The Savannah morning news. (Savannah, Ga.) 1900-current, 1903-06-02
CRITICISED BY COURT
JUDGE EXPRESSED DIsAPPROvAI
OF METHODS OF
MARCH TERM GRAND JURY
IN HIS CHARGE TO THE MEMBERS
OF THE JUNE TERM BODY.

fcctuaI NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. Re-
ferred TO the Interview Had With
Rev. A. NJ. williams Concerning
Policy ShOps-Said Grand Jury
should BE no Respecter of Per-
sOns-Judge BarrOw's Charge a
FOrcefuI One.
The criticism by the court of the
methods employed by the March term
grand jury in it's investigation of the
policy cases was the feature of the
charge of Judge Barrow to the June
term grand jury yesterday morning.
The criticism was aimed especially at
the action of the grand jurors in Sc
curing testimony from Rev. A. M.
Williams, who claimed to know of the
existence of several shops, without
having him sworn as prescribed by
law.
Such action the court characterized
as ridiculous legal farce, saying that
the pursuit of such a course inevitably
ended in a miserable failure, which the
grand jury would be forced to admit.
In this connection Judge Barrow said,
in part:
with regard to the duties of a
grand juror and of the grand jury as
a body, of a criminal nature, your oath
is about as safe guide as you can
have as to what your duties
are. You remember the oath
each one of you took which requires
that you shall diligently inquire and
true presentments make of all such
matters and things as shall be given
you in charge, or shall come to your
knowledge, touching the present serv-
ice, and then it refers to the secrecy of
your proceedings and that your con-
duct shall not be marked by fear, IA
vor, affection, reward, or the hope
thereof.
Paragraph $50 is somewhat instruc-
tive as to the duties of grand jury
what is compulsory and what is not:
| Whilst grand jurors are bound only
| 70 notice or make presentments of
such offenses as may or shall come to
their knowledge or observation after
they shall have been sworn, yet they
have the right and power, and it is
| their duty. as jurors, to make present.
ments of any violations of the laws
Which they may know to have been
committed at any previous time, which
are not barred by the statute of lini-
| tations.'
A Conscientious Obligation.
Now, that means, gentlemen, that
| OF such matters and things as may
| come to your knowledge touching the
| violation of law after this morning
you are bound to take notice. Such
| matters and things as have heretofore
come to your knowledge you are not
bound to take notice of You were
not sworn as grand jurors until a few
| minutes ago, and the obligation was
not fastened upon your conscience to
make diligent inquiry until you took
| that oath. The past can take care
OF itself, but what comes to your
knowledge and observation whilst you
are grand jurors you are bound to
take notice of.
Il want to say to you that it is not
a compliance with your duty to have a
private conversation on the street or
in his office with a man who claims to
know of the existence of crime and
decline to bring him before the grand
jury and administer the oath that the
law requires to be administered to him.
1t is not q compliance with the law
for the foreman, or a member or a
to man who claims to know of vio-
lation of the law and excuse him from
appearing before the grand jury as a
sworn witness.
IF you know of a man who claims
that he knows of the existence of
crime, you have no right to excuse
him from testifying on oath before
your body. You have no right to be
| respecters of persons and take the
word, not under oath, of one man and
require another man to come and tes-
tify before you. The law points out
the plain method that the grand jury
shall pursue. Paragraph 1874 goes so
far as to specify, in words, the oath
that you are required to have admins
tered to a witness: The following
| oath shall be administered to wit
nesses intended to be sent before the
grand jury: The evidence you shall
give the grand jury on this bill of in
d1ctment Tor presentment, as the case
may be-here. state the case), shall be
the truth. the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth So help you God."'
Ridiculous Legal Farce.
''The law requires that that oath
shall be administered to a man who
knows of the existence of crime" said
the court with emphasis; that he shall
be examined in the presence of at least
eighteen grand jurors, and in the pres
ence of nobody else unless it be the
prosecuting officer of the state, and
that he shall not be examined until
that oath is administered to him. OF
course, for a man to claim that he
knows of the existence of crime, and
a member of the grand jury, or the
foreman of the grand jury, or a COM
mtttee of the grand jury, to have an
interview with him down town some
where and call that a diligent inquiry
and true presentment is just simply a
ridiculous legal farce, and any grand
jury pursuing any such course as that
will end its inquiry in "a miserable fail
ure."
The court had little to say directly
on the subject of gambling combining
his references to a reading of the va
rious laws which the law requires him
to give in charge. The act of the Leg
islature relative to the operations Of
the beef trust, was also read. the
court declaring that while the beef
trusts were carrying on their illegal
business In the community, he could
suggest no method by which testimony
sufficient to convict could be adduced
against them.
Judge Barrow in charging regarding
carrying concealed weapons, declared
that he believed il was responsible for
half the crime committed. For a Judge
10 assert that he would sentence TO
Imprisonment, without the alternative
OF fine. in all cases of conviction for
the ofense, he said, would not oper-
ate In the suppression of the vice He
said there were certain forms OF mis-
demeanOr which IL WAS NOT the piaaa