New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1894-12-04

RlNK PERJURY.


no first session Of the LexOw COMMITTEE IL
ter a necessary though regrctfable' recess ue
,.,oncd no extraordinary sensation but scvcral
Interesting incidents. 1t was gratifying 10 Ill"
tho committee in the same mood in which 1t al
;nrrrod and Mr. Golf in the full possession OF
his rare and valuable faculties. The prompt
oppcarance also. Of Father Ducey III che'ri"i
disregard Of an ecclesiastical prohibition adned
to the mild cxcitements of the occasion u! rus
ccstinc the possibility that Il priest ana an arch
bisbop NAV be on the list of future witnesses.
Tho testimony extracted yesterday was ho'
of the highest Importance III lis pe"''i'e VI
tho main object Of the investigation. Dut part
of il ought To become the basis Oh ac''" o0'''
q different tribunal. The witness LAWS wa"
called To show whether or not puDiic on''"''
had guilty knowledge of frnndii'h' INV
If his testimony WAS not conclusive upon "',
noipt II was upon another. lie voumnons!
and catcgorcally proved hmsei 10 p' WI.
,he most oudacous pcriurcrs who have emerSei
into public view during the whoie c"""' :.
This inquiry: and that Is saying Il Sr''' wa
Lewis acknowledged that he went peioi' Wv
Excise Board seven or eight years "i' :" W.
interest of the proprictrcss of the iiotei o''on
and sworc that he owned the business hi'''''''
in order that he might procure license ior NV
establishment. Every succeeding year n' "'''
gone through the same process anu 1T ""''
once he has made IN affidavit mat he pun
chased the business in 1887 and has since con-
ducted It for his own profit He adn''en YES
to-day that all this swearing was false. but said
that no chad never looked at II In that WI!
and did not know what perjury was mat Is
70 saw. having pcrjurcd himself annually ior
sovon veors for n consideration which has not
norhons been actually asccraned. he perJureh
himself still further yesterday by claiming tha'
ho al NOT understand what he had been doing
In IFS menace to society and In the eye OF the
,ov nor,urv il an extremely grave offence hui
t. t. almost never punished. and chiefly for that
rcason II is very prevalent. An extraordinary
amount Of perjury has been proved against VIII
nesscs in this city and vicinity within year.
but. with the possible exception OF 'his HAL
Lewis, they are probably not troupiihs uici''
selves about the consequences lie appearcu ~
he somewhat disquieted yesterday wheh HIS
d,b, to iustice was calculated In his presence.
but we are sorry TO say that he has good reason
:, console himself with the reflection that the
authorities and the community will lose all In
,orost in him SO soon MS he drops out OF the
Senate investigation. Yet he certainly ough'
not TO be let off with the trivial discomfort OF u
public exposure. He ought TO be indicted
promptly. tried resolutely and punished Sc
yerclv. 1t is always absurd and discredi'ape
TO keep on the statute books law when i
theoretically rigorous and practically n dead
letter. even when the matter II treats OF Is oil
small consequence In the case of n perJurer
prosecution and penalty ought tn be swift ana
sure
Chairman LcXow set the nature ana statutory
CONSEQUENCES Of his crime before the witness
Yesterday Other witnesses Of the same sort
h,vo received similar admonlllon already. IL
is Importan, that proceedings should be begun
against them without unnecessary delay III
every case which offers reasonable prosper
Of conviction. The prevalence Of perjury ana
the immunity ~ those who commit IL constitute
"A serious scandal. we'll rs direct ana 'hr
reaching injury TO public and private interests