The Wilmington daily Republican. (Wilmington, Del.) 1890-1902, 1891-05-06
NO INDICTMENTS.
The Grand Jury's Report on the
Parish Prison Lynohing.
IT JUsTIFIEs TIE CITIZENS ACT.

ttce and the OMallcy Detective
Agency Vigorously Denounced and
Jury Bribing Directly Charged.
New ORLEANS, May 6.-The report Of
the grand jury in the international affair
of the parish prisoners March was pre-
sented last night to Judge Mari. 1t JUS
tifes the citizens, presents no indict-
ments, and is given here in full, being
signed by all the jurors:
To the Hon. Robert II. Mari, judge of the
criminal district court of the parish OF New
Orleans, section Al
When this grand jury entered upon its term
of service there was pending in section of
this tribunal the trial Of nino men indicted for
participation In the assassination of the late
superintendent Of police, u. G. Hennesey, on
the night of Oct. 15, 1891. The enormity Of
that crime, executed at the midnight hour,
created unusual interest throughout the whole
country, while In our own city, vitality con-
cerned In the administration of Justice rs
deeply affecting her social, political and ma
terial welfare, the sentiment of the populace
had crystnli2ed into the concrete form of eN-
preston that justice be rendered through the
recognized channels Of criminal Jurisprudence,
that the perpetrators, whoever they were, he
tried by an impartial jury of American citl-
Ecns and meet with righteous conviction.
One fact stood out in awful prominence, and
beyond dispute or question by any mnn-the
fact that crime of unparalleled atrocity had
been committed, evidenced by the five terrible
death dealing weapons, tho numerous slugs
and bullets found inbe,lded in the fences and
houses at the sccne, besides the missiles that
struck down the solitary mnn, who would
never have been marked as tho victim had ho
not ililod the responsible position of chief of
police of the law.
An Unrighteous Verdict.
II ia mot IN hn tI,ot
should be directed to The trial during many
days of its progress; in the selection Of Jurors;
the evidence. Of witness; the arguments of
counsels; the charge of the Judge and final
concentration on the twelve men who by vir-
tue of their solemn oath sat in full Judgment
on their fellowmen. Tho verdict is now offi-
cial record bearing date March 10, 1891 We
cannot be mistaken in tho assertion that the
verdict was startling, amazing, bitter disap-
pointmcnt, ihOcsing to tho public opinion,
provoking the repeated accusation that some
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
10 the strong presentation of the case as made
by the state through the counsel associated in
the prosecution. Clear, continuous complete,
convincing in the direct testimony and tho
material circumstances, it appeared more than
sufficient TO convince tho most unwilling list
ener with its truth and convey the full measure
OF Its power to those who vonturcd doubt.
II
- As the trial noarcd It's termination II was
@hpl Possible for an observer 10 fail to realize
the comments made every side touching
the action of some members Of the jury when
the case should be submitted. Charges aud
epeculatiOns abOunded, coupled with the well
known connection of certain parties Of unen-
viable nOtoricty, as shown by their presence
daily In the court room and building, aronsing
the suspicion that the most subtle, dangerous
and powerful Influence known to the practice
eFi mi al Inv hItttr fapHf In la.
half of the accused. These considerations
have led Us to investigate the subject embrace
ing all its attendant condition and incidents.
The inquiry has been conducted with the ut
most diligence, devoid Of fear or partaity,
with the single purpose Of fastening the guilt
upon the proper persons and prosecuting them
under the indictment Of this tribunal. Each
one of the twelve jurors OF the trial was sum
moned and asked to make II statement. None
objected, but all rather welcomed the opportu-
nifty. II was n notable feature of the sworn
statement that they endeavured primarily to
Justify their verdict by attacking The line of
Ayidence presented by the state and attaching
much weight 10 the arguments of counsel lor
he defense.
The Trinl Jury's Admissions.
II was freely admitted by tho jurors that re-
marks had been in the jury room us early as
The first day, when testimony was offered and
repeated number of times afterwards, that
the state was making poor case,n and this
NhS ppsitiNtiy TelSHltu Ut Ine Close OF the
states evidence. One quarrel at least was re-
ported arising from the accusation by one
Juror to another with the expression you talk
like you were fixed before you came here"
Fhey formed no conception OF the tension to
which the public mind was strung. though i'm
pressed with the deep interest, as shown each
Nay by the crowd of lfGSplc in the court room.
1t was clearly indicated that the necessity for
secrecy was urged as the several jurors were
selected and Joined the company of their fell
hmm aad thsatt, nj rtn
times and finally before the verdict was rem
dered, brought forward again, with the in
junction 10 destroy every vestige of evidence
they had and leave every thought and act be-
hind. We are led to conclude that the jury
undertook to try the case when 1t was sub
mitted by their own estimate Of the value of
statements made by parties not called as wit
hesses. With strange unanimity thoy dwelt
upon what they knew by reading and hearsay
Of certain incidents of the assassination prior
to the trial anti made those the basis of power
full persuasion for giving the accused the ben
eft of the doubt and concluding their labors
In their favor.
Six Were for Conviction.
We must take occasion to say that II WIS
not expected to obtain any evidence of undue
Influence from members of the jury. for those
who were uncOrrupted had nothing TO reveal,
while the others would but make themselves
participits criminis, yet in their numerous
statements much was obtained having a di-
rect connection with and supported by the
great volume of testimony ELECTED during the
course of the inquiry 1t is clearly brought
out by the evidence of the Jurors that as nf-
fecting three of the accused, PolitZ, ScaiTedi
and Monasterio, the Jury engaged in the de-
liberation of the cases some four or five hours,
attended with intense excitement, and on
peated ballots the vote stood: Guilty, o: not
guilty, g. This Is clearly defined indication
OF the convictions of the jury as to the three
nccused. 1t impresses us deeply, as II must
every one TO whom the fact Is conveyed and
forces the conclusion that the evidence was
sufficient TO Justify the six jurors who stood
resolute and determined for verdict OF
guilty, making It well nigh impossible to reach
any other conclusion than a mistrial. These
three accused namod above were probably the
the unwilling actors designated by leaders of
the conspiracy 10 execute villainous part, in
which they had neither personal motive or in
forest.