The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1889-04-03
Where Is the Committee of One Hum
dred?

Where Is the Committee of One Hum
dred?
The original Indictment in the Coy case
was defective. AS soon as the flaw was
discovered, Judge WooDs ordered the
grand jury which returned this indict-
ment to be reconvened. The grand jury,
without hearing any further evidence, re-
turned new Indictment, under which
Coy was tried, convicted and sent to the
penitentiary.
Is there a man in this community who
can explain why this course is not pursued
in the pending election cases? Granting,
for the sake of the argument, that the in
dictments quashed by Judge WooDs'
were defective, why does he not do as he
did in the Coy case-call the grand jury
together so that perfect indictments may
be returned? The testimony is fresh in
the minds OF the grand jurors. 1t would
not be necessary for them to hear any
witnesses. The expense involved would
be trifling. What reason can be given for
the failure of Judge WooDs to take the
same action in these cases that he took in
similar cases, under precisely the same
circumstances, less than two years ago?
Judge WooDs is quoted as saying that
at will now rest with Mr.. CHAMBERS as to
the future disposition of these cases.
If Mr. CHAMBERS desires it, each
individual will be continued under bond,
and at the neat meeting of the grand jury the
parties may be reindicted properly"
1t does not rest with Mr.. CHAMBERS as
to the future disposition of these cases.
1t rests entirely with Judge WOODS. He
has the power to have the grand jury
brought back here at once. The present
grand jury will be in existence for an
other month. The new grand jury will
be impaneled May l. If it investigates
the election cases it will have to 90
over the entire ground again.
The witnesses will have to be summoned
anew, and all the testimony heard once
more. This would involve an enormous
and wholly unnecessary expense. Butno
such thing is intended. 1t is obviously
intended by Judge WooDs and by CHAM
BEERS that these election prosecutions shall
end now. The man CHAMBERS does not
even make pretense of desiring to con-
Yict any of the persons accused of these
crimes. He expresses his doubts of their
guilt to all who will listen. He exhibits
an utter disregard of his oath of office,
and a shocking indifference to the proprie-
ties OF his position.
Where is the committee of one hun
dred? Where are the clergymen who os-
tentatiously sat on the bench with Judge
WooDs when the Coy cases were on trial,
and gave vent at public meetings to their
Indignation over the tally-sheet forgeries?
Where is Brother MCLEOD? Where is
Brother HUNTER? Why are they silent
now when a miserable technicality is
made a pretext for wholesale Jail de-
livery of men charged with gross offenses
against the ballot-box? Where is ALEX
AMBER B. CoNDUITT? Where is WILLIAM
PINK FIsHBACK? Where is JOHN H.
HOLIDAY? Where is WILLIAM HENDER-
son? Where is CHARLES +. COFFIN?
Where is ELI f. RITTER? Where
is WILLIAM II. HOBBs? Where is
WILLIAM H. GRIFFITH? What are these
once vigilant guardians of the purity of
elections about Why don't they stand
up and be counted for right and justice
when both are being trampled under foot
by the knavish instruments of corrupt
political machine?