The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1889-06-26

we're recalled and examined, resulting in the re-
return OF nine indictments. But even in the
cases re-examined 1t VIII appear that only 10
twenty-one of them were az the witnesses sub
/ penaed- In the case against Lucas for bribery
only three out of eleven were called; in that
4 against Carson for the same ofense, four out OF
/ seven. In these two cases-Lucas and Carson
while all the names of the witnesses originally
/ called do not appear on the backs OF the in
| dictments they do appear among the grand jury
| notes 1t is noticeable that seven of the nine
| indictments rebound were in cases where oN OF
the witnesses we're recalled. 1t is quite evident
/ that II one or more witnesses are omitted IN q
/ case the most important evidence maybe lost.
/ 10 Is shown that of the 1l6 cases eighty-two
were absolutely ignored one witness
/ brought before the jury. And OF 2j9 witnesses
/ slxty-four only we're sent for This - what the
/ Aelcs calls reviewing ia cases"
This is not all. The L. 5. attorney has not
/ been governed in his wholesale destruction of
the grand iury's work by the decision of Judge
| Woods as 10 the validity OF certain pleadings.
/ lie has gone further and uoilied indictments
In no degree affected Dy the court ruling, but
rather the contrary.
Among these is the case of Wesley Jarvis,
No. 5000, for double voting. The proof is un-
deniable that he voted twice-once In Green
township OF Madison county and once in
Greenfield Hancock county. EIe is known
and was identified by both election boards.
The defendant was making threats against a
prominent politician which probably accounts
for his case being "nOllied."
Another of this class is one against Ward
Hlldebrand, no. 1857, of Delphi, Carroll
county, and others, charged with fOrcibly and
brutally preventing an old man-over eighty
from going to the polls to vote. The details OF
this crime have frequently been Published aud
show conduct OF the most clearly culpable char
acter. The prosecutor has ''nollied" the case.
Another Is that against Marshal Hollings-
worth, No. 1880, OF Marion county, for brib-
cry. Two young OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES given SIS
the night before the election and carefully in
structed by HOllingswOrth whom they should
buy. This fellow is not even put on trial, but
walks out OF court by the grace OF the govern
ment counsel.
Another is a charge against George Bailey,
NO. 3,992l Of Morgan county, for bribing two
brothers. John and Joseph Kent. Each man
was driven 10 the polls in a buggy, but az daifer
ent hours, and, after depositing the ballots
given them ten-dollar gold piece, in each in
stance, was laid upon the lap of the voter and
by him taken and kept. The Kent brothers
both Joined in an affidavit which is now in pos
session OF the L. :. attorney. setting up these
facts. The case was ''nollied."
Another was against Gilmore Heston and
Frank Taylor NO 1929 of Worthington, who
falsely impersOnated officers; brutality assaulted
uldD DIV tue name OF HOnerL MaZllEOrs pre-
tended 10 place him under arrest; took hful to
Bloomfield and there, by order of the sheriff,
released him, but he could not reach home IN
time to vote. These cowardly heelers have been
released.
\ number of other cases might be cffed of
this class, which the Z. S. attorney has dis
missed, though no defect was found ia the in
dictmeuts. And IN none, except the one
against George Bailey, have the witnesses been
recalled 1t lmpresses one as remarkable
thing that all these men, il honest innocent
and above reproach, should permit the stain
o. an Indictment for high crime-a felony
to remain against their names without demand
ing the purging process of a public trial. Pure
and innocent men do not seek escape upon
shadow y technicalities.
But ED ongh has been shown TO demonstrate
that the review" OF the election cases has
been an n4pty sham; that where Eesorted to
at all il was not done with any purpose OF
furnishing the guilty, but rather with that par
tisan and dis, oval determination which has
characterized the federal court in its disregard
Of law and destruction OF all legal processes
from the beginning. The list as obtained, is
follows:
vs. David T. Francisv-5. 905-qusShsd.
Randall Abrams,
Geo e Cook,
Carrie Sellers. r...Ti.5 $3.50
T. Hoffman, ~
z ~ Johns u,
William hnson-
y
samuel Denton,
F3 e p !Gs'st'' Recalled "''>
George Carr.
". Amo, Walker aud Samuel B. Ensminger-
5siO-Ss 9lI-quashed.
L. A Barnett,
Sherman ctapp,
" A. Van Buren,, ! Recalled Rope.
Noble c Butler,
IssIc Christie.
vs.. Ollie Holman aud William ". Payton-S 912
ana S,9l3-quas5ed
Nr = Richlin. Becalled all
! seph p. earle
Jose J. Stewart. Both re-indicted.
A EncNe.
vs. Ira Thompson and NJ o. Fussellman-s,914
and 3,315-quashed
j. G. Duncan.
Daniel Lively. Recalled ncne
Char IS q. Renner,
George Z, Cash.
VS.. Frank Reedsr aad J. II. Fletcher-S.sls and
s,9la-qnashed.
". o. S IN RecsIled none.
VS.. Nyron {. WhitcoSnb and Melvin C. Wright
1922 and S,92S-q uashed.
Mrs. Jennie Whltcomb,
James Hl,
John D. Beers. po.,,,.5 IL
Milton STAT. OH
Adam Griner.
John A. smith,
vs.. Elmors HestOn and Frank Tsylor--S, 924-
Robert Mazingo,
Clifton Dixon,
Charles Hoagland, Z Recalled aons.
CHARLES Roth,
Noah EldOn
VS.. John W Butler and Isaac y. Hsmmond-5 PCS
and 3926-quashed.
Luther o. Clifford.
John :. Williamson,
John r. Harbaugh.
G. W. Hall. : Recalled uczs.
John ". Wfles.
Samuel Apologize,
John R Carson.
vs. Robert Probasco and Joseph r. Congdon-S, o27
and 3,a25-qusshed
Dr.. c C Bower Not recalled
Us. Samuel Oningsr and Charles c. Irwin-s,e2s
and 5, 0s0-quashed.
Bert Rox well,
Peter r bier,
John Snobarger,
William Gross, Recalled none.
Josiah B. Cobb,
Luelia Day,
Nost Miller.
W. Conrad II. CrosSley, Albert Mowrev, James
Morton, Charles R James and Albert B. Taylor ~
-S,e 1882. asa. S954, a,e35, 3e3s-auashed
3. F. Amen. po..u.5 IL
George Phipps, SoSsI- 81. "a r.,
Ross Long. - II Ae34V4
O ". Cook. t0iN'eN
vs. John r. Jones and Isaac y. Cotton-S, 937-s-
quashed-
Wallace Maimes,
ThOs. NJ. Reveal,
e. A. Foreman,
ao' cl 1, = A."' Recalled six.
John Templeton,
George w. Deems,
NJ 5 GlidwelL
vs. james Thomas and William Blakely-S s5s-
5, S50-quashed.
Alfred IsascS.
William Dutv.