, 1873-12-30

THE sTRAW.BA1L ABUSE.
Renders Of THE TRIBUNE may havo noticed a
controversy in these columns over tho Thomp-
sou burglary case. The facta soem to DO these
The residence Of NIr. 4. G. Givens, on Prairie
avenue, WIS entered one night early III Noveu,-
bor by a burglar. His wife was terrified into q
tlt Of sickness. his properly was jeopardzed, his
OWL llfo threatened. Tho burglar WAS caught
coming out of the window, and arrested by Of
1}cor Burger, Of tho police force. The oillcor
brought tho burglar to Mr.. GivcnB bcforo
taking him to tho station-house, that tho latter
might be nblo to identify him. He then
spent five days iii having tho burglar indicted
by tho Grand Jury. Aftor tho indictment, the
burglar was admitted to bail, two mon becoming
his suretics to the amount Of $4,000. Tho officer
who maao the arrest was then approached, aB ho
swcars. with the suggestion that it would be to
his advantage not to appear against tl6 burglar.
A1r. Givlns also states that hs received intima-
tions that he would be reimbursed for his time
and trouble If lo would not prosecute.
aIr. Givins naturally felt outraged. Lis house
lad been invaded. and his 1ifo, his
property, and his family put in jeopardy. He de-
ternined to aparo no personal effort to secure
Justice in tho case. When tho day Of trinl came,
ho WAS present to prosecute, but tile burglar had
fled. Tho bond has not yet been paid and Mr.
Giyins thinks it mover will bo. Baff1od in tho
effort to secure Justice in the usual why, he hos
made known his grievance in newspaper COM
munication, with tho hope TINT IN exposure wil1
contribute something to the reform OF system
which, wherever the fault may be, too frequently
permits thieves and burglars to escapa.
Tho Thompson burglary case is not altogether
exceptional There aro many others like it.
Now, whore is tho remedy? Men cannot, under
our 1awa, bo denied the right Of bail for other
than capital ofrensos, no matter how cloar tho
proof may DO against them. In tho Thompson
case, tho burglar waB apprehended ip the act of
getting out of tho window, and the proof WIS
apparently indiaputable. Still, he was entitled
to bail while awaiting his trial. Tho fixing Of
bail, however. ia largely at the discretion Of the
Court, and tho amount should be in part dator-
mined by tho known character Of the evidence
against the accused. Should not the clear na-
turo Of the evidence against Thompson 1,ayo
induced the Judge to exact larger bond
than 92,0007 Tho character Of the suretios in
criminal courts III mainly under tho control Of
the state's-Attornoy, 4 largo number of for
fctures and repeated failure to collect from the
s'resies furnish prinaa ,}acie evidence that all
tho caro ind crcumspoction which tho people
hayo right to demand nro not exercised in this
particular. While every man accused Of other
than capital crlnao is entitled to bail, he is not
entitled to it unloas he can furnish euretios that
aro absolutely good for tho amount fixed
by tho Court. It Ia the bnainess Of
the states-Attornoy to ascertain wlethor |
these auretles arc good Or not, aud, If lie docs
his duty honestly md efficiently, worthless
bail-bonds should not be 30 very numerous, |
Mistakes of Judgment will happen, OF course;
but they should bo tho raro exception, in order |
that they 1nay bo credited to mistaken judgment
alono. Provisions for tho apeeder trinl of orinl-
iual cases; increasing tho amount OF bail accord
Ing to tho conolusiycneaH Of the evidence Of |
fercd n greater amount Of diligence in prose.
cutting forfeited bonds and moro crcumapeotion !
with regard to the responsibility Of the Auretics
are essential to break down the niquties Of tho
straw-bail systosn which have been sunased too |
loug III this community.