The Jackson standard. [volume] (Jackson C.H., Ohio) 1847-1888, 1885-09-03

COIOred Voters, Read !


and remember that petition was
sent to President Cleveland for the
pardon of Mullen, and he pardoned
him. The name Of the first man on
the petition was George Hoadly.
Now if there is any colored man in
Jackson county who is low enough to
vote for Hoadly, | am greatly mis-
taken. d. NJ.
MULLEN's CRIME.
On the night of October 18th, 1884,
Mullen, being lieutenant Of police
in the city OF Cincinnati, planned,
conducted and led a raid upon the
homes Of colored men in the city,
making wholesale arrests of all the
male adult inhabitants thereof, to-
gether with such as could be found
upon the street at that hour of the
night, until nearly one hundred and
fifty legal colored voters Of the city
of Cincinnati had been arrested and
locked up in the dungeon at the Ham
mond Street Station House, where
they were kept in close confinement
till the close of the pools on the fol-
lowing day. Mullen had no warrant
or any legal authority for making
those arrests. They were arrested
and imprisoned because they were
colored men and Republicans, and
the object Of their arrest and incar-
ceration was to prevent them from
exercising the rights Of American cit
izens on the following day.
For this crime Mullen was indicted,
arranged, and, when the trial came
on, the evidence of his guilt was so
overwhelming and conclusive that he
abandoned all hope Of escape, and
confessed his guilt. The following is
the 0erbatim sentence of the court:
In sentencing Mullen January 3,
1885, Jud dge Baxter said:
Michael Mullen, you stand con-
victed of the crime of having, by un-
lawful means, prevented a number of
your fellow citizens from voting in
the recent Congressional election held
in this city. You were at the time a
policeman, paid to protect everyone in
the exercise of the legal rights. But
instead of doing this you availed
yourself of an unauthorized and in-
definite order issued by the mayor,
commanding the arrest Of all suspi-
cious persons found on the streets, as
color for your wrongful action, and
proceeded to arrest and imprison 152
citizens, having as good right to vote
as you had, and detained most of
them until the election was over, and
in this way and by these means de-
prived them Of their constitutional
right to vote. The mayors order, we
think, was an usurpation. But if it
were otherwise, you went beyond the
most liberal construction that can
reasonably be given to it. It pro-
fessed to authorize the arrest of 'sus-
picious persons whatever these terms
may mean) found on the streets.
whilst you invaded the homes of some
of your victims at or about midnight
preceding the election, and dragged
them from their beds, without expla-
nation, to the prison improvised for
the occasion, and there detained them
until after the polls were closed. If
there were any facts tending to bring
them within the purview Of the
mayors order, you failed to put them
in evidence. On the contrary, the
testimony demonstrated that you
knew some of them to be citizens Of
Cincinnati for several years preceding
their arrest; and yet you proceeded,
without inquiry, complaint or proof,
to arrest and hold them in durance
vile, as alleged in the Indictment,
under the pretense Of official duty,
but in fact to prevent them from ex-
ercising their constitutional right to
vote for representative in Congress.
The evidence of your guilt was SO
convincing that your Jealous and able
counsel voluntarily yielded to its If
resistible force, and with your acqui-
scence manifested in open court, con-
sented to the finding made by the
jury. This finding thus obtained is a
virtual confession by you that the ar
rest and imprisonment of the persons
named were for the wrongful purpose
alleged in the indictment.
"Such an unprecedented invasion
of the rights of American citizens by
any one, under any circumstances,
would be a grave violation Of the
criminal laws Of the United States
But when it is remembered that you
were at the time in the exercise of
public authority, and <acting under
the obligations of an official oath, re-
quiring impartiality and integrity in
the discharge of your duties, your in
fidelity to your public duties seems to
have been peculiarly fagitive, if not
atrocious. You not only outraged
the imprisoned parties but you struck
a traitorous blow to a fundamental
and vital principle that underlies our
institutions, and you did
your work so noiselessly and expertly
as to have eluded the vigilance of
5000 regular and special policemen,
deputy sheriffs and deputy marshals
then on duty, and supposed to have
been cooperating for the protection
Of all legal voters in the exercise Of
their legal rights, as we'll as the 75,-
900 other citizens of this great central
city, who (if we are to credit the city
press) were so thoroughly solicitous
on that occasion to preserve the purl-
ty of the ballot-box."
"The sublime impudence of such a
raid upon the constitutional rights of
your fellows, in connection with its
successful consummation, precludes
the idea that the scheme was con-
ceived and executed by you alone.
That you had accomplices is manifest.
You never would have ventured upon
a scheme so full Of danger, and from
which you could in no event have de-
rived any personal advantage, without
of cooperation from
others. But your accomplices have
thus far escaped detection and pun
ishment. Their immunity, however,
is no mitigation of your offence. You
were the active and conspicous instru-