The tri-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1866-1868, 1867-02-02

THE AMERICAN LAW REVIEW for Janua-
ry, published by Little, Brown 6 Co., of
Boston. Mass, has come to hand. 1t con-
We extract the, following concerning the
trial of Mr.. Davis, given in its summary OF
events:
"1'hc continued postponement of the trial
of this State prisoner has been the subject
Of bitter alteration. The recent changes
made in the United States circuits seem to
have furnished good technical excuse for
holding no term of the circuit court in Vir-
GINA this autumn. We do not desire here !
to discuss the question, whether Mr.. Davis |
should or should not be brought to trial; |
but we shall submit few suggestions con- !
corning the trial. which, however, are per-
haps too selfevident, so far as the profession
is concerned, to need discussion.
| In regard to all criminal cases, the same
division of responsibility between the exec
utive and judicial departments OF govern
ment can be made. 1t is for the executive
department, through its prosecuting officers
to decide what criminal charges shall be
prosecuted, and what ones shall be abandon
ed. judge has nothing to do with this,
and cannot properly interfere with it. His
duty is simply to try the cases brought be-
fore him. A prisoner undoubtedly has a
right to speedy trial; but, if the govern
ment defer the trial. objection can only come
from the prisoner himself And if he,
through his counsel, does not bring 1t to the
attention of the court, it is difficult to see
what reason the judge has to interfere"
"When Chief Justice Chase holds the cir
cult court for the district in which Davis is,
it will be his duty to give all the instruct
n fhn TO rIn IL
cate the laws of the United States, and to
try all prisoners placed at the bar for trial.
If the Government, for reasons of Its own
does not cali up the case of Mr.. Davis, his
counsel can demand speedy trial and the
judge has then to determine whether the tri-
al shall proceed or not. BIT in the case of a
prisoner defended by eminent counsel, and
{. into whose case enter grave questions OF
State, for the court of itself to move to bring
about trial which is not sought for either
by the Government or the prisoner, would
be- we apprehend, generally regarded as
wholly unwarrantable.
The questions of whether Davis is now re-
tanned in such manner as to place him out
side the jurisdiction of the court. and ofhoW
far the relations of Virginia to the General
Government may have heretofore rendered
it improper to hold civil court there, we
do not intend to touch upon. Whether Da
Wis shall be brought to trial is almost purely
a political question, to be decided by thu
executive department of the Government
When he is brought to trial. the conduct o
the case, until IL verdict is rendered, is mat
ter of legal procedure for which the judges
are responsible, subject to the right of the gov
eminent counsel to abandon the case, if il
their judgment it is best to do so. But som
persons seem to forget, that, while the law
! IL II frio ,icbp of
sons guilty of crimes. they likewise have eve
left it to the Government in their discretion
to decide what cases shall be prosecuted, AM
what ones abandoned !; and the responsible
ty thus imposed must be borne, by the Gov
eminent, and can be shifted on no one else.
And the two items following which are c
, interest
"Ev1DENcE OF CRIMNAI.s-The law Q
Massachusetts, permitting criminals to test
fy has been in operation for several months
, but we do not know that the profession O
| the public has arrived at any settled conclu
sion on the success of the experiment. 1
the next number we hope to insert an articl
by learned judge of much experience, VIII
takes ground against the innovation. W
must saw however that, for our own par
[ we are inclined to believe in the good result
, of the law and this belief is much strength
; ened by seeing its application in late cap
5 tai case, where, after the accused had test
: fed, the impossibility of the Government
= succeeding became so apparent that the al
torney general abandoned the prosecution
We have always been of opinion, that tn
law permitting criminals to testify would al
: in the detection of guilt; we are now dispt
sed to think that it Will be equally service
able for the protection of innocence
f SALARIES OF ENGLISH JUDGEs.-Th
t salary of the Lord Chancellor is 10000
year. Those of the Lords Justices and til
Master of the Rolls 10000 each, and of til
Vice-Chancellors $4,000. The Lord Chi
Justice of the Queens Bench has $4,000
year, the Lord Chief Justice of the Commo
Pleas and Lord Chief Baron 81, 900 each, an
the Puisne Judges of these courts $500
each. This last amount is also the salary
the Judge of the Court of Admiralty and
the Courts of Probate and of Divorce an
Matrimonial Causes. A judges retirin
!, pension is one-half his salary"