The Safe Burglary

The frequent references of late, in the telegraphic dispatches, to the "safe burglary case" in Washington induce us to print a brief review of its origin for the information of those who may have forgotten the circumstances. At the late triai the jury acquitted Williams, aud oould not agree as to Harrington and Whitely. The following is a history of the case : A memorial was presented to the last Congress by Messrs. W. W. Corcoran, W. W. Alexander and other respectable taxpayers, setting forth their belif that the officers of the Territorial governnient were guilty of corruption in the discharge of their trusts. An investigation was ordered, the report on which recommended the destruction of the system of governing the district, and the establishment of a new schome. So bad was the state of affairs, in tho judgment of the committee, that the destruction of the ring was imminent. In order, therefore, to secure themselves, the corrupt officials undertook to cast odium upon those persistent in the investigation. In the spring, the office of the Assistant District Attorney, who made himself so conspicuous in the defense of Governor Shepherd, was mysteriously robbed of a bundie of papera. The robber was arrested soon after the offense was committed, leavicg tho house of Mr. Alexander, and thus a link was forined in the chain of evidence against the inve3tigators. The committee, after an examinatioc, decided that no suspicion rested on Mr. Alexander, and carne to the conclusión Üiat Harrington, the attorney referred to, -was himself, with the coraplicity of a lawyer named Williams, the Chief of the Secret Service and Nettleship, Oolonel Whitely's first assistent, the guilty party. The Treasury Department dismissod Whitely and Nettleship, deenrug them guiifcy of complicity in the case, and reorganized the Secret Service. The case now in the hands of the jury is the result of an indictment frained by the Grand Jury against Barrington, Williams, Whitely and