the effort has been too much for him
Ho has not only lost his grip on tn
Revised Statutes, bus ho has evidentl,
neglected to read tho news dispatches
which appear in his own paper.