Richmond daily palladium. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1876-1904, 1901-06-15
SERIOUS CHARGES.
FILED IN CIRCUIT COURT
TODAY.
The Court Asked to Appoint
Especial Grand Jury---Fuli
Text of the Charges
Action of Court.

In circuit court this morning was
filed the following important docu-
meIt:
Stale of Indiana, Wayne county.
WAYNE circuit court, April term,
1901.
T., the Honorable II. c. Fox. Judge of the Wayne
Circuit Court.
Whereas, William A. Bond is a
member of the Wayne county bar,
and is also prosecuting attorney In
and for the 18th judicial circuit of
the state of Indiana, and as such Is
an officer of your court, and,
Whereas, il is true that many
good and reputable citizens, have by
rumors and charges been made to
believe that said William A. Bond Is
guilty of unprofessional conduct as a
member of said bar and as an at
torney at law; and that he is guilty
OF malfeasance in Office, in tnat he
has failed. neglected and refused to
discharge his duties as prosecuting
attorney, and,
Whereas, it has recently been dis
covered by investigation made by
VIM Il. Tavlor. attorney general,
through his deputy, G. Ii. Lockhart,
that one Levi Nj. Jones, Justice OF
the, peace III and for Wayne town
ship, Wayne county, Indiana. has
been almost daily, during the time
he was in office, guilty of malfeasance
in office, by coneealing and embezzle
ing fines by him collected as such
Justice OF the peace, making false en-
tries in his docaets, and committing
perjury to conceal his embezzlements,
and was and is also guilty of embez
zling other money by him re
ceived in his official capacity, and,
whereas the whole truth cannot be
ascertained in regard to the said
malfcasance OF said Jones without d
full and careful investigation OF his
dock is and many papers which
we're on file with him in his office,
all involving much labor, and,
whereas, il is charged and believed
by many persons that said William
A. Bond has connived at and partici
plted to some extent in the
fruits of such malfeasaDce in Office by
the said Levi NJ. Jones, and that he,
the said Bond, is not and will not be
OliiEtnb III tht it'o'Sts'cH VI S't'
Jones; and
Whereas, The truth cannot be as
certained and made known as IT,
whether said Bond has been and is il
collusion with said Jones, without a
full and proper investigation; and
Whereas, A full ana careful inves-
tigation cannot be had in regard TO
the alleged misconduct and NAL
of
Bond, except in the following man
ner:
first. The D occedings to remove
or suspend an attorney may be com
menced by the direction of the court ];
directing some attorney To draw ur
aud prosecute the accusation.
Second. The proceedings To remove
or sus spend an attorney may be drawn
up by any person and sworn to by
the person acknowledging 1t.
Third. An accusation for impeach
ment of a prosecuting attorney may
be presented to the clerk of court by
the grand jury, who presents 1t To
the Judge, who must thereupon no
tify the attorney general TO act as
prosecuting officer in the matter.
Fourth. When an accusation in
writing, verified by the oath of any
person, is presented To the circuit
court, claiming that any officer has
refused or neglected To perform the
official duties of his office, the court
must cite the party To appear, and
proceed to hear In "A summary man
ner the accusation and evIdS nee, etc.
And, whereas, the supreme court
of this state has held IN the case ot
Rowe vs.. Bateman, 1913 Ind, page
54a, that public officers are created
by the state in order that ii may
carry on the various departments ol
its governments. and 1t Is certainly y
eminentiv proper that the state un-
der the circumstances, being inter
ested in having unfaithful officers re-
moved from the offices which they
hold. should have cast upon it by the
legislature the burden OF prosecuting
in court. in its own name, impeach-
ment proceedings designed for the
protection of the public 10y evictIng
from Office all unfaithful officers.
And. whereas, no attorney at this
bar ought TO voluntarily take il upon
himself 10 make accusations and iu-
stitute dlsbarment proceedings,
and no citizen ought to
voluntarily make an accusa-
tol to institute impeachment
proceedings, because the burden OF
such proceedings is cast upon and
should be borne by the state, and be-
calse by IN liking specific charges Tor
dlsbarment or inpeachnent proceed
ings great labor would be required to
prepare the evidence and because
certain specific charges should not be
made in Justice to Mr.. Bond himself
until a full and careful examination
involving the facts is made to ascer-
tain whether or not evidence can be
produced to sustain them. Another
reason for not making 81 &c fic charges
y part of this motion is that though
such charges might be true evidence
might DE suppressed and witnesses
influenced not TO dlvulge certain
facts known TO them, and,
Whereas, there is now in the city
of Richmond and over the entire
county of Wayne great public scandal
involving the Integrity of William A.
Bond as an officer of this court,
whereby the court may be brought
into contempt of the people, public
necessity exists for this court recall
ing the grand jury TO fully inyestl-
gate and make known whether said
William a. Bond is guilty of NAL
feasance in office, to the end that il
guilty he may be properly accused
and prosecuted in impeachment pro
ceedings, and If on the contrary hs
is innocent, the fact may be estab
lished and made known to the credit