New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1884-04-18
TIE NOMINAL or TIE SHERIrF.

4
The prosecution of Sheriff Davidson broke
down yesterday, and the jury were directed to
acouit the accused official No other result was
possible when the weakness of the District At
! torney's case was disclosed. The other indict-
ments were dismissed, and Mr.. Davidson we
presume has nothing more to fear in the way
of criminal proceedings.
The impotence of this conclusion is not anaz-
| ing when the nature of the proceedings is con-
| sidcred When the indictments were found ii
was mystery why the Grand Jury had
passed by the proof that the Sheriff had
taken out of the public treasury thou-
sands of dollars for the transportation ,Ot
prisoners who were in reality conveyed by the
! Department of Charities and Correction. and
why they had rested the case against him on the
comparatively trivial matter of flew dollars
charged for the services of cleaners and cooks,
which, it was alleged had not been rendered.
| 1t was suggested IN explanation of this action,
| that the charges of cleaners and cooks pre-
scented a perfectly simple, direct issue which
could not be complicated or evaded Another
| explanation was whispered about in some quar-
ters but not acknowledged openly-that the
graver matters of fraudulent charges for the
/
Governor TO act upon by the removal of the
Sheriff. Mr.. Cleveland has not acted, and Mr..
Davidson goes out of court unhurt
One thing is so clear THAT every man may
read it at a glance. This trial does not exalt
the reputation Of District-Attoney Olney.
His most eager apolOgists must admit that the
prosecution made a miserable failure. This was
due to one of two things. The District-Attorney
had a bad case or he managed 1t badly. If the
evidence against tie Sheriff under this indict-
ment was SO weak that the jury must be dl-
rected to find for the defence, whose fault was
it7 The Special Grand Jury that brought IN the
indictment had been acting under the daily adj
vice and guidance of the District Attorney.
Why was the indictment found if there was so
small ground for it When t.had been found
was it not possible for an able and acute Dis
trict- Attorney TO sift his proofs thoroughly be-
fore going to trial Could he not have found
out where he stood In time to avoid such dis
astrous failure as this = The charges on which
Mr.. Davidson was tried proved easy of explana-
ton. Could his responsibility for the admitted
frauds in the transportation of prisoners have
been explained away as easily
OF course Mr.. Dayidson's political friends and
allies will insist that this is a vindcaton for
him, and that the Governor should give him
certificate of good character. But will just and
honest men forget the long, black record of ex
tortion, blackmail, oppression, injustice and
fraud practiscd in the Shcrifl's Office under the
administration of Mr. Davidson! The facts are
plain for all to sec in the evidence taken by the
Roosevelt Committee. Even if Mr.. Olney has
failed to secure conviction on minor charge,
Mr. Davidson has not cleansed himself of the
stains left by that investigation, aud ho never
can No high-minded and conscientious Cover
nor who studies the story OF iniamy unfolded by