Americans Disqualified as Jurors.
By Editor
JUDGE McCONNELL has committed himself to the astounding doctrine that a member of the American League is disqualified from sitting as a juror in the Cronin murder case. This ruling was arrived at after the examination of William P. Turner, of Evanston, had reached the point where he said that he was a member of the Grand Army of the Republic and of the American League. Mr. Turner had been previously cross-examined by the counsel for the defense, who found no reason in his answers for a challenge for cause. He said that he had read the newspapers in regard to the Cronin murder, but had formed no opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the accused. He had formed no opinion as to whether or not Burke was a tenant of the Carlson cottage. So far as the record shows, Mr. Turner appeared to be the “ideal juror” whom the court and counsel professed a longing to secure to try this great case. When asked as to the character of the society known as the American League, Mr. Turner replied that it was a quasi-political society; that further than that he had no very distinct ideas as to its objects, and that he did not think it was affected by religion, nationality, or anything of that kind. He did not know it as the Independent Order of Deputies. He swore that the provisions of the American League had reference to the prevention of members of the Catholic Church from controlling political offices; but he declared that he would give the testimony of a member of the Catholic Church the same credence as if the witness were not a member of that church. Finally, he was asked: “If this society to which you belong has reference to the exclusion of Catholics from political offices, and from controlling political offices, would you not, if accepted as a juror in this case, be prejudiced against defendants if it should appear in testimony that they were members of the Catholic Church?” To this he replied: “No, sir; I think not. I don’t think their guilt is affected by their religion.” Upon this he was challenged for cause by the counsel for the defense “by reason of the views he entertained and the society to which he belongs.” The challenge was objected to by the State, but was sustained by Judge McConnell. To discuss this decision of Judge McConnell’s intelligently, it is necessary to understand exactly what the American League is, and what it proposes. Here is its object, taken from the preamble to its constitution:—“Believing that there is an organized effort being made to eradicate from the minds of the people of the this American Union reverence and loyalty for the Constitution and flag of our nation; that the motives that animated the founders of this Republican government are rapidly being forgotten; that the principles they sought to make perpetual are in danger; that the ballot is defrauded of its potency; that our public-school system is subject to attack, and efforts being made to destroy its efficiency as an educator of American citizens, by perverting and falsifying history; that loyalty to flag and country is subject to snares and derisions; that taxes are unequal; that rights are infringed to grant privileges; that the United States and State Constitutions are violated, and that the civil and religious liberty we have inherited from our fathers is threatened; and believing that these dangers result from persistent and organized efforts being made to introduce principles that antagonize our American system, we form this order to warn our fellow-citizens, and to concert measures to strengthen and extend the civil and religious liberty established by our fathers, and to preserve this American Union.” It is evident from this declaration that the American League is nothing more or less than an organization for political purposes, and that its professed objects commend it to the good-will and support of all loyal American citizens. Except as the Roman Catholic Church, or any other church, party, or organization, impinges upon the institutions of American non-sectarian schools, free ballot, and religious liberty, they are in no sense antagonized by the American League. If any church or party inculcates a spirit hostile to free institutions, and teaches doctrines in regard to secular affairs at variance with the faithful allegiance of citizens, that church or party antagonizes the principles of the American League in so far, and not at all in matters relating purely to religious doctrines or things theological. And yet, this being so, Judge McConnell sustained a challenge against Mr. Turner, and thereby stigmatized every man in the community holding similar views, as unfit to perform the duty of a citizen in a case between the State and five alleged murderers. It was not pretended before Judge McConnell that the American League was intrinsically antagonistic to the Clan-na-Gael, or that its members were prejudiced in any way to the Clan-na-Gael, or Camp No. 20 of the Clan-na-Gael, or any other conspiracy in the Clan-na-Gael, or against the individual prisoners, or, in fact, against any member, society, or church not at variance with the loyal, patriotic, and unmistakably legal duties of citizenship. Against murder, we take it, the members of the American League are prejudiced. So is every other American citizen. Against every conspiracy to murder, whether the plans are laid in the secret councils of the Clan-na-Gael, at the hidden meetings of Anarchists, or by private parties of any faith—Catholic, Protestant, Jew, or Mormon—we suppose members of the American League are prejudiced by their allegiance as American citizens; and so, we take it, is every other loyal American citizen. Upon what ground, then, did Judge McConnell base his dismissal of Mr. Turner?—Solely upon the assumption that because the American League objects to the Catholic Church controlling political offices, its members would have a prejudice against any person tried for murder, because that person happened to be a Roman Catholic. Either this, which is an assumption so illogical and startling as to be past belief, or at the outset of this trial Judge McConnell takes it for granted that not only Messrs. Burke, Coughlin, Beggs, O’Sullivan, and Kunze, the whole of Camp No. 20, and the Clan-na-Gael, are on trial for the murder of Dr. Cronin; but that looming up behind them, and spreading its portentous wings over the whole desperate plot, hovers the great Church of Rome. . . . Carried to its legitimate conclusion, the decision of Judge McConnell precludes the possibility of the selection of any political jury. If Mr. Turner was rightly excused because of his antagonism to the Roman Church, it follows that the Catholic Church, in the mind of Judge McConnell, is in some way a party to the case, and, in consequence, is interested on behalf of the defense. If this judicial assumption be correct, it renders every Roman Catholic in the community subject to challenge because of prejudices, in favor of the defense, and if every Catholic is to be excluded from the jury because of his prejudices, the defendants have good ground for challenging every Protestant talesman. It is needless to say that Judge McConnell’s ruling, and every inference and consequence deducible therefrom, is an insult to the Roman Catholic Church, an unjust impeachment to American loyalty, and a most unfortunate and uncalled-for blow at trial by jury. It is scarcely possible that in the few moments after the challenge was made—when we are told that “Judge McConnell leaned his head on his hand for two minutes, thinking what he ought to do”—he fully appreciated the wide scope of his decision. If everybody who antagonizes or believes in opposing the control of political offices by the Catholic Church is to be precluded from serving as a juror in a case where a Roman Catholic is on trial for conspiracy to murder, the selection of a jury for the Cronin case is impossible. The late Judge McAllister, in all his efforts to secure a jury favorable to Alexander Sullivan, never ventured to render such a sweeping decision as this.—America.