The Ottawa free trader. [volume] (Ottawa, Ill.) 1843-1916, 1888-02-25
AT LAST,

Ing of intense qualification that AT last the
alleged boodler cases are, on Monday next,
TO come TO hearing in open court, and the
merits of the indictments 70 be determined
by law. For more than year Messrs.
Raymond, Bar,els and Milligan have rested
under indictments for having defrauded the
county Of sums of money, and throughout
all this time there has been kept up
through the columns Of the cellar organ
evidently for some purpose, an indecent
assault, not only on the indicted themselves,
but upon all those who were friendly with
them or who insisted that the men should
be allowed the privilege of a judicial trial
before being counted with common Grim
inals and sneak thieves.
Because the FREE TRADER has hereto
fore declared that justice and fair dealing
requires that these men have an unpreju
diced and impartial trial, and be adjudged
according TO the law and the evidence to
be developed on their trials In the courts,
1t has been denounced by the "investiga
tors" as opposed to the enforcement of
criminal law in these cases. Because it
has insisted that they be not tried and con-
demned upon the irresponsible statements
made upon the streets and colored by the
prejudice.Of avowed personal enemies of
the indicted, who might or might not be of
the mem beers of the investigating commit
tee, it has been termed by such irresponsi
bles the especial organ of boodlerism and
the friend of criminals. For preferring,
for the credit of the people of LaSalle
county, that the boasts of the criminality of
these men, made by the prosecution, should
not be realized on their trial, the FREE
TRADER has been continually misrepre-
sented and villified.
The FREE TRADER has in the past Criti-
ciZed the conduct of the prosecution Of
these cases, and the manner of carrying on
this investigation, as well as the accuracy
of its findings. And why should it not?
Here was an investigation ordered forpur-
poses of fairness, by the board of supervis-
ors, carried on by some Of the members Of
the cOmmitte, with the secret, If not openly
avowed hope OF finding defalcaiion on the
part of Messrs, Milligan, Raymond and
Bartels. There was no impartiality in its
desires or in its conduct, and no apparent
show of fairness The mem ers of it, in
stead of keeping the results of their search
If any, to themselves. and reporting the
same 10 the county board or to the public
prosecutor, persisted in furnishing the
same in advance 10 the Ottawa JOuBdI, to
be published for the sole purpose of Great
ing, as was announced by one of them, a
public sentiment favorable to the investi-
gators and against the eXotficials under
vestigation. In an eagerness to fasten the
stamp of suspicion upon these men the
grand jury room was resOrted to, and in
dictment upon indictment returned against
them Did II thereupon become necessary,
in order to bolster up the case charged,
that from the time of the rendition of these
indictments until this present time these
men should have been at work ransaCking
RECORDS and resorting to the columns of an
INSCRIPTIONS press and vilifying all who
have not joined in their Remuneration
In tins whfrl of denunciation the court
even has not escaped. For week past the
Joundl has teemed with slanderous denun-
citation of Judge Blanchard, because he
saw fit to place for trial on Monday next
the case of ex- Sheriff Milligan, indicted
for Withholding public money, rather than
the case of Bartels, whose case 1t was prior
thereto tacitly understood should 60 over
until next term. This paper and the
men II is acting for, casts out the insinua-
ton, if not the open charge, that Judge
Blanchard forgot his public duty when he
set the case as he did-a charge wholly
uncalled for and one that will receive but
little consideration from the people of the
county who know Judge Blanchard. No
matter what people may think of Judge
Blanchard as a jurist, no one ever doubted
his absolute integrity of character.
But why this attack and why this furore
over the setting of case for trial which
the prosecution should have been prepared
to try the day after the grand jury ad-
iourned six months since? Presumably If
the prosecution had any evidence 1t was
presented to the grand jury or the indict
ment would not have been returned; but
If he has not, his committee has been at
work ever since that session In October,
and the prosecutor ought not now to make
complaint because the Court insists that
they must go TO trial and prove the charges
made after an iyestigatlon that has been
going on over eighteen months by a large
committee, assisted at least portion of
thesime by their able attorneys.
If today there are in this county good
many doubling Thomases" as TO the
strength Of the case of the prosecution it
is not strange, for the action of the COM
a. g al