New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1893-07-29
SELECTIONS FROM THE MAIL.
JUDGES AND GRAND JURIES.
A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT ESTABLISHED IN THE
CASE OF MAYOR BOODY.


CASE OF MAYOR BOODY.
the Editor OF The Tribune
Sir: Judge Moore OF Brooklyn. has inaugurated
departure In the administration oil cnmihM law
The Grand Jury OF Kings County had AZ us recent
session filed presentment In Judge Moores 'ou''
ccnsurng certain official acts Of the Mayor anu soc
aldermen OF the city OF brooklyn, relating 10 grant
Of street railway franchises. That grand Jury h'u
finished its labors closed its session. and Adjourned
Without CAV Now comes the Brooklyn Judge ana de-
cides 10 permit the Mayor, on his own eX parte
petition TO inspect and copy the minutes OF the tes
nony given before that grand jury that led them 10
make that prcsentment.
Such judicial order is without precedent Possibly
this Brooklyn Judge may have thought, rs another
once said there being precedent. he would mahe
one. But making precedents IL not especially n
judicial function following them is more properly
wii6n the sphere OF Judicial action. Moreover the
making OF precedcnts In criminal law Is matter OF
no small moment and requires the highest measure
of legal learning and judicial wisdom. Ii Is doubtful
n the Brooklyn Judge has In the present Instance
manifested either Of those essential qualities
1t must he considered that grand jury, unlike n
trial fury, Is not coordinate branch OF any court.
IL IS auasiIndepcndent body, possesses no judicial
function. can neither try nor even arrest any one,
but Is specially Instituted rs the grand inquest oil 'ne
unty-so-callcd In the older bc0ks-to inquire INTO
all matters relating to the public peace or as In
jurously affecting the public welfare ItS ScsSioh9
are not regulated nor It's action directed, nor It's
proceedings controlled by any court. True, uhoer
certain statutory provisions, its organization ana the
administration Of the statutory oath are Conducted III
the presence OF court. and by the court they or the
fury instructed In the nature and general purport
Of their duties and their attention Is directed to such
special matters as circumstances may demand or ms
by statlte may be required. This done, the grand
jury thenceforh itself the director Of its own pro
cccdings. IL meets and adjOurnH its own NOTION
It hears complaints, examines witnesses IS the eX-
elusive Judge Of the weight Of testimony, Initiates
and conducts inquiry into matters affecting tho public
veal within It's jurisdiction. without instruction from,
consultation WITH the knowledge OF any court
Il simply makes the court, under authority OF law,
the mouI-piccc OF It's action by sending TO it, Tor
tLc purpo,e Of record and necdfu judicial proceedings
tncreon the result OF its deliberations either BY In
dctmcnt or prcsentmcnt, but never reporting or re-
voolinr the testimony by which that result
Oas reached. These functions are legal prerogatNcs
OF II grand jury as "A separate lhiepeluehI oouy'
How then can Il Judge lawfully order an Inspection
and copy OF their minutes of testimony In so DOING
+. he rot invading their ghtful and lawful prerosi
lives and transccndng his own! Is IL hot preioh
of privilege and. therefore usuInti0n!
II must also be considered that the proceedihsS
NJ :, grand Jury are as required by law. conducted
privately and under an oath OF secrecy winch oh'n
IS that the counsel Of the state. your OWL anu
your fellows. you shall keep secret" Now INC
secrecy TO be observed under this OATH as all stand
ard authorities tell us. eXtcn5s to the vote gwen
In any case, the evidence delivered by witnesses
and to the communications Of the Jurors to each
other And yet It Is the minutes Of the evidence
delivered by witnesses before that grand Jury that
this brooklyn Judge now authorizes an OUTSIDE per
son 10 inspect and copy. IN THIS Is d9he. 700,
after That GRAND Jury had concluded It's lhDors ana
ceased 10 exist. and when II cOum MAKE no r.
munstrnncc against this invasion OF liz prerogaNes
nd Of
Der OF that grand jury 10 do this thllg ne wou'u
be- an.ilable to punishment as acting IN VloihuoIi,
OF his oath. How, them can judge VINO never nuu
any judicial control OF those minutes OF esunVhs.
lawfully issue a permit for their Inspection! What
authority he possess To order n revelation oi wv
sworn OF the grand jury that the grand jury
self did not possess Ises not such a pf"ceueh.
hinder and restrain the Independent action OIL graho
urrs by snbjcctlng their dongs and deliberations:
under "A statutory oath Of secrecy. 10 revelation anu
eNpo,Ilrr nj the pleasure Of an outside auth"rlN
II tLi, Brooklyn precedent leads. or even lchdN'
TO such result. then II Is mschievous beyOiu measure
-is only evil. and that continually III Is not
record that Is to be Inspected and copied grin u
iury makes no record OF Its proceedings. Such
record would be- inconsistent With their ontl Oh see
recy rs well with the purpose OF that oath. bnt
memoranda that are TO be Inspected and coplef.
Jbe fudge TO do him full Justice Is evidently DOUBT
fui 81 his own authority IN the promises. ana re-
ronps by saving that nothing j. TO De copied Us 10
Grand Juror" lie does not. however. prombit ,h,lr
Inspection: but simply that they shall not De
If is very much 10 he feared that Judge Moore ,,
ind made n precedent In this behalf inau ne WI
himself as n jurst. wish unmadc ~ being one lhas
inr,i,nbly tends 10 the further generalization oil
public Justice In Kings County. ~
New. York, July Il. 1ooJ.