Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1890-12-30
A COMPLAINT AIRED.
Judge Stowe Talks 10 the Grand Jury
About the Petition for
THE WORKHOUSE INVESTIGATION.
he Says 1t Was Impertinent, and Improper
That it Reached Them.
OTHER NEWS CLEANED IN THE COURTS

When the grand jury reported for duty
yesterday morning Judge Stowe stated
to them that in pursuance of remarks made
by him on Wednesday last, relative to the
petition of a number of citizens demanding
an investigation of the workhouse, he would
read them a charge, defining their duties,
etc. This charge was in substance as fol-
lows:
If the matter had not been given such pub
licity by the press l should have contented
myself with quietly suppressing the paper,
without saying anything more than suggesting
10 you that the attempt to communicate was
entirely improper, and that you had and could
have nothing whatever TO DO with it in your
official capacity grand jurors.
In my charge to you on the first dsy of the
term stated generally that so far as criminal
or alleged criminal offenses (bY which l mean
all such OtfenSeS and matters as fall within the
jurisdiction of this court triable by jury) you
could only take notice of them, or, in the Ian
guage of your oath as jurors. they could come
TO your knowledge only by way of informations
made before magistrates and returned to
court such as you have had before you every
day, except in three kinds of cases.
WHERE THE JURY HAS POWER
"Flrst-When the Court, of its own motion,
calls your attention to and directs investiga-
tion of matters of general public import, such
Z
tending to debauch and corrupt the public
morals In such cases tine Court may properly,
in aid of inquiries directed by it, summon,
swear and send before the grand jury such wit
neSses as II deems necessary for full invesu-
cation OF The evil lntlmated. But this course is
never adopted IN cases of ordinary crimes
charged 'sgainst individuals.
"SecOnG--The District Attorney can in some
cases prefer an Indictment against individuals
without a previous binding over or commit
ment, as when the accused has fed the jurls-
ulctlon OF the State.
"ThIrd-The grand Jury may, upon their own
knowledge. in some cases originate a criminal
proceeding by 'presentment.' This is the
notice taken by the jury of an otfense falling
within their own knowledge or observation.
1t must be based upon the personal knowledge
of at least one of the jurors, and must be con-
Cured IN by at least T. 1t is much a crimi-
nal accusation and such as affects the commu-
nifty at large as matters of general importance
in regard to the public health morals or safety
as an Indictment, except that it emanaues from
their own knowledge. 1t Is regarded as in
structiOn for an Indictment This, however is
strictly subordinate TO the Court and applies
only 10 criminal offenses which are the subject
of Indictment Where presentment fails to
show facts which are of such a character, the
Court must refuse Its assistance"
JUDGES QUOTED ON THE QUESTION.
Here the Court quoted at length from opin-
ions of Judges King and Parsons, of Philadel-
phia, and said: "Having thus indicated what
Iue functions OF Ine grand jury are, IL is nlgnly
necessary to say that outside of such functions
they have no more power, authority or duty
than any other J. II or more citizens who may
meet together in any capacity, social or other
wise. And the Court has no more right to in
vest them with power to investigate matters
not falling within the purview of the criminal
law and coming before them by proven au-
thority, than It would have to do SO with any
other body OF citizens we might choose to Sc
lect
In the case in hand the effort to communl-
cate with the grand jury in the manner at
tempted was gross breach of propriety, and
Is only saved from the penalty of being a mis-
demeanor (if at alD by the fact that the
charges specified are such as under no circum-
stances the grand jury can have any power to
examine or consider.
The grand Jury are not even legal visitors of
the wOrkhouse or any other public institution
of this county. In their official capacity they
have no right to be considered or recognized
Their visits to such places are merely personal
and are in sense part of their official
duties, and their exclusion by persons in
charge would be nothing more nor less than
the refusal to admit the same number of ordl-
nary citizens seeking to visit such places from
mere whim curiosity.
In conclusion, the jury have no right to
consider the charges contained in the paper
referred to. The manner in which it was
sought to bring it to the notice of the jury Is
improper and lmpertinent, and 1t can have no
recognition as a paper to be filed among the
records of this court
The application made by the Superintendent;
OF the wOrkhOuse must meet the same fate
Neither the Court nor the grand jury had any
power or authority to investigate the matters
complained of nor TO appoint others to do so.
ANY action either might take would be entirely
extra judicial"