Marshall County Republican. (Plymouth, Ind.) 1856-1878, 1871-11-23
Criminal Jurisprudence.

While the fact that the worst form Of
Indiana Democracy has prevailed for
years in the counties OF Jackson Frank
lin and Clarke, goes far to explain the re-
peated acts of brutality and lawlessness
that have occurred in those localities, it is
not sufficient 10 explain the further fact
that it is almost impossible to arouse pub
lie sentiment to an appreciation of the
guilt of the mobocrats. There is a gener-
al impression that our criminal code is
framed and administered so as to provide
and furnish facilities for the escape of
malefactors. 1t was enacted by a legisla-
ture composed in the main Of criminal
lawyers, and its provisions are interpreted
by judges selected from the same class.
One would suppose from reading cur laws
and seeing them administered in our
courts, that thieves, perjuers and murder
ers were very worthy class of citizens,
whose rights were in danger of invasion,
and that it had become necessary to throw
extraordinary safeguards around them 10
protect them from persecution. From the
time criminal is charged with an offence
the whole machinery of the law is worked
with view to assist him to escape pun.
ishment
In the first place, he cannot be put upar
his trial until nine of twelve grand jurors
agree to indict him. When he is put up
on trial, if his CT me be murder, he car
challenge twenty jurors, While the State
is allowed but six challenges. If hi,
crime be less than murder, he has tel
challenges to the States three If The
Judge trying the case commits an error a.
to the admission of testimony or in in
structions to the jury, the defendant get.
a new trial, while a felon may escape by
means of the grossest misconduct of tn,
Judge, and the State has no redress.
jurors are improperly Influenced by out
siders to the prejudice of the prisoner, h,
can set their verdict aside. but he NAV OBJ
tain verdict of acquittal by the most fla
grant bribery, and the verdict is bar t,
further prosecution. In the argument t,
the jury, the defence has the close; an,
Indiana is the only State diSgraced b,
such a practice 1t was incorporate
into our code by calaboose lawyers
for the benefit of the criminal classes
and has bred such anomalies in the pro
fession as Voorhees, whose chief bust
ness it is to traverse the State and bull,
ignorant juries into acquitting felons
After the closing speech comes a mil
and water charge to the jury, into whic
the law compels the judge to inject st
ries of set phrases prescribed by statute
from which the jury generally get th
impression that the prisoner at the ba
is much injured person, and that eac
juror is in danger of committing som
great crime if he agrees to a verdict {
guilty. ii, notwithstanding all this,
verdict is rendered against the defendan
the lawyers proceed to dissect the recor
with view TO discover some error upo
which they may bamboozle the Suprem
Court into a reversal of the case.
The Supreme Court is the citadel i
which the prosecuted felon finds his la
and surest defense He may fail in Il
grand jury room, his suborned witness
NAV be discredited, the petit jury may
proof against the seductive. eloquence OF
closing speech, and the charge of Il
Court may possibly fail to raise dou
ofguilt in their minds; but after all th
there are many chances that the Supfen
Court may discover some way for his c
cape The assiduity with which q
judges of that court labor to prevent t
punishment of crime is really wonderf'
A r,erusal of their published decisions f
the last fifteen or sixteen years will sho
tlfat scores of the worst felons of t
State have been set at liberty for reaso
so trivial that it is difficult to persua
honest men that the reasons assign
were the only ones influencing the dete
mination of the Court. The effect OF {
this has been to confirm the impressio
in the public mind, that it is practical
impossible to punish sslon, if he has
fuentiai friends and pien:y OF money
Ind. Jzrnal