The Madison daily leader. [volume] (Madison, S.D.) 1890-current, 1891-05-07
Grand Jury Find No Indictments
Against the New Orleans
Lynchers,
But Hold for Trial Six of the Jury
Bribers, Including the NOto-
rious O'Malley.
The Italian Consul Says Serious Com.
plications with Italy Will
Certainly Ensue.

NEW OhlAEANS, May I.-Ihe report
of the grand jury ON the lynching cases
Is, of course, the general topic of con-
versation here and is approved by all
classes of good citizens. The Italian
consul Signor Corte, is however, not en-
thusiastic over the document. He says
that he is very much displeased with the
report. He furnished much information
to the jury he says, which was ignored
evidently, as there is nothing in the re-
port to indicate that it was used. Mr..
Corte adds that his oath of secrecy pre-
vents him telling what he testified to
before the grand jury. The consul says
that he will Immediately transmit the
report in full to his home government,
and he fears that serious complications
between Italy and the United States
viii be the ultimate result.
The Grand Jury's Report.
The substance of the report presented
by the jury to Judge Marr is contained
In the following:
When this grand jury entered upon
its term of service there was pending in
section B of tLis tribunal, the trial of
nine men indicted for participation in
the assassination of the late Superin-
tendent of Police d. G. Hennessy on the
night of Oct. Is, 1890. The enormity of
that crime, executed at the midnight
hour, created unusual interest through
out the whole country, while in onr own
city, yitally concerned in the admins
tration of justice as deeply affecting her
social, political and material welfare.
the sentiment of the populace had
crystalized into the concrete form of ex-
preston, that justice be rendered
through the recognized channel of Grim
lnal jurisprudence, that the perpetrators,
whoever they were, be tried by an inn
partial jury of American citizens and
meet with a righteous conviction.
The verdict is now officially recorded
bearing date March 10, 1891. We can
not be mistaken in the assertion that
the verdict was startling, amazing,
Bitter Disappointment,
shocking to 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 limit of our duty as the grand in
. quest to refer to the strong presentation
of the case as made by the state through
counsel associated in the prosecution,
clear, continuous, complete, convincing,
IN the direct testimony and the material
circumstances. 1t appeared more than
| sufficient to convince 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
m a "a ON, ay cid a oh he
of some members of the jury when the
case should be submitted Charges and
speculations abounded, coupled with the
well known connection of certain parties
OF unenviable notoriety, shown by their
presence daily in the court room and
arousing the suspicion that the most
Subtle, Dangerous and Powerful
influences known to the practice of
criminal law, were being exercised in
behalf of the defense. These considera-
tions have led us to investigate the sub
ject embracing all its attendant con-
ditions and incidents.
The inquiry has been conducted with
the utmost diligence, devoid of fear or
partiality, with the single purpose of
fastening the guilt upon the proper per-
sons and presenting them under indict-
ment of this tribunal. Each one of the
twelve jurors of the trial was summoned
and asked to make statement. None
objected, but all rather welcomed the
opportunity 1t was notable feature
of this sworn statement that they pri-
marily sought to justify their verdict by
attacking the line of evidence presented
by the state and attaching much weight
TO the arguments of counsel for the de-
Tense. 1t was freely admitted by the
TT1y fh0f fl.asx 4
in the jury room as early as the first day
when testimony was offered, and re-
peated number of times afterwards.
that the
State Was Making Poor Case,
and this was positively repeated at the
close of the states evidence. One quar-
rel at least was reported arising from
accusation by one juror to another with
the expression: HYou talk like YOU
were fixed before You came here. y
1t was clearly indicated that the neces-
sity for secrecy was urged as the several
u1urors were selected and Joined the COM
Ipany OF their fellows 1t was impressed
upon them at various times and finally.
before the verdict was rendered, brought
forward again with the Injunction to
destroy every vestige OF evidence they
had, and leave every thought and act
behind. surely the urgency of this was
most cunningly devised
To Conceal the Peculiar Events
that transpired in the jury room. We
are led to conclude that Che jury under
took to try the case By their own eeti-
mate of the value of statements made by
Iparties not called as witnesses; With
strange unanimity they dEelt upon
what they knew by reading and hearsay
Nof certain incide1ks Of the assassination
prior to the trjAl and made those the
living the accused the benefit Of the
oubt and concluding the deliberations
their favor. 1t was not expected to
otain any evidence of undue influence
prom members Of the jury, for those