The Lamar register., 1891-05-09
THE NEW ORLEANS LYNcAlNe.
The Grand Jury Returns Report JUS
tifying the Killing of the
Italians

Inc lOng-iOoked-for report OF the
New Orleans grand Jury charged to inves-
tigate the lynching OF the Italian suspects
has been made. 1t is unique document
and while blaming the jury, the deputy
sherifrs, detective O'Malley and the
Malta, treats the people who executed ven.
geance on the Italians with great ieniency.
Following are important extracts from
the report, which is very long;
When this grand jury entered upon its
term of service there was pending in Sec
tion b, this tribunal, the trial of nine men,
indicted for participation in the assassi-
nation of the late superintendent of police,
d. c. Hennessy, on the night of October
10, 1890
The enormity of that crime executed at
the midnight hour created unusual inter
est throughout the whole country, while
in our own city, vitality concerned in the
administration of justice, as deeply affect
ing her social, political and material
welfare, the sentiment of the populace
had crystalized inc the concrete form of
expression that justice be rendered through
the recognized channels of criminal iuris-
prudence, that the guilty perpetrators,
whoever they were, be tried by an i'm
partial jury of American citizens, and
meet with righteous conviction.
Following the surprising verdict of "not
guilty, ~ the jury were summoned before
the grand Jury and examined. Each one
of the twelve jurors of the trial was
summoned and asked to make a statement.
None objected, but all rather welcomed
the opportunity. 1t was notable feature
of the sworn statements that they prima-
rily 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 defense
1t was freely admitted by the jurors that
remarks had been made in the jury room
as early as the first day, when the tesu-
mony was offered, and repeated number
of times afterward, ''that the state was
making poor case" and was positively
dence. A quarrel, at least, was reported,
arising from the accusation by one juror
Of another with the expression: 'sYou
talk like you were fixed before you came
here.r
Following this investigation, 1t was
quickly learned from various sources that
talesmen had been approached. Every
clue offered was taken up. As a rule the
ta!esmen who had been previously marked
out were seen when alone or invited away
10 some secluded or unsuspected place,
under well designed pretexts guarding the
meaning of the talks, but quietly leading
up to the great trial Talesmen were Wis
tied at their homes during the evening or
early morning, intercepted while on their
way to the court house, stopped in the
corridor of the court house. and the vile
work was deliberately carried on in the
court room during the trial One favorite
expression was that "Big money might be
made by going on the jury and doing
right" There is no possible doubt that
such attempts were made by various par
ties in the service of the defense-enter-
tanned by some OF the talesmen and scorn-
fully rejected by others.
1t is not to be questioned that the work
was systematically executed after care
full preparation and it had to be done
quickly as the hours were few and the
time precious The necessity was imper.
ative for complete lists of the talesmen
but such lists were easily obtained as in
the list of 500 talesmen in the Hennessy
case was in the office of O'Malley and
Adams at II o'clock Sunday morning,
February ~, 1891, though the trial Judge
issued a special order Saturday evening
that the lis. was not to be made public or
given to counsel of either side until
Monday morning. 1t is not shown by
whose hand the list was secured, but
enough is known to confirm the past secret
and powerful influence of the so-called
| private detective agency and Counsel
Adams to handle the machinery of the
court
The moral conviction is forced upon US
that some of the jurors, at least three,
wero subject to money influence to
control their decision. Some of the
urors, themselves, have testified In most
| emphatic terms that if it had not been for
the persistent efforts of three of the Jury,
| most conspicuous from the time that body
was empannelled, the verdict would have
been materially different from that ren :
dered.
In the attempts to influence the tales
| men of the Heunessy case no visible act
was committed, and we fully realize the
difference between crime committed by
| words only and what are known as visible
acts, which might be witnessed by other
persons and tell the tale of crime. In the
! attempts to influence talesmen, and the
successful part OF it, whispered words
conveyed the insiDuation or directly Of
fered the money influence. This reference
will serve to show the barriers this inquest
has encountered in securing evidence, but
sufficient was offered by voluntary and
! reliable witnesses to Justify the indictment
of six men, as follows:
Thomas M. Crystol and John Cooney
with D. c. O'Malley, for attempting to
/ bribe talesman, and Bernard Glaudi.
Charles Granger and Bernard Armant for
attempt by each to bribe three different
talesmen.
Taking into account the volume of testi-
mony admitted by the numerous witnesses
before this grand jury, and considering
that evidence not only in the abstract re.
lation to each party, but in its aggregate
aud collective bearing, we are forced to
the conclusion that Detective O'MalIey is
chargeable with a knowledge of and par
ticipation in most of, if not all the unlaw.