The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1903-10-26
THE aUAsHED INDICTMENTS.

The Journal has already expressed the
opinion that Judge Affords decision in the
case of certain citizens indicted for an al
legged attempt to bride a member of the
Board of Public Works under the late ad-
ministration Is good law. The only ques-
ton involved at this stage of the proceed
ing was whether the acts alleged to have
been done by the defendants came within
the law defining the crime of bribing or
attempting to bride a public official. and
when the court decided that it did not it
was the duty of the court to quash the in
dictment 1t is clear from the language of
the law and its exposition by the court
that the crime which the law intended to
define and punish was that of bribing or
attempting to bride public official, not as
an individual, but as public official. to do
something in his official capacity. In this
of the law. because the act which Logsdon
was asked to do was not an official act
that is it was not within the purview of
his official duty. AS a member of the
Board of Public Works he had no more to
do with the operation of slot machines
than he had with the State printing, and
it was no more a crime within the meaning
and intent of the law to approach him
with an offer of pay for the privilege of
operating slot machines than it would have
been to offer him pay for his influence in
securing favorable decision in the chrys-
anthemum show. Even If Logsdon had en-
tered into an agreement with the other
parties and accepted money for his infiu-
ence it would not have been crime on
their part within the meaning of the law.
The essential quality of corruption would
have been absent because there would
have been no intent to influence Logsdon
in the performance of an official act. His
acceptance of the proposition would have
demonstrated his personal venality and
would have raised strong presumption of
the general corruption of the city admins
tration, which was what the parties were
after. but it would not have been an in
dictable offense. The case would have been
quite different If the parties had made to
a member of the Board of Public Safety
the proposition they made 10 Logsdon, or
if they had offered to pay Logsdon money
for doing some act pertaining to the Board
of Public Works. In either of these cases
the law would have presumed corrupt
motive, just as in the case in hand 1t pre-
sumed the absence of corrupt motive.
AS matter of fact the real motive of the
indicted parties was to expose what they
believed TO be the corrupt practices of the
Bookwalter administration and of Logsdon
in his double capacity as a member of the
Board of Public Works ana chairman of
the Republican committee This was a
commendable motive. because 1t looked ul-
timately to the publication of politics and
the betterment OF city government The
fact that the motive was based on misin-
formation misconception Of facts does
not change its essential quality. We re-
peat that the motive was commendabIe.
though the act was a very unwise one and
might have proved much more serious for
the reformers than it did. Had they blum
dered TO the extent of making this propo-
sition 10 a member Of the Board OF Public
Safety. or OF trying TO hire Logsdon to do
some act within the purview OF his official
duty. the indictment could not have been
] quashed on the ground it was. The case