The Critic and record., 1891-05-06
LYNCHERS IND0RSED.
THE GRAND JURY UPH0LDs THE
CITIZENS ACTION.
The Killing Of the Malta Men at New
Orleans Claimed 10 BE Necessary for
the Public Safety and Order of the
City-A Strong Statement of Fact.

the Public Safety and Order of the
City--A Strong Statement of Fact.
NEW ORLEANS, Ia, May G.-The long
delayed report of the grand jury in the
international affair of the parish prison
ers, March II, was presented late last even
ing to Judge Mari. 1t iustifes the citi-
zens, presents no indictments, and is
signed by all the Jurors. 1t is as fol-
lows:
"GRANp JuRY Room, MAY 3. 1891.
"T'o Tie lion. Robert n. .Mdrr, Jitdge Of TIE
Criminal District Court Of the Parish Of
Ne,o orleans, Section 4!
when this grand jury entered upon
its term of service there was pending in
section B of the tribunal the trial Of nine
men indicted for participation in the as
sassination of the late Superintendent of
Police, ID. c. Henuessy, on the night of
October 10, 1890. The enormity of that
crime, executed at the midnight hour
created unusual interest throughout the
whole country, while in our own city,
vitally concerned in the administration Of
Justice as deeply affecting her social, po-
litical and material welfare, the sent-
ment of the populace had crystallized into
the concrete form of expression, that jus
tice be rendered through the recognized
channels of criminal jurisprudence, that
tried by au impartial jury of American
citizens and meet with a righteous con
Yiction.
Zone fact stood out in awful prom-
nence about and beyond dispute or ques-
ton by any mantle fact that
\ CRIME OF UNPARALLED ATRoCITY
had been committed, evidenced by the
five terrible death-dealing weapons, the
numerous slugs and bullets found i'm
Ial s,,t 1, l, ID 1,n
scene, besides the missels that struck down
the solitary man, who would never have
been marked as the victim had he not
filled the responsible position of chief of
police of the law. 1t is not to he wondered
that attention should be directed to the
trial during many days of its progress in
the selection of jurors; the evidence of wit
nesses; the arguments of counsel; the
charge of the Judge and finally concen-
trated on the twelve men who, by virtue
of their solemn oath, sat in awful iudg-
ment on their fellow men. The verdict is
now official record bearing date March 10,
1891.
1--WE cannot be mistaken in the asser-
ton that the verdict was startling, amaz-
ing, bitter disappointment, shocking to
public opinion, provoking the repeated
accusation that someo of the jury had been
unfaithful to their high office. We feel
that we do not transcend the limits of our
duty as the grand inquest to refer to the
strong presentation of the case as made
by the State through counsel associated
in the prosecution, clear, continuous
complete, and convincing in the direct
testimony and the material circumstances
1t appeared more than sufficient to con-
vince the most unwilling listener with its
truth and convey the full measure of its
power to those who ventured doubt.
AS the trial neared its termination it was
not possible for an observer
TO FAIL TO REALIZE THE COMMENTS
made on every side touching the action of
81 me members of the jury when the case
should be submitted. Charges and specu-
lations abounded, coupled with the we'll
known connection of certain parties of
unenviable notoriety, as shown by their
presence daily in the court room and
building, arousing the suspicion that the
most subtle, dangerous, and powerful in
tluences known to the practice of criminal
law were being exercised in behalf of the
defense. Those considerations have led
us to investigate the subject, embracing
all its attendant conditions and incidents.
Each one of the twelve jurors of the
trial was summoned and asked to make q
statement. None objected, but all rather
| welcomed the opportunity. 1t was q
notable feature of the sworn statement
that they primarily sought to justify
their verdict by attacking the line Of
evidence presented by the State and at
| OF counsel for the defense. 1t was freely
admitted by the jurors that remarks had
| been made in the jury-room as early rs
| the first day, when testimony was offered,
| and repeated number of times after
| ward, that the
STATE WAS MAKING A POOR CASE
and this was positively repeated at the
close of the States evidence.
1T is clearly brought out by the evi-
denee of the Jurors that, as affecting three
| of the accused, PolitZ, Scaffedi and Mon
asterio, the jury engaged in the delibera-
| ton i'll their cases some four or five hours,
attended with intense excitement, and on
repeated ballots the jury's vote stood: Six
| guilty six not guilty. This is a clearly
defined indication of the convictions of
the jury as to the three accused. 1t i'm
presses us deeply, as it must every one
| to whom the fact is conveyed and forces
the conclusion that the evidence was suf-
iicient to justify the six jurors who stood
resolute and determined for a verdict of
guilty, making it well-nigh impossible to
reach any other conclusion than mis-
trial. These three accused named above
were probably the unwilling actors desig
mated by leaders of the conspiracy
TO EXECUTE \ vILLAINoUs PART,
i'll which they had neither personal mo-
tive nor interest.
Following this investigation, it was
| quickly learned from various sources that
talesmen had been approached. Every
| clue offered was taken up, and, as rule,
the talesman who had been previously
marked ont was seen when alone or in
vited away to some secluded and unsus-
pected place, well-designed pretexts guard
ing the real meaning of the talks, but
| nl1ipl,lU 1naninn n tho fria1
fayorite expression was that big money
might be made by going on the jury and
doing right There is no possible doubt
that such attempts were made by various
parties in the service of the defense, en-
tertained by some of the talesmen and
scornfully rejected by others.
| THE necessity was imperative for COM
plete lists of the talesmen, but such lists
were easily obtained, as in other trials.
The grand jury knows that the list of 500
talesmen in the HenneSsy case was in the
office of O'Malley & Adams at II o'clock
Sunday morning, February %, 1891,
though the trial judge issued special or
ders Saturday evening that the list was
not to be made public or given to counsel
of either side until Monday morning. il
is not shown by whose hands the list was
secured, but enough is known to confirm
the
FAST SECRET AND POWERFUL INFLUENCE
of the so-called detective agency and
Counsel Adams to handle the machinery
of the court.
in searching for the true causes of the
criminal acts connected with the empanel
Ing of the Jury in the Hennessy case the
sworn statement of Thomas G.. Collins is
found of great value Collins secured
employment in O'Malley & Adams office
and was commissioned special officer by
the mayor, and paid by the city for this
service.
"This report unfolds the whole story OF
the iniquitous workings of the arch con
spirators and his lieutenants, revealing
the boundless power made TO overcome
and defy the majesty of the law, criminal
and civil proceedings through the opera