Evening star., 1952-12-31
A Grand Jury's Function

A Grand Jury's Function
Some rather startling headlines are emerging
from the current efforts of House committee
to find out whether the State and Justice De-
partments tried to block Federal grand jury
report dealing with Communist employees of the
United Nations. When all of the evidence is in,
however, it will be surprising if officials in either
department are shown to be guilty of wrongful
conduct
The proper function of grand jury, and
especially Federal grand jury, is clothed in
much confusion. In the District grand jury is
expected to conf1ne its activity to returning an
indictment or refusing to indict 1t Is not
expected to return reports or findings which
are unrelated to judicial proceeding.
In 1891 Judge Proctor, then sitting in District
Court, granted motion to expunge from the
record a special grand jury report severely
criticizing two police officials for their handling
of the Virginia Mcpherson Strangling case. The
grand jury's comment was in the nature of a
report to the District Commissioners, filed
through the court, and was attacked by the two
police officers on the ground that it twas no
part of any judicial proceeding" This view was
indorSed by Judge Proctor, and since that time
it has been generally accepted here that grand
jurys function is limited to returning an indict-
ment or refusing to prefer charge.
This does not apply of course, in all juris-
dictions. The grand jury which returned the
report on the U. N. Communists was meeting in
New York 1t is difficult to see, matter of
law, how it would have any more right to return
a report of this kind than would District grand
jury. The difference presumably lies in the
attitude of the judges in the two Jurisdictions
Many States also use grand juries, and often
effectively, to make Investigations and return
reports which are not related to any pending
judicial proceeding.
There are good arguments pro and con, with
respect to this practice Many corrupt political
machine has been shaken up and forced to clean
house by grand jury report, as distinguished
from an indictment. Sometimes this is the only
effective way to unearth and expose corruption
On the other hand, it is practice that is open
to grave abuses As general rule only selected
witnesses are heard by grand jury and there
is no opportunity for an individual named in a
report to cross-examine them Certainly in the
local case it would have been grave miscarriage
of justice to permit the grand jury's report to
stand For 1t presented no indictment which the
accused ofhcers-William S. Shelby and Edward
J. Kelly-would have had an opportunity to face
and answer in open court. Yet in another and
separate proceeding before police trial board
they were adjudged innocent of complaints SINH
lar to those made by the grand jury In most
instances however, there would be no comparable
opportunity for an accused person to clear his
reputation.
Against this background, the alleged activities
of the State and Justice Departments In the New
York case appear to be something less than
sinister. The State Department, of course, would
have no business trying to prevent grand jury
from returning any report. But it is hard to see
why any one should get excited if, as alleged its
only request in this case was to have the report
held up until State Department representative
could appear before the grand jurors and testify.
The Justice Department is in different situa-
tion. It has some responsibility in grand jury
proceedings-at least to the extent of assisting
and advising grand jurors. 1t ought not to
dictate to grand jury, and apparently 1t did
not try to do so in this instance AS practical
matter however, representatives of the depart
ment-generally the district attorneys-have at
tempted and no doubt will continue to attempt
to prevent grand juries from running wild
The House committee should 60 to the bottom
of the matter if it thinks that in this instance
there was an attempt to conceal the fact that
American Communists held key jobs in the u NJ,
or that an effort was made to shield officials In
the State Department responsible for placing
them there And at the same time the COM
mittee should expose the identity of the member
of Congress who is said to have recommended
some of the questionable U. N. Job seekers II
there Is going to be an expose in this business
it ought to go all the way up the line.