Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1893-1920, 1906-04-14
The Difference Between Persecution
aud Prosecution.

The difference between persecution
and prosecution was never more clear
| ly demonstrated than in the justice
| court proceedings growing out of the
charges filed against William WINS
and Wallace Weigand of the Harper
house bar for selling lottery tickets.
Two facts were developed in the testi-
mOny of the informant, or rather the
agent of the informant, in the prelim-
mary hearing. One was that the evil
deAce, such as it was, was obtained
for purely vindictive purposes. The
other was that the aim was not at the
men of whom the tickets were alleged
TO have been purchased, but at anoth-
err whom it is sought to indirectly in
vOlve. The attack is made in the
spirit of malice pure and sim
pie upon the character of Charles
McHugh, proprietor of the Harper.
to whose hotel is attached the
bar where it is affirmed the tickets
were sold The only evidence adduced
from the prosecuting witness, was thai
he bought tickets OF both the accused,
and the same witness in the same con
nectiOn admitted that he himself had
also sold the same lottery tickets TO
John LoOney. who is thus shown TO be
back OF the entire proceeding. So that
If the law was violated in the first
place in the sale of the tickets. ii GER
tainly was in the second instance in
the sale OF the tickets The broker
ought to be as much to blame in the
sight of the law as the original sales
man.
No one. right thinking, can assume
to cOndOne crime. where it is estab
lished or reasonably apparent. Every
one can be unto himself an informant
if SO disposed 1t is no trick to put up
a job to catch some one in q violation
OF the law, and yet whether from q
sense OF duty or moved by personal
motives, the informant is not n pop
ular creature in the eyes of the com
munity. Even when inspired by the
loftiest of impulses which is the com
pulsion of obedience to the law. the
position of the informant is not an en-
viable one When, however, he is i'm
PEELED by personal design, when sus-
tanning it all is the qualification of
vindictive disposition his attitude
is despicable. The man, who for
grudge and revenge, that he may have
the glee OF seeing a fellow citizen
whom he does not like. suffer at any
cost even to the destruction of his
good name or the fastening upon him
the accusation of crime, whether with
or without warrant, is one of the most
abhorrent of individuals under the face
of the sun.
Respect for the law, for the laws
sake, is the first requisite of decent
citizenship. But the law was not
made for the venting of spleen. The |
law is not the implement of vengeance.
Its object and purpose is the preser-
walton of the peace and dignity of the |
people, and the man who goes about |
seeking to find violators of it should |
not only be consistent, but he should |
be very sure that the mote is out of his |
own eye. The ordinary informant, is |
not as rule, responding to the die |
tates of justice or a clear conscience |
There is, as a rule, motive in the pro- |
cedure, whether it be mercenary or |
personal This is the reason why the |
known informant is held in such whole |
some contempt among all people.
1t is the duty of all agencies for the |
public good to point out and condemn |
violations of law or of disregard for
the requirements and safeguards OF /
public decency and public morals But !,
there is a difference between the man