The Jasper weekly courier. [volume] (Jasper, Ind.) 1858-1922, 1889-04-26

i A Contrast
Evansville Courier.
\ In the Courier Of yesterday the follow.
ing telegram from indianapolis sp.
!. pearcd:
!, The case OF Samuel Carpenter, in the
Federal Court, for bribing electors, was
dismissed by Judge Wood. Carpenter
admitted that be had used money 10 So
cure votes for his own election ss State
Senator, but the government failed 10
show that he had used any to assist Id
the election OF the Congressional candi.
date, for which he was on trial, and the
Judge instructed the Jury 10 find for tho
defendant.
This is the Carpenter who was refused
his seat Ia the State Senate because be
was proved to have committed whole.
sale bribery In securing his election.
Notwithstanding the overwhelming
proofs OF his guilt Carpenter was re-
by the Republicans OF the
Senatorial Districts composed Of the
counties Of Shelby and Decatur. but
the shameless challenge thus given 10
decent public sentiment was resented
|at the polls, and Carpenter was defeated
10y large majority. The dismissal OF
this case against Carpenter is quite ia
with Judge Woods other iu-
dicial exploits Of recent occurrence.
It ie a wonder that such q man as
Woods il permitted 10 hold up bis head
i'm civilized community. He is more
Infamous than Dudley or Carpenter, be-
cause they are simply Of the common
herd of outlaws who glory In their own
shame, while Woods occupies an on
Icial station where purity Of character
aud freedom from prejudice are sup.
posed to be natural aud essential at.
tributes. MOREOVER, he is member OF
1.-The church, and by this connection de-
lclares himself to be inspired by morality
Iof every kind as It was taught by the
Savior, whom be processes 10 follows:
When Coy and Bernhamer were on
trial before this same Judge Woods,
why was this same technicality not IL.
|voked In their behalf? They were
charged with the crime OF tally sheet
| forgery, as Carpenter was charged with
bribery. The penalty prescribed By the
statute for these crimes is about the
same. Both charges were made aftor
elections ct which members OF ConfrosD
we're chosen. Up to this point, the cases
against Coy and Beruhamer, and the one
lagainst Carpenter, were parallel, except
as to the exact nature Of the crime alIog-
led TO have been committed, the case
'lagsinst Coy and Bernhamer, as We have
Stated. having been for forging tally
sheets, while that against Carpenter was
for bribery. But in neither case Was e
'lspeciflcd that the crime Wss committed
lin behalf of candidate for Congress. ln
the case against Coy aud Bernhamer, the
forgery was alleged TO have been per-
petrsted to elect two county ofIicialo "a
NJ arion county, while il the case OF bri-
berry against Carpenter, he was charged
with having perpetrated the crime TO
ELECT himself. But In the very nature OF
the case, the crime OF tally sheet forgery
las charged against Coy and Bernhsmer
could have had no direct effect upon tho
ELECTION Of Congressman, while ia the
case Of Carpenter, although the bribery
was primarily to elect himself, the crime
actually did effect the votes IN electing
1.-THE Congressman. So, IL this technical
point was raised ct all, Il is plain to the !.
most ordinary intelligence that Il should
have borne in the same direction In the
case Of Carpenter that II did in the csses
|against Coy and Bernhsmer. Yet Judge
Woods has the insoIcnce 70 use this
to convict Democrats and
TO save Republicans from the clutch OF
the outraged Law.
No more striking instance Of the de-
Iiberate prostitution Of . Court to parti-
san purposes was ever recorded than
that which is found in the contrast be-
tween the action Of this grscelcss in
cumbent Of the Bench in the cases against
Coy and Bernhamer and the one against
Carpenter.