The record-union., 1891-12-25


the most direct avenue. and that is
through the columns of newspapers that
are distinctively set apart for such com
munication.
JUDGE WALLACE replies to the opinion
and Judgment of the Supreme Court in
the San Francisco Grand jury matter
The burden of his reply, the pivotal point
upon which it really turns, is this,
that the Sheriff and Coroner were dis
qualified to serve venires for Grand
Jurors because the statute requires a
Grand Jury to investigate the conduct
and record of all public officials. This
being the law, the court, he says,
took judicial knowledge of it. Hence
it was unnecessary to affirmatively make
the disqualification appear as a jurisdic-
tional fact precedent.
The fatal error in this reasoning is,
that if the ground taken by Judge Wal
lace is sound, then no public officer could
Grand Jury. Not the Judge, for his acts
are subject to the inquisitional power !;
not the Clerk, for his office must be in
veshgated not any of the twelve Judges
who select the IA names from which the
nineteen are to be chosen, for each of the
twelve fill public Office that may be
investigated.
1t will occur to the unbiased mind that
under such method Of reasoning there
could be no Grand Jury at all. The fact
that an Office, or officer, is to be investi-
gated is not, and never has been, held to
be disqualification, and we believe that
no good lawyer can be found who will
dispassionately so interpret the law. The
presumption is always in favor of the
honesty and correctness of the public
charges against him, or develop personal
interest that is likely 10 bias his mind
and influence his action, then disqualifi
cation sets in, IN cases in which the
officer is to act in any manner that may
be liable to sway or influence the judg
ment that may be rendered for or against
him.
But if, for arguments sake, it is as
sumed that because a Grand Jury-as it
always does and is by law bound to do
annually examines into all official acts,
records and servitors, all officers subject
to such investigation are disqualified;
then, before substitute is appointed to
supplant one Of these officers in any
official act relating to such disqualified
ton, the fact of such disqualification
should affirmatively appear of record as
the base Of and essential condition pre-
cedent to the jurisdiction of the court.
The Supreme Court says that no such
showing was made on the record; that
on the record certified from the lower
court it simply appeared that the court
appointed an elisor because it chose to
do So" 1t might not possibly be neces-
sary for the court below to set out in de-
tail the uninvestigated possible charges
or crimes out of which the alleged dis
qualification arose, but it must have
found as fact, and so have entered and
declared it as a jurisdictional affirma-
tive fact, that the Sheriff and the Cor
oner were disqualified. Without that
finding the jurisdiction of the court is not
established, and on the face of the record
its act appears to be arbitrary and tyran-
meal
But if the reasoning of Judge Wallace
be still accepted as sound, then his court
should not have accepted half of the
Grand Jury, as it did. from among those
who were summoned by the Sheriff.
If the doctrine of Judge Wallace is to
engrafted upon our judicial system, any
record the reason for his act or ever dis
closing it, may reject panels selected,
drawn and summoned under the safe
guards of the statutes, and order into
court any set of men he pleases to serve
as jurors for any purpose he pleases. It
is obvious that to invest courts with such
power is to surrender the liberties of
men and to put personal freedom and
private possessions at the mercy of any
corrupt, weak or ignorant court, however
desirable it might be to give such power
to safe and incorruptible Judges.
This matter is one of high concern. It
should be debated with calm and deliber-
alton and free from prejudice and bias
arising out of the special case in the San
Francisco incident. a principle is in
volved in it lying at the very tap root of
free government. it is from such plane,
dispassionate and judicial, that the
RECORD UNION considers and debates
the issue between the court below and
the chief appellate tribunal of the COM
monwealth.
--------------
a Grateful Cow.