Democratic Sentinel, Volume 14, Number 4, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 14 February 1890 — Page 1

The Democratic Sentinel.

VOLUME XIV

THE DEMOCRATIC SENTWEL democratic newspaper. PUBLISHED EVERY FKIDaY, by Jas. Vv. McEwen rates of subscription. • 75 s ° jivertieing Rates. , ar 880 0? vIUBki —, c<ir ’ 40 © 5 J «01ui£B-. . 30 *0 I sM l „ . 10 0° „r««ot. added to foregoing price if k/c *rAs e X» ar V «t to occupy more rhan .gle column - a te q U itable rates jakortonalvarts of ayearu n Business ca^ 3 ! mont bs; « 2 for three ««. nd »4v.rU.ome»u .te. tablishod first publication 10 cents WubU~UotlbM.at.er e e.M. a Httarterly (once m free of extra chargeW the adveitiser free oi ex rogid ts Advertisements for pedons for . d . when

the new IND. O. 8. DALE, Proprietor WSlU>* Attorney -at-Law * _ . IiNDIAMA »BMBSWLANK. • - * W» *• spe3aW<^? ntt «n north side of Washington •WW r. W o *” o *’ w DAV^iry H * brother ARION L. SPITLER, „ OoHeotor nd xAffinfmnd leasing tftndß ‘ .... W, H. H. GRAHAM, • aTTOkN BY-AT-L AW, rbebdblatb, Indiana. Monty to loan on long * t to^Jg eW “ TAMES W. DOUTHIT, and NOTAKY PUBLXO “S- oJc in TOom i T er HOBIP , w ATTOBNEY-AT'LAW, Bensselae I ', Ind OHM .. ..,»»« «» ° nnrt VanßenH 9ge i iig Wrhiamß.Aveti’ipnrcha noS otUble reil estate, pays taxes a may« 7, 87. |taßtrnments. —• ~" \YJ M. w WATSON, ttukney-aT-lav/ Office UP Stairs, in Leopold’s Bazay, nw.NRRELAER /

yrT W-HARTSELL, D «oM—’ Diseases a O mC VniWX"verH e o W u 8 ® lOtk ' , 'July 11,1884. , . - , B. LOUGHRIDGE. VICTOR E. LOUGHRIDGEH DOUGHRIDGE & SON, Phvaician* and Surgeons. Offiw it the new Leopold Block, second floor, second door right-hand side of hall. oer cent, interest will be added to all ■Mounts running unsettled longer than three months. Tlnl DR. I. B. WASHBURN Physician & Surgeon Rensselaer, Ind, flails promptly attended. Willgive special atten Hon to the treatment of Chronic Diseases. IRA W. YEOMAN, Attorney at Law, NOTARY PUBLIC Real Estate and Collecting W REMINGTON, INDIANA. Will practice in all the Courts of NewWs Benton and Jasper counties. ■■■i » _ ..._ ■? Snow Dwigginb, F. J. Sears, Vai.. Seib,' President. VicM’resident. Cashier CITIZENS’STATEBANK BENSSELA&S- TO Dobs a general banking business: Certificates bearing- interest Issued; Bkchans* bought and sold; Money loaned on hnu at lowest rates and onmosfavorable terms V“*-»

RENSSELAER JASPER COUNTY. INDIANA. FRIDAY. FEBRUARY 14. 1890

SPEECH OF HON. D. W. VOORHEES, OF INDIANA,

In the Senate of the United States, Wednesday, January 8, 1890. [Continued from last week. ] In behalf of the people of Indiana I desire the Attorney-General of the United States to inform this body whether the action of his official subordinate in interfering with and obstructing the duties of a Unit -d States commissioner was inspired by his instructions or now meets his approval; and, if so, to further inform the senate and the country by virtue of what law he and his subordinate are upheld,— Sir, I here assert, fearless of any intelligent contradiction from any senator or from anybody else, that a district attorney for the United States has no more legal right over the action of a United States coms missioner in the issuance or the refusal to issue a warrant of arrest than he has over the appointment of a ministei to England.— Such an assumption of authority on the part of an attorney for the -Governmenthas never been claimed or even hinted at in the best authorities on the law of the Federal judiciary. Jn the contrary, United States commissioners are treated as a peculiarly independent class of officials. Spear, in his work on the jurisdiction, practice, and pleading of the Federal courts says:

“Each circuit court may appoint in different parts of the district for which it is held ss many discreet persons as it may deem necessary, who are to be called commissioners of circuit courts,and to possess and exercise the powers which are or may be expressly conferred by law upon commissioners of circuit courts. * * * These commissioners, though appointed by the circuit courts, are not officers of these courts, and the courts do not, by the mere fact of having made the appointment, acquire any supervisory jurisdiction over them or over their proceedings.” It would seem from this citation that neither J udge Woods,nor even Judge Gresham, of the United States circuit court, could have prevented by any authority ot law, commissioner Van Buren from issuing a warrant for the arrest of Dudley, as did Smiley N. Chambers.

From a letter to the First Comptroller of the Treasury by the late Attorney General, Mr. Garland, written October 15,1886, it will be found, also, that the Department of Justice itself has no power of control over United States commissioners in issuing warrants and making examinations into alleged offenses. The Comptroller had presented the very question here involved, and had requested an order by the Department of Justice preventing commissioners from entertaining what he styled frivolous prosecutions, and from issuing warrants for the arrest es certain parties charged with tim* ber depredations. In reply, the Attorney-General, amongst other things, said:

“While I am in full accord with you as to the end in view, us preventing frivolous prosecutions,and am willing and ready to do all .in my power to effect this, yet I do not see how 1 can grant the request contained in your letter. The commissioners, under the law as to these matters, stand as examining courts in the states do as to state state prosecutions (section 1014, Revised Statutes of tlje United States), and they we in nowise subject to any order or direction from this Department in respect of these inquiries. If th > order aske i for were made and yet a oom missioner kn w of an offense otherwise than by in the mode indicated in that order, made in aeO ordaoeewith your request, and

did not take cognizance of such offense he would be derelict in his uuty. And under the law, if he paid no attention to this proposed order of the Deportment I do not see how he could be punished or how this order could be enforced.

What I mean to say is, this is a matter for legislation, and not for departmental order and direction. It would appear, for example, that as the law now stands, these commissioners are committing magistrates for the United States, just as justices of the peace are for *he states, and hey proceed in the mode that the justices of the peace in the states do in making arrests, etc.”

It thus appearing that neither the courts whicn appoint them, nor the Attorney-General who has absolute control of district attorneys, have any control at all over these commissioners in their capacity as examining and committing magistrates, the claim that the district attorneys have the right to direct their proceedings and decide what cases they shall entertain and what eases they shall refuse to investi *ate becomes something worse than rid.culous.

Nor does the fact that a case has been before a grand jury once or oftener, even with what was deemed at the time a fu 1 and satisfactory hearing of proof, make the slightest difference in this question. The jurisdiction of the commissioner as an examining magistrate remains until the statute of limitations bars the offense, and the district attorney has no more right to interfere with its exercise at one time than at another. In the present instance, however, no grand jury has had fair play, or an honest chance to present an indictment in th* Dudley case; as has been fully shown by the proceedings and the movements of the court which had the matter in charge. When, therefore, J ohn A. Lang, a reputable and competent citizen of Indiana, within the last thirty days filed his legal and sufficient affidavit before William A. Van Bnren, a United States commissioner, or “a commissioner of th > circuit court” of the United States, charging that William W. Dudley did “knowingly, unlawfully, and feloniously counsel and advise an attempt to bribe voters in Indianajin the year 1888,” there was no power eithei in the discretion of the commissioner himself or in the-partisan dictation of the district attorney to withhold a warrant for the arrest of said Dudley The action of District Attorney Chambers in ordering the warrant not to issu? calls for his summary dismissal from office, unless the administration, of which he is a member, is willing to have the law still further violated in order to still further protect Dudley. It is not worth while to have it put forth and heralded over the country at stated intervals that the Administration did not shake hands with Dudley at the inauguration bal I, and that he now only enters the White House it the back door or not at all. No fairer opportunity can occur than the one now presented io the President to define his position as to Dudley and his crime and its indorsers. It matters not whether District At-

torney Chambers had the legal right to prevent the arrest ot Dudley or not He exercised that right and not only refused to prosecute him. but declared himself in earnest sympathy with the felonions act with which Dudley is charged. Is the President willing so be held responsible for the conduct and the language of his law officer in Indiana, who openly declares the “blocks of five” letter to indicate simply a patriotic interest in the elections? If so, he will allow Smiley N. Chambers to remain in office; if not, he will call very promptly for his resignation. It is true that Chambers is not alone among the leaders of his partv in Indiana in his estimation and adulation of Dudley and his methods, and the President will

require a full share of moral and political courage to take his stand on the side of law and against the indorsers f bribery. The manner of Dudley’s rece f tion on his recent visit to Indianapolis was full of significance as well as full of shame. The district attorney not only protected him from “annoyance,” but the United States marshal paid him obsequious attentions; Judge Woods descended from the bench in open court to welcome him as one full of honors; he was dined as a favored guest by the chairman of

the Republican state central committee, and followed and waited on by hungry applicants for office as if he he’d for them the keys of lire and death. The President himself was never received at his own home with warmer manifesta ions of personal attachment and approval than greeted the hero of a scheme of election bribery at the hands ®f his leading party assooi tes. But Benjamin Harrison is President of the United States, and as such he is called upon to sbur», the disgraceful example and the pernicious influence of the corrupt po. litical coterie at Indianapol s, and by the immediate removal of Chambers throw the weight of his great office in favor of a pure ballot and the swift punishment of those who seek to debauch it.

Sir, the public mind of the country is in no uncertain mood touching this subject. An officer of the courts, whose duty it is to {iroseeute offenders agatnst the aws of his government is found to be in sympathy with the worst type of criminals and to approve as honorable and patriotic the blackest and most odious species of crime. Wh >t security can the people feel for ihe due enforcement of the criminal laws in such hands? A s a non-partisan view of th 3 gravity of this ugly question 1 quote from an article in the Civil Service Chronicle, written by a gentleman' of ability, who supported Harrison and worked hard to elect him.—

25 * 6ENTS ♦ 25 Hjzn.l sieged 1 THE Indiana Stale Stniinl Has been enlarged Fifty p er Cent. It now consists of Twelve broid eighty-four This makes it the Largest and Best Weekly Paper in the United States. < THE STATE SENTINEL averages in each issue not less than SEVENTY-FIVE COLUMNS OF CHOICE BEADING MATTER. It is a complete family newspaper, has all the news of the week, good stories, full market reports, abie editorials—full of good things for the farmei and his family. We will send this great journal on trial to any address.

Three Send in your name and money at once. Put a silver quarter in a etter and it will reach us safely. ONE YEAR FOR ONE BOLLAR Invariably in advance. Address INDIANA STATE SENTINEL. Indianapolis, Ind. •fiT We want an active Agei_t in ever A Township in India Liberal Inducements. Write for terms, g

(Lucien B. Swift is well known in Indi .na as a repres ntative man. He says: “That Dudley wrote the letter there seems to be no manner of doubt T;»e man who wrote that letter believed in the principles there stated. Some of those principles are Lterally subversive of free government, and M'hen they run their logical course they take a country through corruption an anal chy to the rule of the strongest leader, and to despotism. The man who writes such a letter ought to

be a political and social outcast. He ought to be as much under the ban as Benedict Arnold. Yet Dudley comes to Indianapolis and dines >ith the chairman of the Repub] can state committee. He is called upon and congratulated by men who pass for respectable citizens ** * Therj has never been more convincing proof of how the ways of recent politics have roit d the pul lie conscience. We have, however, one other projf in District Attorn y Chambers,which would if reeded, complete the demonstration.” In the Sp 'ingfield (Mass.) Re■publicafT is the following just conception of election bribery and its far-re ching and fatal consequences:

“ What was the open rebellion of Jefferson Davis compared to this insidious assault upon the bul« walks of free institutions counseled and abetted by Dudley in 1888, and aided and comforted by the Tribune and Feder'l officials acting in the interests of the Administra tion? * * * Now let the Administration declare itself. J Was oi was not the ordinary course of justice interrupted by Federal officials at Indianapolis on the order of any cabinet officer or any superior in the service of the Government?— Did the district attorney shield Colonel Dudley from “annoyance’* at.the command or hint of th«. Administration ?

[Contnuedon 4th page. J

NUMBER 4