The aegis & intelligencer. [volume] (Bel Air, Md.) 1864-1923, 1900-09-28
A REMEDY FOR FARCE TRIALS.

justly so, ABOUT the m1sefable farce
whichis the outcome OF the trials for
alleged violations of the local option
law, when the offense charged Is sell
ing "Ambrosia" Whether this popu-
lar drink is intoxicating or not 1t is
not our province to enquire as we
are not sitting In Judgment on the
case. What we wish to particularly
emphasize however. Ia the character
OF testimony which comes up In the
Court at the trial.
A case fresh In mind is one which
was tried last Friday morning. The
alleged traverser was charged with
selling the seductive drink heretofore
alluded to and had prepared an elabo-
rate defense to show the ingredients
which go to make up the mixture.
But it was altogether unnecessary.
The State signally failed to prove
that this drink possessed any more
intoxicating nature than ginger ale or
lemon sour. The closest examination
only elected the information that it
had frightening effect upon the i'm
biber st cheered but did not inebri-
ate."
The Grand Jury which made this
indictment; it was found at the May
term of court; was one of the best
that Hartford county has had in many
years. On it were many large tax
payers who realized that the costs in
any criminal case are considerable
and must of necessity be largely borne
by the county. Now can any sane
man believe that responsible body
of men like this would make a pre-,
sentiment on any such testimony as
this? 1t leaves only one conclusion
to be formed.
This is not the only case by any
manner of means. Ever since this
popular beverage made its appearance
in our county, almost every grand
jury has before its rising brought up
one or two local option indictments.
In some of these cases we are sure
that the testimony was not sufficient
to find a bill and the action of tine
jurors was only the outcome of the
feelings of extremists but in many
other instances the jurors undoubted
ly had sufficient testimony on which
to justify their actions. When these
witnesses got up in court, however
their story was very different one
and the States officer was compelled
to suffer the ignominy of confessine
that he had no case. OF course the
word went forth throughout the coun
ty that the law was not being en-
forced on account of the laxity o.
those charged with the enforcement
If the people who make these charges
would only come into court and lister
to the evidence, they could very
quickly place the blame.
The practical way out of the diff
Guilty and the only one that suggest.
itself would be to make it impressive
upon witnesses that their evidence
before the Grand Jury is taken under
oath the same as in open court. Il
they were brought to realize in SONS
forcible manner that to tell one story
in secret and another in open court i,
perjury and that they laid themselve.
amenable to the law, the trouble
would then cease.
1t is an outrage on the county which
has to bear this expense Of probably
one hundred dollars in each case anc
it is also unfair to those officials whose
duty it is to see that the law is en-
forced as we'll as the jury making the
indictment. Succeeding grand Jurors
should see that their predecessors an
properly protected in carrying out
their sworn duty.