Year: 1874

Sunday. but that is no reason why Mr.. Tai
should limit the liberty Of the citizen to an
extent to make the interference tyranny.


Charles Ross Once More.


It is hardly to be wondered at that the
lapse Of time since his disappearance, now
more than FIVE months, should have driven
the story of the stolen Ross child almost out
Of notice. Now and then . report creeps
into circulation that he is found, but is re-
ceived incredulously The public has made
up its mind either that the child has been
murdered or that the thieves will not dare to
risk the exposure Of returning him. His
parents, according to popular opinion. may
as well tace their inevitable loss and bear it
as they can.


Now we have good reason to believe that
Charles Ross is not murdered, but that his
captors still hold him ready to give up 30
soon as the ransom is paid. It would serve
good purpose at this precise juncture if
every newspaper in the country would
recall the facts of the child's abduc-
t1OA w At6 IcuOSIsy uu0 us80 sASAA
to fresh efforts to solve the mystery.
During the Arst few weeks after it occurred,
in the general alarm and horror, q dozen diff
ferent hypothesis were offered Suspicion
was thrown first on one side and then an-
other; the Ross family, being unknown, were
dragged before the bar Of public opinion, in
dicted for prevarication, then icentiousness,
and finally for deliberate scheme OF swim
ding. The people caught at any theory
which would disprove the trightful possibility
Of the presence among as OF nm organized band
of kidnappers-the advent Of new crime
more terrible than murder. While press and
people were following these false scents the
thieves disappeared. Sufficient time has,
however, now passed to dispel all these
groundless theories. The character Of the
Ross family, and Of every one connected, even
remotely, with them, has been brought to the
glaring light, and tested by strict judicial
investigation, and by the yet sterner tribunal
Of suspicious public with its myriad watch.
full eyes. The facts Of the case now remain,
clear and indisputable, ready for our action.
and as such we offer them to our readers.


Nrst-Christian X. Ross, the father Of the
stolen child, is q man Of unimpeachable in
tesdty and honor. The theory once advo-
Gated that the boy was secreted by his con-
nivance that he might obtain the ransom
money was met by an indignant and over
whelming refutation from all Of his business
associates, representing the largest CONNER
clal interests OF Philadelphia. It is worth
mentioning in this connection that neither
the committee holding in trust the twenty
thousand dollars offered for the boy and his
captors, nor any one OF the various corps Of
detectives, public and private, employed In
the case, whose interest It naturally would be
to And Mr.. Ross guilty, entertain the slightest
suspicion Of him. but ell have profound and
thorough belief in his upriohtness and re-
spect for his sorrow.


Second-Ths allegation that Mr.. Ross was
debauchee. and that his discarded wife was
really the kidnapper, was the fabrication OF o
Reading newspaper, for which its publishers
have been found guilty in o criminal suit for
libel Mr.. Ross affidavit in this case, deny
ing one by one all the allegations in the Read
ing article, was proved at every point The
brothers and near friends Of MIRA. Ross, and
the poor, broken-hearted woman herself ap-
peared upon the witness stand to testify to the
exceptional purity and fidelity Of his life as o
husband and father. christian Ross" said
his brother-in-law, with natural touch OF
bitterness, ''has but one fault to excuse this
attack-he Is poor" The Ross family led q
quiet, reserved life. and this very reserve, this
distaste for playing any melodramatic r5ls
before the public, irrtated the press and was the
chief cause of the unjust aspersions cast upon
them. We feel it is but proper in this connec-
ton, asa concession largely due to the bersaved
family Of the stolen child. that tho HERALD
should say that while Its investigations Of the
matter carried on at distance were meant
simply to serve the public, they were in
certain particulars erroneous in theory nnd
facts. Our correspondent, acting upon false
information, believed by him to be true did
the character Of Mr. Ross gross injustice, and
We would be wanting In the commoper feel
ings Of humanity were we not thus to DIS
tinctly disavow his erroneous accusations and
express our sincere sympathy tor the afflicted
family OF the gentleman whom they affected


1nkd-It 10 now reduced to certainty that
the child was stolen from no motive OF revenge
or for other III purpose than simply to com.
mand the ransom. It has become customary
OF late years to bargain with burglars for the
return Of stolen bonds and jewels; this is but
q new branch OF the same business.


The case, then, stands thus:-The child
stolen on the arst day Of last July. 1t is be-
lieved, still lives; his sbductors hold him tri-