New Orleans daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1851-1866, 1852-09-28

VOLUME ".
where crime has been committed and the ac-
cused party has fed, in examining witnesses
and preserving testimony. / have known many
instances of parties crossing the State line for
time, and afterwards escaping from punish
ment altogether, because no testimony had been
preserved against them and there was diff
Guilty in finding it afterwards whereas, had the
testimony been taken when the crime was COM
mitted, that difficulty would not have existed,
and punishment would have been dealt out to
the offenders, In cases Of higher crimes, /
would be in favor of striking out the clause,
"unless he shall lshave fled from justice, but re-
lhting to misdemeanors | think that the article
ought to be so amended as to retain testimony
against accused parties who shall have fed.
The perpetrator Of O misdemeanor can be
reached only through the Courts. The Court
has no compulsory power out of the State, and
thus guilty. party, by keeping on the other
SIDE OF the State line for time, frequently
escapes detection and punishment. But per-
sons accused of higher crimes can be reached
beyond the jurisdiction of the Courts. |, there
fore, move that>the article 107 be referred to
the Committee on General Provisions.
ihi. 1IuAI--ll tHe pIlHClplc "hloH hufoSt'lo
be correct, it is applicable to all offences-to
higher equally as to those of a lower grade. The
gentleman from Natchitoches, (Mr. Bullard)
believed that testimony might be retained
against parties accused of nisdemeanors, while
in relation to higher crimes, the right of the
accused to examine the witnesses face to face,
ought to be unrcstrict. /. The argument Of the
gentleman amounts, then, to this, that the
right of the accused to cross question witnesses
shall be qualified. 10 that L am opposed.
Therefore, | move to strike out the words in
Article l07, ''unless he shall have fled from
Justice
Mr. HUNTS motion prevailed, and, on a far
ther motion, the article. as thus amended, was
adopted
THE APP0RTIoNMENT
This subject having been declared the order
Of the day
Mr.. GUIoN said: | am aware that last week,
the Apportionment of Representation was set
down as the order Of the day for this day, but
understood that it was not tie intention OF
gentlemen, as expressed more recently, to bring
on the discussion this day. There are various
interests to harmonse in relation to the great
subject of representation, and / am confident
that the Convention is not prepared to go into
the discussion satisfactorily this day | an
convinced that if the discussion shall be begun
motion will soon be made to postpone it. The
Committee will be ready tomorrow morning
and | move that the Apportionment be made tlle
order of the day for tomorrow.
The Apportionment was made the order of tho
day for Wednesday, the 21st.
BAIL.
The Convention proceeded to take into con-
sderation Article 1O8 of the Constitution
which read as follows:
. Article l0S, All prisoners shall be bailable
BY sufficient sureties, unless for capital offences
where the proof is evident or presumption great
and the privilege of the writ of ha6eas corpus
shall not be suspended unless when in case Of
reoeliion or invasion, the public safety may re
quire it
Mi EUsTfs offered the following as a substi
tute to the above article:
: Article 1OS. ALI persons shall be bailablc
by suthcent sureties, unless for capital offences
where the proof is evident or presumption great
or unless after conviction by petty jury for
any offence or crime punishable with death OF
| Imprisonment at hard labor. The privilege Of
the writ OF hdbeds corpus shall not be sus-
pended, unless when in case of rebellion or in
Fasion' the public safety may require it,
MIR. Hunt shall vote for the substitute
offered by my colleague. The jurisprudence Of
our State requires such an amendment. Under
the common law, bail is left to the discretion o.
the court. The Judge may bail or not, accord
ing to his judgment and discretion in the cir.
cumstances OF each case. But the Constitution
of our State has made that a right, of which tn,
prisoner is entitled to call for The lawful exer
clse, ana now all prisoners are entitled to bal
| under our law, except for capital offences
where the proofs evident or presumption great
In England, the discretionary power has beer
carried very far, and the Court of Kings Bench
has undertaken to bail prisoners after convic-
| ton In one case party was baled after con
vlction OF murder, but the proof Of Innocence
was clear. Our law, however, has taken away
| from the Judges all discretion in the matter Of
oail, ana every prisoner has a right to bal
after conviction except in cases of murder. The
supreme Court has decided that all cases are
pallabie after conviction where sufficient suretie:
| are offered, except for murder, and where an ap
| peal has been dismissed. In all cases where
murder has been committed, the Supreme Courl
has found, that whether before or after conviction
| the prisoner is entitled to bail Now, in such
| high cases as those in which persons are con.
victed and sent to hard labor in the penitentiary
the presumption of innocence may be reasonably
supposed to be done away with man wht
has been convicted by a jury of his countrymer
Will hardly remain to answer, if admitted tt
bail The presumption is that he will forfeit bis
Dali, rather than enter on new trial with the
solemn verdict OF one jury recorded against
hlm My colleague, in his amendment, has
limited the cases in which bail may not be taker
to those which are punishable with death OF
hard labor. He has left the door open for bai
III 'ti' citSes VI assault anu battery, ana IN cases
where there has been a pardon by the Governor
not confirmed by the Senate. The amendment
| by my colleague (Mr Eustis) seems to be well
guarded in all respects, and therefore hope that
the Convention will adopt it.
| The substitute was adopted
TIRE TITLE OF EACH LAW.
| Article llS being before the Convention, and
| read as follows:
Article llS, Every law enacted by the Leg.
lslature shall embrace but one object, and that
| shall be expressed in the title''
| Mr.. JENNINGS moved its rejection,
| MIR. DuFouR-l trust that the Convention will
not strike this article from the Constitution II
IS evident that those who now move to strike out
these provisions, forget the abuses that preceded
them Formerly, legislative papers were so
very much confused that even lawyer, accus-
toned to such business, found it difficult to dis
| tlngulsh their contents 1t was usual to find in
one document, one bill presented, another offered
as an amendment, and so much confusion in the
references to them, that it required labor to dis
cover the measure of legislation that had been
| adopted. Then, we frequently had a variety OF
subjects embraced in one bill. | repeat sir
l trust that the Convention will preserve this
article in the Constitution, ltprevents bad leg
islation more efectually than can be done by
any other known means. Itprevents unworthy
compromises in the Legislature. 1t forces the
Legislature to make legislation so plain that the
people have no difficulty in understanding it.
| hope that the Convention will. not strike this
healthy provision from the Constitution.
MIR. NICHOLS moved to lay the motion by Mr..