Los Angeles herald., 1892-03-17
He Asks Some Questions of
Mr.. McLachlan.
A Pointed Screed on That Of
ficiars Recent Report.
A Weary Republican Gives Express
sion to His Views.
Tho whittier Reform School Scandal
and the Manner Of Its Disposal.
Some eIntorrogations-A
Strong Letter.


prominent Republican explains itself j
EDITORS HERALD: Will you kindly
indulge weary Republican while he
expresses his opinion OF the able man.
ner in which the Whittier school matter
has been disposed of by the powers that
be in this glorious climate?
do not wish to be unjust, and sub.
NIT to any candid man whether the re-
port purporting to be by James Nc.
Lachlan, district attorney, to Judge B.
N. Smith and the statement made by
Mr.. Hervey Lindley to the Times
reporter, do not emanate from one and
the same person. l think that CON-
parison of the two sta ements as they
appear in this mornings Times will
convince an unprejudiced person that
they do. shall therefore assume that
fact.
Mr.. Hervey Lindley in his report
(signed by James McLachlan. district
attorney OF Los Angeles county,) to
Judge Smith. starts in by "regretting
that he has not the power of the court
to compel witnesses to attend and testi-
fy ia the absence of a. duly verified
crime" Oh, shades of Coke, Black
stone and Marshall tell when, how and
where Mr.. Hervey Lindley and his
assistant, Mr.. James McLachlan,
learned that court has "power to COM
pei witnesses to attend and testify in
the absence OF complaint" or other
document conferring Jurisdiction? The
gentlemen seem to have been educated
in "Union league law" to the total neg
lect OF the common and statute law that
theoretically prevails in this "Italy
OF America" Butwhy this lamentation
The gentlemen only name two persons
who had sense enough to recognize the
outrage of the illegal proceeding, and
one of the gentlemen, Mr.. Blackman,
submitted to partial examination, be-
fore the nature of the inquisitorial i'm
position appeared to him in it's proper
light, and properly refused to be put
upon the rack. Mr.. Hervey Lindley
and Mr.. James McLachlan should have
provided themselves with "thumb.
screw" before summoning Mr.. Black.
man to appear before them, and after
having ommitted that little instrument
OF torture, why did they not try the two
"corkscrews" on him?
Now that General Bouton Indignantly
refused to be questioned concerning his
action while foreman of the late grand
jury, is at least a faint indication that
he had sense enough to qualify him for
that position.
Mr.. Lindley and Mr.. McLachlan
cay 81 am unable to obtain
any positive proof as to who
purloined the report presented
by Mr.. Quinn to the grand jury"
Why, bless your innocent hearts Gnno-
cent Of any knowledge of the law have
you not yet learned that stealing a pub
lie record is felony under the laws of
this state, and that after proof of the
corpus deficit all that is necessary to
warrant the arrest and examination of
the suspected person is enough evidence
to make out prima facie case against
the accused? Proof can rarely be said
to be positive until after the defendant
has had an impartial hearing, but this
is not "Union league law" and 80 you
will not understand it. Act for once
under sections 113 and la of the Penal
Code of California, and drag the villain
forth and punish him for having ":re-
ated public clamor and giving it [the
Whittier Reform school alleged steal
an nnwarrantable notoriety."
Gentlemen, if you have any proof
as to the thief your duty has
been pointed out to you. "What
will you do with it," "All the other
grand jurors promptly consented to be
examined fully, General Bouton alone
refusing" Now, gentlemen, if you were
in earnest and were looking for some
thing that you hoped to find, why did
you examine all those members OF the
grand jury who ignored the minority
report? You already had their opinion
in the majority" report of the jury.
Gentlemen, did you examine the wit.
ness that you caused to come before you
in the spirit and feeling in which you
drafted the report to Judge Smith? If
you did, then it is not strange that you
found no evidence of guilt? And Mr..
McLachlan, If you don't mind telling.
and as the proceedings of your inquisi-
tion do not seem to be entirely secret,
and as you said nothing about it in your
report to Judge Smith, did you have Mr..
Hervey Lindley appear before you and
testify as to what he knew about the
alleged steal? Did you swear him,
and if so did you find it nec-
bastinado or the thumbscrew or
"corkscrew" in order to make him
give up the truth? Did he say any thing
about the alleged steal, and if so, did you
doubt any thing he said? Of course you
are not expected to violate Mr.. Lindley's
confidence, and if you can not answer
the foregoing questions without betray-
ing what he said to you about it (the
alleged steaD, you need not answer
them. In your valuable report you
quote from the majority report of the
grand Jury, and say as follows:
''This report shows that nearly $400,-
900 have been received and expended by
the officials of that institution.
Therefore, so far as the contents of
this report are concerned, can see moth
ing for the district attorney to do"
OF course they (the officials) expended
nearly 100000, and the manner in
which part of that sum, set apart for
'aweet charity" was expended is what
is creating public clamor," that is what
honest men, without regard to party,
are kicking" about. OF course there is
nothing the district attorney can
do-even your friends admit that.
will avail myself little further OF
this opportunity, and ask you, Mr.. Nc.
Lachlan, few more questions. Did
you consult Mr.. Hervey Lindley before
making your report to Judge Smith?
Did Mr.. Hervey Lindley see your "re-
port" before you delivered it to Judge
Smith? Did Mr.. Hervey Lindley ap-
prove OF your "rel,Ort ?n OF course this