The Mount Holly news. [volume] (Mount Holly, Burlington Co., N.J.) 1891-1942, 1899-01-31

ONCE more the cause of justice in this
county has been given setback, and the
grand jury-a body that should command
the respect of all-is being severely and
Justly criticised. After the adverse com
ment on the body that met at the October
term and failed to find bills in cases where
there was every reason to sustain the
charges presented, it was hoped that sue
ceeding juries would acquit themselves in
manner whereby criticism could not for
moment enter. But we regret to record
the fact that the grand jury which finish
ed its labors on Wednesday did not cover
itself with glory. To be sure it did the
work that the October body failed to do,
and indicted Hippenstiel, the defaulting
collector of Beverly township, and it
found bills against several poor fellows
who had no friends to pillow and plead for
them, but in a most important case be-
fore them, the jury marched all the way
up the hill' and then marched all the
way down again" The case referred to
was that of the state against William P.
Bryan for assault and battery. On Wed
nesday morning the evidence was strong
enough to warrant an indictment. After
dinner the action was reconsidered, and
while the evidence had not weakened a
particle, mo bill" was recorded. A more
perfect travesty on justice never occurred
The facts in the case are of too recent
Ao ho
upon the man assaulted was brutal and
cowardly, the place where it happened
aggravated the offence. The only excuse
offered in extenuation of the crime was
that language had been used which
justified the assault. The law does not
recognize any such justification. The
evidence before the grand jury was
strong and conclusive, otherwise the
action at the morning session would
not have prevailed. There were no
mitigating circumstances shown in the
reconsideration, but the fact that certain
persons thought ''the parties should
settle their differences out of court" and
the statement that $50 and SO did not
think bill should be found" had
more weight than legal evidence. The
grand jury, therefore, instead of frown-
ing On crime and doing justice to man
who had the right to seek the protection
of the law, went on record as saying that
man who is brutally assaulted because
Of the jealousy or hatred of another,
must not go to the courts constituted for
the purpose of protecting him and for the
further purpose of Furnishing those who
offend the law, but must take the matter
in his own hands and punish his assailant
himself If such is to be the correct in
depreciation let it be known at once and
let grand juries be abolished, for there is
no reason why they should be called to-
gether to indict ignorant chicken thieves
while the intelligent offender is allowed
to go without condemnation. If there
ever was case that should have
been given careful and unprecedented
consideration it was the one we
have referred to, but in spite of the
fact that it was generally known it was
to be considered one of the members
of the jury was the bondsman of the &C
cused in the Justices court. He surely
could not be considered a disinterested
party. If he was selected without thought
of the relations he held to the accused it
was an unfortunate and inexcusable oyer
sight, for it is the duty of the Sheriff to
carefully consider all matters within his
knowledge in selecting his jurors. If,
therefore. this particular juror was sum
moned "'by request" the word cover
sight" is not sufficiently expressive The
action of Wednesday is not necessarily
final. On the contrary the facts that have
been made public demand that it shall
again be given consideration. While the
interest of the man who was assaulted
has not abated a single bit, he is rather
secondary in the matter. The public at
large has right to know whether the
law can be openly and tiagrantly violated
and the offender go free, merely because
he has friends on the jury and off of it
who think bill should not be found. In
Justice to some members of the jury it is
but fair to state that the reconsideration
was secured only after stormy discus
sion, when two jurymen who voted for a
bill in the morning, changed their ballot.