The Washington herald., 1911-03-21
BOTH ARE GUILTY
In CONTEMPT CASE
Harrison Pays 500 Fine and
Pierce Is Sentenced.
GRAND JURORS APPROACHED
TamperinE with Inquisitoria1 Body
Dealt Severe Blow by Justice
Wright, Who Decides Deliberate
Effort Was Made to Defeat Justice
and Operation of the Law.

Jury tampering IN this city, or even the
attempt to approach juror with a view
TO influence him, was dealt a severe
blow yesterday by Justice Wright when
he sentenced William A. Pierce, a lum-
Der merchant of z16 Fourteenth street
northwest, to three months Incarceration
in the jail. aud imposed a fine of 800 on
William H Harrison, commission mer-
chant, of 9CS B street northwest
Pierce was adjudged guilty Of contempt
in. approachin Cresson E. Finch, MEM
Der Of the grand jury. Pierce noted an
pending decision of the Court of Appeals
Harrison was adjudged guilty Of tech
meal contempt, in that he Inquired Of
Leonard Daniel, a grand juror, about
what had been done in the Pickford
case Harrison paid his fine and was
discharged.
Never Intended Contempt.
IT have been guilty of any contempt,
and your honor finds that 1 have" said
Harrison. when called on to make
statement before sentence. 7 never in
tended it, and offer every apology to the
court"
Mr. Pierce referred to his untarnished
record of twenty-five years as a citizen
in Washington.
The decision Of Justice Wright was as
follows:
1T would be a very sorry rule that
would permit cnrruptionist- after the
Preparation of a contempt of court. to
be able to say that the court was so
nowerleSs that ii could not reach him if
his motives We're low enough to enable
lin to lie about it.
4 cannot see any theory where a de-
rial under oath can deprive the court of
the power to inquire into the facts in a
matter to see if there was an attempt
made to obstruct the administration of
Justice In regard to Harrison's case.
there was some question in my mind
t. whether technical contempt of court
had been committed. Upon reflection. |
have no doubt that Harrison is tech
nIcally guilty of the charge of attempt
rinG the obstruction of justice. There is
nothing which tends TO show that he
exercised any impOTtUnitv over Daniel.
Operated in His Mind.
He states that ne inquired of Daniel
whether or not anything had been done
n the Pickford case. He did not ask him
to vote in certain way but that re-
mark put in the mind nf Juror Daniel
the realization that somebody was de-
ton of the grand jury should be in a
certain manner. He did Intentionally and
knowingly put in the mind of the grand
juror that consideration, an element that
operated in his mind at the time he was
d9scharEinS his duty as a grand juror.
His case presents something of mitiga-
ton He did not impusn the testimony
OF an honorable man. He did not attack
the moral integrity of Daniel.
I'd n 7 ha
a all that ne sought Finch and expressed
a determined purpose of influencing his
vote in the grand jury room. That is
what he went to see Finch for. He made
up his mind before he started. and he
persisted so that ne would not permit
himself to be put off. After talking over
business affairs he went as far as he
could 60 after rebuffs had been admin
istered 10 him. that was to impress on
FinCh's mind the degree of interest
Pierce had in the case. allowing Finch
I" understand that he felt ii so deeply
that if the blood of a brother had been
concerned he could not feel it more.
Contrary to Justice.
This Is a deliberate. premeditated eff
fort to defeat the administration of jus
tice and the operation of the law. TO put
in the mind of a grand juror a considera-
ton which would govern him against the
command of his oath and the behest of
his duty. and prevent the operation of
the law in the administration of justice
He also aSsailed the honor of Finch with
out the slightest provocation.
I think that the jurors, Daniel and
Finch, should receive the profoundest
commentator for their high sense of pa
riotsm in realizing that American inSti-
tutinns depend on the administration of
justice. and are to be congratulated for
their bravery in telling the court con-
corning the attempts to bring to their
minds considerations not emanating from
the testimony received in the grand jury
room"