The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1891-05-06
GRAND JURY REPORT
In the New Orleans Malta Case
in at Last.
an ELABORATE DOCUMENT
In Which the Affair IS Reviewed at
Length---The Charges of Jury
BribIng sustained.-sIx Indict-
ed..--startIIng Evidence.

New ORLEANS, La, May 5.-After SIX
wesks' investigation the grand jury COM
pleted its labors in the Hennessey case
and the killing OF Italians at the parish
prison, by presenting the following re-
port at 4:SO o'clock this afternoon:
GRAND JURY RooM, May 8, 1891.
To tie Hon. Robert II. Aarr. Judge cr CriaiRdl
DiIrie, Court Of he Partih Of Orleans, Section 4:
When this grand jury entered upon
its term Of tservice, there was pending in
Section B, this tribunal, the trial OF nine
men indicted for participation in the
assassination Of the late Superintendent
Of Police, D. O. Hennessey, on the night
Of October 5, 1890.
The enormity Of that crime, executed
at the midnight hour, creates unusual
interest throughout the whole county,
while in our city, vitality concerned in
the administration Of justice as deeply
affecting her social, financial and politi.
cal welfare, the sentiment OF the popu.
lace had crystalizsd into the concrete
form OF expression that Justice be rem
dered through the recognized channels
Of criminal jurisprudence. that the
guilty perpetrators, whoever they were,
be tried by an impartial jury OF Ameri-
can citizens and meet with righteous
conviction.
II Is not to be wondered that attention
should be directed 10 the trial during
the many days OF its progress in the
selection Of Jurors, the evidence Of wit
nesses, the arguments Of counsel, the
charge Of the judge, and finally concsn-
trated on the Twelve men who by virtue
OF their solemn oath sat in awful judg.
ment on their fellow men. The verdict
Is now OF official record, bearing date
March Is, 1891.
We cannot be mistaLion in the asser.
ton that the verdict was startling,
amazing, a bitter disappointment, shock.
ing to public opinion, provoking the
repeated accusation that some OF the
jury had been unfaithful to their Office.
We feel that We do not transcend the
limits OF our duty as the grand inquest
to refer TO the strong presentation Of the
case as made by the State through coun.
sci associated in the prosecution-clear,
continuous, complete, convincing in the
direct testimony and the material cir.
cumAtances-it appeared more than SUI.
Rcient to convince the most unwilling
listener with its truth, and convey the
full measure OF its power To those who
ventured a doubt.
As the trial neared its termination, 1t
was not possible for any observer 10 fail
10 realize the comments made on every |
side touching the action OF some mem
bers Of the Jury to which the case should |
be submitted. - Each one OF the |
twelve jurors Of the trial was sum.
moned by US, and asked to make state |
ment. None objected, but all rather
welcomed the opportunity. It was a
notable feature Of the sworn statements
that they primarily 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 defense.
One quarrel at least was reported,
arising from the accusation by one
Juror to another, with the expression:
You talk like you were fixed before
you came here"
We are led to conclude that the jury |
undertook to try the case when il was
submitted by their own estimate
OF the value OF statements made
by parties not called as wit
nesses. It Is clearly
brought out by evidence OF the jurors,
that as affecting three Of the accused,
Politz, sCaffedi and Monasterio, the jury |
engaged in the deliberations In their
case some four or fve hours, attended |
with intense excitement aud on repeated
ballots, the jury vote stood six guilty,
six not guilty.
Following this investigation It was
quickly learned from various sources
that talesmen had been approached.
One fayorite expression was thst
"big money might bo made by going on
the Jury and doing right"
There is no possible doubt that such |
attempts were made by various parties
in the service OF the defense, entertained |
by some OF the talesmen and scorniully |
rejected by others. These are facts
given on evidence Of taleBmen.
The Grand Jury knows that the list
Of 500 talesmen in the Hennessey case
was in the Office OF o 0'Malley and Adams,
at II o'clock Sunday merning, February
22d, 1891, though the trial judge issued
special orders Saturday evening, that the
list was not TO be made public or given
TO council Of either side until Monday
morning.
The following men are indicted:
Thomas McCrystol and John Cooney,
with K. O. 0'Malley for attempting to |
k,ihn n taIaar,an and Raynnaxd NI.n1i |
Charles Granger and Ferneard Armant
for attempt by eaph to bFibe three differ
ent taleBmen.
We are forced to the conclusion that
Dominick o. 0'Malley is Chargeable |
with knowledge Of, and participation |
in most, II not all, OF the unlawful acts
in connection with that celebrated case.
From the beginning Of our investiga-
ton there Is mass ol evidence brought
TO our attention Of the pernicious com.
binations OF what is known as the D. |
C.0'Malley Detective Agency. WeknoE |
for an absolute fact that the bank &C.
count Is kept by interested parties,
being D. O. 0'Malley and Mr.. Adams,
Such combination between de-
tectiye and prominent criminal lawyer |
is unheard Of before In the civilized
world, and when We contemplate the pos
sibilities for evil, We stand aghast. |
Officers OF the Malta and many Of It's |
members are now known. Among them
are men born in this city OF Italian
origin using their power for the bAsest
purposes, be II said to their eternal dis.
grace. ThelArger number Of the society
Is composed Of 4tRlisns and GIctliaps.
In view Of these consideTatioDs, the
Thorough examination Of the subject
has failed 70 disclose the necessary facts
TO justify this grand jury In presenting
indictments.
Judgs Tafrs ConoiuOn.
SAN DIEao, CAL, May 5.-Ek.Minis.