Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1905-04-26

ity with Beavers and he has not yet ex-
hausted his last resource, all appeal to
the Supreme Court. to escape trial.
Henry 2. Diamond was also indicted
for completely in land fra ud5 about the
same time and has thus far evaded
trial. With no disposition to PREJUDICE
the cases of these men it is obvious
that judicial system which enables
them SO long to escape trial is calcu-
lated to defeat the ends of justice. In
the almost two years which have en-
sued since their Indictment it is entire
ly probable that many OF the prosecu-
tons witnesses have disappeared some
are known to have died, and others
will have so far forgotten details as
materially to millitate against the
value of their testimony.
The case of Beavers is particularly
fragrant. He was regarded by the pos
tal officials as no less guilty than August
W. Machen who has been for some
months serving his sentence in the
Moundsville peniteniary and was gen
orally heralded as one of the chief in
stigators of the great system of graft
which was found to permiate the Post
Office Department. But the damaging
character Of the evidence against him
produced no effect and the Government
has been placed at a disadvantage and
put to great expense because of the
| lOopholes for the escape of criminals
which the present judicial system
| affords. During the last session of
| Congress both houses had the excuse
| that it was short session and that no
time could be devoted to legislation
not absolutely Imperative, while during
the previous session the approach of a
presidential election beclouded all
other issues. Next whites, however.
neither Of these excuses can be
advanced for neglect to enact a law
which both Attorney General Knox
and President Roosevelt have pointed
out is essential to the ends of justice.
One other case of somewhat similar
character has recently been brought to
the notice of the public by the reindict-
ment of Senator Burton of Kansas. Had
the law advocated by the President
been on the statutes Senator Burton S
case would not have been remanded to
the lower court by the Supreme Court
on question Of jurisdiction. Now,
however. the Senator of Kansas must
be retired on charges materially weak
ened, not by the fact, but by the lack
of jurisdiction of the St. Louis courts.
The question is frequently asked,
Why does rot the Senate take some
action in the cases of Senators Burton
and Mitchell, both Of whom have been
indicted but each of whom continues TO
ENJOY his salary of $4,000 year as a
Senator, if not to enjoy the privilege of
voting in the Senate. The answer is
this. Under Jurisprudence man
must be considered innocent until prov
en- guilty. The Senate claims that it
has no moral right to PREJUDICE the
cases of these Senators until their
cases have been disposed of by the
courts. It is argued, moreover, that
were the Senate, with fewer facilities
than the courts, to expel these men
such action would inevitably prejudice
the iuries which will be called upon to
try them, perhaps create a prejudice
entirely unwarranted by the facts.
The Senate, therefore refrains from
acting in such cases and defers to the
superior facilities and judgment of the
criminal courts. If the charges against
either Senator were to be ultimately
proven groundless the correctness of
| the Senate's attitude would Immediately
become apparent and the tendency to
criticize the Senate for it's failure to
act doubtless comes from those who
regard an Indictment as equivalent TO
a conviction.
The Senate committee on Interstate
Commerce has resumed its sessions and
is taking testimony on the subject of
railway rate legislation. A large num-
Der of railway men are invited to testi-
fly and it is probable that for a consid-
cradle time little will be heard in sup
port of the stand taken by the President
on this subject, although A. B. Stickney,