The Portland daily press., 1891-05-06
BLOOD AVENGED BLOOD.
People Rose In Their Wrath and
Melted Out Justice.
Grand Jury Declines 10 Single Out
Men for Punishment.
Arsh-COnSpirater O'MaIley and His
COnfederates Indicted.
Crescent City's Tale Of Murder,
Bribery and Scandal.

prison, by presenting special report this
afternoon. The report follows:
To Robert Ii. Mar, Judge Of the Criminal
District Court:
When this grand jury entered upon its
term of service, there was pending, in Sec
ton OF this tribunal, the trial OF nine men,
indicted for participation in the assassina-
tion of the late Superintendent of Police ID.
G. Hennessy. on the night of October 8, 1890.
The enormity of that crime created unusual
interest throughout the whole country, while
In our own city the sentiment of the popu-
lace cryStalliZed into concrete form of eX-
preston that justice be rendered through the
recognized channels Of criminal jurispru-
dence that the guilty perpetrators, whoever
they were, be tried by an impartial jury of
American citizens, and meet with righteous
conviction. One fact stood in awful promi-
nence, above and beyond dispute or question
by any man, the fact that crime Of unpar-
alleled atrocity had been committed as ev-
idenced by. five terrible death dealing
weapons and numerous slugs and bullets,
fired ON an errand of human destruction and
found imbedded in fences and houses at the
scene, besides the missiles that struck down
the solitary man who would never have been
marked as victim had he not filled the re-
sponsible position of the chief officer of the
law. 1t is not to be wondered that attention
should have been directed to the trial during
the many days of its progress. The verdict
March 13. 1891. We cannot be mistaken in
the assertion that the verdict was startling
and amazing, bitter disappointment,
shocking to public opinion and provoking the
repeated accusation that some of the jury
had been unfaithful to their office. We feel
duty as grand inquest to refer to the strong
presentation of the case as made by the state
through the counsel associated in the prose-
cution. The convincing indirect testimony
were more than sufficient to convince the
most unwilling listener with their truth, and
convey the full measure of their
power to those who ventured
doubt. AS the iral neared its ter
mination it was not possible for any
on every side touching the action of some
members of the jury when the case should be
submitted. Charges and speculation
abounded, coupled with the we'll known con-
nection of certain parties of unelviable no.
toriety, as shown by their presence daily in
the court room and building, arOusing sus-
picion that the most subtle, dangerous aud
powerful influence known to the practice of
criminal law was being exercised in the be-
half of the defence.
The Scandal of the Jury Room.
These considerations led us to investigate
the subject embracing all its attendant con-
ditions and incidents. The inquiry has
been conducted with the utmost diligence,
devoid of fear or partiality, and with the
single purpose of fastening the guilt to the
proper persons and presenting them under
Indictment to this tribunal. Each one of the
twelve jurors of the trial was summoned and
asked to make statement. None objected;
all rather welcomed the opportunity. 1t was
a noticeable feature of their sworn state
ments that they primarily sought to justify
their verdict by attacking the line of evil
dence presented by the state and attaching
much weight to the argument of counsel for
the defence. 1t was freely admitted by the
jurors that remarks had been made in the
jury room as early as the first day when tes-
timony was offered, and repeated number
of times afterwards, that the state was
making poor case," and this was positively
repeated at the close of the states evidence.
from an accusation by one juror to another,
with the expression, "You talk like you were
fixed before you came here" They formed
no conception of the tension to which
is clearly indicated that necessity
for secrecy was urged, as several jurors
were selected and it was impressed upon
them at various times and, finally, before the
verdict was rendered, brought forward again
with the injunction to destroy every vestige
thought and act behind them. This urgency
was most cunningly devised to conceal the
peculiar events that transpired in the jury
room. Careful observers testify with refer
ence to the marked inattention of the jury
as the witnesses submitted their evidence,
conduct most unbecoming, and fraught with
the gravest consequences when the momen-
tOus import of the issue Is considered. We
are LED to conclude that the jury undertook
to try the case when it was submitted, by their
ltraN
made by parties not called as witnesses.
With strange unanimity they dwelt upon
what they knew by reading and hearSay of
certain incidents of the assassination prior
to the trial, and made those basis for CIV
ing the accused the benefit of the doubt and
concluding their deliberations in their favor
We must take occasion to say that 1t was
not expected to obtain any evidence of un-
due influence from members OF the jury, Tor
those men who were uncorrupted mad MOTH
ing to reveal while the others would not
make themselves particeps crimtnis. 1t was
clearly brought out by the evidence of the
jurors that. as affecting three Of the accused,
PolitZ Scaffedi and MOnasterio, the jury was
engaged In deliberations in their case some
four or five hours, attended with intense ex-
element, and, on repeated ballots, the jury's
vote stood six guilty and six not guilty. This
is clearly defined indication of the convic-
tions of the jury as to these accused. 1t
forces the conclusion that the evidence was
sufficient to justify the six jurors who stood
resolute and determined for the verdict
guilty, making it well-nigh impossible to
reach any other conclusion than mis-trial.
These three accused were probably unWill.
ing actors, designated by the leaders of the
conspiracy to execute the villanous part in
which they had neither personal motive or
interest.
BrIbing In the Court Itself.
Following this investigation, it was quick
ly learned from various sources that tales
men had been approached Every clue Of
fered was taken up. AS rule, the tales.
men had been previously marked out, and
were seen when alone, OF invited away tn
some secluded and unsuspected place, well
designed pretexts guarding the real meaning
of the tale, which quickly lead up to the great
trial. The talesmen were visited at their
homes during the evening or early morning
intercepted while on their way to the court
house, and stopped in the corridor of the
court, and the vile work was deliberately
carried forward IN the court room during the
trial. One favorite expression was "Big
and doing right" No possible doubt exists
that such attempts, made by various parties
in the service of the defence, were enter
tanned by some of the talesmen, and scorn-
fully rejected by others. These are the facts
given on the evidence OF talesmen. who,
men who addressed them, Indignantly re-.
PEELED any attempt to control their
line of conduct by these emissaries
In several instances the rebuff was answered
that the talk was joke. 1t was surely a
we'll directed joke of deep significance when
the leading part was enacted by counsel of
one of the accused participants in the assas-
sinatiOn at tile time awaiting trial In the
Parish prison, who is now under Indictment
for attempting to bribe juror. Another
class of talesmen took special care to deny
apy knowledge of the vile work or showed q
remarkable deficiency Of memory as to what
they told their friends, causing us to conclude
that they were silent from fear, or had been
seen and cautioned about incriminating anv
one until their tongues were silenced. We
can plainly state that a number of witnesses
most emphatically denied having been an
preached or spoken to about their services
on the jury, even after telling it to their
friends, who informed us.
Among the talesmeD were number of our
citizens who have come forward from sense