The daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1848-1851, 1851-12-06

Under this caption our contemporary, the Delta,
has yesterday some judicious remarks. We
highly esteem the amiable and accomplished gen
tleman who presides over the U. s. District Court
in this city; but, in the matter referred to, we
cannot but disagree with him in opinion.
The Judge orders gentlemen who have read
preliminary reports in the newspapers, to be set
aside as jurors in the cases brought up, and CEN
sures the course Of newspapers in publishing such
preliminary Investigations. This is the matter
now for the argument
If court Of preliminary investigation should
think proper to hold citizen to bonds for trial, il
should be upon very plain presumption Of a
wrong upon laws or rights affecting the public
Respecting the courts Of the country, the citizen
should SO hold it Regarding common sense, he
would be an idiot and unfit to sit upon the jury
if he did not consider it mere presumption
proved to be such by the necessity Of second Of
consequent trial, abstain from positive conclusion.
or convictions. If he entertain such positive con
vctions or conclusions on such insufficient grounds
he is not fit to be juror and should be perempto
rily excluded. But all the courts Of the country
cannot make committal to stand trial, othe
than = prsnso Jaete presumption of guilt and
We are to understand otherwise, preliminary inves
legations are matter Of the most special nonsense
If there be not presumption Of guilt, why annoy
and harass the citizen by the necessity Of
second trial?
II there be such presumption Of guilt Their
must DO aspresumption Of wrongs which touc
the laws or rights Of communities, which can no
be known but in acts, and must, therefore, di
rectly or indirectly, affect individuals. If thes
wrongs have been criminally done once, they ma
be done, and by the same parties, again. Judicis
proceedings are slow; particular cases dra
through a course of years. Is the wrong to b
covered up by law, the wrong-doer to be screened
by formalites from the vigilance of selfprotectio
on the part Of society, in the mean time? If
man ID far presumptively robber, cheat, thief
murderer, that the courts Of the country can hol
him in their grasp. restrain his personal liberty
and command his forced attendance for month,
or even years, why should they yet insist that SO
ciety shall have no warning?
The idea is ridiculous. Honest preliminary te.
timony must be the same, SO far as it goes finally
New and additional testimony may break its fore,
But preliminary Investigations are worth nothing
are intoleraby oppressive Of the citizen, if the
do not establish presumption. II, under the TO
NAL exactnsss of law and the strictness Of judici
Termination, man is presumptively a rascal, VIII
should not the public be enabled to avail itself
the preliminary and formal Investigations of il
own tribunals, for advissment of precaution an
watchfulness?
| The conclusion of an intelligent citizen fro
the report Of preliminary trial, is nothing mo
than this If such and such things are tru
then, ETC.; they are plainly, not positively, tru
because the examining or preliminary court, aft
due deliberation, sends the higher up, for fu
Their examination. A juror Of this tone of min
interests and necessities Of society, is the be
Ijuror, after all. The object of the laws is not
much to punish as to prevent crime. Publicity
judicial proceedings helps to this end. 1t warm
if it libels, it can find legal responsibility. B
if Jurors who read newspaper reports of prelirr
nary trials are to be outlawed, one of two thin
must follow: either presumptive rascals must G
cape free Of publicity, or men who can not sp,
through newspapers, or are too sleepy to re,
them, must become the sole jurors of the Ian