Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1891-05-06
THB GRAND JURY
Report oa Hallellg nlfdtr ild
Killing d Itllhn

Nskvas ~ uV0oV9 0OUVA NV
Killing d Itllhm
II Nv 0llllls LilsR u hItsu6aiial
Llsthk SI vtlkS.
4 Lsnsthy Doosnsat ceaossniss
xhose Noted cases.
New OaLEAxs. May 5.-Aftef six weeks
Investigation the grand jury completed their
labofs on the Hennessy case and the killing
OF Italians at the Parish prison, by pre-
septing special report this afternoon. To
Robert H Mar. judge Of criminal district
court: "When this grand jury entered
upon the term Of service whica was pend.
ing in section B, this tribunal, trial Of nine
men, indicted for participation in the
assassination Of the late supt. Of police. d.
c. Hennessy, on TIE night Of Oct. 5. 1890.
The enarmity Of that crime created unusual
interest throughout the whole couotry,
while in our own city the sentiment Of the
populaee is erys!alizea intoa concrete form
Of expression that Justice be rendered
through the recognized channels Of eli u;nal
jurisprudenee. Apd that the guilty perpe-
traitors, whoever they we're, be tried by an
impartial jury Of American citizens and
meet with . righteous conviction. One
fact stood out in awful prominence. above
and beyond dispute Or question by any man,
the fact that . crime Of unparalleled
atrocity was committed. 10 evidenced BY
I've terrible death dealing weapons, and
numerous slugs and bullets nred ON the
errsnd Of human destruction, found i'm
bedded in the fences and houses as the
scene, besides the missles that struck down
marked as q victim had he not oiled the re-
sponsibIe position of chief officer Of the law. :.
1t 10 no to be wondered that attention should
be directed to the trial during the msny
days of its progress The verdict 10 now
Of official record, bearing date Of March IS,
1891. We cannot be mistaken 10 the as
seriion that the verdict was startling,
smszing, bitter disappointment and shock
ing TO public opinion, provoking the. re-
peaied accusation that some of the jury had
been unfaithful to their Office. We feel
we do not transcend the limits of our duty
as grand inquest to refer to the strong
presentation Of The case as made by the
STATE through the counsel associated in the
secusion-convincinR in direcs testimony
and material circumstance it tsppeared more
than suifisie to convince the most un-
willing listener with its truth, and convey
the full measure of it's power to those who
veDtured doubt.
As TIE trial nesred its terminus it was
not possible for aoy observer 10 fail to
realise the comments made on every side
touching the action OF some members Of
the jury when the case should be submit
ted; charges and specuiations abou1ded
coupled with the well-known connection Of
certain parties of inevitable authority, as
shown by their presence daily in the court
room and building, arousiug suspicion that
the most subtle, dangerous and power
full influence known to the prac-
tice of criminal law was beiog exercised
in behalf OF defence. These considerations
led us to investigate the subject embracing
all its attendant, conditions and incidents
The inquiry has been conducted with the
utmost diligence, devoid of fear or par.
tislity with the single purpose Of fastening
the guilt to the proper persons and pre-
seBting them under indictment to this tribu.
nsi. Each ons' Of the IL jnrors Of the trial
were summoned and asked to make state
ment. None objected--sll rather welcomed
the opportunity. 1t was noticeable feature
Of the sworn statements that they primarily
sought to Justify their verdict by stacking
tbs lire OF evidence presented by the state,
Il
Of the counsel for the defence.
1t was freely admitted by the jurors that
remarks had been made in the jury room
az early as the first day when testimony was
offered, and repeated number Of times
afterwards, that "the state was making
poor case" which was positively repeated
at the close OF the s,ste's evidence.
One quarrel at least was reported, arising
from an accusation by one juror to smother.
with The expression: "You talk like you
were fixed before you came here"
They formed no conception Of the ten
sion to which the public mind was strung.
II clearly indicated that the necessity for
secrecy was urged, as several jurors were
selected, was impressed upon them at
various times ard finally, before verdict
was rendered, brought forward again. with
the injunction to destroy every vestiye Of
eviience they had and leave every thought
ard act behind them. The urgency OF this
was most cuaningly devised te conceal the
peculiar eve nts that tfanspired in the jury
room, Careful observers testify with
special reference to the marked inatsention
of tie jury as the Witnesses submitted
their evidence. Of conduct mast ua-
becoming and fraught with the
gfavest consequence when the mo-
We are led to conclude thst the jury under
took to try the caee when ii was submitted,
by their own estimate OF the value Of state-
ments made BY parties not called - Wit
nesses. With strange unanimity, they
dweit upon what they knew by reading and
hearssy Of certain incidents of The assassi
nation prior 10 the trial. and made those
baAs of powerful percussion for givirg the
accused benefit of doubt and con-
cludiog The delibers'ioBs in their favor
We must take occasion 10 say it was not
expected TO obssin any evidence Of undue in
fuence from members Of the jury. for those
men Who were unsupported bad nothiog
10 reveal. while othsYs would not make
the mselves payticeps cyiminis II was
clearly brough. out by lhs evidences Of the
jurors that, as Sffeeting thfes CT the
accused, Poiilz. Scafedi and MonAsterio,
the jury had engaged In deliberations in
their case some four or five hours, attended
with intense excite ment, ard on repeated
ballots tbs jnry's vote stood six guilty and
six not gully. This Is clearly de-
dDed indication Of the convictions
Of the jury as 10 these accused.
1t forces TIE conclusion that the evidence
was sufficient to justify the six jurors who
st3od resoaute aud determined for verdict
Of guilty, making |; we'll nigh impossible to
reach any other conclusion than . mistaisl.
These three accused were probably unwill-
log sc.ofs, designated BY the leaders of the
conspiracy 70 execute the viiiainous part, in
which they hsd neither personal motive OF
interest FolIosipa this investigation, /;
was quickly learned from various sources,
that tslesrnsn had bsen approached and
every clue offered was taken up; ~ rule
the tals.men had ceen previously marked
Gu. and were seen when sione OF invited
away to some secluded aod unsupported
place, with we'll designed pre,exts saardios
the real meaning Of the talks quickly lead.
ing up 10 the great trial Tslesmen were
visited At their homes during the evening
or early morning. intercsp pied while on the
wsy TO the csurt house, stopped in the cor
ridor of the court and the vile work deiib
erstely carried forrnd In the court room
durirg trial.
One Of the fsTorise expressions va,
'.big money might be made by going on
the jury and doing right There 10 nc
, possible doubt but what such attempts
were msds by various parties in the sef.
vice Of the defense 10 eItsrtsined BY sone
Of the taiesmen and scornfully rejected b.
othefs. These aye facts given on the evi