The sun., 1899-02-12
An Extraordinary Inquest.

We suppose we may say without incur
ring any risk OF punishment for contempt
OF court, that the inquest now going on in
the Adams poisoning case In this city Is
being conducted In a manner utterly foreign
TO the methods OF procedure which have
been usually observed and approved in
judicial Investigations in this country.
Under our system Of jurisprudence it has
not been customary for the prosecuting au-
thorities to make witness Of a person
suspected of being concerned In the crime
and compel him by cross-examination to dis
close any conjecture or suspicion which he
may have entertained duplicating others.
Indeed. the practice at Coroners inquests
has been carefully to avoid calling any sus-
| pected person, lest he should be compelled
practically to testify against himself
different view Of propriety evidently
prevails in the Office Of the District Attor-
ney Of this county.
According to the New York Herald, Mr..
ASA BIRD GARDINER had this to say con-
cerning the testimony of HARRYS CORNISH:
II was only in the courtroom for few minutes
ana did not see or hear much. I have been told
since. however. that he evaded some Of tho quos.
uons. have complete confidence in Mr.. osBoRsEs
ability to pump him dry.
The fact that CORNISH gave Mrs. ADAMS the
poison In in evidence and 1t behooves him to clear
his own skirts. Under the law his ddmis,ion Of
giving the poison makes it possible 10 secure hii in.
dtctm >nt for rider.
Whether this will be done remains. of course. Al
the discretion Of this office"
Does it, indeed2 Common people have
hitherto supposed that where there was
evidence tending to show that a man had
committed murder, the question whether
he should be indicted or not was deter
mined by grand jury. But this little
assumption Of authority on the part OF the
public prosecutor may be overlooked. The
real enormity is his suggestion that il
CoRNIsH's testimony does not "cear his
own skirts" in the estimation of the Dis
trict Attorney, this Office" may exercise
its discretion by asking the grand jury to
indict CORNISH for murderl
This monstrous intimation, given to the
public before the conclusion Of CoRNIsHs
examination, might be natural enough on
the banks OF the Seine but cannot be justi-
fled in New York. 1t is not the custom in
this country, as it is in France, to put
witness on the rack Of oross-examination in
order to extract from him admissions OF his
guilt. Such practice Is forbidden by the
Federal Constitution and by the State Bill
of Rights.
We express no opinion as to the facts of
this extraordinary homicide We have
formed no opinion on the subject, and IL we
had formed an opinion we should not ex-
press 1t at this time. when the matter is the
subject of pending judicial investigation
We assert the right OF the Dresa howayar
to criticise and condemn such methods as
have been adopted by the public prosecu-
tors, in court and out of court, in the con-
duct OF the inquiry and discussion concern
ing it. 1t Is not only our right, but our
duty, to protest against such departures
from precedent and the plainest principles
controlling criminal procedure We exer-
else the right and perform the duty