The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1894-11-04


writer i. also scqnaintea with the climatic
conditions o. that portion Of the American
Union from . residence IN said La Grange
eoansy for . nufnher Of TesrE.
After car-faa reading Of tn. fndict-
rsens against A T. Van de Ns1tsr. pub
Isssed ID the Te4>7repA. ! have serious
ooabts a. % the Correctness OF the state
mens. 4 demand Is made upon nay
cresuiity which confess staggtrs me.
What are the facts as pnbiished7 IL 10
alleged that an indictment was found and
fled. ard that no arrest Of the defendant
ga. made.
Now. am required to believe that the
clerk II that co ri, IN whose keeping this
alleged indictments vas. not only per-
msttsd parties 70 see IL. b0t that he
actually gave s certified transcript OF 10,
visa al OF its Endorsements.
wow. while / DO not sag that such
thing Is absolutely impossible. do say
that Il - paIpably improbable. IL that IS
tue say they administer criminal justice
Ia the state OF Indiana. Old practitioners
IN that state are grossly ignorant Of the
criminal practice under the laws OF that
state. To say that such thing took place Is
preposterogs upon its face: 70 appreciate
this point fully, imagine citizen OF this
county going 70 the clerk OF our court,
LOOKING over the indictments found BY the
grand jury where no arrests have been
made. and imagine farther, IL IL is con-
cssvable Of the clerk Of our court giving
10 sucn person q certified copy Of sncn in-
diciment. together with all or IFS incorse-
Tnenfs. IL would be worth something TO
see Judge Humes ana 20 hear hat he had
10 say Il proof Was presented To him that
the ERIK of our court had been guilty of
such a gross violation Of his duty and
such a manifest contempt OF the court
Now, am required 10 believe that this
clerk Of Ia Grange county. Ind. did this
very thing. IL would be well, IL what Is
alleged Is true. 20 send a copy Of this per-
Torrance back TO the judge IF that district.
Tue editor of the Telegraph the writer OF
this Is informed. II ia.ysr. As such,
1 WAS not al all astonisneI a. his enthu-i-
astic declaration that Van de Nantsr had
not in isxyer-iiks manner denied that
any such indictment had been found
against him. Mr. Van de Eanter is q
plain. straightforward, honest man and
does not pretend 10 be a lawyer. and il is
manifest that no lawyer drew up his ptb-
lished statement he simply denied that he
had any knowledge of said alleged indict-
meat before its publication ia the 1eic-
graph ms Language IS not that OF a
lawyer, but OF a p!ain man. and is sufficient
for the purpose. There is a studied
attempt in the TsIeeraph's article N show
sense OF guilt on the part Of Van de
Nanter. and hence that extraordinary
story OF his fight from La Grange center.
This story Is quite romantic. Let "a see
II the facts lend TO IL any degree of proba-
bllity. First, this record published in the
Telegraph purpor.s TO DC a full record.
Certainty the Telegraph, as an honorable
journal. would not publish a partial or
defective record. This being conceded.
there Is nothing in this record 20 shos
the Issuance Of bench war
rant - without bench warrant
the spectacle of the sheriff guarding the
door of that building on cold November
night 10 romantic, II not Iudicrops, but We
are required 10 believe that the sheriff had
bancn warrant. although this pretended
full record does not show that any was
ever issued. We ars also required 10
believe that this lawyer, with whom Mr..
Van De Vanter was in consultation, knew
all about this indictment and that the
sheriff vas waiting at the door of the
building. ia the upper stories OF which
be aud Mr. Van de Vanter were, although
he had never been down 20 see aud never
went out of the building until he ex-
tinguished the lights and went off 10
livery stable to hire team and sleigh 10
TO take his friend Van de Vanter to
Sturgis, Mich.
The courtesy and delicacy Of that sheriff
exeites my admiration; he did not even go
into the building, bat stood out in the cold
in that November night waiting for the
down coming of the ''Siick" Van de VAN
ter; there he stood all the time that that
LAWYER was absent, making preparations
for Van de Nanter's escape.
When we consider that lawyers Office
Is at least q semi-pnblic place, We can APP
pTeciate the refined delicacy of that sheriff
In not even entering the halls of that
building.
Secondiy-With a somewhat full knowI-
edge Of the climatic conditions of that sec
ton of the country, l must be permitted
"a - = Il
November that the creakipg OF the boots
rs one walked over the snow could be dis
tinctly heard, or that there was good
eleighing. or any sssighing At all, there at
that season of the year. But a. this " hole
story Is extraordinary. probably the season
OF isss y as extraordinary, just TO lit these
extraordinary incidents.
Third-Mr. Van de Xanter says that he
knew nothing about this indictment IL
this be true. then the whole story is
myth. lie is sustained in his declaration
by the fact thas he went back TO
that town two years afterwards TO visit
acquaintance aud friends. that he was
publicly on the streets and in other public
places. and no one attempted 10 arrest
him, and he knew nothing about tins
awful Indictment Where was this deli
cate. bat wAtehfal sheriff. Dad be die IN
the discharge of his duties on that Noven-
Der night
curtin mere - q kcti-eQlsyre raj.
road and telegraph line, called the Grand
Rapids & Fort Wavne. running through
Sfurgfs, Lima and Ia Grande center thence
on - Fort Wayne. The wagon read from
la 6rande center passes through Lima
and other towns between la Grande center
aad SsaSgis. Mich. Trains OF cars are
passing over this road in nearly every hour
Of the night and day; tha wagon road =
parallel with and but q shor. distance from
thls railroad line: IL would take Mr.. Van
lie fsnter NJ least two hours TO reach the
Michigan liae; telegraph line runs sIou z
side the track and Van de Nantsr eou q
have been stopped by the sheriff at many
places along said road.
Ffth--lf this alleged Digit took place
Who weuid know itf IL is manifest from
the published statement that the sheriff
an1 Van lie Waiter. tie laHyer With
Nhoei he vas in consultation. aal his
fTispd aud the ;eamster were the only par
ties who hai or could have pefson al
snowflake 81 the alesi nighs The
statement of neither one a. these parties
Is given, hence this remarkable story can
haze no other foandauan than mere
ramo-.
Nos. oil of this oonviaees me that there
Was 40 warrant nor any attempt az
arrest am satisfied from = careful rsai-
ms 81 the account published In the Teie-
grspA tals alleged hisht Of Nsn de Xaater's
\ a uuse fabrication. / See BY the morn.
ing's Telegraph that there is repnhllea-
tsoa o. tHfs alleged indictment. and the
inference Is. THAI because Van lie Nanter
VAS ina eted. il the facts So be. he Is
ga'lty. / had Supposed. In my sim pllcitv,
that nam Vas presumed 20 lie innocent
Until l0ry Il his peers found him 20 he
guiits. II | REMEMBER correctly the
editor 81 the Telegraph ~as accused 81 q
violation Of the Iass II The state Wat
would he have thonxht of his fellox-
citizens = DO soald have SAD THAI be - as