The Saline County journal. [volume] (Salina, Kan.) 1871-1893, 1884-06-26

pardon the trial was a gross outrage
upon the rights of citizenship That
Is the meaning Of this proceeding, and
In that fact lies the Wiekedness Of the
thing. The trial was oppressive aud
unfair they say but they do not ask
TO have \ fair trial, what thiy are ell
titled to II what they say j. true. aud
what they would have been permitted
% receive IL they had taken the ur,li-
nary and lawful course and appealed
to the supreme court. IL these same
men had been convicted of stt.alin.
horses or sheep and had been tried
and committed Ia the same MANNER
that they say they were tried la thesr
cases, dOes anyone suppose they
would have asked for par,lun; or IL
they had, does anybody believe u"v-
ernOr Click would have inierfcr,-,i E?
He would have done in that t7tSr
what he ought tO have done ia this
informed the applicants that their
proper remedy is by appeal Ia the sti-
preIne court. WHY did he not De- ~ .
Will his organ, the Journal, phrase
inform ms l. he afraid to trust the
Supreme court
But this Is not nearly all Of this
UuAluEEAiAiH NitNgEEuAlNE- NNANtlllNE
Click Is q lawyer. and L. entitled tn a
presumption in favor OF his knowing
something about the rules of svidence
and the value OF testimony In these
cases he acted upon testimony that
he would not have the audacity to
present to a court, and which he
would nOtl permit the opposing eOun-
sci TO present.
Here Is an extract from the sherifI7s
statement, referring 10 one OF the
cases
81 can now assure your eXcellency
that in the trial Of that case his man
ner. conduct, rulings and decision i'm
pressed me as being those OF a highly
prejudiced judge, and made and car
ried on for the express purpose Of con-
victlng the defendant"
What witness would be permitted
to tell a jury anything like that? The
judges conduct impressed me What
conduct, pray q? Not a single act Of
the judge or q word pointed out or
named. The sheriff knows as well as
the Governor does, that there Is no
evidence in that The judges con-
duet might have Impressed" ether
persons differently, as it did, doubt
less, or the prisoners would not have
been convicted.
The clerk Of the court was a witness
before the Governor, also.
His statement Is :
my personal ObservatiOnsOf the
transaction in relation to the con-
victiOn Of your six petitioners from
the beginning to the end-frOm the
singing out Of a few eulprits among a
large number-tO the lenieney Of the
sentence upon complete conviction
prohibits me from asserting that the
word fairness" or Justice" has been
complied with or consulted but that
i'm its stead the most conspicuous
prejudice and partialIty-for what aim
or purpose / am not prepared TO say
has laid itself bare before the public of
this community, as well on the part
Of the prosecuting officer and his
counsel as on the part Of the presiding
judge"
That is even worse than the sherifs
about equal TO a politicians letter
In opposition TO some coveted ap-
pOintment. Such stuff would never
get TO jury in court.
mOny. and il comes from the Super
says
at Is well known fact that Judge
J. II. Prescott is a radical Prohibition
ist. In the prosecution Of these men
he allowed men TO go into the jury
box who said that "they did not think
that $500 and ninety days In the
county jail was any too large penal
ty for selling beer" Others were ex-
cused because they thought the pen
atty too severe. Judge Prescott
acted the part Of prosecuting at
tOrney i'm all Of these eases. When
ihe county attorney failed tO bring
out the desired Information he PRES
cOtt) would question the witness.
Motions and objections made by the
court. These men have been shame
fully dealt with. II ever men were
worthy Of pardon they are"
This comes from an officer who has
charge Of the intellectual, and 10
some extent the moral welfare OF the
young people OF that country. He
does not say these men are not guilty
or that the judgment OF the court Is
unjust or dispropOTtiOnRl to the Of
fences committed, and II he did, IL
would be no evidence In any court,
which he knows very we'll
These are samples Of the evidence
on which Governor Click decided tO
set aside the verdict Of a jury Of men |
sOlemney sworn 10 hear aud try truly |
that heard the testimony OF wit
uesses sworn TO testify truly, and the |
judgment of judge who Is bound by |
oath as well ns 10y all the restraining |
and guiding Influences Of high ju- |
dieial position. These tests OF testi- |
mony are given because they were |
paraded I'm Governor Clicks organ rs |
sufficient reasons for his conduct. |
Every lawyer, and every citizen Of
experience; every man /
whoever served on jury or as a wit ]
ness in court, knows that this kind Of 1
stuff Is not permitted In court. II Is |
just such talk and gush that men use
on the street in reference to candidates /
for office. But the Governor sets /
aside all rules of evidence as well as
the judgment Of q coordinate depart /
ment Of the government, and sets up /
bis own will as the law OF the land /
How, we ask Is Il possible to main
tain and enforce the laws Of the land /
with such q man as this acting as
Governor Of the State Let the peo-
pie look where whisky and DemOera-
sy are leading. This article Is very /
long but we do not apologize.